See other Ron Paul Articles
Title: I Would Not Carry a Gun for the Government
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/11/ ... arry-a-gun-for-the-government/
Published: Nov 9, 2013
Author: Ron Paul
Post Date: 2013-11-09 08:09:33 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 1589
Comments: 57
Ron on his new personal website, and why he became a doctor and not a soldier. When I was thinking of the URL for my new personal homepage, I considered many possibilities. Thanks also to all those who sent other suggestions. But I settled on RonPaulMD.com as reflecting a very important area of my life. To be a physician, and deliver 4,000 babies, was extremely fulfilling. Many times, I see people wearing a “I Was a Ron Paul Baby” t-shirt. Once, when I gave a speech in Iowa, I was told the head of the convention center wanted to talk to me. She had her birth certificate, and this time, she said, she wanted a legible signature! I was delighted to sign it again. RonPaulMD.com highlights the non-political aspect of my life, the part not involved with that great engine of violence in DC, except to oppose it. Though when I first ran for office, advisors told me to emphasize the MD, since it showed I was not a lawyer! Most important, I became a doctor to avoid being a soldier. I knew I would be drafted, and such things as seeking asylum in another country, or becoming a conscientious objector, were out of my range of thought at that time. But if I became a doctor, I knew I would not be given a rifle and told to shoot other young men at government orders. Though the horrible UN oath is used in medical schools these days, I still adhere to the Hippocratic Oath, and its injunction to “First, do no harm.” It’s a great, ancient libertarian principle.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Ada, Lod, Jethro Tull, X-15, Esso, randge, Paulites (#0)
What a hypocritical son of a bitch. Firstly, I suppose being a professional politician, in a criminally corrupt government is an admiral vocation?????? For twenty two long years, Paul sat with the scum lawyers, called them "gentlemen", took our money and left Congress a multi millionaire. Secondly, not a word of concern about those of us at the bottom of the social ladder, that could not find a way out of military service. The unwashed masses had not the brains nor money to attend medical school, and we were not cowardly enough to run. This SOB divided the country enough to elect Obama, TWICE. Now he is scamming people full tilt to elect his son as the next president. Rotten SOB.
Now there's an indictment that must make a fella take pause. The champion of the sons of liberty is just another monkey wrench in the works. Know guns, know safety, know liberty. No guns, no safety, no liberty.
Ron Paul must have read the last verse of "The Young British Soldier" by Kipling: When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, And the women come out to cut up what remains, Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains An' go to your Gawd like a soldier. Go, go, go like a soldier, Go, go, go like a soldier, Go, go, go like a soldier, So-oldier ~of~ the Queen!Most important, I became a doctor to avoid being a soldier.
#2. To: Cynicom (#1)
#3. To: Cynicom (#1)
-Alex Kurtagic
#4. To: Cynicom (#1)
This nation would be SO much better off with the other side of the same coin--Mittens and McAmnesty! With those two bastions of good governance we would have a veritable utopia right now! We should blame any person who dare run against the complete corruption and idiocy of the pre-chosen options in POTUS elections! Ron Paul has alone divided this nation! How dare that dastardly Ron Paul engage the people in any interest in actually abiding by the Constitution! How dare he bring any light whatsoever to the corruption of the Federal Reserve! Such thinking works to DIVIDE this nation of apathetic sheep! It is our complete idiocy and failure to ever go against the pre-chosen options that UNITES this bastion of freedom! This SOB divided the country enough to elect Obama, TWICE
" If you cannot govern yourself, you will be governed by assholes. " Randge, Poet de Forum, 1/11/11
"Life's tough, and even tougher if you're stupid." --John Wayne
#5. To: abraxas (#4)
That would seem to be true perhaps to anyone that still believes there are two parties in our political system. Like Perot, Ron Paul had an excellent opportunity to create a second, viable political party. Perot garnered nearly twenty million votes, that fact put a scare in the ruling elite. The voters must not have any option other than candidates owned by them. A time had arrived that the elite not only could offer a totally unqualified candidate, but also a black man to boot. First time in history, one billion dollars came forth to grease the pathway. To strengthen their hand, they put up a man that no one wanted, McKook. Then by chance or intent up comes Paul with a message no American could deny. Paul gathers up millions of believers, a lot of money, the result being there is NO OTHER EFFORT BY CONSERVATIVE AMERICANS. Result Obama is elected easily. Twice. This nation would be SO much better off with the other side of the same coin--Mittens and McAmnesty!
#6. To: Cynicom (#5)
Result Obama is elected easily. Twice. The results are undeniable. And, I admit to voting for Paul the last time around. He was my choice over Obummer and Romney. ;) Then by chance or intent up comes Paul with a message no American could deny. Paul gathers up millions of believers, a lot of money, the result being there is NO OTHER EFFORT BY CONSERVATIVE AMERICANS.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
#7. To: Cynicom (#5)
My sister, who lives in Chicago, told me that she could not vote for Obama the first time, so she voted for McCain. I told her that she still voted for evil, since BOTH candidates were members of the Council on Foreign Relations. They were BOTH internationalists. The CFR owned them both. ;) The voters must not have any option other than candidates owned by them.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
#8. To: Cynicom (#5)
Perot garnered nearly twenty million votes, that fact put a scare in the ruling elite. The voters must not have any option other than candidates owned by them. one billion dollars came forth to grease the pathway. I presume this means that you do, because you think Ron Paul did great harm to you and the lot of us by getting in the race. Paul learned from Perot how viable the third party run is in this nation. He also ran on the Libertarian ticket some years ago and learned from his own venture into third parties. After Perot, the elites made it a hell of a lot harder to be a viable third party candidate ensuring that you can't even get on the ballot in all 50 states. By all means, explain how you know more about a third party ticket than a person who actually attempted it. Yes a billion invested in Obie.......but that equal amount was invested in Mittens and McAmensty. Goldman Sachs bought both of them, but you continue to pretend these turds were options and superior options to Obie. Options that were squeezed out because a man was on the ballot who wasn't a whore to Goldman Sachs. You can't have it both ways, Cyni. Seriously, you think Ron Paul brought us Obie and that we would be so much better off with the bastions of good governance known as Mittens (elite whore) and McAmnesty (elite whore)? That would seem to be true perhaps to anyone that still believes there are two parties in our political system.
" If you cannot govern yourself, you will be governed by assholes. " Randge, Poet de Forum, 1/11/11
"Life's tough, and even tougher if you're stupid." --John Wayne
#9. To: abraxas (#8)
There is but ONE party. Paul learned from Perot how viable the third party
#10. To: BTP Holdings (#7)
Voting is a first class fraud. My sister, who lives in Chicago, told me that she could not vote for Obama the first time, so she voted for McCain.
#11. To: Cynicom (#9)
Okay, please explain to me how Ron Paul is responsible for this and the fact that ONE PARTY continually wins one way or the other. Please explain how Obie is any difference from Mittens or McAmnesty. You say that Ron Paul is an SOB because we have Obie for 8 years. Do tell, what is the alternative? Is Ron Paul so terrible for attempting to be an alternative to corporate funded two party fraud candidates? There is but ONE party.
" If you cannot govern yourself, you will be governed by assholes. " Randge, Poet de Forum, 1/11/11
"Life's tough, and even tougher if you're stupid." --John Wayne
#12. To: Cynicom (#9)
I know this to be true. The way the PTB see it, since they control both parties, is that they alternate between the parties in power, so the people believe there is change. The facts are that there is no change, or very little, since BOTH parties are controlled by the elite. ;) There is but ONE party.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
#13. To: BTP Holdings (#12)
Americans have to realize there is but one party, if they do not, there is no way of assessing what is going on in this country. I know this to be true.
#14. To: abraxas (#11)
It is impossible to explain to anyone, that believes there are two major political parties. Impossible. Okay, please explain
#15. To: abraxas, Cynicom (#4)
This nation would be SO much better off with the other side of the same coin--Mittens and McAmnesty! With those two bastions of good governance we would have a veritable utopia right now! We should blame any person who dare run against the complete corruption and idiocy of the pre-chosen options in POTUS elections! Ron Paul has alone divided this nation! How dare that dastardly Ron Paul engage the people in any interest in actually abiding by the Constitution! How dare he bring any light whatsoever to the corruption of the Federal Reserve! Such thinking works to DIVIDE this nation of apathetic sheep! It is our complete idiocy and failure to ever go against the pre-chosen options that UNITES this bastion of freedom! Brava! This SOB divided the country enough to elect Obama, TWICE
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from evil. ~ Unk (Paraphrase of Clarke's 3rd Law: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.")
#16. To: Original_Intent (#15)
OI... From Rons capitulation Trotsky memo... " But I am a Republican, and I will remain a Republican." Anyone paying attention, got off the band wagon at that time. Some remained aboard for a second round, there was no excuse for that.
#17. To: abraxas (#11)
You've raised good questions on this thread along with catching incongruities and circles within circles arguments. Okay, please explain to me how Ron Paul is responsible for this and the fact that ONE PARTY continually wins one way or the other.
#18. To: Cynicom (#16)
Oh, I am not denying that he was compromised. I just do not grant that it was voluntary. The evil ones found a way to bend him. I do not know exactly how, but I do believe it to be so. Since I am not a "bandwagon" voter I was on board only so long as the bandwagon was going my way. Then I got off. I think it became clear with all of the stolen votes and sElections that regardless RP would not be allowed to win. Had he won he would be dead. The ruling cabal would have seen to that.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from evil. ~ Unk (Paraphrase of Clarke's 3rd Law: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.")
#19. To: Original_Intent, abraxas, Cynicom (#18)
How was Ron Paul "compromised?" All Ron Paul did was run as a Republican. Since when is that a grave sin? Because Cynicom says it is so? Cynicom votes Dem Party down the line - he's a unionist through and through - and I don't believe for 1 millisecond that Cynicom does not vote. The main question to be asked is not why Ron Paul is a Republican but rather why the current majority of Republican Party politicians are RINO's, why they have strayed so far away from the traditional Republican Party tenets of small government, national defense but not foreign war adventures, etc, etc etc. Here's a short video clip about Ron Paul's answer to the question about why he runs as a Republican: Oh, I am not denying that he was compromised. I just do not grant that it was voluntary. The evil ones found a way to bend him.
#20. To: Original_Intent (#18)
OI... If one takes time to go back to 07, they can find considerable information that to many people, Ron Paul was a stalking horse way back then, for his son Rand. This is short example of what thinking people were considering. "One speculation goes like this. The Paul supporters realize they cannot win as a third party or in the Republican Party as currently constituted. Age aside, Congressman Paul's views are too far outside the mainstream to ever claim a majority but the father, Ron, may be a stalking horse for the son, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) in 2016 or 2020. Romney will still be the 2012 nominee but the Paulistas have other goals." To me the quid pro quo became quite apparent when Rand declared support for Romney, his father did not. Now Romney is out of the way and owes Rand. Had Ron come on strong for Romney, Romney might well have won in 2012, with a win Rand is down and out in near future. Now the Pauls have to contend with the Bush cabal.
#21. To: scrapper2 (#19) (Edited)
This is speculation and clearly labeled as such, but I believe it was through his family - likely threats of "dire consequences". There was a marked change in his behavior and reactions at the time of the South Carolina debates preceding the 2004 sElection. I have detailed my thoughts on this before and I suspect it to be fairly close to the truth. How was Ron Paul "compromised?"
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from evil. ~ Unk (Paraphrase of Clarke's 3rd Law: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.")
#22. To: Cynicom (#20)
Oh, I agree that at this point that is the appearance. I suspect there is more to the story - as I have commented about before. However, it is inference and the reading of persons as an old Poker Player.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from evil. ~ Unk (Paraphrase of Clarke's 3rd Law: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.")
#23. To: Cynicom (#13)
The PTB own both parties. They alternate power between the two so as to make it look like there is change, when, in fact, there is no change. ;) Americans have to realize there is but one party, if they do not, there is no way of assessing what is going on in this country.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
#24. To: Cynicom (#16) (Edited)
Repeating that erroneous meme despite all evidence that's been presented time and again to the contrary makes you sound like a "MSM" tactician, Cyni. After Super Tuesday, when McCain became the clear frontrunner, Ron Paul announced a staff-spending rollback -- not a capitulation. Edited the Quote section and for spelling. Rons capitulation Trotsky memo...
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#25. To: GreyLmist (#24)
Ha... How many votes did Paul receive in 08, in 12? He quit, he took a hike. Olde Ron is back taking in money. For some unknown reason, no millions of supporters, rather a few thousand. Olde saw, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on ME. not a capitulation.
#26. To: GreyLmist (#24)
Grey... "On June 12, 2008, Paul announced that he was ending the presidential campaign, ..........investing the more than $4.7 million of remaining campaign contributions....... to build up the new advocacy group Campaign for Liberty. Although he suspended his campaign, he appeared on the ballot in Montana and Louisiana in the 2008 general election. He was also listed in some states as a write-in candidate. He received over 47,000 votes, giving him the eighth highest popular vote total in the election. Uhhh, ahhh, uhhhh. Olde Ron Had more family on the payroll than any other candidate, either side. Over 60.
#27. To: X-15, All (#3)
Ben Griffin | We Will NOT Fight For Queen and Country - YouTube, 8.75 minutes From the Description section: Oxford Union Website @ http://www.oxford-union.org/ ABOUT THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY: Ben Griffin gives his argument in opposition for fighting for Queen and Country. Filmed on Thursday 7th February 2013 "The Young British Soldier" by Kipling
The Union is the world's most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. It has been established for 189 years, aiming to promote debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe.
MOTION: THIS HOUSE WOULD NOT FIGHT FOR QUEEN AND COUNTRY
RESULT: MOTION DEFEATED
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#28. To: Ada, All, *Music Club* (#0)
Though the horrible UN oath is used in medical schools these days, I still adhere to the Hippocratic Oath, and its injunction to “First, do no harm.” It’s a great, ancient libertarian principle. Ron Paul didn't have to become a doctor to avoid being a soldier. Simply enlisting in a branch of Service other than the Army, as he did, was enough to do that, technically speaking. He could have endeavored to become a Military Chaplain as a conscientious objector but aspired instead to become a doctor to do no harm and what ever he could to help Medically. The point is, he knew he would be drafted and didn't flee to another country to dodge that or seek a deferment as a conscientious objector, nor on any other grounds, as he could have. He didn't want to shoot other young men, so what does that make him, really? Ordinary: Foo Fighters - My Hero Acoustic camelot lives on - YouTube, 6.25 minutes Ron Paul 2016...Run, Ron Paul, Fighter for Peace against the Mongers of War...Please do run again for the Presidency as our Champion of the Constitution. I became a doctor to avoid being a soldier. I knew I would be drafted, and such things as seeking asylum in another country, or becoming a conscientious objector, were out of my range of thought at that time. But if I became a doctor, I knew I would not be given a rifle and told to shoot other young men at government orders.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#29. To: Cynicom (#5)
Paraphrasing someone I read years ago -- at Information Clearing House, iirc the location: After they've been asked politely once to remove those boot(s) but refuse to do so, that indicates deliberate oppression by them and not an unintentional mistake. That's when any reasonable expectations go defunct which they might have had otherwise about politeness niceties towards them duly on the part of the oppressed. to anyone that still believes there are two parties in our political system
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#30. To: GreyLmist (#28)
Glad you mentioned that. I have for some time been trying to find out if olde Ron DID IN FACT TAKE DEFERMENTS. Being near my age, and the draft was not off until Nixon, I have to wonder how he did seven years or more without a deferment. another country to dodge that or seek a deferment
#31. To: GreyLmist (#29)
Grey... Ron Paul "volunteered" in 1968. This is from Selective Service website. Take note at classification of married with children was a "deferment". "PATERNITY DEFERMENTS — Under the Selective Service Act of 1948, Executive Order 9988 (April 22, 1948) provided that husbands who maintained a bona fide family relationship with their wives or children were deferred in Class III-A. But on September 25, 1951, Executive Order 10292 changed the status of childless husbands. They were no longer deferrable in Class III-A, except in cases where they could prove that their induction would cause extreme hardship for their dependents. Fathers maintaining a bona fide family relationship with a child continued to be deferred in class III-A (paternity deferments). Executive Order 10469, July 11, 1953, did away with paternity deferments, except for those men who filed evidence showing paternity before August 25, 1953. Men whose induction would cause extreme hardship to dependents could still qualify for a Class III-A deferment. From March 14, 1963 to April 23, 1970, the III-A classification was broadened to include all men who were fathers. President Kennedy issued Executive Order 11098 on March 14, 1963, to expand entitlement to this paternity deferment. For a man to qualify for a III-A deferment as a “Kennedy father,” there had to be a “bona fide family relationship in their home” between the father and child. The definition of a man’s “child” in the regulations of the period included “a legitimate or illegitimate child from the date of its conception.” Therefore, the III-A classification could be granted during his wife’s (or significant other’s) pregnancy. The III-A classification also remained available to men, married or single, whose induction would be a hardship to their dependents I think olde Ron was less than forthcoming.
#32. To: Cynicom, christine, All (#26) (Edited)
Cross-referencing the seeming prelude to your Ron Paul Post #11 at 4um Title: Actual Media Proof They Are Blacking Out Ron Paul! It fell way short so we ate the difference. This was an effort above and beyond our personal financial support. Your concern about MSM blanking out Paul was proven to Christine and me when just prior to the primary, the paper "lost" the two thousand dollar ad and it never appeared. It was quite obvious they did not want the ad to appear, so they refunded the money. With deep apologies of course. The paper refunded the ad money eventually, so I suspect that you started becoming disappointed with Ron Paul when his "marketability" as an '08 candidate fell short of fully recouping your personal donation-investment to zero actual output for you by way of the 4um fund drive. If so, I think your persecution faultings and failings of him as monetarily driven are more than a little ironic. Random excerpts from your posts in this thread: Americans have to realize there is but one party, if they do not, there is no way of assessing what is going on in this country. It is impossible to explain to anyone, that believes there are two major political parties. Impossible. Voting is a first class fraud. Like Perot, Ron Paul had an excellent opportunity to create a second, viable political party. up comes Paul with a message no American could deny. Paul gathers up millions of believers, a lot of money, the result being there is NO OTHER EFFORT BY CONSERVATIVE AMERICANS. This SOB divided the country enough to elect Obama, TWICE. Result Obama is elected easily. Twice. How many votes did Paul receive in 08, in 12? He quit, he took a hike. "On June 12, 2008, Paul announced that he was ending the presidential campaign, ..........investing the more than $4.7 million of remaining campaign contributions....... to build up the new advocacy group Campaign for Liberty. Although he suspended his campaign, he appeared on the ballot in Montana and Louisiana in the 2008 general election. He was also listed in some states as a write-in candidate. He received over 47,000 votes, giving him the eighth highest popular vote total in the election. Uhhh, ahhh, uhhhh. Ron Paul created a Revolutionary Party-wing and without that even having to be put to a vote, which you consider a fraudulent exercise in futility anyway. That's where you ought to explain why what he managed to do to provide an alternative choice (underfunded as he was in comparison to the bigger spender candidates) still wasn't good enough for you. Ron Paul never received even close to enough votes officially in either election to divisively impact results such that Obama was selected twice. Four Third Party candidates, which he wasn't, got about 1.5 million votes officially between them in '08 and that might have had some impact on how easily or not Obama first went to the White House. In 2012, the comedienne, Roseanne Barr, offically got more votes as a Presidential candidate than Ron Paul. He was officially unlisted amidst the anonymous "Others" category and betwixt them all they didn't even accumulate 1/2 of 1% of the nation's vote, according to the tallyers. I don't know why you persist in wrongfully blaming Ron Paul for Obama's White House residency instead of any of those who had higher vote counts to that effect. I don't know what you've implied previously about 10 million fewer votes for Obama in 2012 but still enough to give him another 4 years, as if that's somehow reflective of Ron Paul divisions rather than a decrease in Obama's approval ratings and disgust with the rigged voting system (that many others besides just you have seen more clearly as fraud). I don't know either why you persist in wrongfully claiming that Ron Paul quit/took a hike when he never withdrew from either race, in '08 or '12. That is an indisputable fact of "mainstream" records, even, and what you've omitted from your June 12, 2008 reference is that his suspension on that date of active campaigning for delegates, not withdrawl, was 9 days after the very last States had already voted in their Primaries/Caucuses. Our elections shouldn't be determined, as they are, by monied interests and unfair Party controllers. Under those disadvantageous circumstances, could he have been nominated despite those formidable hurdles, were it not for those errantly campaigning against him, such as yourself? I don't know that for sure but do think his chances would have been much better and also that many have a better sense of affiliation with our Constitution because of his campaigns. You evidently see it otherwise, don't care that he wasn't nominated, are even gleeful that he wasn't and I count that as not something for Americans or the rest of the world to celebrate. I expect you'll be wanting to count admonishingly the number of times I've used the word "you" in this posting and forms therein -- and that might be all you'll take into account or give an account for from it. Or, maybe not if I've used more words than you'd rather count through. If so, I'm prepared too that you might not think much of it. I know you can type very articulately when you want to so whatever you can manage to say other than your coded "uhhh" retort, I'd count as something perhaps better than nothing. Edited for spelling, grammar and punctuation. angst loathing and hyperactive monetary-bashing focus: Christine and I took a leap of faith to the tune of near two thousand dollars on behalf of Ron Paul for an ad in the Manchester newspaper. We solicited here on 4um for financial help to underwrite the cost.
There is but ONE party.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#33. To: GreyLmist (#32)
Grey... Hint... Lengthy posts are not read by most. angst 1 (ängkst) n. A feeling of anxiety or apprehension often accompanied by depression. You really figure that fits with the millions that found out Paul had clay feet????? Just perhaps the remaining few are unable to accept that they were taken in. Such people would be called RUBES,
#34. To: Cynicom (#33) (Edited)
You're right about the word "angst" not being the most apt descriptor. I still have time to replace it but was in a hurry to post what was written "as is" and then make corrections as needed due to some technical difficulties at the time. As for the rest of your post, says you but not me. Edited sentence 2 for grammar and punctuation. angst 1 (ängkst) n. A feeling of anxiety or apprehension often accompanied by depression.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#35. To: GreyLmist (#34)
Well now young lady, I am a RUBE, but never been accused of being angsty. The word even sounds like one that needs a doctors attention.
#36. To: Cynicom (#35)
Hillbilly translation please. angsty
#37. To: Jethro Tull (#36)
Well, actually just seeing if Grey was paying attention. I do have a rather large verbal vocabulary. Here in Hickville...ANGSTY...means a rube that could not care damn less about some politician. They all are bottom feeders. Hillbilly translation please.
#38. To: Jethro Tull (#36)
I would have made a good Ben Tillman in the Senate. Course, prolly been locked up also.
#39. To: Cynicom (#30)
Dr. Ron Paul served as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force from 1963-1968, no deferments, he could have been posted to Greenland if the Air Force wished. I have to wonder how he did seven years or more without a deferment.
-Alex Kurtagic
#40. To: Cynicom (#38)
Any relation to Benjamin Tillman of the Delancy Street Tillmans? I would have made a good Ben Tillman in the Senate.
#41. To: X-15 (#39)
X... See my nr 31 here. Selective service calls them deferments. Most recognize only student deferments, however that is incorrect. We all start out as 1-A Deferments for many causes are added until one is classified 4-F and then he has it made. Paul was married and whacked out kids. When he was called in, it was because of a totally different SS system. Medical people of many stripes come under totally different regulations.
.
.
.
Comments (42 - 57) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest