Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rudy is Chilled by Draft; He's a Dodger: Vets (deferment called "rare and questionable")
New York Post ^ | April 15, 2007 | CATHY BURKE

Posted on 04/15/2007 3:02:41 AM PDT by Liz

.... Rudy Giuliani carries a lot of baggage - but it's his draft-dodging past that may prove the biggest drag, prominent veterans tell New York magazine in tomorrow's issue. Speaking about terrorism and the Iraq war last week, Giuliani boasted, "It is something I understand better than anyone else running for president." But it was draft deferments that kept Giuliani, 62, out of Vietnam while he attended law school. He was granted a 2-A occupational deferment for his job as a law clerk in 1969 after his boss, the late Manhattan federal Judge Lloyd MacMahon, wrote a letter to the local draft board - a move criticized years later as rare and questionable. Law clerks were not on the 1968 list of critical jobs that qualified for occupational deferments. Giuliani "has made it clear that if he had been called up, he would have served," Giuliani spokeswoman Katie Levinson told New York magazine. He was opposed to the war in Vietnam on "strategic and tactical" grounds," she added, although she wouldn't offer specifics.

"If Giuliani is the nominee, we're going to hammer him with ads, and it's going to be easy because the issue is simple: He's a draft dodger," Jon Soltz, an Iraq vet who served as a captain and runs VoteVets.org, a left-leaning version of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth .......a sense that a candidate can handle the role of commander-in-chief remains important to most Americans.

(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: dodgerudy; electionpresident; giuliani; liberalgiuliani; liberalrudy; lizhanover; rino; rinogiuliani; rudy; stoprudy2008
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 301-314 next last
To: ketsu
So I take it you love Murtha and McCain and hate Cheney, Rush and Bush?

Are you listing Bush among those who didn't serve in the military?

141 posted on 04/15/2007 6:47:12 AM PDT by Petronski (FRED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ketsu
While what you say is true, if the president had been truly interested in serving his country why wouldn't he have enlisted in a true military unit?

Shame on you.

142 posted on 04/15/2007 6:48:22 AM PDT by Petronski (FRED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: madconserv

Where was this in the article?


143 posted on 04/15/2007 6:48:31 AM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007 (Why vote for Duncan Hunter in 2008? Look at my profile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Liz
A Conscientious Objector? Who'd 'a thunk it?
144 posted on 04/15/2007 6:49:02 AM PDT by TommyDale ("Rudy can win the War on Terror!" Perhaps, but for whose side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ketsu
Your politics are muddling your worldview.

Your troll worldview is tedious and wearisome.

145 posted on 04/15/2007 6:49:38 AM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: TalBlack

I knew a lot of rich people who served in Nam and a lot of poor with educational deferments, this was not a rich poor thing, that’s the argument the Dems always use. The NG was then and is now an honorable way to serve this country.


146 posted on 04/15/2007 6:49:45 AM PDT by ontap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: ketsu
I don't particularly care about Rudy.

Mulefritters.

147 posted on 04/15/2007 6:49:49 AM PDT by Petronski (FRED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: ketsu
I don't particularly care about Rudy.

Mulefritters.

148 posted on 04/15/2007 6:49:59 AM PDT by Petronski (FRED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: ketsu

He asked about YOUR military service, not your father’s.


149 posted on 04/15/2007 6:50:45 AM PDT by Petronski (FRED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: ketsu

Only a liberal Democrat or a crazy person would think that serving your country by actually joining a branch of service would be avoiding the draft. Yet many of them actually fled the country, rather than face the draft.

Are you really Al Gore?


150 posted on 04/15/2007 6:51:03 AM PDT by TommyDale ("Rudy can win the War on Terror!" Perhaps, but for whose side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ketsu

But were his experiences worth it, that should be the question.

Since he was an outstanding Lawyer by any measurement, I’d say that he has long since served the country in ways that being drafted wouldn’t have done.


151 posted on 04/15/2007 6:53:35 AM PDT by usmcobra (I sing Karaoke the way it was meant to be sung, drunk, badly and in Japanese)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: ontap

The issue with Rudy, as with Clinton, isn’t so much that each of them avoided service in Vietnam. It is the circumstances surrounding their attempts to avoid service or to gain deferments. Clinton’s record is shot through with cowardice and deceit; Rudy’s deferment appears to to have been jury rigged.


152 posted on 04/15/2007 6:54:23 AM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
Clinton didn't get rashed because he got a deferment. He got trashed because he LIED about his intentions after getting that deferment and also trashed the military in his excuse.

THAT is why people got mad and used the short-hand "draft dodger."

153 posted on 04/15/2007 6:54:24 AM PDT by Miss Marple (Prayers for Jemian's son,: Lord, please keep him safe and bring him home .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: ontap

“I knew a lot of rich people who served in Nam and a lot of poor with educational deferments,”.

True. In fact Colin Powell’s comments in the matter cited above by ‘ketsu’ are lib boilerplate. ( aka “Bullshit” for those of you in Rio Linda)


154 posted on 04/15/2007 6:57:07 AM PDT by TalBlack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: airborne
Well, that's fine as long as Duncan Hunter is in the race. What are you going to do if he doesn't make it through the primaries?

And more to the point, should we lose in 2008, who are you going to get who served in the military? There are fewer and fewer people who have served in the military (let alone in combat), due to the gap between Viet Nam and the Gulf War. I understand your desire, but at some point it is going to be impossible to find a candidate who has served.

This is one of the drawbacks of an all-volunteer military, interestingly. I also think some sort of national service for all 18-year-olds should be instituted, but since Congress would have to vote on it it's not going to happen.

155 posted on 04/15/2007 7:00:13 AM PDT by Miss Marple (Prayers for Jemian's son,: Lord, please keep him safe and bring him home .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: usmcobra
But were his experiences worth it, that should be the question. Since he was an outstanding Lawyer by any measurement, I’d say that he has long since served the country in ways that being drafted wouldn’t have done.
I don't really buy that. I don't think Rudy was thinking "America really needs me as a prosecutor! As much as I would love to go to Vietnam, America needs me here!". Does that change his record of (some very good) accomplishments? Not at all. That's why I think the frenzy over service is misguided.

However as I said to an earlier poster, if service is important to you, and you genuinely adhere to that principle, more power to you.

What I don't like are people who use it as a tool for political leverage. Rudy already has a reputation as "weak" and "not conservative" among the faithful so the draft issue plays into those doubts. And democrats *will* use it as a wedge issue.

What I would really like to see is an honest appraisal of his good and bad points without all the religious furor over whether or not he is ideologically "pure" enough to pass muster. As I said to a previous poster
156 posted on 04/15/2007 7:00:47 AM PDT by ketsu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: mborman; ketsu; Enterprise
I've always believed every male should serve a minimum of two years in uniform

Mandatory military service is a tax. Two years out of, say, a 45 year employment career, equals a 4.4% tax. Not substantial, but still a tax.

Mandatory military service can hinder or derail one's career path. It causes a loss of momentum during the prime formative years of an individual's life.

Mandatory military service can be an instrument of mischief for those with their hands on the levers of power. Apart from Vietnam being a Kennedy & Johnson war (good conservatives, no??) what would have been the upshot in Nam with only a volunteer army to wield?

Under the threat of being drafted, I served almost 2 years active duty in the Naval Reserve in 67 and 68, and my shipmates and I were not "Rodney Richpigges". We were mostly Average Joes who made the best decisions we could at that time, decisions that would allow us to keep some modicum of control over our lives. I will not apologize for doing this. As the son of a Pearl Harbor career Naval officer, I deeply respect everyone who has served, especially those who saw combat.

One last thought: In reading this thread, it keeps coming back to me what continuing damage the disaster called the Vietnam War keeps inflicting on this country.
157 posted on 04/15/2007 7:03:39 AM PDT by MelonFarmerJ (Proudly voting Conservative in every election since 1964)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale
Obviously, you were never around during the Viet Nam war.

For draft age men, there were several ways to avoid having to go over there and fight.

#1. Go to College. (The most popular method)
#2. Join the Peace Corps
#3. Get assigned to special research or study project for the government.
#4. Join the National Guard (This was the second most popular method)
#5. Be the only son available to help run the family farm

These were all deferments and millions of draft age men took advantage of one form of the above or another.

Saying that Giuliani was a draft dodger because legally he did what millions of other men his age did, merely points out that you are picking cherries for issues to degrade him.

It does not make Rudy look bad, it makes people like you look incredibly petty and vindicative.

158 posted on 04/15/2007 7:03:52 AM PDT by PSYCHO-FREEP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
It was certainly considered important when Slick Willie Clinton was soiling the White House with his presence.

Maybe it had something to do with Clinton protesting the war on foreign soil, ya think?

Good grief, and I thought only liberals couldn't tell the difference. Discernment sure is a rare commodity these days.

159 posted on 04/15/2007 7:08:56 AM PDT by McGavin999 ("Hard is not Hopeless" General Petraeus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP
Saying that Giuliani was a draft dodger because legally he did what millions of other men his age did...

"Legally" is the operative word. Try morally.

He pulled strings to obtain a deferment to which he was not entitled.

160 posted on 04/15/2007 7:10:18 AM PDT by Petronski (FRED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 301-314 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson