I don't see how 2 years overseas as a Peace Corps volunteer (and the website DOES seem to make a clear distinction between employees and volunteers) 50 years ago and up to 4 years military experience in Vietnam at least 40 years ago support your position.
I'm not saying I disagree with your opinion, just that the weight of your "evidence" is negligible and the "evidence" itself seems unrelated to the issue.
The game in Washington continues. Half-time is over and the players are back on the field. Here we go again. The Democrats have kicked off and it looks like the Republicans are trying to run it back. Let’s see if this time they can play a little hardball. Obama has got to play defense, let’s see where it goes.
The game in Washington continues. Half-time is over and the players are back on the field. Here we go again. The Democrats have kicked off and it looks like the Republicans are trying to run it back. Let’s see if...
Perhaps you've a point, but those two years (& weeks) as a Peace Corps Volunteer did give me a perspective of government II'd not had before. It wasn't four years in 'Nam,; it was less than two: 12 months in Viet-Nam as a lieutenant in the First Infantry Division (15 Sep '66 until 14 Sep '67) & 10 months in Viet-Nam as a captain in the 101st Airborne--3 March 1969 until 22 January 1970, when WIA during a firefight & subsequently evacuated on a stretcher.
I've been retired on the taxpayer's dime since November 1970, with the dubious distinction of being one of the 23,214 Viet-Nam vets to have been determined by the VA to be 100% permanently disabled due to his wounds. That's 42 years of wrestling with gov't med care.