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.
I think any self-proclaimed freedom-loving American who often hearkens back to the founding days of our country and why we're unique would be horrified at the idea of members of our standing military turning out to support a particular political candidate or party. Just what else would Ron Paul supporters justify?
Question, if we are using the numbers of people who shows up for an event as an indication of some form of support, would we not also use those same numbers to show a lack of support?
If there are 22,000,000 or so veterans in the USA and about 1,500,000 active military for a combination of over 23,000,000 not including friends and family, don't we subtract the number of people who did show up at the rally from the total members of that group and that shows the lack of support from that group towards that person?
If we say "Wow, look at all those who showed up and that indicates support" shouldn't we also look at all those who didn't show up as an indication of those who don't supprot the person.
If thousands of active military marching on the White House, and turning their backs on the President doesn't wake a lot of people up to the realities of the direction our country has been heading, then their is truly no hope.
Keep in mind, these are ACTIVE military in uniform marching on the White House which is more than frowned upon. They are going to make sure that their voices are going to be heard.
PS. Be sure to watch the very powerful 20 minute speech at the bottom. It actually put me in tears.
Yeah, baby! People are waking up! And I was losing hope for a split second there I agree with Ron Paul --we support the troops by bringing them home- not endangering them for profits.....
Question, if we are using the numbers of people who shows up for an event as an indication of some form of support, would we not also use those same numbers to show a lack of support?
If there are 22,000,000 or so veterans in the USA and about 1,500,000 active military for a combination of over 23,000,000 not including friends and family, don't we subtract the number of people who did show up at the rally from the total members of that group and that shows the lack of support from that group towards that person?
If we say "Wow, look at all those who showed up and that indicates support" shouldn't we also look at all those who didn't show up as an indication of those who don't supprot the person.
Sure, because nothing is ever worth fighting for unless the majority participate. Everyone knows that
If you paid attention, you wouldn't have trouble answering a simple question... "Why did they sign up"?
So let us see...
Let us see...
Let us see...
And we see... you claimed "not getting it".
[url="http://askville.amazon.com/young-people-join-military/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=8477890"]Cute, and mostly stupid.
Here's the thing. You made that up. I didn't "claim" anything, that was your ill conceived perception. I asked you to explain since I didnt understand, nothing more, nothing less. Your ill conceived perception gave you YOUR incorrect answer. That's on you. But you're a mind reader right Kreskin?
I look to the ones who would know the answer, the ones closest to the question yet you ridicule that with "cute mostly stupid". I'll tell you what's stupid, people who think they know better than the ones involved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
Joining the military was merely about a "hobby" or playing games. And now is the time to go and complain about the outcome. How mature of them.
Yes how immature of these teenagers to not know what they are getting into. Shame more didn't have your maturity and didn't make mistakes at that age. (so what happened that you lost that know how? ) I know I made enough big mistakes at that age that affected me long term. (None life threatening though.) And I'm better off than than quite a few people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
Must suck to be at the receiving end.
Receiving end of what? Guess since I asked you to clarify that's another run around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
Stop complaining about freedom with the run-around show you just performed.
LMAO You made up. There was no run around on my part.
FYI: to take part in the march next month, we have to provide proof of service so yes, everyone marching in the front will be Veterans. The ones in the back will be other supporters.
wait a minute, all you supporters are doing is confusing the issue and contridicting each other: the poster did not say vets, he said active, so which is it?
Encouraging people to disobey the regulations that they agreed to adhere to is a complete sign of disrespect.
Using uniformed active duty personnel to make political statements is a complete sign of disrespect.
But bringing them home to protect our borders like the Constitution says which would take them out of harms way isn't respect? Understood, the actual life is less important than a perception of yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24
You can parrot the talking points about donations, etc. all you like.
The fact remains that Mr. Paul is using, or is attempting to use, members of the military for his own political purposes,
No it's not a fact, just a misguided perception of yours.
Question do you think Pauls campaign is organizing the march?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24
which as far as I can tell, has absolutely nothing to do with protecting our borders or any other sanctioned duty.
You can't possible tell or make an informed decision. If you were informed you'd know everything he says about foreign policy revolves around bringing the troops home yet YOU say different.
What you say goes against everything Ron Paul has every said and voted on about foreign policy and bringing the troops home.
As I type this the crowd at the Ron Paul speech after the NH campaign people are shouting "bring them home, bring them home". but you know better right?
Here's the thing. You made that up. I didn't "claim" anything, that was your ill conceived perception. I asked you to explain since I didnt understand, nothing more, nothing less. Your ill conceived perception gave you YOUR incorrect answer. That's on you. But you're a mind reader right Kreskin?
The only thing I've got to read is mindless posts. After all, you answered the question you supposedly didn't get, so I will leave it at that.
Quote:
Yes how immature of these teenagers to not know what they are getting into.
Correct. Only idiots would treat "service" as a replacement for "Hobby Lobby" or as an institution to get free training (and entitlement programs for life).
Quote:
Shame more didn't have your maturity and didn't make mistakes at that age.
Well, there is greater shame when people age, but don't mature. Age is not a guarantee of maturity.
wait a minute, all you supporters are doing is confusing the issue and contridicting each other: the poster did not say vets, he said active, so which is it?
Nita
It is BOTH! I am part of the group, it is for anyone who is serving the country or has served!
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.
I agree with Ron Paul --we support the troops by bringing them home- not endangering them for profits.....
) I know I made enough big mistakes at that age that affected me long term. (None life threatening though.) And I'm better off than than quite a few people.
