Skip to comments.Ill. Congressman Hare: Puffing Military Record and Intimidating Voters
Posted on 06/08/2010 10:08:13 AM PDT by Mobile Vulgus
Congressman Phil Hare (IL, 17th District) is the perfect example of the sort of congressman no one should want. He's arrogant. He's dismissive. He's self-important. He's easy to anger. And worst of all he has disdain for his own voters. The man is simply a creep.
In April we had video of this arrogant cuss saying that he didn't care about the U.S. Constitution in the Obamacare fight. Apparently that darned old rag of paper is meaningless to this powermad pol.
This time we have Congressman Hare intimidating a voter and demanding that this Vietnam vet supply the congressman with his home address so that he, the congressman, can track the constituent down and further threaten him.
What's all the threats about? It's Congressman Hare's military record, a record that Hare is puffing up and using to mislead voters. By federal law Hare's military service does not make of him a "veteran" of the Vietnam War. Now, Hare did serve, but he served in the reserves here in the U.S. during the Vietnam War. By law, however, reserve troops are not officially Vietnam veterans...
Read the rest at Publiusforum.com...
I’d call this sorry buffoon one of the biggest morons in Congress, but he is in such august company.
Flush all the crap like this wherever you find it! It’s this garbage that is destroying America!
If there was a time for this gerrymandered district to flip, it’s this year.
Do you think that a reservist should be able to say that he or she is a war veteran, if he or she didn’t go to the combat area? I’m undecided, and I was in the navy reserve when I was activated and sent to Iraq for six months. I think that Rep. Hare should be honest, by saying that he was in the army reserve, 1969-’75.
They should specify “reservist” or combat duty. My grandfather, who served for years in the reserves, his tombstone at the national cemetery specifies “World War II”, “Korea” & “Vietnam”, even though (as far as I know) he never went to the latter two areas (and was stationed in Australia as an officer in WW2).
Not that I have any use for Hare, but this a story from 2001, being reported on today, making the story seem current ?
Wow I guess this is “Exaggerate military service” month. I hope this hurts Hare.
To answer your question, no, if someone served on a base away from the actual war they shouldn’t be called a veteran of that war in my book.
.....buffoon one of the biggest morons in Congress, but he is in such august company.....
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Isn’t that like saying you picked up a turd by its clean end?
According to the date on the letter by Ken Moffett it is June 2, 2010. He sent the letter to the ethics committee in D.C. That makes it current.
I think that Rep. Hare should be honest, by saying that he was in the army reserve, 1969-75
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Well being a pol from IL doesn’t give him much room to be honest, by nature.
He should and is classified to be a Vietnam Era Vet and if was never activated should specify he was in the Reserve.
If his unit was activated and sent he can claim that.
I was awarded a Vietnam Service Medal w/star for duties prior the war ‘officially’ starting and I consider myself a Vietnam Vet, but do specify I am not a ‘combat vet’.
you’re exactly right. I blew my read of it.
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.