Posted on 10/19/2007 11:31:13 AM PDT by RKV
Elvis' number coming up was a fluke.
This link says no military service for Reid: http://vote.military.com/military/bio/?id=370
Hmmm. So Harry didn’t serve and he’s criticizing others who didn’t serve. Not sure where he gets a leg to stand on, but that, of course, never stopped him before.
Thank you.
OK. But surely a super-patriot like Reid could still have volunteered. His happy-talk about the Marine/Law Enforcement Foundation being a great cause may also be a smoke screen. I doubt he's ever contributed.
I was in the first lottery group. My number was 10. I got the same deferment as Rush and for the same reason. If I remember correctly the Army set the rules. In fact the Army doctor told me “ Son, you might live to be 100, but the Army doesn’t want you”
I’m sure he would. Still, I seems a bit shallow to me to hear that kind of criticism coming from a non-veteran. I’m personally in the same boat as Dingy Harry, I registered and got my number (237) and they didn’t pick me (this was 1975 about when Ford was turning off the draft). I sure wouldn’t make hay about someone else’s lack of military service, of course, Harry is a complete @$$ anyway. I was in Nevada just prior to his last election. His signs all said “Independent” - then he comes out as Senate majority leader (i.e. “partisan”).
He was too busy displaying the advertising space on the bottom of his shoes while he was a boxer..
A Reid booster could say the same about Rush.
Ultimately Reid's argument is unfair, because when he was of prime draft age (1957-1961) very few people were being drafted and when Rush was of prime draft age (1969-1973) many were being drafted.
That is pretty damn funny. And fitting.
Guess that’s why he thinks he knows more and knows better than career military men in the field.
What does it really matter? Even if he had won the Medal of Honor, someone would still villify him.
“Well, he would probably argue that he never sought a draft deferment in his life while Rush did.”
I have a lot of experience with the draft resistance and draft manipulation.
In my opinion the medical deferment does not leave any room for argument, once it is given by, or accepted by the draft board, there is not much room to argue against it.
The medical deferment is the only one that also shuts down the complaint that the draft has nothing to do with enlisting, somebody can be personally suspicious of, or annoyed by a medical deferment, but there is no solid ground to make a real argument concerning it.
Same here. My number was 8, and my knees had had several dislocations. When the doc put me on the table and manipulated my knee, it sounded like a person walking on a box of rice crispies. I thought I’d get a 1-Y, but he wrote, 4-F and said, “you’re knees are too bad.”
Agreed, I just like to be calibrated when all the mud-slinging gets going. Murtha is proof that being a decorated combat veteran (also McGovern) doesn’t mean you have the right of a particular argument.
Indeed.
And being drafted in 1957 meant spending a two-year enlistment either in the US or Germany for most draftees - not risk of actual combat in the jungles of Southeast Asia.
Actually, about the same number of men were drafted between 1957 and 1961 as between 1969 and 1973 (about 600,000).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.