Look which political movement gets up in a huff when a veteran’s service and the issues surrounding it is examined. They must have made the same protests under their breath when they were financing the attack on Sen. Kerry’s record.
Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011
Yes, I’m sure they had their camo-bloomers in a bunch when Kerry was being attacked, or McCleland for that matter.
You know, this really does speak to his character that he would accept 58,000 dollars of tax-free money each year when he his married to an heiress and they have 8 or 9 houses, etc. Wouldn’t that money be better spent on other veterans?
But no, it’s out of bounds, just like his ditching his crippled first wife. That’s just so wrong to talk about — it’s not like he was doing something terrible like bumping fists with his wife or something.
You know, this really does speak to his character that he would accept 58,000 dollars of tax-free money each year when he his married to an heiress and they have 8 or 9 houses
Exactly right. It speaks directly to his character.
Does he have to decline the money? Of course not. He served and getting it is his due.
But 58,000 a year isn’t going to make one iota of difference in his lifestyle. He wouldn’t even notice not getting it. Yet it just isn’t in his character to give up something when others might benefit from it more.
I like how he was described as ‘technically disabled.’ What does that even mean?
Oh, good, the coin’s flipped back over again.
Say, all you lefty hypocrites, how can we possibly have a Commander-in-Chief who’s never seen combat?
Wasn’t that the argument for the past 8 years?
Or is that a racist thought now too, along with every other damn criticism of the Obamessiah?
Go call out the waaaaaaaaaaaaahmbulance.
Cue outrage in 3…2…1…
matt621: “Say, all you lefty hypocrites…”
So it is hypocrisy to point out when someone is being a hypocrite. I don’t think you will find that definition of hypocrisy in any dictionary.
“how can we possibly have a Commander-in-Chief who’s never seen combat?
Wasn’t that the argument for the past 8 years?”
No. I would explain what the actual argument was, but I think it is clear that you are far too stupid to understand.
“Say, all you lefty hypocrites, how can we possibly have a Commander-in-Chief who’s never seen combat?
Wasn’t that the argument for the past 8 years?”
No. Don’t you wish all of life’s questions had simple, one-word answers?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024927/The-wife-John-McCain-callously-left-behind.html
Look at the pic of mccain circa 1973 – hes waving – hands above shoudlers – interesting hes not disabled then like he is now. And yet someone said his disability is he cant raise his arms above his shoulders?
All I have to add is that the right wing has been attacking McCain’s war record ever since he dared challenge Bush for the presidency. They were doing it again when the conservatives wanted Romney.
From Sept. 1999:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=14821
From Jan. 2008:
http://holycoast.blogspot.com/2008/01/veterans-group-attacks-mccains-war.html
Since the Republic party made questioning someone’s war service ok, I ask you this: part of the McCain legend is that he refused to be released from captivity at one point. Is that REALLY a patriotic act? Instead of getting back into the fight and killing the enemy, he went back into prison and made propaganda videos for the enemy. While our boys were being drafted to get McCain out of prison, he refused to leave on his own accord. People were killed trying to free him.
Is McCain a Manchurian candidate? It would be irresponsible not to speculate.
matt621: “Say, all you lefty hypocrites…”
Is that really all you’ve got, bub? Being in war or even uniform has never been a requirement by anyone. One of the many arguments against your Chimp in Chief was that he went AWOL from his plum non-combat TANG job that his family’s friends got for him so he could avoid Vietnam.
And now yer boy McSame, who opposed an increase in veteran’s benefits, is shown to be taking more money each year tax-free than most Americans earn, when he himself doesn’t need it. So you see, what he wants for himself as a veteran is something he is happy to deny other veterans.
Here’s how you can wrap your poisonous microcephalic brain around the concept: pretend that we are talking about John Kerry. Now you understand, right?
Let’s see: one Vietnam veteran Presidential candidate claims 3 Purple Hearts and then comes home and spends all his free time biking, skiing, and windsurfing and the Left claims “How DARE you question any of his injuries!!!”.
One Vietnam veteran Presidential candidate claims 1 Purple Heart and can’t raise his arm above his shoulder. The Left’s reaction: “He’s faking it”!
Bravo for consistency…
Speaking of Cleland,
I wonder how much disability he gets. He seemed to be able to do his job just fine.
Enlightened Liberal,
Clearly not enlightened enough.
The Code of Conduct is quite clear that you are released in the order you are captured. Anything else would be a gross violation of everything McCain was trained to do.
I would like to see how many propoganda tapes (not videos) you would have made after handing from a chain for 28 hours in excruciating pain.
They should have at least added that photo of the woman at the GOP convention. It could make a good avatar for our friend Jaye Tea.
http://www.projo.com/blogs/shenews/photos/purpleheart.jpg
I don’t know squid, seems to me that making propaganda tapes for the enemy isn’t part of the Code of Conduct either. You should be prepared to see the same level of scrutiny on McSame’s record as Republics put on Kerry, wouldn’t that only be fair? Did McCain falsify the details of his capture to set up for a Presidential run in the future? If he is severely disabled, then why is there film of him lifting his arms over his head long after captivity ended? Maybe there needs to be a group of Viet Nam vets that served nowhere near McCain (like the Swift Boat vets) to shed some light on these discrepancies. Remember, your ilk told us that no question is out of bounds for someone running for President, so get ready for it.
SaveFarris: Let’s see: one Vietnam veteran Presidential candidate claims 3 Purple Hearts and then comes home and spends all his free time biking, skiing, and windsurfing
A Purple Heart is awarded to those who were wounded. It doesn’t mean they were disabled. But don’t let facts slow you down, there.
One Vietnam veteran Presidential candidate claims 1 Purple Heart and can’t raise his arm above his shoulder.
As bobh already posted, he can raise his arm above his shoulder.
(retry link):
he can raise his arm above his shoulder.
SaveFarris: “Let’s see: one Vietnam veteran Presidential candidate claims 3 Purple Hearts and then comes home and spends all his free time biking, skiing, and windsurfing and the Left claims “How DARE you question any of his injuries!!!”.”
Let’s see… on the one hand, we are talking about a permanent disability that is being described as ‘technical.’
On the other hand, we are talking about one time injuries.
They are not the same.
Bravo on being stupid.
Squid Shark: “Speaking of Cleland,
I wonder how much disability he gets. He seemed to be able to do his job just fine.”
Only a conservative could be this stupid.
His elbow is clearly BELOW his shoulder, you idiots. Even with a picture you guys can’t get it right.
Please, please, please keep pushing this fake disability meme. Push it hard. I’d recommend an enormous banner across all lefty blogs. It’ll be a huge winner for you guys.
JWG: “Please, please, please keep pushing this fake disability meme.”
McCain recently said giving improved educational benefits for enlisted men was, ‘too generous.’ Yet he’s a multi-millionaire who takes $58,000 a year for something his own team described as a ‘technical disability.’
He’s acting like a hypocrite.
But I guess that’s rarely an issue for you guys.
McCain said giving the same benefits to everyone no matter how long they have served was too generous, idiot. McCain was sponsoring a GI Bill that improved benefits for personnel who served more than one enlistment.
There’s nothing hypocritical about McCain receiving money that he earned through torture. Well, unless you’re really stupid like you guys keep proving.
Like I said before, please keep pushing this meme loudly and often. It’s a sure winner!
There’s nothing hypocritical about McCain receiving money that he earned through torture.”
He’s not receiving money because he was tortured. He’s receiving $58,000 a year for what his own staff labels as a “technical disability” (and, yes, I know he received this technical disability by being tortured, but your sentence made it sound like he is being paid as compensation for the torture in and of itself). McCain receiving $58,000 a year for a technical disability is pretty darn generous, in my book, which is why, on this issue, the “hypocrisy” label is rightfully affixed to him.
“Say, all you lefty hypocrites, how can we possibly have a Commander-in-Chief who’s never seen combat?”
I’m not certain the author of this comment was intending to make a serious point, so I feel a bit odd responding to it, but here goes. Neither the American Constitution nor any ensuing case law in the two centuries-and-change of which I’m aware makes any sort of requirement or preference that the president have served in the military. If it had, we’d have excluded from the office Thomas Jefferson (of whom I am frankly not a fan, but many are), Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt (unless one counts serving as Secretary of the Navy) and Woodrow Wilson.
“Is that really all you’ve got, bub? Being in war or even uniform has never been a requirement by anyone. One of the many arguments against your Chimp in Chief was that he went AWOL from his plum non-combat TANG job that his family’s friends got for him so he could avoid Vietnam.”
A friend of mine and Vietnam vet told me that the grunts’ disdainful nickname for the Air National Guard was the FANG… I’ll let you guess what the ‘F’ stood for…
I read of a theory recently that stated that Americans are so preoccupied with their president’s ‘character’ (and other things unrelated to policy – religion, etc.) because our ‘head of state’ and ‘head of government’ is the same person. In Britain this isn’t so; the Brits can invest their national pride in the Queen while the MPs and Prime Minster aren’t, as a general rule, subjected to the same level of ‘private life’ or previous life heated scrutiny, although the United States’ puritan roots may also play into that.
For myself, I don’t really care who served in the military, who didn’t, who was wounded and who wasn’t, who’s had one wife and who’s had twelve. I care whether it appears that somebody can be a competent executive, is generally honest and will follow more policies with which I agree.
Taking a position against GI benefits seems to me about the Republican equivalent of a Democrat openly taking a pro-gay marriage position – regionally okay, but nationally a loser. I agree with Eric Alterman that it defies explanation why so many servicemen would tilt Republican, but one has to think that McCain isn’t doing himself any favors alienating that demographic.
Whether it’s hypocritical to accept his disability payment while personally wealthy and taking a position against the new bill is a good question. On the one hand he did legitimately earn it, and who the hell am I to tell him what do with his money? On the other, it seems that vet’s benefits is one more thing that is perpetually underfunded and could probably use every penny it could muster, especially in light of the Iraq war.