Debate Info

Debate Score:35
Total Votes:37
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 Veterans Group Blasts Trump’s Memorial Day Remark As ‘Most Inappropriate’ Ever (25)

Debate Creator

Rusticus(1624) pic

Veterans Group Blasts Trump’s Memorial Day Remark As ‘Most Inappropriate’ Ever

VoteVets calls it “appalling” to offer happy greetings and self-promotion on a day meant to honor the fallen.

Add New Argument
1 point


1 point

Haha easy m8, sometimes people just really mispronounce.

2 points

ROTFFLMMFAO you link the Huff and Puff Post as that is reality ????????????

1 point

A bit late but I want to honor my parents who were both WW2 veterans.

Mom and Dad, thanks for helping to save the world.

I miss you both very much.

1 point

While I shudder to take Huffington Post at it's word there have been several other places where I've seen this promotion. While I doubt there is a law against what he did, it was in very poor taste for the President of the US to promote himself numerous times instead of genuinely honoring the men and women who have served their country, bone spurs and all. It shouldn't be a surprise though, he's a businessman first, President second.

outlaw60(15500) Disputed
1 point

Huff and Puff Post is what you Progressives like there Jewel

Rusticus(1624) Disputed
1 point

Case in point. outlaw is a prime example of a NEWSMAX/DRUDGE REPORT/ALEX JONES/RUSH LIMBAUGH sword swallowing moron.

0 points

Do you "shudder" at Huffington Post because it's not on the Republican Reich wing approved reading list?

Can you name a single Reich wing "New's" outlet of any kind that has anything close to the credibility of the Huffington Post?

Admittedly the Huffington Post isn't a newspaper it's a blog site so it's a collection of opinions rather

than hard news and it doesn't claim to be otherwise. Even so it's credibility is higher than any Reich wing rag.

I happen to like it because it's more current and up to the minute.

You've simply bought into the Reich wing attack on the free press / anything other than crap

with a Reich wing slant. These are morons who gobble up sources like NEWSMAX, FOX and ALEX JONES ect. dictating to you what is and is not a credible news source. What a joke.

For crying out loud, think for yourself. Don't let the idiot turds bully you.

2 points

I prefer many news sources and while I would entertain one of their articles I wouldn't base my opinion solely off it. Surprisingly a person can do that without being "reich" wing as you so put it or left wing.

outlaw60(15500) Disputed
1 point

Well stated and shown that you Leftist want State Run Media !

The tweet is real. But, it may be interpreted in different ways.

Rusticus(1624) Clarified
1 point

here's another dummy

Antrim(1297) Disputed
2 points

Just noting how you describe everyone who disagrees with you as a dummy.

This type of intolerance formed the basis for the establishment of Nazism.

I would be certain that your brave and honourable parents would be ashamed of their son's Waffen-S.S. tendencies.

2 points

I’m a dummy how? I just said it could be interpreted in a lot of ways...

Fueled by unions and secret donors, liberal vets group spends millions boosting Democrats

"New tax documents obtained by OpenSecrets Blog suggest that one of the oldest, most politically active nonprofits in the country, VoteVets Action Fund, devoted most of its activities in 2014 to influencing that year’s midterms.

Vote Vets Action Fund — which last week attacked the presumptive GOP nominee, Donald Trump, as a “cheap fraud” — is currently the highest spending liberal nonprofit active in federal elections, a perch it is accustomed to holding. Fueled largely by social welfare organizations aligned with Democrats and millions of dollars given by unions, VoteVets — with just two employees and no volunteers — has spent more on elections since its founding in 2006 than the combined spending of much more prominent politically active groups on the left, like NARAL Pro-Choice America and the Sierra Club, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission.

Electioneering as social welfare

The new tax documents show that between July 2014 and June 2015, VoteVets spent nearly $7.6 million overall. During that same period, VoteVets’ filings with the FEC indicate it spent more than $3.6 million supporting Democratic candidates or opposing Republicans.

Social welfare organizations like VoteVets are not supposed to be primarily political, though neither the IRS nor the FEC has shown an appetite for policing them. That, combined with the fact that they don’t have to disclose who their donors are, has made 501(c) groups — also known as “dark money” outfits — attractive vehicles for contributors with a strong desire to influence politics but just as powerful an impetus to remain in the shadows. Political spending by these organizations reached new heights in 2014’s congressional races and is on track to break new records in 2016.

The vast majority of dark money is spent by GOP-aligned groups — more than 72 percent of the 501(c) groups reporting activity to the FEC in 2014 were conservative, and in the last presidential election cycle, that total was more than 86 percent — but Democrats also have stalwarts in this category that provide them with reliable support in most election cycles. VoteVets is one such group.

In the last five election cycles, VoteVets has spent more than $12 million, including the more than $600,000 it has reported spending so far in the 2016 cycle supporting Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), who’s running for Senate. That’s a total that is dwarfed by groups on the right like Crossroads GPS, whose spending is measured in the hundreds of millions, but it puts VoteVets among the biggest all-time spenders on the left.

VoteVets newest tax return displays all of the main hallmarks of a political organization using its 501(c) status as a way to avoid donor disclosure. By far the largest outlays it reports were related to political activity."