Re big sarge and Matt X:

I think the term "chicken hawk" is an excellent insult:
1. It's slightly amusing, which is why an "adult would use the expression ... in a debate";
2. it's not profane; and
3. it effectively communicates the point (i.e., people know what you mean).

Finally, and best of all, the term reduces its proper objects to outraged sputtering; their response is limited to accusing you of making arguments you haven't made, such as "only people that have served in the military can support a military action" or that you are "question[ing] the legitimacy of someone's opinion just because they don't have personal experience with the particular action they're advocating."

Neither of which follows from the term.

Whether a person served in the military is unrelated to the correctness of his views about the use of the U.S. military; moreover, the term "chicken hawk" ought not to be applied to those who, in a particular instance, want the U.S. to use military force.

Rather, the term is best used against that class of public commentators and officials who never served their country but who, over and over, seem especially eager for their fellow Americans to risk death, disfigurement or disability for this-or-that cause du'jour.

I have my own theories about why there is a class of such persons, but since my primary theory relates to my suspicion that they are suffering from personal guilt and a penchant for military eroticism, I'll keep it to myself.

It's not an argument against one's point-of-view in a military debate that he didn't serve in the military. Rather, it's a collateral assertion designed to point out his lack of moral credibility. And I'd only deploy it against those who fall within the class of commentators who regularly argue for the use of military action - not against those who show some reasonable discrimination on the matter.

Everyone got a draft lottery number, whether they were already deferred or not. If they had a deferment, it did not matter what number you had. Once you lost the deferment, the lottery number became important.

I had lottery #286. In 1970, I lost my student deferment, took the physical, and waited to be called. They did not get to 286.

If Trump had a medical deferment, THAT is why he wasn't drafted. If he had lost the deferment (not likely), then his high draft number came into play, and he still wouldn't have been called.

Take this from one who was there in 1968 (@ age 21) and was subject to the draft; I have some info on that question.

Technically, one could possibly both have a high draft lottery number and a medical "deferment" or disqualification thereafter.

However, unless actually drafted to serve (contrary to the Donald's statements attributed above), then he would not have gone through the entrance physical process UNLESS he active sought a medical DQ ahead of time by seeing doctors and submitting a request for a medical disqualification.

Moreover, I do not ever recall hearing or seeing the term "medical deferment." A deferment was a TEMPORARY suspension of one's obligation to enter the draft, e.g., by being in the last year of college when they gave the I-S and II-S deferments, depending on how many semesters you had left in school; or when you were married with a pregnant spouse. ("defer", a verb, to put off, delay; to POSTPONE induction into military service.)

Otherwise, I don't believe there was a medical "deferment". You either passed your medical exam and went in, or flunked it at the exam like yours truly did on his draft day at which point the examining officer physical kept my draft card and I haven't see it since. (October 29, 1968.) But, had I become medically disqualified before the entrance exam (AFEES), I would have received a 4F draft status, which was the Golden Fleece at that time. It's hard to envisage a temporary medical disqualification from the draft. Recall that almost everyone was subject to being called up; the Tet offensive was in Jan. 1968 and the draw up of U.S. troops thereafter tremendous in numbers.

One last very important thing, I do not recall exactly when the draft lottery number system kicked in. But I was drafted in 1967 and October 1968 AND I DID NOT HAVE A LOTTERY NUMBER. It could be that he would not have had a lottery number in 1968. I want to be fair and do not recall whether I would have had the lottery number in 1968 had I not been drafter earlier in 1967. If any one knows, that would be a fact check to see whether that part of Donald's story is within the realm of possibility.

Overall, his story does not all ring true; at best for him, it's not complete.

Perhaps he just "misremembered."

The GOP does not need his active interference at this time, unless he'd like to donate to the party or particular candidates at which point his $$$ would be gladly accepted.

It's not a big deal. Bill Clinton was a draft dodger too, but was elected anyway, twice.

piperl4: who is "Blondi?" Googling yields Hitler's dog.

I don't know why we don't just let the tabloids pick the president as I would be willing to bet that more people read the tabloids than have read the Constitution of the United States.

I think it should be manditory for the President of the United States to have served in the Military. At least they will know what it is like to work for peanuts, while putting your life on the line. I do not think our current President or Blondi will every make geat presidents. Our Country is in a very sad state of affairs and we worry about Blondi and the other guy. Someone needs a reality check.

Every time I go to post it is denied because I say the truth. What a shame

A lot of people that have commented here are saying what's the big deal if he (Trump)skipped out on the draft. I don't think that is the real issue. I think that the issue is that he has been all over Obama about his records but is willing to lie about his.

That photo with the Don's hair flying in the wind is priceless. NRO, you made my day.

I think people are importing a lot of additional issues into a pretty straight-forward question about Donald Trump and the Vietnam draft. Specifically, why didn't he get drafted? His answer is inconsistent with the draft timeline and therefore raises the additional question of whether his memory is faulty (it was 40+ years ago) or if he's not telling the truth.

Honestly, his motives don't really matter. His response was poor and left him open to fact-checking that now revisits the original question with greater scrutiny. For any presidential candidate in the current military climate, you must have an answer to that question that addresses: personal choice, respect for armed services, appreciation for the freedoms they protect, and your assessment of the U.S. military in foreign relations (whatever it is). You'll get flack from the extremes but if your answer is adequately coherent the middle block will be satisfied and move on to something else. Pretty easy.

The real lesson from this episode is that Trump is much better on offense than defense. For how early we are in this circus, that's pretty ominous.

Okay, I'm fine with NRO not being so enthusiastic or even mildly pleased with the fact that Donald Trump running on the GOP ticket. Fine. Criticise him on his lack of legislative experience, or his hypocrisy on "getting tough" with China, all the while having his clothing line be made in China, but this is just petty and down right bias and smear-mongering.

Where was NRO on Dick Cheney's avoidance on the draft, because he had "...other more important issues." Oh, so I guess serving and defending your country is not all that important. Where were you NRO?

It's one thing to ignore Dick Cheney's avoidance and Mitt Romney's avoidance...but to turn around and bash Donald Trump while giving the others a pass, just makes me think that the NRO has become more aligned with the arch-enemy of liberalism than opposed. NRO might as well work for the New York Times...if it's going to do their job for them and bash GOP potential contenders.

You shouldn't be too judgemental about young men who tried to avoid the draft in those days. The military isn't for everyone, and it works best when its members have volunteered. Vietnam was tough on everyone. Because the war was so unpopular at home, it made for tough leadership issues when the men went over there.
I served 30 years from the end of the draft era until 1998. From experience I can say that the all-volunteer military is a notable accomplishment for the military forces. If the draft is seriously proposed again (unless we are in a general war) I will oppose it strenuously.

Born on May 26 of 1950. Married on September 26, 1969. My lottery # was 356 & I knew this number at least 8 to 12 months before my marriage. So I don't know where people are getting their facts because they are not facts at all...

Donald's supporters are as thin skinned as Obamas'. Trump is just a 'crony capitalist', which in my book, is worse than a left wing liberal. He is no conservative. How is he going to jaw-bone, or arm-twist the Chinese who own trillions of our debt?

I served 24 years in the all-volunteer Army, retired in the Spring of '05. I've never understood this obsession with the draft status of people of the Vietnam era. If someone figured out a way to avoid the darn thing, more power to 'em. My beef is with those who chose to actively undercut our efforts there and elsewhere, e.g. Kerry (Senate testimony, treasonous actions with his buddies) and Clinton ("I loathe the military" letter to his ROTC commander, protesting against our country in Britain).

To all you folks who like to toss the "chickenhawk" label around: stick it where the sun don't shine, fella. This means you, Chris Matthews, and everyone else who likes to question the legitimacy of someone's opinion just because they don't have personal experience with the particular action they're advocating.

It is NOT fair to ask anyone why they have not served in the military. It would be a loaded, gotcha-type question, and unless the answer is related to some sort of medical issue, would be misconstrued and twisted beyond all recognition by the political enemies of the person answering it. A person's career choice is a personal one and should not be subject to this type of scrutiny.

People were mutilating themselves, having unnecessary surgery that would make them exempt, volunteering for jobs that would exempt them, switching religions, sifting through the draft laws...made for a resourceful bunch of people that didn't get killed.

#269. We watched the lottery from the basement in our dorm in La Crosse, Wisc. My buddy Scott was #1.

Nobody who ever went through Army basic training would call it "Boot Camp;" so who's a "nitwit?"

I'm shocked, SHOCKED! that a rich white boy could buy himself a medical deferment from the draft in 1968-69. Not! Like all the rich white boy politicians. George W. Bush used Daddy's pull to get into the Air National Guard - a questionable move, since flying high performance aircraft was a lot more dangerous than most Army assignments, even in-country. The much-decorated John Kerry got himself into the Navy, like JFK - and got his precious butt out of the swiftboat assignment ASAP, once he found out a guy could get killed out there. Everybody knows about what Bill Clinton thought about military service.
At this late date it's really immaterial, even though if anyone has a right to hold a grudge it's I, since I'm a 2-tour Vietnam Army veteran ('66 & '70) and volunteered for both tours. The guys that kept out of that miserable war really were smarter than those of us that got suckered into it by the lies of the politicians like Lyndon Johnson and Robert McNamara. More power to 'em.

I thank God every day i served my entire career in an all volunteer military.

NRO, IMHO, is starting to get ridiculous on Trump...the 'avoided the draft' canard is useless 35+ years after the end of Vietnam War and I am sick of it applied to anyone on either side of the aisle at this point.

Back in the day when Buckley ran this joint, he would have stopped the constant nit-picking by his writers and had Trump on 'Firing Line' for some hardball questions and answers.

"Has NRO ever asked Mitt Romney where he was in 1968-1969?"

Not sure if NRO has ever ran a post on it, but he's been asked about this in previous elections.

He was in France, on a Mormon-obtained missionary deferment. He received three deferments and then his 1969 lottery number was 300.

I've read that he's flipped his answer about this topic. In 1994, he told the Boston Globe he was glad that he did not have to go; he didn't want to. In 2007 he said that he wishes he would have been there. That doesn't seem like too huge of a flip to me, but perhaps we'll see that story rehashed once the race really gets started.

External Link 

NRO has criticized the fact that none of his five sons have ever served. His explanation of that fact was that working on his campaign (as his sons did) counted as service to the country.

External Link 

I was in Law School starting in 1967. We were told in 1968 that the rules had changed 1) no student deferments anymore and 2) drafting the oldest first. This was before the lottery. So, if the Trumptster had graduated and was in grad school at that time, he was in the same position and either joined like me, got drafter or figured a way out.

It seems to me Mitch Daniels is National Review's Most Preferred Candidate this election cycle. There seems to be little support for him among conservatives outside of some Hoosiers rooting for the local boy.

Has NRO ever asked Mitt Romney where he was in 1968-1969?

In Bart's world view, only people that have served in the mitliary can support a military action, or they are cowardly "chicken hawks". It's amazing that any adult would use the expression "chicken hawk" in a debate about anything.

I thought that if you were deferred, you carried your number with you until you were 1-A or otherwise permanently deferred. I was 122 but student deferred until 1972 when I made myself available, but was not drafted. I forgot that the lottery was held in 1969. But I still remember my number.

Does National Review hate Donald Trump/birthers more than they hate Obama?

I don't know, I'm just asking questions.

J.D.: "[W]hy hasn't Obama been vetted by this same media who vets anyone pretending to have an R in the back of their name - just askin'!"

Because in 1968, Barack Obama was seven years old.

It's fair, of course, to ask candidates why they chose not to serve in the military. Those who could have been drafted during the Vietnam War, however, seem to fall within a particular category of inquiry - as we saw with controversies about Quayle, Clinton, G.W. Bush and Cheney.

It may not be fair, but that's the way it is: as those who could have been drafted for Vietnam (i.e., anyone born before 1954) begin to move past the age of electability (in 2012 they will be 59), the issue will recede.

Post-Vietnam era, a candidate who volunteered will always have a bit of an advantage. But in the absence of a draft, a post-Vietnam candidate who didn't volunteer probably won't be hurt by his not having done so.

That's probably the way it will be for awhile. I encourage a healthy skepticism, if not disdain, for those who never served but who tend to be first off the mat to sound the call to arms to help various foreign tribes escape from the natural consequences of their cultural barbarity and political passivity.

That category of "chicken hawks" aside, however, military service is probably a "plus" while lack of military isn't necessarily a "minus".

I went to college in the fall of 1966. After three years of majoring in Wine, Women and Song, my local Draft Board reviewed my less than stellar college transcript and classified me as 1A. I was drafted in June, 1969 and started Boot Camp on August 26, 1969.

I remember specifically comparing with other guys at Fort Leonard Wood where we stood on the lottery when it came out later in 1969.

I seem to recall my number was over 300. Nevertheless, I was already in and my lottery status was moot.

Trump is a nitwit and I'm sure he used his influence to dodge the draft, but he certainly wasn't the Lone Ranger regarding that subject.

The Vietnam Draft was an absolute disgrace. It basically said that if you were rich and/or you went to college that your life was worth more than the kids who came from the mills, the mines, the fields, and the ghettoes.

Although, my career path was set back a few years, I'll never regret my Military Service.