John Kerry's Questionable War Record
By Paul Conroy
Over many, many years
of working with and for veterans of war, I can say undoubtedly I have met my
share of good people.
These are people who, usually after years of red tape, ask for little in
return except for the lousy benefits due to them.
I know this for a fact, because I have tried tirelessly to help these
good men of honor to obtain payment for hearing aids, due to loss of hearing on
the battlefield.
I have met them all. men who have served from WWI to present day
conflicts.
Whenever I have the
fortune to meet a veteran, be it by work or happenstance, it is an automatic
response for me to extend my hand with sincere gratitude and say thank you.
Without fail, these men, whom I have the utmost respect for, never seem
to surprise me by their reaction to me.
Typically their first reaction to me is clearly one of surprise, then
comes a pregnant pause, and then finally, a truly grateful ‘no, thank you’
is returned. This
has happened to me when meeting people from many different persuasions and all walks
of life. I
will admit, I rarely have met any of the ‘top brass’, but if I did, I would
say ‘thank you very much’.
Lately, my thoughts have focused on the Sen. John F. Kerry and his responses to our noble men in service. I doubt I will ever have to worry about what I would or even could say to the Senator from Massachusetts. As I understand it Mr. Kerry thinks his war record should not be questioned. O.K. he did serve and did receive honors as we all know, but then he came home and testified before congress just how bad the war was, and all of the "atrocities" committed in Vietnam. I get a little bit more confused when Mr. Kerry campaigns as a war hero, in his words “I know a thing or two about aircraft carriers,” but he then will stray from the fact that he discarded his medals. We all know now, he was seen protesting with Hanoi Jane. So what exactly would we be thanking the Senator for, whom even as of late has voted against increased money for our good soldiers serving dutifully.
I’m sure it is easy
for Mr. Kerry to vote for a pay raise for himself, but I guess for men in
combat, voting for a raise and increased support is morally wrong.
This is not new to many people. If John Kerry had any deciding votes in
the 80s, the cold war would not have ended, as we know he prefers appeasement.
Yeah, that has been a sound proven means of international diplomacy.
In 1992 Mr. Kerry
said, “Vietnam should not be used as a litmus test for the presidency.” I
agree, however, I believe this might have been in defense of Boy Clinton, and we
all know where and what he was doing during the Vietnam conflict.
So as it appears Mr. Kerry should not be questioned about his war record,
but campaigning with a life long Republican whom he pulled out of the water and
saved his life.
No offense, but I would do the same thing if I were on a boat with a
perfect stranger. Now attacking a proven leader during a new kind of war is
perfectly fine, in which I say ‘Thank you Mr. President’.
Of course the elite
media would never report on much of this, they merely dismiss Kerry’s’
double standard, but all consumed where was George W. Bush, in Alabama or Texas,
and for how long, blah, blah, blah.
Who really cares, everyone knows, even the leftist media, though they
hope and try (but not too hard in 1992) to make some kind of copy out the
President’s record, but the ‘war hero’ gets a pass.
I actually hope this becomes an issue; don’t think Mr. Kerry did not
get a little privilege himself upon entering the service as an officer in the
Navy. With
no disrespect to the Navy, Mr. Kerry wasn't in the trenches with the typical G.I.
I am rather certain his hearing has not been damaged as a result of
direct combat.
Paul David Conroy is a Sr. Partner at T.E.M. Consulting Group L.L.C. www.temgroup.org