Military Service Does Not Equal Patriotism

FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | 3/09/04 | David Yeagley

[kattracks]

John Kerry is campaigning for president with a very effective tool. We could call it the new American mascot—the U.S. military uniform. Sure, others have worn it before in political campaigns, General George Washington for starters. The military uniform nearly always stands for discipline, courage, and bravery, just like American Indian mascots do. Schools, colleges, and universities use Indian mascots and logos for that very reason. But it isn’t likely that American schools and colleges will ever use the image of a modern American military man as a mascot. There is too much political controversy over what he might represent, thanks to politicians. The fact of the matter is they are threatening to discredit the sacrificial, unselfish use of the military uniform.

Indian mascots never stood for confusion, uncertainty, or treachery. John Kerry has come to represent all three. Although he’s banking on his personal service in Vietnam, the fact is clear: the mere fact that a man once wore the uniform in no way proves he is above criticism. In fact, some genuine traitors have worn the uniform.

 

Sergeant Asan Akbar (Mark Fidel Kools), the American black Muslim convert, rolled a grenade into an officers tent over in Kuwait last Spring (2003), killing one officer and wounding 15 others. Now there’s a real patriot.

 

Remember John “Muhammad” Allen, another American black Muslim convert. Allen is also a Gulf War veteran, and was honorably discharged in 1994. He later decided he didn’t like America at all, and simply started shooting people on the street. Is there higher disgrace that could be rendered to the American military uniform? 

 

Then there’s James Yee, the Chinese American-turned Muslim, a West Point graduate who served as an Army chaplain in Guantanamo Bay. He was arrested on suspicion of espionage and treason in September 2003. His trial has yet to commence, and the accusations are multiplying. Of course, the mighty patriots of Harvard have rallied to his defense. “Pluralism,” they call it. That means they want to erase the historical concept of what it means to be an American. Why, Yee is the perfect patriot for them. 

 

The trend was recently renewed by Ken Nichols O’Keefe, the “former Marine, former American” who joined the peace movement, which tried to use human shields to block the U.S. military entry into Iraq. O’Keefe is a Gulf War veteran no less. He’s apparently declined heroics in Baghdad the second time around. 

 

Of course, we here in Oklahoma City already had that kind of surprise. Timothy McVeigh, the man executed for the Oklahoma City bombing of the Murrah Federal Building on April 15, 1995, was an outstanding soldier in the U.S. Army. He won the Bronze Star in the Gulf War, 1991. He returned to America and blew up 168 civilians. A “fine” military man, that McVeigh. 

 

Indeed, wearing the American military uniform doesn’t guarantee the person wearing it loves America, understands America, or is even interested in defending America. That should be quite clear by now.

 

That people like John Kerry should think to conjure up images of genuine American patriotism by publicizing a very dubious military record and subsequent political activism is a sign of leftist  delusion. The Left always presumes the public is ignorant and treats the public as such. John Kerry won’t make it with such tactics.

 

Wesley Clark didn’t get too far with his uniform, either. Everyone knew he played the international bully for NATO when he bombed the daylights out of Yugoslavia, slaughtering thousands of Serbian civilians. Well, that was all Clinton’s draconian approach to the Balkans.

 

Using the military uniform to validate their personal political views is the most divisive thing politicians can do. It confuses everyone, and does the worst service to the military itself, and to all the men and women actively laying their lives on the line for America: it trades personal service to the military in return for personal vindication. 

 

Perhaps politicians who want to brandish their bravery ought to simply put on an Indian war bonnet when they speak. Indeed, the Indian warrior image has never been understood to mean anything but raw courage. 

 

It’s worked well for lots of colleges and universities. But, if the Left is determined to remove the Indian image from schools, then American politicians should never be allowed to sport their military uniform. Why, this is potentially harmful and demeaning to real military personnel. It is psychologically crippling to their morale and unity. 

 The American military uniform doesn’t make a good mascot for politicians anymore. The Left has trashed it. 

---

Dr. David A. Yeagley teaches humanities at the College of Liberal Studies, University of Oklahoma. His opinions are independent. He holds degrees from Yale, Emory, Oberlin, University of Arizona and University of Hartford. He is a member of the Comanche Tribe, Lawton, OK. For more information on Dr. Yeagley's initiative to teach patriotism in the schools, click here. E-mail him at badeagle2000@yahoo.com. View his website at http://www.badeagle.com.

[leadpenny]

I kinda like another piece Yeagley has on his website:
______________________________


So they got Martha Stewart, not for the orignal crime for which she was accused: securities fraud. They threw that out. They got her for trying to cover it up! They seem delighted to send her to jail. This is apparently a great triumph of justice. It is perfectionism akin to her own sense of the same. They matched her. Too bad her lawyers didn't. Of course, they will appeal. They have their own job security tactics.

Friday, March 5, Martha was convicted of conspiracy, obstruction and two counts of lying to investigators. This is all about cover up, the crime of all crimes in white collar life. The ultimate tempest in the teapot.

Fine. No one is above the law--except for Bill and Hillary Clinton. And the Communists have already condemned Martha as a capitalist, therefore the enemy. They've tried to associate her with the Republicans, as if she is their version of a feminist, thus taking unfair advantage of the Communist agenda for women! Think of it--stealing feminism from the Left. What evil manipulation by Republicans!

It does appear to be true, conservatives, of any caliber, are held to higher standards than Liberal Communists. Martha is no enemy of America. Hilary Clinton is. Hillary has lied about murder, covered up financial fraud, and claims "I don't recall," as a matter of daily breathing it seems. But, it is far more important to see Martha in jail for trying to save a few thousand on the stock market. The country must have a sense of justice somewhere. Hanging Martha will have no irrevocable consequences on anyone. She's a safe target. But to oppose the Clinton's is to invite murderers in your face.

Okay, we'll let Martha set the pace for displaced social righteousness. We'll be angry at the essentially harmless. Good people will be tried, convicted, and punished for their mistakes. This means people like Hillary will never be tired, convicted, or punished for the most heinous, treasonist crimes. They are truly not in the same class as Martha. American courts have just proven that.

True to their Communist agenda, the American courts have said once again, down with the good, up with the bad. And some commentators want to say this is a sign that the system works! Indeed. It works for the anti-Americans. It works for murderers.

It worked for O.J. Simpson. It's working for Arab Muslim terrorists. And Janet Jackson wasn't even arraigned for indecent exposure in Houston. But it's important that a white woman be brought down. It is important that she be brought down by white people. White Leftists. All dark people can rejoice now. You know you have the courts on your side, at least when it counts--when a rich white woman tells a "white" lie.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

His opinions are independent. He holds degrees from Yale, Emory, Oberlin, University of Arizona and University of Hartford. He is a member of the Comanche Tribe, Lawton, OK.

Whew! That's a relief--for a minute I was afraid someone had posted the opinion of a Republican. And his references to war bonnets could get some of us in trouble--but a Comanche probably doesn't have to worry about that.

[FReethesheeples]

Good post. John Kerry is NOT good for the military, the war on Terror, or Troop Morale!

Nasty John the Waffling French Undertaker, who is behind the atatacks on GWB's 9/11 ad, per NewsMax & the American Spectator & now the NY Post.

Kerry, who is personally endorsed by Yasser Arafat, Haiti's Aristide, Iran's Mullahs, Traitor "Red Jane" Fonda, Kim Jong Il, (& Kim Il Jong), Mugabe, Marxist thug Chavez of Venezuela, Castro of Cuba, & France's Jacques Chirac, is a weapon of mass economic destruction.

He'll destroy the troops in Iraq, the War on Terrorism,

& the U.S. stock market with all his negative talk and whiny-leftist-liberal sour-puss troop-bashing, Bush-bashing, America-bashing talk & self-aggrandizing, ultra-negative sourpuss whiny elitist personality.

[af_vet_rr]

I've never believed that military service equaled patriotism, just as sticking a flag on your car doesn't make you a patriot. I knew too many people in the service who weren't there to serve their country (or if they were, they did a pretty poor job).

It takes a helluva lot more.