Thousands of active duty soldiers to march on the Whitehouse for Ron Paul. (Democrats, Republicans)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why is it bad for someone to serve their country and at the same time get skilled training like what the military offers and advertises?
Serving? I thought these folks were complaining about it. I'd assumed these people actually joined to serve because there was a need to. Now I realize they joined to use tax dollars to acquire skills, access their hobby of playing with real guns, and social entitlements, and finally politicizing.
I know there are folks who joined with the intent to "serve", seeing the need (right or wrong). And I see these folks who made the choice to fight and only to make it a political issue later.
Let them march--even better: let them march as part of an event orchestrated by Paul's campaign team. Then all the White House has to do is point out to the whole country that the action wasn't legal. Court martial the marchers and discredit Paul as potentially treasonous.
I guarantee you if Paul thought for one might that might be a possibility, you wouldn't be reading about the march.
The march is not being organized by Ron Paul.
The march is also for those who are NO longer in the Military. Also families of fallen armed forces member as well as civilians who have never served.
If Ron Paul was President your son would be out of harms way. He would be home protecting our borders where he belongs. NOT protecting other countries borders. That is the proper and deserving treatment of all the ones who are serving their country. I wish him all the best and I'll fight for him to come home where he belongs. I was taught to do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24
Not a spokesman? Really?
"The soldier, Cpl. Jesse Thorsen, was brought on stage as a military supporter by the Texas Republican, and appeared thrilled to be participating. Standing beside the candidate, he compared the experience to “meeting a rock star.”
According to you anyone who speaks in favor of a candidate is a spokesman. It's called a supporter. Anytime I speak to people about the policies of Ron Paul I'm a spokesman??? Cpl Thorsen was not speaking on behalf of Ron Paul. You can rewrite the definition if you want but don't expect others to accept it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24
From the above link:
"The military has a detailed set of regulations on service members and political activity. Under a Defense Department directive, troops on active duty are expected to “avoid inferences that their political activities imply or appear to imply official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement.”
Also from the link above:
"Generally speaking, the policy does not prevent troops from participating in partisan activities. But officials tend to draw the line when service members do so while wearing a uniform or acting in an official capacity.
“It’s not in keeping with the spirit of the letter of the DoD directive,” said an Army spokesman, George Wright, without directly addressing the issue of Thorsen’s appearance."
My 'poser' mentality? It's not me who doesn't appear to understand the basic tenets of military service as it relates to political endorsements.
But hey, personal attacks are the last refuge of he who has no defense.
But that is not what it's about and you cannot blame Ron Paul for the willful actions of others. If you refuse to recognize personnel responsibility that is on you. It is poser mentality when try to blame others and call it lack of respect all the while ignoring overwhelming evidence of the respect he has for the ones who wear the uniform and the respect those in uniform give him back. No other candidate has their support and respect like Ron Paul does. But somehow you know better???
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24
You choose to keep ignoring the main issue here, which is adherence to and respect for the USCMJ.
Why is it that you refuse to address that basic fact?
That is your misguided perception. The rules do state he should not be in uniform but that's not the main issue. The main issue is the overwhelming respect Ron Paul gets from the troops. However YOU somehow know better than ALL the ones who respect Ron Paul. That is arrogance and denial at it's finest.
Here are the facts, plain and simple
You show lack of respect for those in the military that support Ron Paul. You base it on nothing more than someone being in a uniform and showing his support for Ron Paul. You don't blame the reporter for doing the same thing which is inconsistent yet you laughingly blame Ron Paul. (I bet you didn't know a reporter was interviewing him first and the feed went down, did you) You are trying to make an issue over something that is not an issue yet blindly ignoring the huge support Ron Paul gets which is unmatched by any other candidate. THAT is why I call it poser mentality.
If Ron Paul was President your son would be out of harms way. He would be home protecting our borders where he belongs. NOT protecting other countries borders. That is the proper and deserving treatment of all the ones who are serving their country. I wish him all the best and I'll fight for him to come home where he belongs. I was taught to do that.
According to you anyone who speaks in favor of a candidate is a spokesman. It's called a supporter. Anytime I speak to people about the policies of Ron Paul I'm a spokesman??? Cpl Thorsen was not speaking on behalf of Ron Paul. You can rewrite the definition if you want but don't expect others to accept it.
But that is not what it's about and you cannot blame Ron Paul for the willful actions of others. If you refuse to recognize personnel responsibility that is on you. It is poser mentality when try to blame others and call it lack of respect all the while ignoring overwhelming evidence of the respect he has for the ones who wear the uniform and the respect those in uniform give him back. No other candidate has their support and respect like Ron Paul does. But somehow you know better???
That is your misguided perception. The rules do state he should not be in uniform but that's not the main issue. The main issue is the overwhelming respect Ron Paul gets from the troops. However YOU somehow know better than ALL the ones who respect Ron Paul. That is arrogance and denial at it's finest.
Here are the facts, plain and simple
You show lack of respect for those in the military that support Ron Paul. You base it on nothing more than someone being in a uniform and showing his support for Ron Paul. You don't blame the reporter for doing the same thing which is inconsistent yet you laughingly blame Ron Paul. (I bet you didn't know a reporter was interviewing him first and the feed went down, did you) You are trying to make an issue over something that is not an issue yet blindly ignoring the huge support Ron Paul gets which is unmatched by any other candidate. THAT is why I call it poser mentality.
And you choose to continue to ignore the ramifications of public support of a political candidate by active duty military personnel.
These folks can support Mr. Paul to their heart's delight within the framework of the USCMJ and I support 100% their right to do so.
I don't care that they support Mr. Paul and why or how you would construe my understanding of the responsibilities inherent in following the USCMJ with a lack of respect for those who took that oath is totally beyond me.
But, hey, one doesn't expect logical thought from cultists.
Oh, and thanks for your concern, but, my son did not join the army to stay home.
Some sanity expressed below:
"But there is one Big Lie that Mr. Paul’s supporters like to throw out there that really gets my dander up.
...
The Paulbot emails me and says, “Ron Paul has more support from the military than any other candidate!†Military personnel email me every day telling me that on base there is at best one Ron Paul supporter and how frustrated they are that the Paulbots are telling this Big Lie."
And you choose to continue to ignore the ramifications of public support of a political candidate by active duty military personnel.
These folks can support Mr. Paul to their heart's delight within the framework of the USCMJ and I support 100% their right to do so.
I don't care that they support Mr. Paul and why or how you would construe my understanding of the responsibilities inherent in following the USCMJ with a lack of respect for those who took that oath is totally beyond me.
I do understand. Don't blame me for your continued misguided perceptions. ONE soldier being in uniform is not an all encompassing example of the lack of respect Ron Paul has for the military.
Your mentality is the same group think mentality racists use. See one person of color do something irrelevant and make a blanket statement about how bad "those people" are. No wonder you don't get it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24
But, hey, one doesn't expect logical thought from cultists.
take off your blinders. Your agenda is getting in the way of common sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24
Oh, and thanks for your concern, but, my son did not join the army to stay home.
Oh and btw YOUR sons reasons for joining have nothing to do with our foreign policy
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24
Some sanity expressed below:
"But there is one Big Lie that Mr. Paul’s supporters like to throw out there that really gets my dander up.
...
The Paulbot emails me and says, “Ron Paul has more support from the military than any other candidate!” Military personnel email me every day telling me that on base there is at best one Ron Paul supporter and how frustrated they are that the Paulbots are telling this Big Lie."
LMAO what a great article you linked. It's got to be one of the dumbest ones I've read and you fell for it, not surprising.
So let me get this straight Ron Paul ONLY gets support from the people with money since they donate. According to you all the other candidates have a large support base from active military personnel but they don't donate. Understood. If they broke down the actual voting and Ron Paul got the most votes from them, you'd say "that doesn't mean he gets more support. The others just didn't vote".
I don't believe the "Military personnel email me every day telling me that on base there is at best one Ron Paul supporter". How absurd. Keep posting I enjoy the laughs from agenda driven people with blinders on.
Serving? I thought these folks were complaining about it. I'd assumed these people actually joined to serve because there was a need to. Now I realize they joined to use tax dollars to acquire skills, access their hobby of playing with real guns, and social entitlements, and finally politicizing.
I know there are folks who joined with the intent to "serve", seeing the need (right or wrong). And I see these folks who made the choice to fight and only to make it a political issue later.
What would you do if your work transferred you to a dangerous part of town? You do understand quite a few don't have a choice since they are forced to go even after serving a tour.
Why do you think teenagers are targeted more? Vulnerable? A lesson learned, don't get backed into a corner.
Sorry AA, but if ALL the military personnel, active or otherwise, were to line up around the Whitehouse, including the administrative staff, I STILL could not support Dr. Paul.
Sorry AA, but if ALL the military personnel, active or otherwise, were to line up around the Whitehouse, including the administrative staff, I STILL could not support Dr. Paul.
Who else, besides our active troops and veterans, would you need to explain that our foreign policy is deeply flawed?
Would you need first-hand experience?
Or would you continue to believe our politicians and the military-industrial complex pundits and the war-profiteering corporations no matter what?
Who else, besides our active troops and veterans, would you need to explain that our foreign policy is deeply flawed?
People who can think without having the need to see the military as their Hobby Lobby, a tax payer sponsored training program and entitlements for life.
The march is also for those who are NO longer in the Military. Also families of fallen armed forces member as well as civilians who have never served.
and if you are right, which I have my doubts, Paul will step in and insist this not happen.
Nita
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
