Brave men and heroes.

With the Senate runoff election in Georgia, the issue of Max Cleland has came back up. Cleland, in case some of you may not remember, lost three limbs in an accident in Vietnam. He won a Senate seat but lost it in a bitter election. Both sides slung mud but Cleland lost, probably as much over his leftie voting record as anything else. Of course Kerry, with his damnable comments about American service men in Vietnam, did much to negate any sympathy vote Cleland may have won otherwise.


In one of the forums I occasionally opine in another member quoted Ann Coulter writing about Cleland and the Democrats. I didn’t believe, and so noted.

“Fred, the Coulter quote looks like one of those made up quotes that float around the Internet supposedly written by Jay Leno, Maureen Dowd, etc. And if she wrote it, it exists some place on the Internet. Quotes claiming to come from Newsweek do not impress me.

But that is beside the point.

Those who claim there was no bravery in the incident in which he lost his limbs are like those on the Left who claimed that there was no bravery in McCain getting shot down, or those on the Right re Kerry serving on a Patrol Boat or the Lefties denigrating Bush going through flight training and flying a F102.

The bravery is in the act of going in harm's way.

All four acted bravely, as millions of others have done. The soldier who died in Vietnam is dead. The ANG pilot who crashed is dead. The Navy seaman who was killed on his ship when a missile misfired is dead. All died serving the country. Millions of others were injured. All were brave.”

But the quote had been more or less accurate and a link to her article was promptly provided. If I ever want to find the missing Dead Sea Scrolls I will start a thread about them and then deny they exist. An intrepid blogger will show up at my front door with them in a matter of minutes. But I digress.

Coulter wrote:

“Former Sen. Max Cleland is the Democrats' designated hysteric about George Bush's National Guard service. A triple amputee and Vietnam veteran, Cleland is making the rounds on talk TV, basking in the affection of liberals who have suddenly become jock-sniffers for war veterans and working himself into a lather about President Bush's military service….

….On "Hardball" Monday night, Cleland demanded to see Bush's pay stubs for the disputed period of time, May 1972 to May 1973. "If he was getting paid for his weekend warrior work," Cleland said, "he should have some pay stubs to show it."

The next day, the White House produced the pay stubs. This confirmed what has been confirmed 1 million times before: After taking the summer off, Bush reported for duty nine times between Nov. 29, 1972, and May 24, 1973 — more than enough times to fulfill his Guard duties. (And nine times more than Bill Clinton, Barney Frank or Chuck Schumer did during the same period.)

….Moreover, if we're going to start delving into exactly who did what back then, maybe Max Cleland should stop allowing Democrats to portray him as a war hero who lost his limbs taking enemy fire on the battlefields of Vietnam.

Cleland lost three limbs in an accident during a routine noncombat mission where he was about to drink beer with friends. He saw a grenade on the ground and picked it up. He could have done that at Fort Dix. In fact, Cleland could have dropped a grenade on his foot as a National Guardsman — or what Cleland sneeringly calls "weekend warriors." Luckily for Cleland's political career and current pomposity about Bush, he happened to do it while in Vietnam.

There is more than a whiff of dishonesty in how Cleland is presented to the American people. Terry McAuliffe goes around saying, "Max Cleland, a triple amputee who left three limbs on the battlefield of Vietnam," was thrown out of office because Republicans "had the audacity to call Max Cleland unpatriotic." Mr. Cleland, a word of advice: When a slimy weasel like Terry McAuliffe is vouching for your combat record, it's time to sound "retreat" on that subject.

Cleland wore the uniform, he was in Vietnam, and he has shown courage by going on to lead a productive life. But he didn't "give his limbs for his country," or leave them "on the battlefield." There was no bravery involved in dropping a grenade on himself with no enemy troops in sight. “

Link

Plainly caught in denial, although agreeing that such comments were bad by anyone, I replied.

Thank you Fred:

Based on the article I say that Coulter would have been better off not writing the article and she was wrong. As much as I enjoy her quick wit and sharp tongue she has over reached herself in this column and deserves to be told, 'Shut up."

Coulter is a partisan as is Cleland and Terry McAuliffe. Both were very much involved in dishonest attacks on Bush and like many times in life she let her temper get the best of her and deservedly gets zapped for it.

But like the finger in the eye or the unseen head slap in the NFL, the gouger and slapper also deserve condemnation and should also be told "Shut Up." Better Cleland should have used his background to (correctly) point out our strategy, at that time in Iraq was remarkably similar to Vietnam... kill some terrorists and fly away... than complain that Bush was AWOL when the White House was showing TANG pay records. The Vietnam strategy was wrong. Rumsfeld's Iraq war strategy was wrong. (But the objectives of both were honorable and worthy.)

Besides the fact partisan attacks regarding the service of an individual are just wrong, I think we make the mistake of confusing "brave" with "hero."

Vietnam was not a "battlefield" and Cleland was not a "hero." Both are exaggerations. Cleland's injuries were the result of an accident. His bravery was in being there.

To be a hero a person must do something beyond being brave. You have the soldier falling on a live grenade to save friends, a Sgt York calmly taking the German machine guns out of action and capturing a large number of troops... a NY fireman going back in and up the WTC towers when he knew it could collapse any moment... the passengers of UAL flight 93 who crashed it rather than letting the terrorists fly it into a building.

Bravery is knowingly going in harm's way. Heroism is taking actions that you know will likely kill or harm you while benefiting others.

There are many brave people. There are few heroes.

We live in the age of hype and overstatement. It is time we settle down and start remember that words have meaning.

The origin of the Marine Corp hymn

It is amazing what you can stumble on to on the Internet. If you ever wondered about the origin of the songs of our military, this article will tell you.

That it is written by a Marine seems to have caused a bit of bias, but when you can do it, it ain't bragging.

Is Obama watching the terrorist attacks in India?

Evidently the Iraqi people are,

BAGHDAD (AP) - Iraq's parliament on Thursday approved by a wide margin a security pact with the United States that lets American troops stay in Iraq for three more years.

The vote in favor of the pact was backed by the ruling coalition's Shiite and Kurdish blocs as well as the largest Sunni Arab bloc, which had demanded concessions for supporting the deal.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki appeared to have won the comfortable majority that he sought in order to give the agreement additional legitimacy.

Parliament speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani said an "overwhelming majority" of the lawmakers who attended the session voted in favor of the pact by a show of hands. The parliament's secretariat, which counted lawmakers as they entered the chamber, said 220 out of 275 legislators attended.

Link

The religion of peace strikes again.

Carter's failures in 1979 lead directly to what is happening now.

You cannot negotiate with these people. They seek to kill to intimidate.

It will be interesting to hear what Obama has to say about it

The French Man

Europe continues to be the canary in the coal mine, only in this case the mine is located in France.

We get this from the Brussels Journal, which continues to be one of the few that will step up to the plate on certain matters.

Eric Zemmour, a French journalist who writes for Le Figaro, is at the center of a storm of controversy following comments he made on television November 13. Zemmour, born in Paris, is from a family of Jewish Berbers who left Algeria after the Algerian war. Zemmour’s main point was that there are different races distinguishable by skin color. Both the French paper press and the blogosphere have had a field day with this story, accusing him of resurrecting the Nazi theory of race, of being a “Lepeniste”, of making comments that emit a nauseating odor, of being a promoter of ethnic separationism, of triggering a “civil war” between Jews, blacks, and Arabs, of expressing the malaise of French “Negrophobes”, of seeking a return of “a white France”, etc...
Here is a small portion of the whole conversation between Zemmour; Isabelle Giordano, the moderator of the show; Rokhaya Diallo, a black woman from Senegal and president of an organization called “The Indivisable Ones”; Vincent Cespedes, another of many long-winded French philosophers who have nothing to say and take an eternity to say it; and Renan Demirkan, a German actress and writer of Turkish origin:


- Eric Zemmour: There is racial “métissage”, that is, the mixture, physically, of races.

- Rokhaya Diallo: What are races? What do you mean by “races”?

- Eric Zemmour: If there are no races, there's no “métissage”!

- Rokhaya Diallo: Well, no, because maybe it’s the second type that you were talking about... [She is referring to the “métissage” of cultures]

- Eric Zemmour: So there is no problem in that case!

- Rokhaya Diallo: No, because you are talking about the two types of “métissage”, so perhaps the second type exists.

- Eric Zemmour: Yes, the second...

- Isabelle Giordano and Eric Zemmour together: Because for you Rokhaya, races do not exist?

- Rokhaya Diallo: No, well, I...

- Vincent Cespedes: Nor do they exist for scientists.

- Isabelle Giordano: We’re listening to her... [The meaning of the French text is not entirely clear.]

- Eric Zemmour: What interests me in this story – I’ll be quick, is that I have the feeling that the consecration of races during the period of the Nazis and before has been replaced by a denial of the existence of races. And to me, one is as ridiculous as the other. What do you mean they don’t exist? You can clearly see that they do exist!

- Rokhaya Diallo: But how can you tell? I don’t understand what you are seeing...

- Eric Zemmour: Well, skin color, quite simply...

- Rokhaya Diallo: And so according to you, skin color means that I belong to a race different from yours?

- Eric Zemmour: Of course you do! No, but... that you would rediscover...

- Rokhaya Diallo: Oh well, this is interesting...

- Eric Zemmour: It’s obvious, I belong to the white race, you to the black race!

- Rokhaya Diallo: No. I belong to the French community and...

- Vincent Cespedes: Maybe that reassures you, Eric. Does that reassure you to belong to the white race!

What interest me here is the claim that race doesn't exist, or at least to "scientists."

Well, if race doesn't exist, what is all this chatter about diversiy and the good that it does? I've never put much emphasis on race myself, looking at my rather mixed background and the fact that I can't seem to get much further back than the early 1800's it just didn't seem all that important.

Now I can understand that a minority would want to be assured a fair shot at the pie. But I think that with the election of Obama we can pretty well lay aside the claim that America is a racist country, although I'm sure there are some racists alive and well in the country.

But this grabbed me.

- Eric Zemmour: It’s obvious, I belong to the white race, you to the black race!

- Rokhaya Diallo: No. I belong to the French community and...

Seems kinda strange, eh? I would ask, why can't you be black and a member of the French community, whatever that is.

It appears that at least some inn Europe are starting to catch on.

Eric Zemmour, questioned exclusively on the phenomenon of migrations and their consequences, was not afraid to affirm: “What is happening is a demographic tsunami.” He also revealed the confidential remarks of a minister, unnamed, who confided in him that “We are witnessing the end of the Roman Empire.” [...]

In addition, Zemmour declared himself in agreement with a quote from General de Gaulle:

“It is good that there are yellow, black and brown Frenchmen. They show that France is open to all races and that her mission is universal. But on the condition that they remain a small minority. Otherwise, France would not be France. We are above all a European people of the white race, of Greco-Latin culture, and of the Christian religion [...] Do you believe that the French body can absorb ten million Muslims, who will perhaps become 20 million tomorrow and 40 million after that? If we allow integration, if all the Arabs and Berbers of Algeria were considered as Frenchmen, what would prevent them from coming and settling on the continent where the standard of living is so much higher? My village would no longer be called Colombey-les-Deux-Eglises, but Colombey-les-Deux-Mosquées!”

These famous words were uttered by de Gaulle in 1959.

What few admit openly (although Zemmour clearly hints at it) is that France is being conquered, not merely immigrated to. And so there will not be assimilation of foreigners into the French population, but the reverse – the partial assimilation (through rape and intermarriage), and the partial integration through ghettoization, of the French population into a foreign population.

Christmas Gift!

And a Happy Thanksgiving to You and Your Family...

John received a parrot as an early Christmas gift.
The parrot had a bad attitude and an even worse vocabulary.
Every word out of the bird's mouth was rude,
obnoxious and laced with profanity.

John tried and tried to change the bird's attitude by
consistently saying only polite words, playing soft music and
anything else he could think of to 'clean up' the bird's vocabulary.
Finally, John was fed up and he yelled at the parrot.
The parrot yelled back.

John shook the parrot and the parrot got angrier and even ruder. John, in desperation, threw up his hands, grabbed the
bird and shoved him in the freezer.

For a few minutes the parrot squawked and kicked and screamed.
Then suddenly there was total quiet.
Not a peep was heard for over a minute.

Fearing that he'd hurt the parrot,
John quickly opened the door to the freezer.

The parrot calmly stepped out onto John's outstretched
arms and said 'I believe I may have offended you
with my rude language and actions.
I'm sincerely remorseful for my inappropriate transgressions
and I fully intend to do everything I can to
correct my rude and unforgivable behavior.'

John was stunned at the change in the bird's attitude.
As he was about to ask the parrot what had made such a
dramatic change in his behavior, the bird continued....

........"May I inquire as to what the turkey did?'

Hat tip to Shawn.

Up Up and Away!

This is funny. And all Lefties should watch it to the end.

And a hat tip to either Grant M or Jimmy M. (I'm having a Senior Moment.)