Newt was not allowed to serve???
That’s a new one - LOL! Where do you get this stuff from? I had not heard that line of argument anywhere until now. Can you provide some support for that statement?
I don’t know how many promotions Paul got. But, from what I have read, he came in as a Captain (as is common for medical corps and jag) and was already up two ranks (skipping 2nd Lt and Lt) - it would not be surprising for him to stay at that level after a couple of years of active duty and a few years of reserves.
In the Navy, medical, legal and supply are all staff functions, not Line functions (which means that they can’t command a vessel basically. It is usually a good 6-8 years before advancing to O-4 as a Line officer (varies from time to time of course and needs of the service). But, you would not know that, right? If you had served you would.
OTOH, how many patients did he see and how did that go? (seeing as that was his job, not commanding a tank, driving a boat, flying a U2). Do you have facts that he was a bad doctor and got bad fitness reports or are you just making crazy stuff up and conjecturing?
Is it wrong to just willingly serve and focus on doing a good job in your area of specialization until your commitment is up without ambitions of climbing the military career ladder?
Are all service members who did not stay in until retirement “ineffective”? (by the way, how many years did you serve and what rank did you achieve - are you willing to be judged by your own definition of success?)
Is he ineffective as a Congressman just because he keeps getting re-elected or is it because he votes his principles (which you disagree with apparently - like following the Constitution).
You know, I send quite a few like minded independent / conservative people to FR as a source of facts on the conservative side of the battle. The spittle-lipped, crazy eyed invective that has been erupting around here makes me re-think that.
Most of us are not Paul experts and have never really looked at him before now - we are just frustrated citizens trying to sort through factual positions and background of candidates without the liberal lies and spin.
The only reason we begin to look at him is because the field of candidates is not satisfying. If a sane and rational conservative just merely reads the entire positions page on the official Ron Paul website, there is nothing objectionable there from my perspective.
I’m not going to skip my own personal due diligence just because some goofball yells at me on FR. I’m also not intimidated with folks trying to shout me down - I’ve dealt with plenty of libs who live that way because they have nothing to fall back on fact wise.
This kind of insulting and ignorant rhetoric will just turn folks off. Why don’t you try to politely outline why you have such contempt for Paul (or anyone else) with links to facts like actual video of the candidate saying some of the looney things that are attributed to them (whomever they are). Otherwise, you just sound as foolish as the left. Surrender monkey? Point me to where he surrendered... “Cut and run” - that’s a new way to describe military service as a physician..
When you make a statement or claim that is provably false, or just exaggerated supposition (even if minor) then everything you say has to be questioned.
At this point I don’t have a candidate that I’m excited about. I would love to have a principled (but pragmatic) Reagan to rally behind, but so far I don’t see it...(in those whom are official candidates).
Try a different tack - tell me who you are for and why... Give some of the other folks a chance to play virtual whack-a-mole on your position..
There is a long path to the nomination - it’s going to go on for many months given the way it is structured. We could wind up in a brokered convention - who knows?
Venting is cathartic - I feel better now. Your post did not deserve this long a response, but I’d like my fellow FReepers to understand where I’m coming from.
Have a nice evening.