You either went to the army or to jail, your choice.
You forgot C. "Draft Dodger"
Don't you agree? eh!
Very true Nelson. While the actual #'s of draft dodgers was overstated. What's interesting here is how the country's attitude changed in 75. My Dad, a WWII vet, despised the draft dodgers, but hated the protesters more. Right up till 75, then the Pentagon Papers were leaked. After that he still hated the protesters, only because they were laying blame on the solders instead of the government who sent them there. What changed was his attitude toward's the DD's. It went from "they should all be in jail', to "If they (The government) ever pull this again, Ill take my kid to Canada myself" This from a decorated Airborne vet who made 3 jumps in the war. Sicily, Normandy, and Holland. To say the government he fought for had lost his trust was an under statment.
That also started my now 37 year hobby of watching these nutsac's like a hawk, believing only what they do and nothing they say.
Politics has always been about the money. What's changed is the MSM. Not long ago the MSM was like the paparazzi for politicians. The above mentioned Pentagon papers, Watergate, Iran/contra, all stories that were broke by hungry reporters looking to make a name for themselves. Then comes deregulation of the MSM by the FCC. That gave us media giant's like Rupert Murdoc who previously could not as a foreign national own a US media outlet. Today 2 companies own close to 70% of all nationally syndicated print, radio, and TV media in the US. Murdoc's Fox broadcasting, and Clear channel communications. Take a wild guess who is a princapal owner of clear channel, If you said Mitt romney's Bain Capitol, you were correct. And if you said they still do, you were correct again. In fact guy's like Hannity, & for a short time beck & windbag, and a host of other's are actually double owned by both. How? They have or in beck's & windbag's case had both TV show's on fox and radio shows on clear channel at the same time. Some of you may remember when faux was outed for the liars they really are as it happened right here in florida between 1997 & 2000. Here's the whole story.
In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.
Back in December of 1996, Jane Akre and her husband, Steve Wilson, were hired by FOX as a part of the Fox “Investigators” team at WTVT in Tampa Bay, Florida. In 1997 the team began work on a story about bovine growth hormone (BGH), a controversial substance manufactured by Monsanto Corporation. The couple produced a four-part series revealing that there were many health risks related to BGH and that Florida supermarket chains did little to avoid selling milk from cows treated with the hormone, despite assuring customers otherwise.
According to Akre and Wilson, the station was initially very excited about the series. But within a week, Fox executives and their attorneys wanted the reporters to use statements from Monsanto representatives that the reporters knew were false and to make other revisions to the story that were in direct conflict with the facts. Fox editors then tried to force Akre and Wilson to continue to produce the distorted story. When they refused and threatened to report Fox's actions to the FCC, they were both fired.(Project Censored #12 1997)
Akre and Wilson sued the Fox station and on August 18, 2000, a Florida jury unanimously decided that Akre was wrongfully fired by Fox Television when she refused to broadcast (in the jury's words) “a false, distorted or slanted story” about the widespread use of BGH in dairy cows. They further maintained that she deserved protection under Florida's whistle blower law. Akre was awarded a $425,000 settlement. Inexplicably, however, the court decided that Steve Wilson, her partner in the case, was ruled not wronged by the same actions taken by FOX.
FOX appealed the case, and on February 14, 2003 the Florida Second District Court of Appeals unanimously overturned the settlement awarded to Akre. The Court held that Akre’s threat to report the station’s actions to the FCC did not deserve protection under Florida’s whistle blower statute, because Florida’s whistle blower law states that an employer must violate an adopted “law, rule, or regulation." In a stunningly narrow interpretation of FCC rules, the Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a "law, rule, or regulation," it was simply a "policy." Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly. (Anybody surprised this happened in Florida?)
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.
Liberal media my a$$!