>He was apparently not willing to get a job to pay for it >either.
Does noone actually read the posts around here? Third post saying the same thing. The poster was talking about this boy's PARENTS!!! Father! The woman's husband. Not the boy.
For a father to be able but unwilling to pay for his son's education is a believable thing. However for a father to consider (or not) getting a job to pay for his son's college education is not quite so plausible, since the purpose of obtaining such education is so that one can get a job. Not to mention that, if the father refuses to pay for the college in the first place, he is certainly not going to get a job to help pay for the loans. That is likely why so many posters on the thread, myself included, are reading the original comment as stating that the son was unwilling to get a job.
If you are able to point me to the incorrect nature of my earlier assumption, minus your air of condescension, I will happily correct myself.
From post #41, by the same poster who gave us #14:
I meant a civilian job.
Turns out he was referring to the son, but inadvertently left out the crucial piece of information to show that he was referring to a civilian job, which led so many to believe that he was demeaning the military. However, he was referring to the son.
It seems that you're the one who doesn't read the posts around here. Next time, be a little more careful before you start shouting at people.