Setting the Record Straight
POSTED BY: misbehaven
UPDATED: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 04:14
VIEWED: 3014
PAGE 1 of 2
I've been listening to Republicans attack the patriotism of Democrats since shortly after 9/11. The latest "traitor" is Rep. John "Jack" Murtha.
Here's some background on him. "Murtha left Washington and Jefferson College in 1952 to join the Marine Corps and was awarded the American Spirit Honor Medal for displaying outstanding leadership qualities during training. Murtha rose through the ranks to become a drill instructor at Parris Island and was selected for Officer Candidate School at Quantico, Virginia. Murtha was then was assigned to the Second Marine Division, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. Murtha remained in the Marine Corps Reserves, and ran a small business. In 1959, Murtha, then a captain, took command of the 34th Special Infantry Company, Marine Corps Reserves, in Johnstown. He remained in the Reserves after his discharge from active duty until he volunteered for service in the Vietnam War, serving from 1966 to 1967, serving as a battalion staff officer (S-2 Intelligence Section), receiving the Bronze Star with Valor device, two Purple Hearts and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry. He retired from the Reserves as a colonel in 1990, receiving the Navy Distinguished Service Medal." (Wikipedia)
I thought it was time to set the record straight. The following list shows which congressman actually served in the military and which ones didn't. Notice how those who attack the patriotism of others are the ones who never served.
Democrats: The men who "don't support the military and are weak on defense."
* Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
* David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
* Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
* Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
* Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.
* Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
* John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V, Purple Hearts.
* Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.
* Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star Bronze Star, Vietnam.
Paraplegic from war injuries. Served in Congress.
* Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53.*
*Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74.
* Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91.
* Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons.
* Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam, DFCs, Bronze Stars, and Soldier's Medal.
* Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and Legion of Merit.
* Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.
* Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat V.
* Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
* Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57
* Chuck Robb: Vietnam
* Howell Heflin: Silver Star
* George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.
* Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments. Entered draft but received #311
.* Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.
* Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
* John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and Air Medal with 18 Clusters.
* Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII. Saved by Raoul Wallenberg.
Republicans: The men sending people to war.
* Dick Cheney: did not serve. Five deferments, the last by marriage.
* Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
* Tom Delay: did not serve.
* Roy Blunt: did not serve.
* Bill Frist: did not serve.
* Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
* Rick Santorum: did not serve.
* Trent Lott: did not serve.
* John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to teach business.
* Jeb Bush: did not serve.
* Karl Rove: did not serve.
* Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man who attacked Max Cleland's patriotism.
* Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
* Vin Weber: did not serve.
* Richard Perle: did not serve.
* Douglas Feith: did not serve.
* Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
* Richard Shelby: did not serve.
* Jon Kyl: did not serve.
* Tim Hutchison: did no
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Interestingly enough, since the US military went all-volunteer in 1973, the proportion of Republicans in the military has increased continually. At one time, there were a lot more Democrats in the military, which is why a lot of the politicians with military records are Democrats. Currently, however, the US military is mostly a Republican voting block. Why? It probably has something to do with the radical change in ideology of Democrats as they move further and further to the Left. Almost extinct are democrats, like JFK, who were strong on defense. But more and more, these strong on defense democrats are changing their story to the Democratic Party line or they are leaving the Democratic Party. Joe Lieberman is the latest to leave, and he's doing very well as an Independent with lots of Republican votes. There were Republicans waiting in line to vote for him on a non-Democrat ticket.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
We have a volunteer army....Well, it's true
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Almost extinct are democrats, like JFK, who were strong on defense.
All the Democrats I just listed are strong on defense, they just have differing opinions from the Bush administration as to how to best defend this country. Just because they don't fully support the President doesn't mean they're weak on defense.
Quote:
But more and more, these strong on defense democrats are changing their story to the Democratic Party line or they are leaving the Democratic Party. Joe Lieberman is the latest to leave, and he's doing very well as an Independent with lots of Republican votes. There were Republicans waiting in line to vote for him on a non-Democrat ticket.
The Democratic Party line is not anti-Defense. Again, it just differs from the Republican Party line. And Joe Lieberman didn't leave the Democrats by choice. He continually ingnored his constituency and they axed him in the primary. And of course Republicans are waiting to vote for him, because he stands a better chance of beating the Democratic candidate, even as an Independent, than the Republican candidate does. And Lieberman is still going to support Bush and the Iraq War if he retains his Senate seat.
Right now more than fifty veterans are running as Democrats for Congress and dozens more are running up and down the ticket.
Listed below are some of the Democratic veterans who are running for office. These are veterans from Vietnam, The Persian Gulf War, Afghanistan, and Iraq.
AZ-3: Herb Paine
AZ-8: Jeff Latas
CA-3: Bill Durston
CA-4: Charles Brown
CA-46: Jim Brandt
CO-5: Jay Fawcett
CO-6: Bill Winter
FL-5: Rick Penberthy
FL-6: Dave Bruderly
FL-7: Jack Changon
FL-9: Bill Mitchell
FL-15: Dr. Bob Bowman
GA -1: Jim Nelson
IL-6: Tammy Duckworth
IL-14: John Laesch
IL-16: Dick Auman
IN-3: Tom Hayhurst
KY-2: Mike Weaver
MD-3: Mishonda Baldwin
MD-6: Andrew Duck
MI-8: Jim Marcinkowski
MN-1: Tim Walz
MO-9: Duane Burghard
NH-1: Peter Sullivan
NJ-3: Rich Sexton
NY-23: Bob Johnson
NY-29: Eric Massa
OH-4: Richard Siferd
PA-7: Joe Sestak
PA-8: Patrick Murphy
PA-10: Chris Carney
PA-19: Phil Avillo
SC-3: Lee Ballenger
TX-3: Dan Dodd
TX-5: Charlie Thompson
TX-6: David Harris
TX-10: Ted Ankrum
TX-13: Roger Waun
TX-21: John Couragess
TX-23: Rick Bolanos
VA-Senate: Jim Webb
VA-5: Al Weed
"The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation."
-Bertrand Russell
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:And therein lies the problem. You understand me perfectly. I have no doubt that many Democrats would want to be consistently strong on defense. I simply know that they cannot be and still retain their constituency or their jobs, and therefore they are not. Most of them will bow to their anti-war Liberal voters, which constitutes a major portion of the Democrat vote, other like Leiberman will hold firm to their principles and be voted out.
Originally posted by misbehaven:
The Democratic Party line is not anti-Defense. Again, it just differs from the Republican Party line. And Joe Lieberman didn't leave the Democrats by choice. He continually ingnored his constituency and they axed him in the primary.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
[BAnd therein lies the problem. You understand me perfectly. I have no doubt that many Democrats would want to be consistently strong on defense.
They are consistently strong on defense, they just have a different idea as how to best defend the country. And so do their voters.
Quote:
I simply know that they cannot be and still retain their constituency or their jobs, and therefore they are not.
Actually, they can be. Being strong on defense does not equate to being pro Iraq War. If anything the war in Iraq is helping terrorism to flourish, not helping to eradicate it.
"The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation."
-Bertrand Russell
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
When someone says "strong on defense" I don't know what that means. Does that mean voting for military spending? Supporting a universal draft? Not using the military to impose capitalism on other nations?
Term needs defining.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Many of the Right will never understand this concept; they see attack AS defence, and as a martial arts nut I can see that POV, however, when it is applied to situations not already in progress, 'attack being defence' can be called into serious question.
Originally posted by misbehaven:
Being strong on defense does not equate to being pro Iraq War.
I believe in a strong, state of the art, second-to-none military, with all the bells and whistles.
I also believe in wise and measured use of same.
Chrisisall Hawk
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That may be. But most military men and women don’t see it their way. Despite the few veterans on the Democratic side (all honorable men, I’m sure), the truth is that the military vote went +70% to Bush in the last election. And the Military vote consistently goes about three fourths to Republicans, not Democrats.
Originally posted by misbehaven:
They are consistently strong on defense, they just have a different idea as how to best defend the country. And so do their voters.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
When someone says "strong on defense" I don't know what that means. Does that mean voting for military spending? Supporting a universal draft? Not using the military to impose capitalism on other nations?
I don't think there's a clear definition. It's really a political catch-phrase invented by politicans to help obtain votes ("I'm strong on defense"), and it remains largely open to your own interpretation of what "strong or weak" means. To a Republican, it might mean massive military spending and support for the war in Iraq, which many view as an essential to fighting terrorism and defending our country. To a Democrat, it might mean less military spending, and more funding for border security, law enforcement, intelligence services, port security and an end to the Iraq War, which many see as a drain on resources that acutally weakens our ability to defend this country.
"The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation."
-Bertrand Russell
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME