Good post.
The old adage concerning stones and glass houses still applies no matter how much we despise the messenger. The real question is why would he change from a correct term that was used when running for the office to another term that is not correct in most people's understanding of "Vietnam veteran" being that of been there, done that.
AMEN----any individual who served in WW2 is a WW2 veteran whether they were overseas or in the USA---at least they served!!!(back then almost every civilian served as well with being rationed or in defense work)---all the smartassed libs and rotten RATS will try anthing to divide service men and woman---the man served during the Viet Nam War period---PERIOD----I thought Cleland lost his limbs because he was stupid with a grenade??---if so, why do the RATS continuously trot him out for display?
Thank you for supporting him. I'm a veteran although I wasn't in a combat theater. I served right after Vietnam (went to basic in Feb '76) during the Cold War. People don't understand that whether you see combat or not, you are important to the mission, which is not to denigrate the combat vet. Combat vets are in a class by themselves. Max Cleland didn't get his injuries in combat, but he doesn't tell folks that. Funny how the pot is calling the kettle black.
Thank you for your service!