Posted on 08/22/2004 6:50:24 AM PDT by kattracks
The Bronze star was awared that many years after the fact??
I knew he was going to lose (The Couric/Russert soft pedal on the MTP interview of Bush last spring was the final straw - I knew the Big Media was soft pedaling on purpose then) ... but sheesh.
This fact, along with all the others, begs the question: why did the democrats pick someone, with such incredibly easy to find information about how rotten he is, to be the nominee?
Oh, I keep forgetting. Hillary, 2008. Thanks for the reminder Christie.
And, what's in it for the 9 veterans who served with, and support kerry? Probably the typical Democrat patronage payoff of a soft job with a gold badge ..... assigned to a do-nothing job with the U.S. Marshalls Service. The Dem's are good at getting their friends those prestineous government jobs with all the perks, but no responsibilities. This is not saying the the USMS is a do-nothing Agency, just that there is a lot of "fluff" built in just for payoffs like this.
Bingo
However, we can roughly determine the period. John Lehman served as Secretary of the Navy under President Reagan from 1981 to 1987. Kerry was thus awarded his Bronze Star years after the fact when he was either a public prosecutor (1976-1982), Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts (1983-1985) or a U.S. Senator (1985 until present).
Belated awards of medals for bravery in combat to politicians are always suspect, but Kerry could help us out here too by providing us with more information
Maybe 5 to 10 percent of those reading the citation realized that this was awarded more that a decade after the event. (maybe that many, but I doubt it). If only we had a fair media. sigh
Not at all.
What I meant to say was that Kerry supporters have expressed outrage over the term, "self-inflicted", rather than discussing the nuances.
Not only that, but how fast did he run after he threw the grenades?
Not faster than exploding rice!
"He just needs to show everyone the scars."
Except the butt-shot scar.
Valorous? Unh, unh.
I went back and re-read some of the responses and I see where the point was made that "self-inflicted" was not to mean doing it to yourself on purpose, but that it was not done by hostile fire.
I tend to agree with that, and you stated "Was the shrapnel American made or Russian made?", which is basically is the same thing.
I'm afraid I ignored your above remark. Not intentional. ;)
LOL
It seems even Kerry's going back to pick up Rassmann was a joke. It seems he bugged out upon hearing/seeing the mine go off under PCF 3. After several hundred yards, and realizing there was no enemy fire, Kerry turned around, went back to the scene, and got to Rassmann just a few yards ahead of another PCF.
To some people perhaps. It actually means exactly what it says - inflicted by one's own actions (rather than enemy action).
An injury has to have resulted from enemy action, direct or indirect, for a Purple Heart to be awarded. (I believe that there's also a provision covering accidental injury while undergoing enemy action but, once again, enemy action has to have occurred.)
Wrong. His Bronze Star was awarded shortly after the incident.
The unusual aspect of the story is that the citation was re-issued by Lehman's office years later rather than being replaced with a certified copy as would normally be done.
No, he was re-assigned as an admiral's aide in New York in March 1969. His status changed from "active duty" to "inactive reserve" in January 1970.
Hmmm......""someone"". I wonder.....could that someone have the initials of HRC perhaps?
"At second glance it could seem that someone with his and/or her sights set on the election in 2008 has arranged for us to discover discrepancies in Kerry's record which will contribute to his loss, just as Gore was meant to barely lose in 2000."
Well, I can't guess right ALL the time! ;)
Well, I can't guess right ALL the time! ;)
That response of mine did sound a bit harsh, didn't it? Sorry about that, I didn't mean it to.
Come to think of it, we seldom, if ever, see any photos of the guy wearing a short sleeved shirt! Could it be that, in contrast to his refusal to disclose his military records indicating he is hiding something, his refusal of his "right to bare arms" might indicate that he is hiding.... NOTHING, as in "no scars" to be found? Just a thought!
(click pic for link) "John Kerry: Traitor" on back
How DARE you be accurate when I'm wrong?
"A Tour in the Nam was 12 months, one year, 365 days, one circle around the sun. Guys would count down the days until their time was up. It was a big deal. When you only had a few weeks to go until your year was up, you were "SHORT", going home soon."
That's interesting, a "Tour" in Vietnam is only 365 days. My late Father was a fighter pilot in VF-96, an F-4B Fighter squadron in Carrier Air Wing 9. CVW-9 was deployed aboard the USS Ranger (CVA-61) from August 5th, 1964 to June 1965 on combat missions over both South and North Vietnam. Then CVW-9 had a "rest period" of four months before they were redeployed back to Vietnam as the air group aboard the USS Enterprise (CVAN-65) from October 26th, 1965 to June 21st, 1966 conducting combat air operations over North and South Vietnam.
Now when I do the math, it is clear that both of his combat deployments with VF-96 were only 10 and 9 months respectively, so with the help of your unquestionable expertise and knowledge that a "tour" must be 12 full months exactly, I am now able to state without any fear of contradiction, to use your words "that he didn't serve a Tour, let alone TWO Tours" of Vietnam.
Or did he?
dvwjr
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.