Weaver95: tomasso: The difference in their situations resulted simply from the difference in their ages. Paternity was not a deferment between 1953 and 1963. Paul just got a tough break. He was drafted in 1963, and President Kennedy re-instituted the paternity deferment just a few months later (by executive order on September 10th).

Paternity WAS an exemption starting in September of 1963, in the period when Newt would have been drafted, so Newt's point was completely correct. There was no question of his being drafted. Because Newt was married with a child after the Kennedy order, being drafted was simply never the oppressive reality that it had been for Paul and his contemporaries in a similar situation just a few short years earlier.

By the way, Paul is being disingenuous when he said "I went." He didn't have the choice to stay out. He could either have entered the Army as a private or had to agree to join the medical corps for assignment as an officer to any branch of service where he was needed. He chose to the medical corps.

politics is perception tho. And Ron Paul just made Gingrich look like a draft dodging hippie.

THIS. By the time you explain that, your average GOP voter has lost his or her attention span and is fixating on O RLY Taint's latest.

Of course, that same voter has the hindsight of a gnat - so Newt may not yet be done.

Newt's most awkward moment last night (as it will be on any given night) was when he was defending the sanctity of marriage.

Romney dodging the contraceptive question was annoying, especially since his non-answers finally got the crowd to start booing that tiny liberal for no dropping it. Huntsman's quip about it after mentioning he had 7 kids was funny, though.

GAT_00: For the record, there were two Presidents who had a large number of Americans die on their watch who were not military members in some way - Wilson and FDR. Both of which obviously served in World Wars and both of which were precipitated by someone attacking us. Every other war we have ever had happened with a military veteran sending American troops to their death.

This is the dumbest farking argument. Unless farking WWIII breaks out, you statistically want someone who isn't a veteran as President if you don't want large number of troop deaths.

It's amazing how quickly so many people forget "Afghanistan & Iraq" and "Chimpy McFlightsuit."

Watching him belittle McCain and Kerry for their service was particularly galling.

Yes, it is a very good thing that we have a civilian controlled military, but we *just* saw that system fail utterly. So while yes, we have had presidents with no military experience treat the military responsibly, I understand and share the preferrence for a CiC who belongs to the club my father called "Them's That Been Shot At."

Bathia_Mapes: As much as I dislike Ron Paul, that was indeed a true OH SNAP! moment.

Ron Paul is a clever sonofabiatch who just has the old-school version of internet overdose. It's not unusual for him to be pretty insightful or funny when he's not saying something crazy.

Jim_Callahan: Bathia_Mapes: As much as I dislike Ron Paul, that was indeed a true OH SNAP! moment.

Ron Paul is a clever sonofabiatch who just has the old-school version of internet overdose. It's not unusual for him to be pretty insightful or funny when he's not saying something crazy.

He reminds me of Perot, but much of his current platform is a big turn off as well.

The most dominant theme in Newt's campaign for the Presidency is that he's a whiny biatch. Almost every time he opens his repulsive yap, he is biatching about gotcha questions and personal attacks. Obama won in 2008 in part because he appeared Presidential, and a large part of appearing Presidential is not allowing your opponent's inevitable attack machines to make you look flustered and weak. Newt is already making it look to the public like he is unable to handle the stress of the job.

GAT_00: For the record, there were two Presidents who had a large number of Americans die on their watch who were not military members in some way - Wilson and FDR. Both of which obviously served in World Wars and both of which were precipitated by someone attacking us. Every other war we have ever had happened with a military veteran sending American troops to their death.

This is the dumbest farking argument. Unless farking WWIII breaks out, you statistically want someone who isn't a veteran as President if you don't want large number of troop deaths.

Both of which were precipitated (I think you meant "preceded") by someone attacking us? You really need to learn your history.

The US was involved in both world wars long before any attacks on us.

And thus, Ron Paul instantly ascended to the Presidency!

...oh wait, we still have TEN MORE FARKING MONTHS OF THIS BULLSHIAT!

cmunic8r99: Interesting paragraph in that article:

President Kennedy set up Executive Order 11119 (signed on September 10, 1963), granting an exemption from conscription for married men between the ages of 19 and 26. President Johnson later rescinded the exemption for married men without children by Executive Order 11241 (signed on August 26, 1965 and going into effect on midnight of that date). However, married men with children or other dependents and men married before the Executive Order went into effect were still exempt. President Reagan revoked both of them with Executive Order 12553 (signed on February 25, 1986).

What year were Newt and Paul talking about?

Newt was born in 1943, so by the time the automatic marriage deferment was established by Kennedy in 1963, he was 20. For about two years, then, he was eligible to be drafted but wasn't.

That's because he DID receive a deferment -- for being a student.

Sgt Otter: Curiously enough, despite being a C-130 pilot, most of Perry's photos from his Air Force days have him posing with fighter jets.

Sounds like a textbook example of a 'poser'.

I can't wait until the Vietnam generation is out of politics. This tired old canard of who didn't get drafted why in every election cycle is...well.....tired. And I didn't see Gingrich getting mad, the end of the clip, he seems to have handled pretty well, shrugging and saying he wasn't eligible for the draft...

A fine biatchslap.

Romney's sons can't spend their time in the military because they're busy serving their country by working on their father's campaign.

Sgt Otter: KiplingKat872: GAT_00: For the record, there were two Presidents who had a large number of Americans die on their watch who were not military members in some way - Wilson and FDR. Both of which obviously served in World Wars and both of which were precipitated by someone attacking us. Every other war we have ever had happened with a military veteran sending American troops to their death.

This is the dumbest farking argument. Unless farking WWIII breaks out, you statistically want someone who isn't a veteran as President if you don't want large number of troop deaths.

It's amazing how quickly so many people forget "Afghanistan & Iraq" and "Chimpy McFlightsuit."

Watching him belittle McCain and Kerry for their service was particularly galling.

Yes, it is a very good thing that we have a civilian controlled military, but we *just* saw that system fail utterly. So while yes, we have had presidents with no military experience treat the military responsibly, I understand and share the preferrence for a CiC who belongs to the club my father called "Them's That Been Shot At."

And former Air Force officer Rick Perry wants to go back into Iraq.

Curiously enough, despite being a C-130 pilot, most of Perry's photos from his Air Force days have him posing with fighter jets.

"Thems that been SHOT AT."

Since you seem to have missed that part.

I'm on the fence about this. On the one hand, I appreciate any time that fat load gets his lunch handed to him. And having it served by Ron Paul, a strange freakish old man, makes it all the more delightful. Still, I don't subscribe to the idea that a President MUST have had military service to be qualified to order men into combat. One of the hallmarks of our democracy is civilian control of the military. Let the military get too clubby and start making all their own decisions, and you have the massive waste and fraud we have at best, and North Korea at worst.

What we really need in this country is a draft. The real chickenhawks are average citizens who scream GO BOMB IRAN BACK TO STONE AGE when they have no real risk of ever seeing combat. As a country, we might be more tempered in our decision to use military force if we had to really sacrifice in the use of it.

//BTW, I have a 17 year old son so I understand the risks here.

RoyBatty: The difference is that Paul has disavowed the newsletters, the sentiments, has said he bears moral responsibility for them nonetheless, and there is no other evidence of racism in his public comments or his legislation since then

Except wanting to repeal the 14th amendment and all the other kooky shiat he and his son spout.

Close2TheEdge: I'm on the fence about this. On the one hand, I appreciate any time that fat load gets his lunch handed to him. And having it served by Ron Paul, a strange freakish old man, makes it all the more delightful. Still, I don't subscribe to the idea that a President MUST have had military service to be qualified to order men into combat. One of the hallmarks of our democracy is civilian control of the military. Let the military get too clubby and start making all their own decisions, and you have the massive waste and fraud we have at best, and North Korea at worst.

What we really need in this country is a draft. The real chickenhawks are average citizens who scream GO BOMB IRAN BACK TO STONE AGE when they have no real risk of ever seeing combat. As a country, we might be more tempered in our decision to use military force if we had to really sacrifice in the use of it.

//BTW, I have a 17 year old son so I understand the risks here.

A draft during their lifetime didn't teach many of these clowns because they got out of it.

While I hate drafts (the best militaries are volunteer militaries, drafts are good for nothing but to create cannonfodder) do think some form of mandatory national service, like the Swiss have but for both genders, could be very useful.

Come on, libtards. You can't ask Newtie to join in a war he loudly championed at the top of his lungs. That isn't like asking him to leave a wife that has cancer. That shiat is dangerous,

From Factcheck.org - Paul blasted Gingrich for avoiding the draft during Vietnam, and Gingrich said Paul had a "long history" of inaccuracies. The truth is Gingrich was both a student and a father at the time, and probably would have failed the physical anyway, according to his stepfather, an Army man. lol

KiplingKat872: Close2TheEdge: I'm on the fence about this. On the one hand, I appreciate any time that fat load gets his lunch handed to him. And having it served by Ron Paul, a strange freakish old man, makes it all the more delightful. Still, I don't subscribe to the idea that a President MUST have had military service to be qualified to order men into combat. One of the hallmarks of our democracy is civilian control of the military. Let the military get too clubby and start making all their own decisions, and you have the massive waste and fraud we have at best, and North Korea at worst.

What we really need in this country is a draft. The real chickenhawks are average citizens who scream GO BOMB IRAN BACK TO STONE AGE when they have no real risk of ever seeing combat. As a country, we might be more tempered in our decision to use military force if we had to really sacrifice in the use of it.

//BTW, I have a 17 year old son so I understand the risks here.

A draft during their lifetime didn't teach many of these clowns because they got out of it.

While I hate drafts (the best militaries are volunteer militaries, drafts are good for nothing but to create cannonfodder) do think some form of mandatory national service, like the Swiss have but for both genders, could be very useful.

I could get behind a "Citizenship requires service" platform, especially if there was a non-combat option available Congrats, you've graduated highschool/college. Now either spend two years helping make society better, or you don't get to vote/run for office/live here (Or whatever).
/Probably to close to SOCIALISMRH!#$@!#$! to ever take off here.

RoyBatty: Weaver95: I think RP knocked Gingrich back on his pins and the Gingrich was not pleased.

I have no ideas what the rules for getting drafted were in Vietnam, but could Newt have been accurate?

Paul went to Vietnam as a Flight Surgeon, M.D.
Gingrich would have gone as Gomer Pyle, Ph.D.

Is it possible that Newt was not eligible for the draft because of his wife and kid, but that Paul would have been? And that Newt didn't have to ask for a deferment or special treatment (ala Bush).

Which is not to say it's not fun seeing Newt squirm and squirm and squirm.


Newt was accurate. MDs were under different draft rules than everybody else.

Not so much of a snap, after all, except to the less educated watching the debate.

davidphogan
Ron Paul may be a crazy old racist asshole, but at least he's better than your typical Republican.

I'll take the crazy old racist as prez for four years. Can't be any worse than what we've had for decades and I need four years of laughs.

riverwalk barfly: From Factcheck.org - Paul blasted Gingrich for avoiding the draft during Vietnam, and Gingrich said Paul had a "long history" of inaccuracies. The truth is Gingrich was both a student and a father at the time, and probably would have failed the physical anyway, according to his stepfather, an Army man. lol

See. He was not only was a chiickenhawk, he was also a fatty fat fat fark.LEAVE NEWTIE ALONE!!!!!!

NIXON YOU DOLT!!!!!: I can't wait until the Vietnam generation is out of politics. This tired old canard of who didn't get drafted why in every election cycle is...well.....tired. And I didn't see Gingrich getting mad, the end of the clip, he seems to have handled pretty well, shrugging and saying he wasn't eligible for the draft...

Yes, that was a very convincing "Harrumpf, harrumpf. Hey, I didn't get a harrumpf outa that guy. You watch your ass!". I can just imagine how convincing he would be against Putin or Ammadinnerjacket.

Mart Laar's beard shaver: Newt was accurate. MDs were under different draft rules than everybody else.

Not so much of a snap, after all, except to the less educated watching the debate.

Except that Gingrich still could have gone. He didn't.

WaitWhatWhy: I could get behind a "Citizenship requires service" platform, especially if there was a non-combat option available Congrats, you've graduated highschool/college. Now either spend two years helping make society better, or you don't get to vote/run for office/live here (Or whatever).
/Probably to close to SOCIALISMRH!#$@!#$! to ever take off here.

Only if it is retroactive. That means everyone has to pitch in the first year, not just the newly graduated.

Mart Laar's beard shaver: Newt was accurate.

ORLY? Because he flatly asserted that he didn't request a deferment. That's not true; he requested and obtained a student deferment before Sept. 1963, when Kennedy established the marriage exemption.

Libtards, you are totally missing the picture. Sure, Newtie could have gone to war. But then, what would have become of his reputation as a hypocritical chickenhawk sack of shiat?

With Gingrich's father being a Lieutenant Colonel, what are the chances he was actually in the line of fire in the Mekong Delta?

/Just asking.

I love the smell of napalm in the morning.

Farking While Farking: I love the smell of nafacepalm in the morning.

FTF everyone that watched the debate

Farking While Farking: I love the smell of napalm in the morning.

Smells like Newtie avoiding his call to serve when his country needed him.

Not to denigrate Ron Paul's military service but he served as a flight surgeon in the Air Force after graduating from medical school. There were different rules for drafting doctors. Newt used the married with children deferment to quite possibly avoid combat in Vietnam. But he could have still volunteered to serve. Which is really why Paul's point is well-taken. That there are too many chicken-hawks out there, like Newt, Chaney, etc.. who love to send others to their deaths without any empathy for what it may be like to actually serve in combat.

PonceAlyosha: WaitWhatWhy: I could get behind a "Citizenship requires service" platform, especially if there was a non-combat option available Congrats, you've graduated highschool/college. Now either spend two years helping make society better, or you don't get to vote/run for office/live here (Or whatever).
/Probably to close to SOCIALISMRH!#$@!#$! to ever take off here.

Only if it is retroactive. That means everyone has to pitch in the first year, not just the newly graduated.

That seems fair, but you'd need to give them some sort of financial protection for stuff like morgage, etc. An exemption for people above retirement age might be a good idea as well (although they should be able to join in if they want). Honestly, you'd probably need some folks with experience in most fields to get things started anyways. Plus, then the newly graduated would basically have an intership in their chosen field.

On an unrelated note:




Can I borrow a cup of spiders?

/peterlorre