To answer a troll;
Americans through John Kerry, learned that the medals system in our military can, like anything else, get ‘gamed’. People get medals they don’t deserve if they are of a low enough moral standing. Like, for example, Kerry.
Our resident troll claims that Max Cleland is a hero. I say he’s nothing of the sort, as does Cleland himself as quoted in this post by Tom Alday of about a year back [1].
In Cleland’s own words: “I didn’t see any heroism in all that. It wasn’t an act of heroism. I didn’t know the grenade was live. It was an act of fate.”
So, if one wanted to be a ‘nice guy’ and better Cleland’s position following the war, one could always ‘gild the lilly’ a bit. And given that the system is fairly easy to ‘game’ as John Kerry so aptly demonstrated, it wouldn’t be hard to do. Let’s say he’s on his way TO having a beer instead of coming BACK from having a few, they reason… because, after all, if we say he’d had a few beers in him at the time of the accident, he’d not get nearly the benefits, wouldn’t be called a ‘war hero’, and so on. And who’s it gonna hurt if we portray the story that way?
So, the press has covered things in this way over the years…
“He told the pilot he was going to stay awhile. Maybe have a few beers with friends. … Then Cleland looked down and saw a grenade. Where’d that come from? He walked toward it, bent down, and crossed the line between before and after.” (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Dec. 5, 1999)
“(Cleland) didn’t step on a land mine. He wasn’t wounded in a firefight. He couldn’t blame the Viet Cong or friendly fire. The Silver Star and Bronze Star medals he received only embarrassed him. He was no hero. He blew himself up.” (The Baltimore Sun, Oct. 24, 1999)
“Cleland was no war hero, but his sacrifice was great. … Democratic Senate candidate Max Cleland is a victim of war, not a casualty of combat. He lost three limbs on a long-forgotten hill near Khe Sanh because of some American’s mistake …” (The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Sept. 29, 1996)
Ah, so nobody gets the blame that way… including Cleland, himself.
Cleland even admitted that, but for his accident, he would have “probably been some frustrated history teacher, teaching American government at some junior college.”
We know what the ‘official’ record states. All the news accounts told the exact same story for 30 years — including that Cleland had stopped to have beer with friends when the accident occurred. But these were all drawn from the official record, which we now know to be at least questionable, if not flawed. It’s amazing how these half truths become legend. But, we also know what’s more likley than the official record.
And speaking of bending the record for the advanacement of Cleland and the Democrats, would someone please explain to me why we’re still hearing the often disproved claim that Cleland was injured in the battle for Khe Sanh?
Easier to sell him to voters that way one supposes.
The Democrats have built up this myth of Cleland because they needed something to try to tear down George W Bush with. And God help anyone who questions that myth. You end up with Foraming Trolls like Arne.
Bottom line: Given the proclivity of Democrats to pump up the military record of their own, (see the publicly disputed record of John Kerry) I suppose Cleland to be among these. And what I’m saying is not slander. Slander assumes facts no longer on record. The ‘official record’, having been proven as open to being faked, ala Mr. Kerry, cannot be taken as fact. Thereby are all ‘readings’ on the matter equal again.
Have the defenders of Cleland else to offer?
And if we are to take as a given what it says in the official record, does this mean we should also take as a given that President George W. Bush served his country with honor, as it says in the official record? Funny how that point gives the left a miss..
Now, Anre, I know you’re playing games with your addresses, but I also know where that’s coming from. Do you suppose your employers will like that info?