Posted on 01/09/2012 9:51:16 AM PST by mnehring
I’ll bet you’ve never personally performed open heart surgery. You haven’t? Really? In that case, I don’t want your stinkin’ opinion on how the government should best distort the health insurance markets with artificial incentives. You probably also haven’t dropped acid in the last ten years. Given that painful deficiency on your CV, I don’t want to hear any of your sanctimonious blithering about The War on Drugs.
I assume, furthermore, that you’ve never been behind enemy lines, staggering home through the bad guys’ wire with your small intestine in one your canteen cups.* If such is the case; then you, like Newt Gingrich, have no right to have an opinion on issues of international military involvements.
So argues Dr. Ron Paul, who has the unique moral authority to decide whether John Huntsman really has American values. As Devine Emperor of Truth and Logic; Dr. Paul hath (self)-righteously decreed that Newt Gingrich has no right to an opinion on matters of war and peace.
“I think people who don’t serve when they could and they get three or four or even five deferments aren’t — they have no right to send our kids off to war, and not be even against the wars that we have, (My bolding)” Paul, a former Air Force flight surgeon, said. “I’m trying to stop the wars. But at least, you know, I went when they called me up.”
– Congressman Ron Paul.
The entire reason people serve in the US Military is to defend and uphold the US Constitution. The entire reason that politicians and their enemies make arguments based upon “Chicken-Hawking” is to deprive people who have not been under enemy fire, of the right to participate in the vital national conversation involving war and peace. It’s a way for great and courageous defenders of the US Constitution like Dr. Ron Paul to strip others of their rights under the 1st Amendment.
This would make Dr. Paul a smug and arrogant elitist pig. He is as revolting on the issues of war and peace as President Obama is with regards to social issues. It makes me think that Dr. Paul is a bitter clinger who desperately holds on to his 9-11 Conspiracy Theories and his Racist literature and his proposed Fed audit.
As one who wore the uniform briefly, I can understand a teaspoon’s measure of Ron Paul’s frustration over the civilian leadership of the armed forces. It has to be one of the more vexing aspects of the entire US Constitution when Von Clausewitz of the 9-11 LIHOP Theories ponders the document. But that’s exactly the point. You and I don’t have to like Mr. Gingrich’s resume on military issues in order for him to have a right to express his views.
Ultimately, “Chicken Hawking” is the revolting logical inverse of the argument that a former military person would make a great foreign policy president. I doubt there is a single opponent of the Iraq War who spent all of 2005 thinking “Ya know what? I don’t like this whole Iraq War thing. However, George W. Bush and John McCain have landed fighter jets on an aircraft carrier before. Based upon that, I have no valid point of view on whether the GOP has a correct policy via-avis the Iraq War.”
That’s the astonishing thing about the entire “Chicken Hawk” branch of logical fallacy. Not a single practitioner of it will ever admit that a more experienced member of the military that holds a diametrically opposed point of view on some defense-related issue has a God-Given right to serve the Ron Pauls of the world a big, steaming cup of STFU. This situation sends them appealing to all-important bastions of authority like Gen Wesley Clark.
Thus, Ron Paul’s use of the “Chicken Hawk” smear to demean one of his opponents in the GOP Primary reminds me of what is wrong with American Democracy. Here we have a former military member, sworn to uphold and defend the US Constitution, attempting to deprive an opponent of his right to speak based on pure CV snobbery. This is not courageous libertarian constitutionalism. It is post-modern feudalism instead. Elitist Pigs like Ron Paul, who use their resumes and life experiences as a weapon to silence the points of view they don’t want to hear, are an enemy of American Democracy.
* – If any members of our rich and vibrant RS community have done all three, than what in the heck are you doing wasting time on the Internet? Get out there and fix all the world’s problems!
“When did we start calling a resume a CV?
That’s European, no?”
It’s Latin - but if I recall, the term is used for resumes of those in certain professions like medical people or professors and PhD’s, right?
“Had we respected that qualifing standard, we would not have the vapid anti-American Muslim in the White House who has mandated homosexuality on the military.”
I don’t think that follows. And we have liberal generals like Powell and Clark who endorsed BHO.
Requiring military experience of the POTUS is too limiting and can rule out some good leaders who nonetheless revere our military and, unlike BHO, would value the advice of their generals.
Ron Paul is sneaky and mean. It’s my understanding he never saw combat, but he got his medical schooling free via the military. He loves to mislead people saying they “overwhelmingly” support him, but I’ve heard from (and read) MANY military who do NOT.
He was drafted, and the other night in the debate after being slammed by Paul who said “at least when my country called me up, I went” (or something similar, insinuating that Newt was a chicken/draft dodger), Newt tried responding that he wasn’t eligible for the draft, but RP talked over him.
RP needs to have his numerous lies pointed out as often as possible. At least Santorum’s had the guts (besides Newt) to call him out. But then Paul just lumps the candidates together, saying “they’re all status quo”.
Anyone see the great Frank Luntz special last night with NH voters and some of the candidates? Newt was the only one who took the time to personally appear, the others were surrogates - Rand Paul (who saw how the group disagreed with his dad’s awful foreign policy), Huntsman’s wife, and Lincoln Chafee for Romney. (I usually like Chafee and his public stands, but was really disappointed to see him be such a cheerleader for Mittens.) It was surprising, however, that Santorum wasn’t represented.
I’m not suggesting it be a constitutional requirement. But I prefer a conservative with military experience over a communist who hates America. Maybe it’s just me. :)
“I think Newt probably looked bad to most undecided voters when he started talking about being an army brat.”
I don’t think so - he was trying to illustrate how he grew up around that life with a career military dad, thus having an understanding of it. (”Army brat” is not a derogatory term.)
“He should have said exactly what this article says.”
There wasn’t time. Newt was given far too little time and opportunity to speak in that debate, which was a real shame. Maybe in the immediate future, he can voice the things said in the article, though.
“The simple fact that Gingrich gets all defensive and never actually tells us exactly HOW & WHY he never served should be a BIG RED FLAG to all voters.”
He tried to say he wasn’t eligible for the draft, but Paul talked over him so he couldn’t be heard very well.
I’ll apologize here in advance before a lot of people respond to correct me - guess I was wrong about the military paying for his medical school. I’d recently read that, but from what I’m seeing here, that wasn’t the case.
Anyone who has a choice as Gingrich had falls under deferment. Inelgibility is a non choice on the part of the applicant as was the case for our ONLY son who had already served 3 yrs and was in the top of his ROTC class.
I could have sworn he said he “wasn’t eligible for the draft” (because of his age and being married w/kids).
Age had nothing to do with it and marriage with kids has never been a disqualifier, EVER. Now there once was a time when being the only son could qualify for a deferment, but it was NEVER a disqualifier. I do not know if he is an only son, but if that was his excuse, it is pretty poor one.
25 yrs old and not eligible for the draft? HARDLY! I know stinky when I smell it and his excuse reeks!
correction, 20 something years old did not make one exempt. Putting the time table in accord with RP’s years of service, Gingrich would have been 22 yrs old and was just out of college. Nice try though it’s just too bad the truth diesn’t line up with his excuse.
I like Newt as a historian, but as a politician/possible president, his political character leaves a lot to be desired and thus far he has not come forward with the kind of character that we need to turn this nation around to get it back on a solid constitutional foundation. I can honestly say this about ALL the candidates thus far, including RP. I am neither for or against any EXCEPT Mittens, who can take a flying leap back to Michigan and retire so we will never have to hear from him again. Well, Mittens & Huntsman who isn’t really in the running anyway according to the numbers.
Neither Madison, nor Polk, nor Lincoln, nor Wilson, nor Roosevelt ever served in war. War as Clausewitz said, is politics by other means. The Presidency is a civilian position. Neither Grant nor Ike wore uniform while in office, nor afterwards, so far as I know. War is a political matter.
Two of my friends were #’s 1 and 3. Both of then elected to join the Air Force soon thereafter. Two of my older Brother's friends elected to do the same.
The good Dr. is out of line. Being a physician, and in the Air Force, he was unlikely to put put in harm’;s war. I respect his service, but he makes too much of it.
It really struck a cord with me all the media talk of RP not seeing himself in the white house. That is because RP does not look at it as a personal gain, his focus is getting the constitution stitched back together so it's back on sound footing. There was a time when a man who wanted to be president and only went into politics as a way to pave a path to the white house was denied because it showed lack of character. But that was those old dead guys who shed blood that gave us our freedom. That is RP, if our constitutional footing wasn't so fragile, RP wouldn't even be in the race. He'd be happy at home in TX attending to patients.
excerpt from Washington's farewell address of 1796 ALL Patriotic Americans should hold fast to
If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield…
As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government...
Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests…
Such terms as “chickenhawk,” are odious, and while it is honorable to do what one does not have to do, that does not oblige others to rise to that standard, nor make them cowards. That is what Paul is asserting. The ‘white feather “belongs to another age.
But I remember when they first started doing the draft “lottery”, I was in college and some guys got married so they wouldn’t have to go. Grade point averages also played a part. That was very early on, though, and I think that as the Vietnam war went on, some of the earlier disqualifiers no longer applied.
But I remember when they first started doing the draft “lottery”, I was in college and some guys got married so they wouldn’t have to go. Grade point averages also played a part. That was very early on, though, and I think that as the Vietnam war went on, some of the earlier disqualifiers no longer applied.
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.