The Times tells me that Romey did well in the debate no one watched. This detail caught my eye:
In one of the most personal clashes of the evening, Mr. Paul and Mr. Gingrich fought over military service. Mr. Gingrich said he was married and had a child, so he did not join the military as a young man. Mr. Paul said that he, too, had children, and when he was drafted, “I went.”
We thank him for his service, but... this is from his bio:
Ronald Paul was born on August 20, 1935, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.... He graduated from Gettysburg College in 1957 and furthered his education by attending Duke University Medical Center. During this time, he married Carol Wells, who he had known since high school. In 1961, four years after his marriage, Paul obtained his medical degree.
Paul, by now in his late 20s, moved with his wife to Michigan where he completed his internship at the Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit. Utilizing his physician's training, Paul served in the United States Air Force as a flight surgeon for several years (1963-1965). While in the air force, Paul reached the rank of Captain. Directly after his service in the air force, Paul worked again as a flight surgeon for the United States Air National Guard (1965-1968). After serving the nation's armed forces, Paul and his wife Carol moved to Texas, where they still reside.
And from his website:
Ron Paul is a proud Air Force veteran. He served as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force from 1963 to 1965 and then in the U.S. Air National Guard from 1965 to 1968. During his military service Ron Paul spent time on the ground in Iran, Pakistan, South Korea, Turkey, Ethiopia and other countries.
That would certainly be disruptive to family life and the establishment of a practice, but he was not likely to be shot at.
CNN has a fact-check with Gingrich's background:
The facts: Gingrich turned 18 in 1961, as U.S. involvement in Vietnam was escalating. But he continued his studies, getting an undergraduate degree in 1965, his Master's in 1968 and his doctorate in 1971.
According to the Selective Service, prior to 1971 "a man could qualify for a student deferment if he could show he was a full-time student making satisfactory progress in virtually any field of study. He could continue to go to school and be deferred from service until he was too old to be drafted."
In addition, the fact that Gingrich had two daughters -- born in 1963 and 1966 -- gave him a III-A classification, putting him far back in the line of people who might have been called to serve.
Verdict: True, but incomplete. Gingrich is correct, that he was not eligible for the draft. But that does not mean he could not have been one of the 3 million Americans who ultimately served in the war.
Vietnam was scarcely on the radar in 1961. By 1965, after he had an undergraduate degree and a daughter, Gingrich had a decision to make. And in 1965, it was not yet clear to the public at large that the Johnson Administration had no strategy for winning the war. If Newt was going to enlist, that would have been the time.
I am no fan of the 'chickenhawk' argument, but CNN includes this from Gingrich:
"Given everything I believe in, a large part of me thinks I should have gone over," he told Vanity Fair in 1989.
Please see comments in thread below.
Posted by: PaulL | January 08, 2012 at 09:16 AM
My father, a veteran of WWII and Army lifer, went to VietNam in April of 1963. When he told our family he had gotten orders, none of us even knew where VietNam was or what was going on there.
It wasn't until LBJ took the reigns of the "adventure" that most Americans even began to hear about the place.
Posted by: Neo | January 08, 2012 at 09:17 AM
M "effing"SNBC?
Gag. Tell us where you will make pain. Why will you beat your wife. Huntsman going Newt. Served his country. Sons in the Navy (take that DoT). What a snake. Come together as Americans. (I'm turning it off and listening to the Beatles) Imagine.
Posted by: MarkO | January 08, 2012 at 09:18 AM
I'm sure everybody remembers JFK's ugly little war back in 1961 ... I think they called it Cuba.
Posted by: Neo | January 08, 2012 at 09:19 AM
I hope Clarice gets lots of hits from PA and OH today.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 08, 2012 at 09:19 AM
Mr. McGuire,
You noted: "That would certainly be disruptive to family life and the establishment of a practice, but he was not likely to be shot at."
What has being shot at have to do with service? Most members of the Armed Forces are never shot at or close to actual deadly combat. But there is inherent danger in all branches of service and their various MOS.
I am no Paul fan and his view of Gingrich not serving is irrelevant anyway. The majority of American's have never served but that doesn't mean anything to me regarding their patriotism, love of country or loyalty. The "chickenhawk" argument is normally the purview of the left since it is the way for them to accept their own appeasements and avoid civic responsibility that comes with serving your country.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 08, 2012 at 09:20 AM
Speaking of wars ...
Posted by: Neo | January 08, 2012 at 09:22 AM
Was TM in Viet Nam?
Posted by: MarkO | January 08, 2012 at 09:22 AM
Clarice's Pieces
Posted by: Extraneus | January 08, 2012 at 09:23 AM
CAPTAIN CRAZY UNCLE is on FNS now. I hope Fox leaves Chris Wallace in New Hampshire; he can go live with Souter in his rundown shanty.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 08, 2012 at 09:24 AM
Hey - when did you guys come here? All that snarkblogging for nothing!
Posted by: Jane | January 08, 2012 at 09:24 AM
Minus 17 at Raz today.
My guess is that TM is way too young to have been in Vietnam.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 08, 2012 at 09:29 AM
I am following both threads, Jane!
Posted by: centralcal | January 08, 2012 at 09:31 AM
Minus 17? After these debates he could go to single digits. Smarmy.
Posted by: MarkO | January 08, 2012 at 09:32 AM
Your snarkblogging never goes to waste, Jane; great job.
Very good pieces, C; I'd add to Surber's excellent comments that Lewis's "falling out" with FDR was largely caused by threats of a strike in the middle of a war. You can call that "looking out for the miners" but it was a disaster image wise.
I think the miners have had El JEFe's number all along. I was incredulous at some of his stump speeches in southeast Ohio; they were as tone-deaf as the garbage about how he wouldn't have supported the surge even with hindsight. The trouble was McCain ran a worse campaign.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 08, 2012 at 09:35 AM
But there is inherent danger in all branches of service and their various MOS.
That's true, but it's far more manageable as an officer (especially one in a support field), and Paul's chosen field had little or no personal risk, at least where he served. Still, I agree service has a cachet not dependent on risk.
Paul's remarks are more than a bit ridiculous, drawing a parallel that obviously doesn't exist. The better response from Newt to "I went when they called me up" would've been "they never called me."
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 08, 2012 at 09:40 AM
Secret party at the white house to avoid the glare of the public during a recession. LUN
Posted by: peter | January 08, 2012 at 09:45 AM
All that snarkblogging for nothing!
Not at all. I'm stuck overseas with CNN International (grrr) and enjoyed it immensely. Thanks again (and to the other contributors as well).
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 08, 2012 at 09:45 AM
Cecil,
I just don't get the point McGuire was trying to make by inserting "getting shot at"? Do you?
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 08, 2012 at 09:57 AM
I'm puzzled about Ron Paul's service. It says that he advanced to the rank of captain in the Air Force. During the same era, one of my cousins entered the Navy as a chaplain at the rank of full lieutenant, and a second-cousin entered the Air Force as a dentist at the rank of captain. Both advanced at least twice. Does anyone know the service procedures for this sort of thing?
Posted by: Mark Folkestad | January 08, 2012 at 10:04 AM
Heh, 'while in the Air Force, Paul reached the rank of Captain'. I'll bet he went in as a Captain.
==============
Posted by: Nurses entered as 2nd Leftenants. | January 08, 2012 at 10:06 AM
Beat me to it, Mark.
==========
Posted by: Quite a reach. | January 08, 2012 at 10:08 AM
What did we forget MASH, this quickly, Capts Pierce and Mcintire, (I know we probably want to, but it was a big thing when I was growing up;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawkeye_Pierce#Hawkeye_Pierce
Posted by: narciso | January 08, 2012 at 10:10 AM
Well, the chickenhawk accusation is basically one of cowardice (an unwillingness to "put your money where your mouth is"), and Paul kind of implied he had Vietnam service when it was actually Vietnam-era support service in a different theater, which was a bit disingenuous.
I was in high school at the time, but one of the big dilemmas was whether to volunteer (and have some control over your assignment) or wait and get drafted and get put into a front-line infantry unit (or at least that was the perception). Paul seemed to me to be trying to leave that impression, which in his case is complete BS. I'm just guessing that's where Tom (Maguire, BTW) was going, but that's how I read it, and if so, I mostly agree.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 08, 2012 at 10:10 AM
Yes, nurses all went in as officers. And a lot of doctors, dentists and chaplains went in as O-3, which is captain in the Army, Air Force and Marines, and (full) Lieutenant in the Navy. Somehow I'm not too impressed with a boast of having achieved the rank of captain at the end of his hitch.
Posted by: Mark Folkestad | January 08, 2012 at 10:12 AM
MF,
Just my experience:
Paul could have gone in as an O-2 (1st Lt.) or as an O-3 (Capt.) back then. Usual Docs coming in come in with grade such as O-3 due to their professionalism and need for recruiting. Nurses on the other hand come in at O-1 and rise up but if they have advanced degrees and needed MOS (such as surgery or flight nurse) it could be at higher grade. By the way, Chaplain's come in usually at O-2.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 08, 2012 at 10:14 AM
I lied to my mother and dropped my college deferment in the early Seventies, and took my chances in the draft lottery. My number came out 328 of 366, so I would never have been drafted. I respect and honor those who did serve, whether they were drafted or enlisted. But I don't disparage those who used every legal exemption and deferment to avoid service. On the other hand, you don't want to get me started on the evaders, many of whom are now vexing my Canadian cousins with their inflexible doctrinaire Leftism.
Posted by: Mark Folkestad | January 08, 2012 at 10:17 AM
Docters were drafted then, JiB, so not much need for recruiting. I believe they are still subject to being drafted.
====================
Posted by: By special arrangement with the AMA. | January 08, 2012 at 10:17 AM
Cecil,
Thanks for the clarification. I didn't catch the debate so I don't know the full context of Paul's and Ginrich's remarks only what TM wrote. Although, I can tell you from personal experience, duty in Turkey can be just as dangerous especially if you ever have to use a highway.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 08, 2012 at 10:18 AM
Anybody remember what a 'weatherbeater' was during WWII?
================
Posted by: Hint, protection from drafts. | January 08, 2012 at 10:19 AM
I didn't catch the debate so I don't know the full context of Paul's and Ginrich's remarks only what TM wrote.
I didn't catch it either, I'm just going by the morning news stories (which make Paul look more than a little ditzy; as if he needed the help). And I know where you're coming from on the risk thing, my peacetime service was a heckuva lot more dangerous than the wartime stuff turned out to be.
But for me the bottom line is the point you made earlier about the chickenhawk argument. It's fallacious ad hominem, capitalizing on the fact that most people never serve.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | January 08, 2012 at 10:31 AM
Neo, do you have a link for that F&F piece?
Posted by: Jane | January 08, 2012 at 10:31 AM
1964-74 was a different time with many different circumstances. I lived it my complicated way.
I have no patience for any asshole trying to impose one's trendy, present-day morality in a game of one-upmanship.
Posted by: sbw | January 08, 2012 at 10:32 AM
Well stated sbw; I've wanted to wring the necks of people who know better who act like it was a simple time of simple choices.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 08, 2012 at 10:43 AM
Kim,
Talking about now not then.
If you know of medico's being drafted this day and age can you cite that? AFAIK, there is no draft only discussion of how it would be implemented if there was a national emergency requiring more health professionals in time of war if recruiting didn't provide enough personnel.
I believe a lot to today's military docs are reservists and received their medical school and undergraduate tuition under future obligation.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | January 08, 2012 at 10:46 AM
I think the thing about not getting shot at refers back to the 2000 and 2004 elections, when smug lefties always said that merely serving (like Bush) didn't count, no matter how dangerous his specialty was, and that only combat duty (like Gore's and Kerry's) made someone eligible to be president.
Of course, they had not thought so in 1992 or 1996, when they all supported an actual lying draft-dodger against a couple of veterans, one who had been shot down, and the other permanently disabled in combat, and they would not think so in 2008, when offered a choice between a non-veteran and another crippled veteran and former prisoner-of-war.
Posted by: Dr. Weevil | January 08, 2012 at 11:05 AM
One of these things, is not like the other;
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/202867-obama-follows-in-rumsfelds-footprints
Posted by: narciso | January 08, 2012 at 11:05 AM
only combat duty (like Gore's
Full Metal Keyboard. As the son of a Senator, ManBearPig was in less danger than GWB was flying widowmakers like F-102s.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 08, 2012 at 11:15 AM
As usual, ABC's little Georgy Steponallofus got a little bit too cutesy, trying to sabotage the Republicans. He's not biased. Naw. Still a shill for the Clintons, like little Lacky Davis. If Sawyer has anymore face lifts, the dimple on her chin that used to be her belly button will be a dent on the back of her head.
Other than that aggravation, the candidates did okay. Not great. But okay. They didn't hurt themselves anyway. But let's see how they do in the debate today.
Posted by: Anne | January 08, 2012 at 11:19 AM
Since the debate ended 90 minutes ago, you may have lost your chance.
Posted by: Jane | January 08, 2012 at 11:59 AM
--But for me the bottom line is the point you made earlier about the chickenhawk argument. It's fallacious ad hominem, capitalizing on the fact that most people never serve.--
As Dr. Weevil points out it would be merely scurrilous were anyone to hold it as an actual principle, but they're not even that honorable.
It's mere partisan maneuvering which flares into a flaming righteous cause when a McGovern or a Kerry is the candidate and fades into utter obscurity and irrelevance when Clinton is facing Dole or Obama, McCain.
It's the same posture they adopt when a Dem starts or fights a war and while Republicans aren't immune to it any objective person will note its vastly higher incidence among the left.
What is curious is that they can't see (or perhaps they can but refuse to admit it) how this quite properly gives rise to questioning of the patriotism of those who engage in it.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 08, 2012 at 12:04 PM
Sometimes she misses the mark,
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2012/01/did-romney-who-went-to-harvard-law.html
Posted by: narciso | January 08, 2012 at 12:10 PM
Gotcha, JiB, and I think you are more correct than I am about the present draft status of doctors. I do believe the AMA keeps a registry which will be available in the case of need for a draft.
==================
Posted by: Thin ice. | January 08, 2012 at 03:57 PM
I think the chickenhawk slam is really sleazy, but casually implying that 5 years of service, let alone presumably saving our men's lives as a flight surgeon, is no big a deal unless bullets were flying around is just astonishing.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 08, 2012 at 04:30 PM
ABC didn't get enough Romney blood last night so baton was passed to Gregory to try fror some today
Posted by: maryrose | January 08, 2012 at 04:44 PM
It all fits.
From TM above, "Ron Paul...furthered his education by attending Duke University."
The Defense rests.
Posted by: daddy | January 08, 2012 at 05:09 PM
"Since the debate ended 90
minutes ago, you may have
lost your chance." - Jane
That's why God invented TiVo;
to watch it at my leisure. :)
Posted by: Anne | January 08, 2012 at 05:12 PM
Anne:
Did you read my response to your comments on the Tea Parties?
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 08, 2012 at 05:29 PM
Have you met my twin sister?
Posted by: Sylvia | January 08, 2012 at 05:38 PM
Jane @ 11;59 am
Oops, really? Then I suppose that I will have to watch the reruns, huh?
Posted by: Anne | January 08, 2012 at 06:02 PM
JM @ 5:29
Most of them before they gave me a headache. :)
Posted by: Anne | January 08, 2012 at 06:59 PM
Anne:
I'm just asking about the one I linked to.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 08, 2012 at 07:05 PM
JM @ 7:05
Yes, I read it, the only aspect of which was memorable, though, was that you were wrong
about my man, Marco. He is extremely popular
in Florida. He won 53% of the votes in a
3-way race, garning votes from Republicans,
Independents and Democrats, alike ..., the
magnitude of which is quite unprecedented in
Florida. He was a dynamo in the legislature,
too. His opponents, Crist and Meeks, were a
weasel and a lightweight. It wasn't a contest.
Posted by: Anne | January 08, 2012 at 07:28 PM
You supported Murkowski but not Crist?
Posted by: hit and run | January 08, 2012 at 07:44 PM
lol
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 08, 2012 at 07:48 PM