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

To: wideawake
I have never served in the military in any capacity.

One of my hugest pet-peeves is when someone who never served complains about the service of someone who did honorably, be it Paul, McCain, Bush, whomever. If a vet wants to go ahead and do so, I won't raise a peep, but for non-veterans, forget it.

Which is immaterial to the point: Ron Paul by his own admission served in a military he did not believe in solely for the cash.

He was a doctor with a private practice when he was commissioned. He certainly wasn't "moving on up" financially. And a very good portion of our guys and gals serving overseas currently enlisted due in large part for the financial benefits. Please don't smear them.

81 posted on 01/11/2008 8:04:17 AM PST by jmc813 (Don't screw this up, vote for Thompson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]


To: wideawake

I see some have almost successfully changed the subject and buried the topic that Paul blatantly lied either in 1996 when he admitted he wrote the articles and they were just taken out of context or in 2001 (and this week) when he claimed he never wrote them and never saw them.


85 posted on 01/11/2008 8:06:08 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]

To: jmc813
One of my hugest pet-peeves is when someone who never served complains about the service of someone who did honorably

As I explained, Paul did not serve honorably.

He was a doctor with a private practice when he was commissioned. He certainly wasn't "moving on up" financially.

Incorrect. He was a medical school graduate when he was drafted.

As he told the Dartmouth Review, if he had spent his medical residency in the private sector he would have gotten paid less than he was paid as a resident by the USAF, and he would have had to work much longer hours.

He was getting paid better in the USAF and still getting credit for a residency. His draft notice was a career enhancer.

And a very good portion of our guys and gals serving overseas currently enlisted due in large part for the financial benefits.

Ah, but those guys and gals voluntarily signed up and believe in the cause they are fighting for. And almost all of them who are currently serving, unlike paul, have been in harm's way. The benefits are an added bonus for people who have risked their lives.

As Paul has publicly admitted, he was morally opposed to the work he was doing - i.e. examining pilots to make sure they were fit to do things like participate in bombing runs in Vietnam.

So, unlike our troops in the field, Ron Paul spent his entire military career far from the battlefield while boosting his career and collecting a paycheck, while claiming that he was doing something he was morally opposed to.

There is a word to describe someone who does things he beleives to be wrong in exchange for a paycheck.

And that word is not honorable.

Please don't smear them.

Don't you smear them by comparing them to a weasel like Paul.

249 posted on 01/11/2008 11:26:57 AM PST by wideawake (Ron Paul and his newsletters: The Milli Vanilli of the New Millenium)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]

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