Sen. Joseph Maxwell Cleland and Sgt. Peter Damon
Sen. "Max" Cleland and Sgt. Peter Damon are American heroes. For more on Sen. Cleland, go to my post of February 12, 2006 (one of my better posts, if I dare say so). Sgt. Peter Damon lost both arms in Iraq. Sen. Cleland (Capt., Ret.) lost one arm and both legs in Vietnam.
Last week, the Boston Globe shared the story of Sgt. Peter Damon. Sgt. Damon has filed a lawsuit against liberal extremist and propagandist, Michael Moore. Apparently, Michael Moore knows more about how Sgt. Damon feels regarding the war in Iraq than the Sgt. does and Mr. Moore chose to speak for Sgt. Damon in his laughable movie, "Fahrenheit 9/11". Sgt. Damon has filed a lawsuit to correct the mischaracterization of his position; Mr. Moore, the loud-mouth, so far, has had no comment on the lawsuit. Hmmm. Really? He has nothing to say? Telling.
Anyway, in the Globe story I mention above, the Boston Globe goes out of its way to twice inform the readers that Sgt. Damon's injuries were not suffered in combat. I can find no story in the Boston Globe that informs the readers that Sen. Cleland's wounds were also not suffered in combat. To me, an injured soldier is a hero whether the wounds are suffered in combat or not. Certainly, if the wounds are suffered "in theater", as both Sen. Cleland and Sgt. Damon's were, then the distinction between how Sen. Cleland lost his limbs and how Sgt. Damon lost his is even less.
However, that's not the way the Boston Globe plays it given their extremely liberal slant on all things. As I say in my post of Feb. 12, Sen. Cleland was used by Sen. John F. Kerry and the Democratic Party in the run-up to the 2004 Presidential Election. Imagine if anyone ever cut short a Sen. Cleland introduction that talked of a "wounded and decorated Vietnam War veteran" with the quick interjection of "but his wounds were not combat related". The assault on the fact-sharer would be immense, intense, brutal . . . pick a word . . . but, I'd agree the verbal assault would be justified. Though, I still stand by my indictment of Sen. Kerry and the Democratic Party for acting as though they were embarrassed that Sen. Cleland's injuries were not combat related.
Anyway, the Boston Globe interjected that Sgt. Damon's injuries were not combat related and it seems I'm the only person offended.
The letter I submitted:
Editor,
Former U.S. Sen. Joesph Maxwell Cleland (Capt., Ret.) and Sgt. Peter Damon are American heroes (Veteran files suit over role in film, Says 'Fahrenheit' distorted his views, June 1, B1). Sen. Cleland is a triple amputee and Sgt. Damon is a double amputee. Why did the Boston Globe feel the need to twice point out that Sgt. Damon's injuries were not combat related while never pointing out that Sen. Cleland's were not combat related (Sen. Cleland picked up a hair-triggered grenade on the tarmac of a Vietnam base, the grenade then exploded in his hand; he had just returned to the base via helicopter from a combat mssion). Both suffered catastrophic personal injury "in theater". Why the different treatment? (End of letter.)
Sen. "Max" Cleland and Sgt. Peter Damon are American heroes. For more on Sen. Cleland, go to my post of February 12, 2006 (one of my better posts, if I dare say so). Sgt. Peter Damon lost both arms in Iraq. Sen. Cleland (Capt., Ret.) lost one arm and both legs in Vietnam.
Last week, the Boston Globe shared the story of Sgt. Peter Damon. Sgt. Damon has filed a lawsuit against liberal extremist and propagandist, Michael Moore. Apparently, Michael Moore knows more about how Sgt. Damon feels regarding the war in Iraq than the Sgt. does and Mr. Moore chose to speak for Sgt. Damon in his laughable movie, "Fahrenheit 9/11". Sgt. Damon has filed a lawsuit to correct the mischaracterization of his position; Mr. Moore, the loud-mouth, so far, has had no comment on the lawsuit. Hmmm. Really? He has nothing to say? Telling.
Anyway, in the Globe story I mention above, the Boston Globe goes out of its way to twice inform the readers that Sgt. Damon's injuries were not suffered in combat. I can find no story in the Boston Globe that informs the readers that Sen. Cleland's wounds were also not suffered in combat. To me, an injured soldier is a hero whether the wounds are suffered in combat or not. Certainly, if the wounds are suffered "in theater", as both Sen. Cleland and Sgt. Damon's were, then the distinction between how Sen. Cleland lost his limbs and how Sgt. Damon lost his is even less.
However, that's not the way the Boston Globe plays it given their extremely liberal slant on all things. As I say in my post of Feb. 12, Sen. Cleland was used by Sen. John F. Kerry and the Democratic Party in the run-up to the 2004 Presidential Election. Imagine if anyone ever cut short a Sen. Cleland introduction that talked of a "wounded and decorated Vietnam War veteran" with the quick interjection of "but his wounds were not combat related". The assault on the fact-sharer would be immense, intense, brutal . . . pick a word . . . but, I'd agree the verbal assault would be justified. Though, I still stand by my indictment of Sen. Kerry and the Democratic Party for acting as though they were embarrassed that Sen. Cleland's injuries were not combat related.
Anyway, the Boston Globe interjected that Sgt. Damon's injuries were not combat related and it seems I'm the only person offended.
The letter I submitted:
Editor,
Former U.S. Sen. Joesph Maxwell Cleland (Capt., Ret.) and Sgt. Peter Damon are American heroes (Veteran files suit over role in film, Says 'Fahrenheit' distorted his views, June 1, B1). Sen. Cleland is a triple amputee and Sgt. Damon is a double amputee. Why did the Boston Globe feel the need to twice point out that Sgt. Damon's injuries were not combat related while never pointing out that Sen. Cleland's were not combat related (Sen. Cleland picked up a hair-triggered grenade on the tarmac of a Vietnam base, the grenade then exploded in his hand; he had just returned to the base via helicopter from a combat mssion). Both suffered catastrophic personal injury "in theater". Why the different treatment? (End of letter.)
posted by Zack at 9:44 AM
4 Comments:
saw the same article. they mentioned he was in national guard many times as well but they never tell us that kerry was in navy reserves. reserves equals navy but why cant they just say it anyway
Anonymous, yes, my sources confirm that Sen. Kerry, my favorite whipping boy, it's so darn easy, was in the Navy Reserves but the Reserves are part of the Navy so to me it is the same thing. I'll let regular Navy guys comment of the Reserves being something less (Sen. Kerry and the Boston Globe crowd seem to suggest it because they never mention the distinctive fact). I think I agree with what you're implying: if you belong to the Girl Scouts but are tasked with the job of going door to door in Iraq sweeping for terrorists what difference does it make what uniform you wear ("he" in your statement above meaning Sgt. Damon)? It makes no difference to me. If you carried a rifle in the swamps of Vietnam, you're an American hero. If you carried a rifle in the streets of Basara, you're an American hero. I'm positive that Se. Kerry is not the ONLY American hero that served in Vietnam as he would have you believe. Everyone else was a "monster" (his word) and he's the only hero? No.
Completely unrelated-
Any thoughts on the current Ann Coulter brouhaha?
On a much bigger note, who's crying more over the recent death in Iraq- Al Qaeda or the U.S. liberals and democratic pols?
Anonymous, Ann Coulter is right, though the language she used was a bit harsh. Look at all of my posts, I'm constantly arguing against Kerry, Murtha, Sheehan and similar. They're all victims or unassailable because of military service or other. I can't challenge them without exposing myself to being insensitive or mean. I heard Ann speak twice since this all started and everytime the interviewer asks about the widows Ann interjects and acknowledges the other 2,996 spouses that lost a loved one. Why don't we hear from them? Oh, they don't hate Bush; we get it.
The al Fedaban Americans are def. more upset about the al-Zarqawi death than al Qaeda.
Congratulations to the United States Air Force, U.S. Special Forces, the Coalition Forces, Iraqi Security Forces and the Iraqi people for taking just the next step in securing a free and safe society. This is not a time to gloat but it is OK to acknowledge a great moment in the pusuit of freedom.
Post a Comment
<< Home