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: 1674
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
Comments (1-16) not displayed.
.
.
.
#17. To: abraxas (#11)
You've raised good questions on this thread along with catching incongruities and circles within circles arguments.
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 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:
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.
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. "“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 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 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. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
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. ------- "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
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.
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.
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 ------- "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
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. ------- "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
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. ------- "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
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.
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.
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. ------- "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
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,
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. ------- "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
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.
Hillbilly translation please.
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.
I would have made a good Ben Tillman in the Senate. Course, prolly been locked up also.
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. 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)
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)
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)
#21. To: scrapper2 (#19)
(Edited)
How was Ron Paul "compromised?"
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)
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)
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.
#24. To: Cynicom (#16)
(Edited)
Rons capitulation Trotsky memo...
#25. To: GreyLmist (#24)
not a capitulation.
#26. To: GreyLmist (#24)
#27. To: X-15, All (#3)
"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
#28. To: Ada, All, *Music Club* (#0)
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.
#29. To: Cynicom (#5)
to anyone that still believes there are two parties in our political system
#30. To: GreyLmist (#28)
another country to dodge that or seek a deferment
#31. To: GreyLmist (#29)
#32. To: Cynicom, christine, All (#26)
(Edited)
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.
#33. To: GreyLmist (#32)
#34. To: Cynicom (#33)
(Edited)
angst 1 (ängkst) n. A feeling of anxiety or apprehension often accompanied by depression.
#35. To: GreyLmist (#34)
#36. To: Cynicom (#35)
angsty
#37. To: Jethro Tull (#36)
Hillbilly translation please.
#38. To: Jethro Tull (#36)
#39. To: Cynicom (#30)
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.
#42. To: Jethro Tull (#40)
hehehehehe On Delancy street????? Not a chance. Ben was NOT Irish. Any relation to Benjamin Tillman of the Delancy Street Tillmans?
#43. To: Cynicom (#42)
I could tell he wasn't a Mick when he ordered a celery tonic rather than a 'bat and a ball'. I'm thinking you know what a bat and ball is :) Ben was NOT Irish.
#44. To: Jethro Tull (#43)
I do not.
#45. To: Cynicom, abraxas (#4)
Cyni, when I saw this was by Ron Paul, the first person I thought of was you! Figured you'd be in the first 3 comments and you didn't disappoint. Surely this is a personal vendetta on your part. To say this: And then this (which I agree with completely): If you personally despise Ron Paul, that's your right. But it seems that's all it is. Best to you.... This SOB divided the country enough to elect Obama, TWICE
That would seem to be true perhaps to anyone that still believes there are two parties in our political system. ..... There is but ONE party.
#46. To: Cynicom (#31) (Edited)
From March 14, 1963 to April 23, 1970, the III-A classification was broadened to include all men who were fathers. I think olde Ron was less than forthcoming. On your Selective Service/Draft Deferments info and slipshod, slapdashery regarding your designated "enemy", Ron Paul [with bracketed inserts by me]: As a junior at suburban Dormont High School, he was the 220-yard dash state champion. He graduated from Gettysburg College with a [Bachelor of Science] degree in Biology in 1957. [He also became a married man that year and Rand, who isn't listed at the Wikipedia link as the eldest of his 5 children but as the middle child, was born in January of 1963.] Paul earned a Doctor of Medicine degree from Duke University's School of Medicine in 1961, and completed his medical internship at the Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit and his residency in obstetrics and gynecology at Magee- Womens Hospital in Pittsburgh. [In the early years of the Viet Nam War,] Paul served as a flight surgeon in the United States Air Force from 1963 to 1965 and then in the United States Air National Guard from 1965 to 1968. So, I'm not getting whatever Ron Paul problem you were trying to suggest as to Draft Deferments, which weren't automatic (not even for men with family dependents) and the possibility was ever-present that men could be Drafted into a War at anytime it might occur. Looks to me like he was eligible for Deferment but didn't go that route, as he could have, since he volunteered instead. P.S. Per our discussion at #33 and #34 of the word "angst" as misapplied, I've changed that in line 1 of #32 to "loathing". If you would cease and desist with your baselessly inimical missions against Ron Paul and think of him in French more like an "en ami"/as a friend, that would be so nice. Edited for spacing, punctuation and sentence 1 of the next to last paragraph. Ron Paul "volunteered" in 1968.
Ronald Ernest Paul was born on August 20, 1935, in Pittsburgh
-------
"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
#47. To: Cynicom (#35) (Edited)
The word even sounds like one that needs a doctors attention. Ok, you're probably right that I am a young lady to a "RUBE" elder like you. :) (Your word, not mine.) I recommend Ron Paul, of course, as a good doctor for your "rube/hicks" cubist shape-shifting, as well as any traces of politico angstiness. How, though, is it that you reached the age you are as an American (if indeed you really are an American) without even knowing about the basic tools of Baseball? [Edit to reference your Post #44] Helpful hint 4 u, Cynicomster [bracketed insert mine]: Yogi Berra Quote: It gets dusk early out there. -- Referring to the bad lighting conditions in left field at [Yankee?] stadium; or something similarly along those lines. Edited for punctuation, spelling and rewording + /s notation for sarcasm. Well now young lady, I am a RUBE, but never been accused of being angsty.
-------
"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
#48. To: GreyLmist (#47)
Again, this from SS and I think it is quite plain. 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.
#49. To: Cynicom, X-15 (#48)
Ron Paul "volunteered" in 1968. Well I don't think whatever you're insinuating about it is quite plain. What is it that you think I'm missing by reposting that for me again? Did you miss the places where I not only told you at #46 that Ron Paul volunteered for the Air Force in 1963 (not 1968, as you keep saying when, actually, his Military Service was over that year) but X-15 also told you at #39: "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." They could also have assigned him to the vicinity of Viet Nam's battlefield-frontlines, if they chose to do that. Why are you so like totally devoid of any Air Force fellowship whatsoever with respect to Ron Paul? Are you still stuck recalcitrantly in "MSM" deceptive-meme mode or what? Again, this from SS and I think it is quite plain.
-------
"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
#50. To: Cynicom (#44)
This would be a bat and a ball. 
#51. To: Jethro Tull (#50)
I had no clue.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
#52. To: Lod (#51)
I learned it as a kid. It must be a regional thing up here.
#53. To: Lod, Jethro Tull (#51)
Me neither. Broaden my education.
#54. To: GreyLmist (#49)
There we go again, using big words. I drank a bit, smoked time or two but was never introduced to insinuatin. The Preacher told me once I was good at sinnin but I didnt know what he meant. PS...Ron Paul took a dive, TWICE. hehehehehe Well I don't think whatever you're insinuating
#55. To: Cynicom, X-15 (#54)
There we go again, using big words. I drank a bit, smoked time or two but was never introduced to insinuatin. The Preacher told me once I was good at sinnin but I didnt know what he meant. suggest or hint (something bad or reprehensible) in an indirect and unpleasant way. I overestimated your verbal dictionary due to your braggings about that at #37. You can swap out that word and replace it with the more simplistic "implying" if that helps. If you don't then address the issues about what you think I've missed in your Draft Deferments postings, I shall presumably have to re-guage the limits of your serious attention at far fewer words than X-15 posted to you at #39 on the subject, which was very few and very precisely just one sentence but that you somehow seemingly missed altogether. Yes, that is a remark so silly as to be funny but it's wrong and I think you might even know that by now. Nevertheless, you're still not getting any Ron Paul Commentator vote of confidence from me. Well I don't think whatever you're insinuating
in·sin·u·ate
verb PS...Ron Paul took a dive, TWICE. hehehehehe
-------
"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
#56. To: GreyLmist (#55) (Edited)
Silly??? Perhaps, but it softens the trauma of being used, abused and cast aside by a professional politician. This is a personal experience, a demonstration of just how gullible people are in following politicians and or other snake oil salesmen. Years ago I watched from a distance, an airport speech given by Robert Kennedy. On one side of the fence was Kennedy on a platform, the other side contained the supporters, mostly women and children as it was the middle of the day. As they left, I asked one lady what Kennedy had important to say, she paused for a moment, then said, "I dont know, but he said it well". Nearly 100 feet of the 8 ft high chain link fence had to be replaced because of the pressure exerted by the people. Yes, that is a remark so silly
#57. To: Cynicom (#56)
Will get back to the first part of your post later. Just noting here for now that a suspect RFK bodyguard was a Lockheed Aircraft employee - Thane Cesar Years ago I watched from a distance, an airport speech given by Robert Kennedy.
-------
"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
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest