Romney's Lack of Military Service Faces Scrutiny [AP Double-Standards and Amnesia ]

On a stage crowded with war heroes, Mitt Romney recently praised the sacrifice "of the great men and women of every generation who serve in our armed services."

Though an early supporter of the Vietnam War, Romney avoided military service at the height of the fighting after high school by seeking and receiving four draft deferments, according to Selective Service records. They included college deferments and a 31-month stretch as a "minister of religion" in France, a classification for Mormon missionaries that the church at the time feared was being overused. The country was cutting troop levels by the time he became eligible for the draft, and his lottery number was not called.

President Barack Obama, Romney's opponent in this year's campaign, did not serve in the military either. The Democrat, 50, was a child during the Vietnam conflict and did not enlist when he was older.

“Read your posts on this thread, it is defending his refusal to serve that you are most obsessed with”

No, I started out merely celebrating the fact that unless we institute another draft in the near future we’re not going to have any more draft-era presidential candadites, and thus can stop parsing what counts as dodging and what as service. I only got around to Romney specifically in my sixth or so post, after attacking the draft and asserting the general principle that military service is not necessary to be elected president.

“look at your flurry of initial posts defending not serving, defending it means something to you, this thread shows that.”

I don’t think so. There may have been a “flurry,” as you say, but I was particularly bad at expressing myself yesterday. This is amply evidenced by my inability to get across my point about McCain versus Obama.

What really means something to me is repudiating the implication that every abvle man must serve in the military if he is to be a real American, or whatever. This involves defending not serving, obviously. But I didn’t bring it up. And to say that I’m obsessed or whatever with defending not serving would be like saying I’m obsessed with the sun rising in the east if someone, unprompted by me, suddenly started arguing the sun rises in the west.

Not every man can serve, but every patriotic, conservative man should desire to serve, it is just another measure of conservatism and patriotism.

You seem to be somewhat hostile to the idea.

The Romney line is clearly anti-military, they clearly have a non-serving agenda.

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.