I just lost all respect for Ron Paul.

Ron Paul just used the oldest left wing trick in the book. It really pissed me off. It was about Newt not serving. Calling someone a chickenhawk is just as bad as the name of itself. The line well you shouldn't send people off to war unless you are willing to send your kids is a bunch of BS. Or saying unless someone served they can't be for the war.

Well let me tell something Mr Paul as person who served in the military myself I never hold it against anyone who has not served in the military but supports the wars. That is chickensh** on your part. Newt payed his taxes the American person pays there taxes and by god if they support a war it is non of your fracking business.

This is America and regardless if you served or not you have the right to support any fracking thing you want.

He uses that line quite often in his books against people like Cheney that you can just feel it from the book he hates.

ssvs04 wrote:

He uses that line quite often in his books against people like Cheney that you can just feel it from the book he hates.

This is BS and is used by the far left all the time. It a false argument and excuse. I would never as a retired military person tell anyone or politician they do not have the right to go to war if they did not serve. I find this very offensive what he said. Very offensive. I know Paul served in Nam and Newt didn't. Paul lied and said Newt got deferments and Newt did not get one. Newt had a kid Paul had a kid. Paul decided to join that is his choice and I respect that. Newt decided not to join and I respect that. However Paul never did serve in Vietnam. He makes it like he did but he never did.

Everything I've ever heard said Newt used several deferments, both school and family, in order to avoid being drafted. Lots of rich people did that. Given that, I'd say Paul is right on. It's not just that Newt didn't serve, he hid from service. There's a big difference between never serving and being a draft dodger.

Ron Paul was drafted and served as a flight surgeon. Don't know why you first said; "I know Paul served in Nam..." then turned around a sentence later and said; "However Paul never did serve in Vietnam." Sure he did, he was drafted and served as a flight surgeon in the Air Force from 1963 to 1965 and in the Air National Guard until 1968.

eber322 wrote:

Everything I've ever heard said Newt used several deferments, both school and family, in order to avoid being drafted. Lots of rich people did that. Given that, I'd say Paul is right on. It's not just that Newt didn't serve, he hid from service. There's a big difference between never serving and being a draft dodger.

Ron Paul was drafted and served as a flight surgeon. Don't know why you first said; "I know Paul served in Nam..." then turned around a sentence later and said; "However Paul never did serve in Vietnam." Sure he did, he was drafted and served as a flight surgeon in the Air Force from 1963 to 1965 and in the Air National Guard until 1968.

Ron Paul also said that if you did not serve you can't send troops to war. Newt just cleared it up. He had a kid my father in law was pregnant with my wife he didn't serve. So what Ron Paul was saying is that if you never served then you have no right to support any military action you have no right to go to war. I am sorry eber but Ron Paul was wrong in saying it. This is a far left tactic. This is a tactic that Samuria tried to use on me years back. It is offensive. And Ron Paul saying he served in Nam and lying about is wrong. He served during Nam but never served in Nam. He never was stationed in Nam. Look it up if you can find it I will stand corrected. Just because you served does mean you were stationed in Nam.

Do you agree with Paul that if someone never served they have no right to support any war or if they are elected official they have no right to vote to go to war or use force? Because that is what Ron Paul just said. He used a far left wing tactic. I find it very offensive. I found it offensive when they did it to Bush and offensive when they did it to Clinton. Clinton never served he stayed withing the law.

Ron Paul is jerk he came off as a jerk.

I agree with Ron Paul that somebody who dodged the draft, like Newt and Romney both did, shouldn't be sending anybody else off to die, yes. Newt did what most rich families did, went to college for ten years straight in order to dodge the draft. The poor cowards had to run to Canada as they couldn't use school to save their @sses. Meanwhile Romney's dad sent him to France as a "missionary" to keep him out of the draft, what a joke... a missionary in France in the 60's. Couldn't even go to Africa to make it look good, instead he sat on his rich @ss in France living it up.

eber322 wrote:

I agree with Ron Paul that somebody who dodged the draft, like Newt and Romney both did, shouldn't be sending anybody else off to die, yes. Newt did what most rich families did, went to college for ten years straight in order to dodge the draft. The poor cowards had to run to Canada as they couldn't use school to save their @sses. Meanwhile Romney's dad sent him to France as a "missionary" to keep him out of the draft, what a joke... a missionary in France in the 60's. Couldn't even go to Africa to make it look good, instead he sat on his rich @ss in France living it up.

Did they go to Canada illegally? Do they pay taxes? Are they American citizens? Do they have the right to run for president? Yes to all. Ron Paul who holds the constitution so high would take that right away from them. Newt did not break any laws. I don't care if Newt did what most rich families did. My father in law was poor. He did not serve in Vietnam because his wife was pregnant with my wife. Yet he is one of the most honorable men out there.

Ron Paul took a disgusting leftwing tactic. I don't care if Newt went to college or not he broke no laws. He has ever right if he becomes president to send troops into harms way as if Ron Paul was president.

Skycastle wrote:

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

Do you agree with Paul that if someone never served they have no right to support any war or if they are elected official they have no right to vote to go to war or use force?

NO - he's wrong there. But purposely avoiding the draft is another thing. That shows cowardice, pacifism, or a strong belief that the war is wrong. Newt & Romney aren't pacifists, but I don't know what they've said about the Vietnam war being right or wrong. Anybody know?

Like you, POV, I'm a veteran, but I'm not as offended by Ron Paul's remark here as you are. The man isn't perfect, but he's the best guy running, and the only one who will return us to Constitutional government, thus avoiding the otherwise inevitable fall into communism or fascism.

eber322 wrote:

"I agree with Ron Paul that somebody who dodged the draft, like Newt and
Romney both did, shouldn't be sending anybody else off to die"

Cowards, pacifists, or moral objectors. Which are they?

Newt did it legally some didn't I have no respect for the ones that ran to Canada. They broke the law. This tactic that Ron Paul uses is a favorite of the left. I emailed Ron Pauls website today with my disgust with him. I explained my position very clearly I have yet received a response.

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

]Newt did it legally some didn't I have no respect for the ones that ran to Canada. They broke the law.

Do you realize what you are saying? If you have enough money to buy your way out of the draft that's ok. But if you're poor and run away and hide in Canada because you can't afford ten years of college, then you're bad person. So money makes right.

I don't really care what your Father in law did, there were deferments for things like being the only son in a family, being the sole bread winner for a family with young kids, old people, disabled people, etc where you are the only one able to work, etc. Those are all fine. Using your families money to go to college for ten years straight simply to avoid the draft, when poor people back then couldn't go to college like they can today, or using your money and power as a politician to send your kid to France as a "missionary" to keep them safe while the 'real people' kids get to go off and die is bull.

I have no respect for the people who ran away to Canada either, likewise I have no respect fro the people who used their families power and money to avoid the draft "legally".

Also, Ron Paul didn't say if you never served you can't send others off to war... he said;

Quote :

“Yeah. I think people who don’t serve when they could and they get three or four or even five deferments, they have no right to send our kids off to war…I’m trying to stop the wars. At least I went when they called me up.”

So like I said, he wasn't talking about people who never served, he's talking about draft dodgers like Newt and Mitt. Which is exactly what they are, even though they used their daddies money to make it nice and 'legal'.

Quote :

“Yeah. I think people who don’t serve when they could and they get three or four or even five deferments, they have no right to send our kids off to war…I’m trying to stop the wars. At least I went when they called me up.”

I don't care if they got 100 deferments. They didn't break the law. They are eligible to be president. Again my father in law was poor he didn't go. My father was well off you could consider him rich at the time and my brother went. Newt didn't break any laws is can be president and if did get deferments he still can send kids off to war as per the constitution. The one that Ron Paul upholds so much.

No they didn't break the law, they just used their money to buy their way out. Newt also flat out lied; he said that he wasn't eligible for the draft because he was married and had a kid. Bullshit, that doesn't make you ineligible for the draft. You have any idea how many thousands of Americans were drafted and went over there even though they had families? You know how many thousands were denied deferments even though they had kids?

I said before that I have no respect for those who ran away to Canada. But I have more respect for them than for the rich daddies boys who bought their way out. At least breaking the law requires a little bit of courage, flashing daddies money doesn't.

Anybody who is afraid to fight and hides in school or France for ten years doesn't deserve to send others to die. And no there's nothing in the Constitution that says they aren't eligible to be president, nobody said they weren't, including Ron Paul. It's not a Constitutional question, it's a moral question, why should somebody who is to chicken to risk their own neck be able to sends others to slaughter?

eber322 wrote:

No they didn't break the law, they just used their money to buy their way out. Newt also flat out lied; he said that he wasn't eligible for the draft because he was married and had a kid. Bullshit, that doesn't make you ineligible for the draft. You have any idea how many thousands of Americans were drafted and went over there even though they had families? You know how many thousands were denied deferments even though they had kids?

I said before that I have no respect for those who ran away to Canada. But I have more respect for them than for the rich daddies boys who bought their way out. At least breaking the law requires a little bit of courage, flashing daddies money doesn't.

Anybody who is afraid to fight and hides in school or France for ten years doesn't deserve to send others to die. And no there's nothing in the Constitution that says they aren't eligible to be president, nobody said they weren't, including Ron Paul. It's not a Constitutional question, it's a moral question, why should somebody who is to chicken to risk their own neck be able to sends others to slaughter?

It does not matter they did not break law they are a United States Citizen they have the right to be president. Don't get me wrong I am no real fan of Newt. If they have the right to be president they have the right to send the military in harms way. Sorry Eber but I am very passionate about this. I said the same thing when Clinton was president. He broke no law he was a United States Citizen. If you are a United States Citizen then you have free speech. Telling someone they have no right to think they can send someone into harms way because they themselves did not serve is trying to deny that person their right to free speech. I served under Clinton for 6 years. My brother in law for 8 years. He was sent to Somalia when all that BS came down. He said the said the same thing I did even though he hated Clinton.

Nobody ever said they don't have a legal, Constitutional, right to be president. Ron Paul never said that. Like I said it's a questions of morals, is it right to send others to die when you were to afraid to risk your own @ss? It's not that they don't have a legal right to be president, it's that they don't deserve to be elected because they lack moral character.







Clinton broke all kinds of laws, before, during, and after he was president, but that's a whole other discussion.

eber322 wrote:

Nobody ever said they don't have a legal, Constitutional, right to be president. Ron Paul never said that. Like I said it's a questions of morals, is it right to send others to die when you were to afraid to risk your own @ss? It's not that they don't have a legal right to be president, it's that they don't deserve to be elected because they lack moral character.







Clinton broke all kinds of laws, before, during, and after he was president, but that's a whole other discussion.

That is not what Ron Paul is saying. He is saying that you have no right to send people into harms way. This has been forever a far leftwing argument. I hate when the left does it I hate when Ron Paul does it. If Ron Paul was not saying that he would be saying well you should send your own kids. Sorry eber but I feel it is a disgusting argument.

That's is exactly what I said he is saying; He's saying that if you dodged the draft you have no moral right to send others to do what your afraid to do. That is what Ron Paul said.

eber322 wrote:

That's is exactly what I said he is saying; He's saying that if you dodged the draft you have no moral right to send others to do what your afraid to do. That is what Ron Paul said.

Newt did not dodge the draft he did everything legal. He also makes sounds like he was stationed in Nam and he was not. By his own thinking he has no more right to send people into harms way then Newt does.

Newt did dodge the draft, he stayed in college for multiple years simply to avoid having to honor his draft notice. Just because he found a legal way to avoid his draft summons doesn't change the fact he dodged it. And now Newt lies about it, saying he wasn't eligible for the draft. Bull, he was drafted, if not he wouldn't have needed deferments to avoid going. Ron Paul never said he was stationed in Nam, he said he went and served after he was drafted. He went and served where he was told to, like all military people do.