Core Following
Posted July 20th, 2007 by Nathan DeGraaf
The following list breaks down the percentages of monetary donations given by US soldiers to the Republican candidates:

52.53%: Ron Paul
35.4%: McCain
7.9%: Romney
5.2%: Giuliani
2.2%: Hunter
2.6%: Others
It's nice to see His Coreness on the top of a list, huh?
Time for a little anecdote.
When Brother Jay was in the military, my mother once asked him what he thought of President Bush. Jay responded with, "I think he's the commander in chief of the military and in charge of the free world."
Essentially, Corporal DeGraaf was acknowledging the fact that, as a member of the United States Military, he had no business questioning his leader. There's no I in team and all that. And really, I would expect nothing less from the brave men and women fighting to protect my freedom. They can't afford to question their leaders and under few circumstances should they.
Nevertheless, US soldiers still get to vote in elections and they still get to donate to campaigns. And I think that's awesome.
But what I really love is that our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan will gladly pay their hard-earned money to help support the one candidate who wants the war to end as soon as humanly possible.
I was talking with my friend Brick about why this would be and we chalked it up to either one or a combination of two reasons. Ron Paul and John McCain (the two who top this list) are the only Republican military veterans running for office and military personnel tend to respect other military personnel. And Ron Paul wants to withdraw from Iraq. And soldiers in Iraq probably think it sucks in Iraq.
Now, I ain't no politician, and I ain't no soldier, and I ain't all that smart, but it seems to me that when the majority of your soldiers are offering a percentage of their income to the guy who wants to end the war you're fighting in, well, it may be an unpopular war.
Like I said, I ain't bright. But I can add two and two.

52.53%: Ron Paul
35.4%: McCain
7.9%: Romney
5.2%: Giuliani
2.2%: Hunter
2.6%: Others
It's nice to see His Coreness on the top of a list, huh?
Time for a little anecdote.
When Brother Jay was in the military, my mother once asked him what he thought of President Bush. Jay responded with, "I think he's the commander in chief of the military and in charge of the free world."
Essentially, Corporal DeGraaf was acknowledging the fact that, as a member of the United States Military, he had no business questioning his leader. There's no I in team and all that. And really, I would expect nothing less from the brave men and women fighting to protect my freedom. They can't afford to question their leaders and under few circumstances should they.
Nevertheless, US soldiers still get to vote in elections and they still get to donate to campaigns. And I think that's awesome.
But what I really love is that our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan will gladly pay their hard-earned money to help support the one candidate who wants the war to end as soon as humanly possible.
I was talking with my friend Brick about why this would be and we chalked it up to either one or a combination of two reasons. Ron Paul and John McCain (the two who top this list) are the only Republican military veterans running for office and military personnel tend to respect other military personnel. And Ron Paul wants to withdraw from Iraq. And soldiers in Iraq probably think it sucks in Iraq.
Now, I ain't no politician, and I ain't no soldier, and I ain't all that smart, but it seems to me that when the majority of your soldiers are offering a percentage of their income to the guy who wants to end the war you're fighting in, well, it may be an unpopular war.
Like I said, I ain't bright. But I can add two and two.
Labels: ron_paul






9 Comments
You know Nate, I like to think that you're not a gullible guy. However, when I read this shit about Ron Paul, I've got say that you're being duped.
Ron Paul is a device of the Republican Party. He's the "NOT ALL OF US ARE HORRIBLE" guy.
It's a genius move by the Republican Party, really, not embracing him.
The Republican Party does not embrace Paul because he isn't really a Republican. He is a Libertarian that runs under the Republican Party. I don't believe its so gullible to support a man like Ron Paul. He's consistent and more 'real' than anybody else running for nominations from either party. The man is no bullshit, and politicians love bullshit. Thats why the Republican party does not embrace him. He represents ideals of government and what government was when it was run by a generation of people who had seen hard times and hardships, and came out of them with common sense and virtue towards humanity. What government is and has become lacks decency and respect and a sense for these things, and the constitution. Ron Paul doesn't buy into 'the machine' and that makes him a Patriot.
ps. Nate, I've casually read your blog for some time now, and I've got to say I'm a fan. Always an honest perspective on things whether I agree or not. How about a beer, baseball and boobs political agenda? Sorry to hear about Carpenter. Unfortunately you beat my mets so i can't feel too bad. Keep rockin hard.
Sounds like something I'd read on his website, Zach. That is, if I was a complete clone and couldn't see obvious political manuevering.
The problem with the American public, and yourself Zach, is that there is still faith in this God awful political system.
Ron Paul won't change things. Ron Paul is a tool.
The man's record speaks for itself, Nick. If you could find a way to poke holes in his voting record and his consistent position, I would believe you.
Here we are, a little over a year before elections are held, and the conspiracy theories are already being thrown around.
If you can find one system of government that is more representative of its constituents than American democracy, that still provides numerous freedoms and liberties for its citizens, then please, Gaudio, enlighten us. At times, our leaders can be broken, but our political system is the best humanity has come up with so far.
The Dude:
I bring you the Canadian system which I think is much more representative of its constituents. Especially in picking our leader.
Nate, to say that soldiers shouldn't second guess their commander-in-chief or commander in general is very dangerous. When you don't question and blindly obey war crimes and brutal acts happen. (not all the time but more frequently)
Luke, I feel you, but active soldiers don't have that luxury. Civilians do. There's is not to question why, there's is but to do and die.
Fuck, I used the wrong their.
Well nick, until this "god awful political system" changes, i.e. constitutional change, we the people as American citizens are to live by the constitution, as our politicians should. And he's the man that is doing it. In agreement with Nate, find something to demerit Ron Paul, vis a vis his political actions and any statements made inconsistent of those actions. His campaign is solid in that regard, and the people have no reason to be weary of him, unlike the other candidates. By the way, anybody see Ron Paul tear apart Giuliani? He was my mayor, and I know his shit-eating bullshit from a mile away. I don't know how the rest of America perceived what happened in New York, but Giuliani wasn't quite the heralded hero here that the media made him out to be, especially on the national level.
Post new comment