President Bush to Receive Purple Heart Medal

[michaeledward]

If the Independent Council wasn't digging for dirt on White Water - dirt that never materialized - there would have been no Paul Jones inquiry, and no testimony under oath for perjury. There is no way around it. The impeachment for perjury has a direct causal relationship to oral sex. Those who prosecuted President Clinton for impeachment did so under the guise that no President is entitled to personal space -- -- or because they were perverted voyuers "we are outraged by sex, but we want to know every detail" (Didn't Newt Gingrich just say that).

And, very little energy has been spent, and very little taxpayer money has been wasted on President Bush. He had a rubber stamp Republican Congress for his first six years in office. Unfortunately for him, the Justice Department is catching up with Congressmen Delay, Cunningham, and Ney --- Look soon for Young from Alaska to fall, and a guy from Florida is singing pretty strong too.

So this is interesting ... Someone with at 28 point rep power posted a negative rep on the above post with the following comment ...

A man who cannot control his lusts should not be in control of others

Now, why someone who negative rep me with that comment, over the investigation of President Clinton is just wierd. There is no ascertion of what Clinton did was correct or incorrect.

I wonder if they were negative repping me because Delay, Cunningham, Ney, Gingrich and Ken Starr could not control their lusts, or because perhaps they, themselves, were tittillated by l'affaire de Lewinsky.

It is quite probably the largest non-sequiture I have encountered here on MartialTalk. Wow!

Back to the appropriateness of President Bush's decisions.

 

[michaeledward]

One other irony was pointed out elsewhere on the internets.

It seems to me that the Republican National Convention, prior to the 2004 Presidential election, had delegates sporting 'Purple Heart Band-Aids', apparently to mock the Democratic Presidential Candidate.

I don't remember hearing anything from the President telling his delegates to desist from that behavior.

One might wonder what those who sported those heart band-aids might think about this?

 

[Mariachi Joe]

Give it a rest, Joe. Whenever anyone says anything that doesn't utterly praise and revere Our Beloved Decider the True Believers say "Yeah, but BIll Clinton (got a *******, wasn't in Vietnam, eats live puppies and sacrifices them to Satan). Bill Clinton has his faults. George W. Bush is a disaster and has been one for his entire life. A more venal, stupid, disconnected, narcissistic, thieving, power mad mass murderer has never sat in the White House in my life or that of my aging parents, possibly ever. The Republican Talking Points mantras of praising Chimpy's cushy job in the ANG - from which he deserted during time of war - while denigrating men who actually served - Kerry, Murtha, McCain and Gore - is a disgrace to the United States Armed Forces.

Stop drinking coolaid for a second, take a breath, and relax. In case you forgot we live in America land of the free and I am excersizing my right to my own opinion. You can disagree with it all you want but why do have to name call. Clinton himself admitted that he dodged the draft and that it was one of the biggest mistakes of his life. What I am sick of is people who take pot shots at Bush but let Clinton slide for doing the same thing. Can we at least try to be fair?

 

[Mariachi Joe]

Mariachi Joe ... that was an intersting sentence or two.

George Bush's absence from the National Guard for a period of greater than a year is still unaddressed and unexplained. The term for such periods of absence is 'Desertion'.

But, the comment about Clinton 'running to' Moscow; what are you attempting to infer? Young Bill Clinton earned a Rhodes Scholarship; awarded each year to 32 of the most gifted young men (at the time) in American, to study in one of the most prestigious learning institutions in the world. During his time abroad, he visited other nations; which is one way people learn about the world.

George Bush, before becoming President, had never left North America. And, although serving, after he received one million dollars of United States taxpayer training to pilot aircraft, did not show up for training.

You know, in the early 80's, a college colleague of mine visited Moscow. I remember sitting in her dorm room listening to her stories of the visit. All of us wanted to visit Moscow then.

It seems odd, to hear you use the visit as a slur. I wonder if this political shorthand you are using, even makes any sense to you today. What the hell is so bad about visiting Moscow?

I'll be happy to answer. At the time Mr. Clinton went to Moscow we were in the middle of the Cold War and the former Soviet Union was an enemy of the United States. I don't care where Mr. Clinton went but the fact is that he did dodge the draft, he has admitted to this, so if someone is going to take shots at Bush for bailing on the Guard then at least be fair enough to point out that Clinton dodged the draft. I am just getting tired all the onesided comments. It's okay if Clinton did it, but if Bush does it call him every name under the sun.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

My position isn't partisan because I'm not trying to link this to a Democrat vs. Republican thing. I'm not saying this was a poor choice due to the fact that Mr. Bush is a Neocon in the guise of a Republican, and that somehow it reflects his politics. This particular act, of accepting the medal, was wrong and it makes no difference his political alliance.

Yes, I believe the idea to give Mr. Bush the medal in the first place was also erroneous. The Vet who did this did it out of good intentions, but it was most certainly an inappropriate choice as well.

However, Mr. Bush should certainly have risen above the situation, recognized how inappropriate it was, invited the Vet to the whitehouse for a visit, thanked him for his generous spirit and good will, and declined to accept the medal. As the man who currently sits in the White House, the man who's duty it is to give out the Purple Hearts in the first place, Mr. Bush should have known better.

Anyone who claims the title "President", regardless of political alliance, should know better.

Do you seriously think that even a "trivial" decision like this isnt scrutinized by a heard of advisors? While you may be right here, I dont think it was such a huge deal and I was in the service at a time. Kerry threw his medals away (physically and pubically) while calling soldiers murders and that was alright, but this is a slap in the face? If its an insult to the troops, I think the blame falls on the giver, not the reciever.

 

[mrhnau]

Stop drinking coolaid for a second, take a breath, and relax. In case you forgot we live in America land of the free and I am excersizing my right to my own opinion. You can disagree with it all you want but why do have to name call. Clinton himself admitted that he dodged the draft and that it was one of the biggest mistakes of his life. What I am sick of is people who take pot shots at Bush but let Clinton slide for doing the same thing. Can we at least try to be fair?

I'll be happy to answer. At the time Mr. Clinton went to Moscow we were in the middle of the Cold War and the former Soviet Union was an enemy of the United States. I don't care where Mr. Clinton went but the fact is that he did dodge the draft, he has admitted to this, so if someone is going to take shots at Bush for bailing on the Guard then at least be fair enough to point out that Clinton dodged the draft. I am just getting tired all the onesided comments. It's okay if Clinton did it, but if Bush does it call him every name under the sun.

Do you seriously think that even a "trivial" decision like this isnt scrutinized by a heard of advisors? While you may be right here, I dont think it was such a huge deal and I was in the service at a time. Kerry threw his medals away (physically and pubically) while calling soldiers murders and that was alright, but this is a slap in the face? If its an insult to the troops, I think the blame falls on the giver, not the reciever.

Great posts guys... very well said.

One thing though Blotan, those were not Kerry's medals, he TOOK them from someone else. So, not only was he throwing away medals, but he was throwing medals FROM SOMEONE ELSE! *gasp*

 

[MJS]

ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful. In addition, if anyone feels that they are having issues with someone via the rep system, please contact an Admin. to look into it, rather than discussing it in the thread.

-Mike Slosek
-MT Asst. Admin-

 

[jdinca]

Do you seriously think that even a "trivial" decision like this isnt scrutinized by a heard of advisors? While you may be right here, I dont think it was such a huge deal and I was in the service at a time. Kerry threw his medals away (physically and pubically) while calling soldiers murders and that was alright, but this is a slap in the face? If its an insult to the troops, I think the blame falls on the giver, not the reciever.

You forget, this has nothing to do with the act, it has everything to do with the fact that Bush is evil. There's nothing that Bush could do that would have made the left happy, other than resign or die in office. Ironically, that would put Cheney in charge, which would piss the left off even more.

Kerry threw his medals away and called his fellow soldiers murderers. But, since he's not Bush, that's okay and is easily excused. Clinton admittedly dodged the draft, went to Moscow in the middle of the cold war when it was still a communist country but that's okay, he's not Bush. Bush has a questionable service record in the National Guard, so let's eviscerate him.

If it were Gore, or Kerry who had accepted the soldier's medal, the response would have been that it was an honorable and gracious thing to do.

This was such an insignificant event in the grand scheme of things that I'm surprised this thread is still alive.

 

[CoryKS]

This was such an insignificant event in the grand scheme of things that I'm surprised this thread is still alive.

Are you kidding? This stuff is catnip for a certain mindset. Here's another little chew toy: Bush uses Ohio pen to veto troop withdrawal measure.

Bush signed the veto Tuesday night with the pen, given to him by Robert Derga, the father of Marine Corps Reserve Cpl. Dustin Derga, who was killed in Iraq on May 8, 2005.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

This craps pathetic.

 

[jdinca]

Are you kidding? This stuff is catnip for a certain mindset. Here's another little chew toy: Bush uses Ohio pen to veto troop withdrawal measure.

No, I'm not kidding you. Is this issue still in the news, or is just here and in the liberal blogs where it's still getting play?

As for the signing with the pen, how does the father who gave Bush the pen feel about it? Is he proud that he used it, or is he upset? If he's happy Bush used the pen, then you don't have a leg to stand on. If he's upset, then you have a gripe. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but in these two cases what MATTERS, is what the individuals involved think.

"Derga asked Bush to promise to use the pen in his veto."

'nuff said?

This stuff is catnip for a certain mindset.

Whose mindset? Those that disagree with the left wing viewpoint? In that case, it must be bad...

 

[michaeledward]

I'll be happy to answer. At the time Mr. Clinton went to Moscow we were in the middle of the Cold War and the former Soviet Union was an enemy of the United States. I don't care where Mr. Clinton went but the fact is that he did dodge the draft, he has admitted to this, so if someone is going to take shots at Bush for bailing on the Guard then at least be fair enough to point out that Clinton dodged the draft. I am just getting tired all the onesided comments. It's okay if Clinton did it, but if Bush does it call him every name under the sun.

Please share the source on this data ... where President Clinton states he "dodged" the draft. I wonder if Vice President Cheney's statement that he had "other priorities" qualifies under that phrase "dodge".

And the hyperbole is getting mighty thick in these last few posts.

jdinca, you will recall that Vice President Gore served in Vietnam, as did Senator Kerry. But, by the way, neither is currently Commander-in-Chief. I think there is something about that status that makes accepting such a gift a bit different.

I will point out again, that the people who are making rabid comments on this thread, are not the left-wing blogs and tin-foil hat crowd. The hard right are making the most vitriolic comments.

 

[jdinca]

Are you kidding? This stuff is catnip for a certain mindset. Here's another little chew toy: Bush uses Ohio pen to veto troop withdrawal measure.

Whoops, my bad. :wink2:

 

[michaeledward]

jdinca .... no comment? Are you really proposing that we consider Vice President Gore and Senator Kerry as the same as Commander-in-Chief Bush?

Isn't that the argument you make when you say ...

If it were Gore, or Kerry who had accepted the soldier's medal

And you mis-represent facts.
Senator Kerry did not throw "his" medals away.
Some of Senator Kerry's fellow soldiers were murderers.
I am waiting for someone to document President Clinton admitting he dodged the draft, rather than to ascert it as a political point.

I don't think anyone has eviscerated Bush on his desertion (in this conversation, anyhow). And if you have evidence that he attended the National Guard duties required of him, that would be nice to see to.

So, please don't piss on me and tell me it's raining. Back up your arguments.

 

[Flying Crane]

Do you seriously think that even a "trivial" decision like this isnt scrutinized by a heard of advisors?

well, then I would say the whole bunch of them lack that necessary insight.

While you may be right here, I dont think it was such a huge deal and I was in the service at a time.

fair enough, i really see it more as an example of how out of touch with reality Bush and his administration is, and it completely turns on its head the meaning that the medal is supposed to have. Bush is supposed to GIVE the medals, not RECEIVE them.

They are meant to be given out based on clear criteria: wounds received, or death, due to an act of the enemy under conditions of war. Bush accepted the medal based on the re-defined/inappropriately-defined criteria of a well-meaning, but completely erroneous supporter. He should not allow the criteria of the medal to be re-defined by a citizen veteran.

Kerry threw his medals away (physically and pubically) while calling soldiers murders and that was alright, but this is a slap in the face?

Kerry is free to do whatever he wants with his own medals, but I can understand why others might be offended by it. As to calling our soldiers "murderers", I would like to see the exact language he used, and the full context under which it was said. I suspect this may be an over-simplification of his true message, and not an accurate reflection of what he really said. But without seeing it, I cannot comment further.

Regardless of this, whatever Mr. Kerry or anyone else did or did not do that was or was not appropriate, it is immaterial to the discussion of Bush accepting the Purple Heart. I personally don't see the Democrats as the savior of this nation. They are problematic in their own way, and that's why I am a political Independent. But pointing out perceived wrongs done by others doesn't lessen the mistakes and wrong-doings of Bush.

If its an insult to the troops, I think the blame falls on the giver, not the reciever.

I think my earlier paragraph answers this. The medal is to be given out based on clearly defined criteria. Accepting the medal based on how a citizen veteran has re-defined that criteria is inappropriate.

While I find the vet's actions inappropriate, I believe he was motivated by good intentions and I don't fault that. However, yes, it was still inappropriate.

But still Mr. Bush should have recognized how inappropriate this was, and declined to accept the medal, and the far greater blame rests on his shoulders.

 

[Flying Crane]

As for the signing with the pen, how does the father who gave Bush the pen feel about it? Is he proud that he used it, or is he upset? If he's happy Bush used the pen, then you don't have a leg to stand on. If he's upset, then you have a gripe. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but in these two cases what MATTERS, is what the individuals involved think.

"Derga asked Bush to promise to use the pen in his veto."

'nuff said?

well, the pen was simply a personal gift between the two men. A personal gift is just that, and nothing more.

The Purple Heart carries a great deal of National symbolism, and is only to be given out (not received) by the President. It is given out based on clear criteria. If those criteria are not met, it is not given. The Purple Heart is far far different from a simple gift between individuals. It is just completely apples and oranges. Not at all a similar situation.

 

[mrhnau]

I think my earlier paragraph answers this. The medal is to be given out based on clearly defined criteria. Accepting the medal based on how a citizen veteran has re-defined that criteria is inappropriate.

This is the whole point I made earlier...

Bush is not receiving this medal for wounds received during combat. He is receiving it because some guy wants to give it to him. Same thing when I got the award from my grandfather. Same with many people receiving them posthumously or at later times.

The guy giving it to Bush was not giving it as a formal decoration, nor will Bush ever wear it if he were to wear his military regalia.

I'm sorry, I simply don't see an issue here other than Bush haters desperately wanting to pin something else on him. This thread should have died a long time ago.

 

[Flying Crane]

This is the whole point I made earlier...

Bush is not receiving this medal for wounds received during combat. He is receiving it because some guy wants to give it to him. Same thing when I got the award from my grandfather. Same with many people receiving them posthumously or at later times.

The guy giving it to Bush was not giving it as a formal decoration, nor will Bush ever wear it if he were to wear his military regalia.

I'm sorry, I simply don't see an issue here other than Bush haters desperately wanting to pin something else on him. This thread should have died a long time ago.

well, I actually see this as a very different issue as well.

You received the medal from your grandfather. Obviously the medal has become a family heirloom and was passed on to you as such. There was no suggestion that you earned the medal based on combat merit. As a family heirloom, that is completely appropriate. Or as a simple gift between friends, it could be passed on. I would see nothing wrong with that.

This Veteran, however, gave the medal to Bush based on "verbal and emotional" attacks upon him by citizens of the US and members of our lawmaking body who oppose and disagree with his actions and policies. This suggests (laughably) that Bush merits the medal for these "wounds", and it also suggests that those citizens and members of congress who oppose him are somehow at war with him and are "enemy combatants". This is a completely inappropriate characterization in both cases. It also implies that the intent of the giver was actually as an unofficial "formal decoration", and Bush knew this and accepted it anyways. And by accepting the medal, Bush implies that the above meritless characterizations actually have merit. Like it or not, he is a political figure and his actions make political waves. His actions send messages to the public that he apparently is unable to recognize, or else he is willing to accept.

While some gifts, like a pen, may be appropriate to accept, the symbolism attached to the Purple Heart and Mr. Bush's position in US Politics, mandates that Bush had a duty to decline the gift.

And I agree, this thread should have died already.

 

[Sukerkin]

I agree on all counts, Michael but commend you especially on a fine post that deserves to be the one to wrap this issue up :rei:.

 

[jdinca]

well, the pen was simply a personal gift between the two men. A personal gift is just that, and nothing more.

The Purple Heart carries a great deal of National symbolism, and is only to be given out (not received) by the President. It is given out based on clear criteria. If those criteria are not met, it is not given. The Purple Heart is far far different from a simple gift between individuals. It is just completely apples and oranges. Not at all a similar situation.

I certainly understand your point of view but the fact of the matter is that the Purple Heart was given as a gift from a soldier to his commander in chief, not as a medal earned in combat. Were that the case, I would be in 100% support of your position. I don't see in any way how this denigrates the meaning behind the medal. The soldier earned it by being wounded in combat. He is so supportive of the President and what he's doing, that he felt it appropriate to give it to him as a gift. It's his choice, like it, or not.

What I find surprising is that some of the comments about the soldier makes him look like he doesn't understand the meaning of what's he's done. If ANYBODY understands the significance, it would be the soldier who earned the medal in the first place.