Posted on 01/17/2006 8:32:14 PM PST by Calpernia
Since November, the media have carried around Rep. John Murtha around on their shoulders like a conquering hero for his opposition to the war in Iraq. They’ve thrown around the words “war hero” like clowns throwing candy at a parade. Murtha was broadcast far and wide attacking Vice President Cheney for his five deferments from Vietnam, suggesting these chicken hawks don’t like any suggestions about how to fight a war.
If Murtha were a Republican accusing a Democrat like this, we know what would happen. The so-called nonpartisan, objective, “mainstream” media would either (a) totally ignore him as an irrelevant, obscure House wacko, or (b) investigate his own military record to see if he earned all the “war hero” talk. And if discrepancies were found, all hell would break loose. And if you don’t believe me, just ask John O’Neill and the Swift Boat Vets for Truth, who underwent first (a) and then (b) when they challenged John Kerry.
But Murtha is a Democrat accusing a Republican. So it fell to the Cybercast News Service, (CNSNews.com, which I founded), and reporters Marc Morano and Randy Hall to look into the Murtha military record. What they found were a lot of similarities to the military record of John Kerry.
Like Kerry, Murtha’s medals came for surface wounds that never caused his evacuation from the battlefield, and like Kerry, he attempted to get his medals by political manipulation, in Murtha’s case, through then-Rep. John Saylor. But Saylor’s office felt it was odd for Murtha to seek medals for “superficial lacerations.”
Murtha also told differing stories about when and where he was wounded in action. A Pittsburgh Post-Gazette story reported in 2002 that Murtha had facial lacerations. In 1994, the Uniontown (Pa.) Herald-Standard quoted Murtha saying he was “wounded in the arm” for one medal and “my knee was banged up and my arm was banged up when a helicopter was shot down” for the other. Then, Morano and Hall uncovered a June 1, 1967 report in the Johnstown (Pa.) Tribune-Democrat quoting from a letter from Murtha to his wife describing his injuries as being "struck in the ankle" by a "shot that ricocheted off the helicopter."
Since there were so many similarities to Kerry – including the fact that author Morano was also one of the first reporters on the Swift Boat Veterans story – the left predictably threw an ugly fit. It was not long, then, for Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne to load his air-rifle for rhetorical battle. “I underestimated the viciousness of the right wing,” he began.
Even before he gets started, we know where he’s going, don’t we?. Liberals want to insist when they tout a “war hero” making their anti-liberation of Iraq talking points, it’s 100 percent beyond the pale of decency to investigate him. They want the world to know that when a “war hero” acceptable to them disagrees with President Bush, everyone must stop, shut up, and listen like an old E.F. Hutton commercial.
Dionne sounds just like his hero Bill Clinton as he proclaims to be maddened by “the unblushing hypocrisy of the right wing and the way it circulates...personal vilification to abort honest political debate.” As if that weren’t enough, there’s also this: “Moreover, the right has demonstrated that its attitude toward military service is entirely opportunistic.”
Now here is where we should all acknowledge our partisanship – I oppose the Clintons and the Kerrys, and Dionne favors them. But can Dionne honestly state that the left wing (and “objective” smearers like CBS) have not resorted to “personal vilification” on the military record of George W. Bush? Can he honestly ignore that the left has vilified the World War II military service of Bob Dole in 1996 (Robert Ellis in The Nation) and George H. W. Bush in 1992 (Sidney Blumenthal in the New Republic)?
More importantly, how dare anyone on the left accuse any conservative of attitudinal opportunism where military service is involved. Military service didn’t matter a bit to them when Bill Clinton was running, but was vitally important when Kerry was their man in 2004. They felt George W. Bush’s National Guard record was a scandal in 2000, but also didn’t want the media poring over Al Gore’s Vietnam service as a journalist. Four years later, there they were again, poring over Bush’s Vietnam-era service record.
It’s fair to state that on some investigative stories, only conservatives want the tough, thorough report, and on others, only liberals are really jazzed about it. But what about the public interest? A media revering the words “objective,” “nonpartisan,” and “mainstream” would investigate both Republicans and Democrats when politicians start dragging out their war records.
Yes.
And he doesn't like it.
Apparently. Not holding my breath that he/she will admit that the comparison was way off base though!
Nope.
He won't ever admit that his illustration is wackanoodle.
ROFLMAO!!!! Wackanoodle?? That's a good one!!
*scibbles in notebook furiously*
Yes.
Used to describe pre-moonbat moonbats in their pupating stage.
LOL!!
INTREP
NOTE:
From Ray Funderburk, MOPH
The greatest threat to the sanctity and significance of the Purple Heart comes from the medal's easy availability. Anyone can buy one at flea markets, pawnshops or on the Internet, where Web sites offer the decoration, no questions asked, for as little as $35. An accompanying certificate on onion skin parchment and personalized with your name and any rank you choose costs about $25.
Such commerce in the symbols of American courage and sacrifice would be outlawed by a measure spearheaded last July by Rep. John Salazar, D-Colo. His "Stolen Valor Act" would make it a federal crime to falsely wear the Purple Heart and other top military decorations, or to even list them on a resume if they were not officially earned.
But the proposed bill now sits in the House Judiciary Committee, and its fate remains unclear. "We're waiting for the committee to act," said Salazar
tidbit post 108
OUCH!
I have seen those websites and always thought it a shame that anyone could just go buy one.
"We do know they were in a warzone. Pres. Bush and VP Cheany were not."
Wrong, wombat. Cheney was too old for VN so the question in his case is moot. GWB VOLUNTEERED to go to VN but was refused due to insufficient time remaining in his service time to train in the jets he would have to fly in VN.
Now, please continue to your next snide comment about YOUR President or do you live on Neptune?
We could eliminate those sites if this bill would get signed.
>>>Such commerce in the symbols of American courage and sacrifice would be outlawed by a measure spearheaded last July by Rep. John Salazar, D-Colo. His "Stolen Valor Act" would make it a federal crime to falsely wear the Purple Heart and other top military decorations, or to even list them on a resume if they were not officially earned.
But the proposed bill now sits in the House Judiciary Committee, and its fate remains unclear. "We're waiting for the committee to act," said Salazar<<<<
ping
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1560750/posts
Stolen Valor Act of 2005
So Murtha had the medals before he got them.
Over here....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1560750/posts?page=96#96
I'm confused about Murtha having the medals before he was 'injured'.
We saw requests and turn downs from Kerry and Murtha trying to get medals.
Were they officially issued? Or could they have just acquire them like suggested by Funderburk http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1560750/posts?page=2#2
" I'm trying real hard to see evidence of a war wound on his right cheek. Can somebody point it out? "
From the Pittsburgh Post Gazette- " In the first incident, his right cheek was lacerated,.."
My assumption from the beginning was that it was Murtha's right buttock. And I hope we never have a photo of that landscape.
What do LBJ, JFK, Kerry and Murtha all have in common?
Cleland did relate those facts. He was honest about the fact that he lost his limbs on the way to get drunk when he bent over and picked up a grenade.
What is omitted is that it sounds very much like a fragging!
And then question is why would someone frag Cleland unless he was incompetant and they thought he would get others killed.
Of course, since he registered and ran and voted democrat, no MSM would pursue the story.
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.