Posted on 11/02/2006 11:40:53 AM PST by SmithL
The John Doolittle-Charlie Brown race took more spirited turns Wednesday as a leading House Republican assailed a Brown e-mail calling the Iraq campaign a "war of occupation/aggression" and the Brown campaign released a television ad pointing out Doolittle's lack of service in Vietnam.
On the steps of the state Capitol, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and a 2008 GOP presidential candidate, took Brown to task for an e-mail he wrote in April 2004 while a civilian employee of the Roseville Police Department.
After other employees had exchanged e-mails exulting over the anticipated return of a local resident coming back from military service in the Iraq war, Brown added a comment on the department e-mail system: "Only 130,000 or so military members left over there now wondering when they will get home from this war of occupation/aggression."
Brown, a Democrat, is challenging GOP incumbent Doolittle for the 4th District U.S. House seat.
On Wednesday, flanked by Doolittle supporters as he demanded an apology from Brown, Hunter said: "It is not a war of aggression in Iraq. I think his statement is an affront to the troops."
While the Doolittle campaign said it received the e-mail as a result of a public records request from a retired Roseville police lieutenant, Brown has referred to the same e-mail in campaign speeches.
Brown, a Vietnam combat veteran and retired Air Force lieutenant colonel whose son, Jeff, is entering his fourth tour of duty in Iraq, acknowledges sending the e-mail. At a late August campaign stop in El Dorado County, Brown said that after he sent the message "I got a thick stack of ugly e-mails calling me unpatriotic. And then there were e-mails from people saying, 'Thank you for speaking out. We're scared.'
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine, right, greets supporters at a press conference Wednesday at the state Capitol in support of Rep. John Doolittle. At left is Jim Bopp of Citrus Heights, a retired Army lieutenant colonel.
Why's ev'rybody always pickin' on me?
Doolittle just won today. Brown is another liberal appeaser. NEXT!!!!
The rhetorical equivalent of:
I for one will be glad that in the next few years the crop of candidates for office will have been too young to be questioned about why they didn't serve in Vietnam.
Frankly, I think the attacks on Allen for that are already too much -- by the time he was old enough to seriously consider going to Vietnam, the draft was beginning to wind down. He turned 18 in 1968, and was still in college when the war ended.
It's one thing to complain about someone like Clinton dodging the draft. But to complain about someone who played college football rather than sign up for the military is pretty silly, not everybody wants to join the military, even in a time of war.
Charlie Brown is the Placer County version of John Kerry.
Like Kerry, he is quick to mention his military service.
Like Kerry, he trashes the troops and their basis for being in Iraq.
Like Kerry, he has absolutely no leadership skill. He jumps from one side of an argument to the other in the blink of an eye depending on who he is talking to.
As a vet, I always wonder where these Charlie Browns, John Kerrys, etc come from. How do they justify turning on their "brothers and sisters in arms" like that? It is one thing to disagree with foreign policy but they cross the line. I think the title of "traitor," at least as it applies to their conduct regarding their comrades in arms fits! Disgraceful!
"Brown campaign released a television ad pointing out Doolittle's lack of service in Vietnam. "
If they are basing who should be in office on their military records, Bill Clinton would never have been President and Hillary shouldn't even campaign for it.
Charlie Brown's campaign idiots and dupes were standing on the corner waving American flags like he's a true patriot. I almost threw up in my car. He's trying to make the public think he's patriotic. Give me a break. The guys a Liberal POS and using the flag and the military to hide behind after he demonstrated against the military. Surely, the American people aren't that stupid.
This guy (Charlie Brown) even went so far as to appear, in full uniform at the house of a well-known anti-war protester, Steve Pearcy. Pearcy and his wife had hung an effigy of a soldier from their home. Brown was there to support them and their protest.
Now he's trying to put distance between himself and them, and they are ticked off. BTW, he's gotten Cindy Sheehan mad at him, too, for backing away from her.
The guy is a fraud.
I'm always amazed that anybody in uniform can get hit upside the head an start idolizing the Cindy Sheehans of the world.
His son is on his fourth tour in Iraq. I don't thing it is fair to say he is a traitor. His family has risked more than mine for this war, and he deserves respect for that. I disagree mightily with his politics, but his son has risked his life for me and this country and I will not criticize his patriotism or call him a traitor.
The RATS had a political rally in Jersey a while back. They had to delay the rally so they could find an American flag to put behind the candidate.
Liberals stand as an example of what the word hypocrite truly means. As I've said repeatedly, our forefathers must be turning in their graves at the insanity that is the Liberal Democrat party.
He certainly is not a traitor, and he and his son deserve to be applauded for their service.
In my post I used the term fraud, because Brown is portraying himself as more conservative than he is, and he is running in a particularly red district...strongly republican, strongly conservative. He is far more liberal than he is letting on. But recently, he has been called on it, both in the Sacramento Bee, with two articles in two days, and on the Tom Sullivan Show Wednesday.
BTW, I know you were not responding to my post.
I don't know anything about his son, but the son is not the father. Cindy Sheehan has made a living on the back of her heroic son and she is truly a traitor. Websters defines "traitor" as one who betrays another's trust. Charlie Brown may have honorably served his country, but as I said in my previous post, he IS a traitor regarding his fellow servicemen and women. His statements and actions regarding the troops, myself included, have betrayed the men and women in uniform, a uniform that he once wore.
If a person wants to be a liberal and a veteran, that is fine. I may disagree with them but once they start saying and acting in a manner harmful and distressing to the troops in the field, i.e. Kerry, Murtha, Cleland, and yes, Charlie Brown, then they are traitors to the military they once served.
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.