Ah, after thinking about it more, I see the differences here:
I should have caught this earlier. I've never considered military service to be any more or less than what citizens are expected to do. As I mentioned before, people I know who shipped out or joined did it because it was the right thing to do... no more, no less. No one ever said "I'm laying my life on the line for my country by joining the service." We just did what we were told to do...
To consider that because a president or candidate has done military service somehow demonstrates a "indication of commitment" is somewhat foreign to me because it wasn't anything special to me when I did my own military service. The President is just another guy who puts his dungarees or fatigues on the way I do...
Quote:
|
Military service has long been seen as an indication of a candidates committment to the nation.
|
As interpreted by an the individual. The reason I disagreed with this is because I've never thought that way nor have I ever heard any of the people I hang out with make a big deal about it. I read this as a "blanket statement" initially without considering its personal interpretation... Which then lead to the veteran/non-veteran comparisons.
The phrase is subjective in that regard. If one sees a candidates military service as some special form of commitment to the nation, fine. I don't and that's fine too because I don't...
So, to August, I owe an apology... You see it your way, I see it mine.