PDA

View Full Version : Obama Skips Medal of Honor Ball



i_willie12
01-30-2009, 10:54 AM
Obama Snubs Nation's Heroes, Becomes the First President
to Skip Ball Honoring Medal of Honor Recipients in Over 50 Years

Submitted by Julie on January 21, 2009 - 10:13pm.
2008 News Politics U.S. Government U.S. Politics World Politics

Barack Obama may have stumbled over his words briefly during his
inauguration, but he made an even bigger blunder later Tuesday evening.
The newly sworn-in President opted not to appear at what should have
been one of the most important Balls on his agenda that evening -
"The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball."

The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball was begun in 1953 for President Dwight
Eisenhower's inauguration. The event recognized recipients of the Medal of
Honor, the nation's highest military award. There were 48 Medal of Honor
recipients in attendance, who were undoubtedly disappointed by the new
Commander-in-Chief's failure to show. Over the past 56 years and 14
inaugurations, no President has skipped this event - until now.

The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball is sponsored by the American Legion,
and co-sponsored by 13 other veteran's service organizations, including
those such as the Paralyzed Veterans of America and the Military Order of
the Purple Heart.

Instead of attending this ball honoring our nation's heroes, Obama was busy
making stops at 10 other official balls. Obama and his wife's first stop was at
the Neighborhood Ball. >From there they went to the Home State Ball for Illinois
and Hawaii, the Commander-in-Chief Ball, the Youth Inaugural Ball, and the
Home State Ball for Delaware and Pennsylvania. They finished off the night
with brief appearances at the Mid-Atlantic, Western, Midwest, Eastern, and
Southern regional Balls.

Celebrities were a plenty at the balls, with Stevie Wonder, Shakira, Mary. J. Blige,
Faith Hill, Jay-Z, Alicia Keys, Adam Levine, will.i.am, Sting, Mariah Carey, and
Leonardo DiCaprio in attendance at the Neighborhood Ball. In addition, the other
nine balls also featured a star-studded lineup including Kanye West and Kid Rock
at the Youth Ball, Marc Anthony at the Western Ball, and Cheryl Crow at the Western
Ball.

It was the party without all of the celebrities that Obama
skipped. The very people who he sought to have support
him during his candidacy and campaign, who have fought
to protect this country, were snubbed in favor of publicity
and the opportunity to rub shoulders - yet again - with the
out-of-touch Hollywood elite!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

SHAME ON YOU PRESIDENT OBAMA. THESE BRAVE MEN CAME TO RESPECT YOU, YET
YOUR BLATANT FAILURE TO RECOGNIZE THEM SENDS THEM AND ALL WHO HAVE FOUGHT TO DEFEND THIS NATION, THE WRONG MESSAGE. MAKE NO EXCUSES MR. PRESIDENT - WE NOW KNOW WHERE VETERANS STAND UNDER YOUR WATCH!

This message needs to be sent around the world 100 times and personally to President Obama on a regular basis. Will you assist in getting that done? Don't add or detract anything to or from this, and also be RESPECTFUL, no matter how you feel about it!

i_willie12
01-30-2009, 10:55 AM
I dont do alot of political posting but this is ridiculous!!! Had to pass it along.

kb27_99
01-30-2009, 11:14 AM
What’s really sad is that the majority of America put this clown in office!

Keith Stroyan
01-30-2009, 11:53 AM
That's strange, I thought the news show I was watching (briefly - "balls" aren't my thing) said he was there on Inauguration nite.??

Anybody "Scoped" it?

BHB
01-30-2009, 12:00 PM
Do we have another "loathe the military" type in office?

BHB

ErinsEdge
01-30-2009, 12:04 PM
Actually I believe he did go there. They had a screen on stage and he spoke with members of a Chicago unit in Iraq and all but one were Cubs fans.

I was wrong, that was the Commander-in-Chief ball

Georgia Smith
01-30-2009, 12:09 PM
From TruthorFiction.com
Obama Became the First President to Skip an Inaugural Ball Honoring Medal of Honor Recipients-Truth!

mikeller3
01-30-2009, 12:11 PM
This is my first post here and normally I don't get political however; This guy is a scumbag, from a long line of scumbag politicians. Given the opportunity he will make it impossible to be a sportsman buy the many things he has supported and proposed in the past. I did look this up and it is true. Check out this link http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obamas-balls.htm or just google it. Change bla bla bla change. Looks like the same old libs trying to create more B.S. to me. As a former Marine I am outraged to hear that our president AKA The Commander and Chief of the worlds stongest military force would shrug off MOH recips, the highest honor bestowed upon a member of the military, like they were not important. IMO these are the most important people to visit on that night, at least to say thank you for makeing it possible for him to become president of the greatest nation in the world, by defending the freedom that jerks like him take forgranted. He is a scumbag and when it comes out that he is a scumbag and the media is done turning him into the messiah, you can all say you herd it here first!

IMO of course!

DoubleHaul
01-30-2009, 12:16 PM
I am outraged to hear that our president AKA The Commander and Chief of the worlds stongest military force would shrug off winners of the CMH, the highest honor bestowed upon a member of the military, like they were not important. I

He didn't really do that. True, he did not go to the American Legion's ball--the reason given was that it is not an official ball of the PIC. However, he did invite the CMH winners to the Commander in Chief ball where he got his photo op done. So, you could argue that he is the first President since DDE to honor CMH winners in this way.

JusticeDog
01-30-2009, 12:22 PM
http://isaacs.newsvine.com/_news/2009/01/23/2345799-obama-blows-off-medal-of-honor-receipients-not-exactly



Here's what happened, and the American Legion doesn't feel snubbed. Joe Biden did attend the ball.

So, can we move this to Potus Place where it belongs?

Mark Littlejohn
01-30-2009, 12:29 PM
This didn't involve much research.. (sourced via www.snopes.com (http://www.snopes.com) )

http://isaacs.newsvine.com/_news/2009/01/23/2345799-obama-blows-off-medal-of-honor-receipients-not-exactly

Excerpt:




"In answer to your inquiry:
The American Legion, as it has on every inauguration evening since 1953, hosted the Salute to Heroes Inaugural Banquet & Ball on January 20th. The quadrennial event is co-sponsored with fourteen veterans service and military service organizations and honors recipients of the Medal of Honor. Forty-seven of these heroes attended this year’s event which was held in the Renaissance Washington DC Hotel.
President Obama was invited but did not attend. Vice-President Joe Biden did appear, however, and was very warmly received. The new President’s absence was understandable considering the unprecedented logistical challenges presented by the vastly increased number of visitors to this inauguration and the necessary attendant security measures. The American Legion, as an organization, does not feel offended or “snubbed.”
Thank you,
Craig Roberts
Media Relations Manager
The American Legion
1608 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
...."

John Kelder
01-30-2009, 12:41 PM
What is also sad is that 4 short years ago the liberal media chastised Bush and his
"rich Republicans" for spending 42 million dollars on his inaugeration ,but BHO spends $120 million and its ok .

AmiableLabs
01-30-2009, 12:43 PM
So-o-o-o --

Biden did attend; There was an unprecedented number of balls for Obama to attend; Obama invited some CMH winners to another ball, The American Legion is understanding and forgiving,

-- But it still happened. Obama did not attend.

Franco
01-30-2009, 01:05 PM
He probably feels uncomfortable around U S Military vets and a disdain for the military in general.


Looks like N Korea is going to be the first to see what he's made of. They probably sense his weakness.

mikeller3
01-30-2009, 01:52 PM
The head of the Legion is required, as a politician, to say he and the members of the legion are not offended. As a 12 year member of the Legion, I am pissed. Pissed that everything this guy does is okey, and everything that repub's do is not. Stop justifing inabilities and call a spade a spade. He wasn't there he was the first to not show up and that make him a jerk. And for those that want to defend him, let me know how you feel when he passes the new ammo bill on the table that would break most ammo companies and raise the price of ammo out of the reach of the rest of us. If they can't take away your guns they'll take away your ammo, problem solved for them. I'm sick of them making policy that only helps them. We will bail out the fat cat bankers and auto mfgs, but we'll let the little guy rot, and work his a** off to support all of these bailouts and welfare programs. To finalize, get back to me in 4 years and let me know if you think he is the next coming of Jesus or Satin. Let his record stand for itself. Maybe we'll all get lucky and he'll end up like the rest of his crooked Illinios political buddies and be politly escourted from office:)

WindyCreek
01-30-2009, 02:39 PM
Sure is an interesting spin (but wrong) to say he is the first President to honor Medal of Honor recepients that way.

Couple of things to correct - First it is not the CMH it is the Medal of Honor, it is awarded by the Commander in Chief not Congress. Second nobody wins it. It is not a prize, it is earned through sacrifice and intrepidity that go beyond what anyone could imagine. If you doubt it look up any of the citations. The receipients of the Medal of Honor take great offense to being called "winners". In their words "You might win the Super Bowl but you do not win the Medal of Honor". I escorted several during my military career, an honor with memories I will carry with me forever.

Bottom line, the new President had a chance to prove he appeciates Veterans who gave more than he will ever understand and he blew it. Make any excuse for him you want but the proof is in his actions or lack thereof. There were 48 Medal of Honor receipients that attended the Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball (see the link below), he might have slighted them but no doubt they enjoyed the company of those who did honor them that night.

There are only 98 surviving recepients of the Medal of Honor as of today, the youngest is 58 years old and many are World War II Veterans. Unfortunately four years from now there will be even fewer. We can only hope in four years there will be a President that understands sacrifice and service and will honor the heroes at the 2013 Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball.

BTW the first stop for President George W. Bush on the Ball circuit in 2005 - The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball.

http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/8627


He didn't really do that. True, he did not go to the American Legion's ball--the reason given was that it is not an official ball of the PIC. However, he did invite the CMH winners to the Commander in Chief ball where he got his photo op done. So, you could argue that he is the first President since DDE to honor CMH winners in this way.

YardleyLabs
01-30-2009, 02:45 PM
What is also sad is that 4 short years ago the liberal media chastised Bush and his
"rich Republicans" for spending 42 million dollars on his inaugeration ,but BHO spends $120 million and its ok .

Just so we're clear. The $42 million number was the cost of the parties themselves under Bush and was paid for by contributions, not taxpayers. Another $100 million or so was paid for security by taxpayers. Bush's inauguration was unusual because most Presidents play down their second inaugural while Bush spent much more. About 300,000 attended, or 100,000 fewer than attended his first. There was very little criticism at that time and most of that stemmed from a single Congressmen.

The comparable number for Obama is about $45 million for the parties themselves, a cost that was also paid by contributors. The final bill for security is not yet known but should be higher than for Bush since there were more than five times more people attending (1.5 - 2 million). There was a lot of criticism of the costs of Obama's inauguration -- mostly in the form of Conservative complaints that the media were not complaining about it. MSNBC, which typically fawns over Obama as much as Fox fawned over Bush, was the source of the mistaken comparison of the party-only cost for Bush's inauguration to the party plus security cost for Obama. While this error was quickly corrected in the mainstream media, the same bloggers complaining about liberal bias have continued to use the erroneous numbers.

There were 60 inaugural balls, including 10 "official" balls sponsored by the campaign. Six of these ten were located in a single building to make security easier. My understanding, although I only have one source and it may be wrong, is that the Medal of Honor recipients were among the invitees to the Commander in Chief's ball which Obama attended. He did not attend the MOH Hero's Ball in part because it was located in the 16 story Renassance Hotel which presented special security problems. He also did not attend an Illinois event in his honor in the same hotel. He did send Biden -- apparently no one wants to kill him. He also spent a long time, relatively speaking, at the CIC Ball including his video conference conversation with soldiers stationed in Afghanistan. I don't know how anyone can find a basis for calling him disrespectful of the military based on his record in inauguration day.

There are plenty of real issues and areas for disagreement between conservatives and the new President. This issue is plain stupid.

WindyCreek
01-30-2009, 03:23 PM
Kind of interesting in that since 1953 no other President has had this problem.

"Plain stupid" - the links below might convince you differently, the second link has the citations of the 98 surviving:

http://www.history.army.mil/moh.html

http://www.cmohs.org/recipients/living_recips.htm

He did not attend the MOH Hero's Ball in part because it was located in the 16 story Renassance Hotel which presented special security problems. He also did not attend an Illinois event in his honor in the same hotel. He did send Biden -- apparently no one wants to kill him. He also spent a long time, relatively speaking, at the CIC Ball including his video conference conversation with soldiers stationed in Afghanistan. I don't know how anyone can find a basis for calling him disrespectful of the military based on his record in inauguration day.

There are plenty of real issues and areas for disagreement between conservatives and the new President. This issue is plain stupid.[/QUOTE]

YardleyLabs
01-30-2009, 03:43 PM
Kind of interesting in that since 1953 no other President has had this problem.

"Plain stupid" - the links below might convince you differently, the second link has the citations of the 98 surviving:

http://www.history.army.mil/moh.html

http://www.cmohs.org/recipients/living_recips.htm

I've read the citations and still say this issue is plain stupid. BTW, I suspect the secret service would be the first to say that "since 1953 no other President has had" a similar security problem.

Henry V
01-30-2009, 04:19 PM
While this issue makes a good headline, my question is who has a better track record of supporting veterans health care and supporting veterans.

This report is quite interesting with all kind of references too.
http://www.vetpac.org/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=103

There is talking the talk and making the dance and then there is walking the walk to take action to support veterans. Time will tell.

WindyCreek
01-30-2009, 05:07 PM
In 20 minutes you were able to read the citations of the 98 surviving Medal of Honor receipients let alone some of the 3,000 plus who have passed on?

Since President Obama has such serious security issues I guess we won't be seeing much of him in public.

The issue here is character, these men showed it. It is humbling to stand in their shadows. No matter how much paint you put on this "issue" it is still ugly. As I mentioned in 4 years we can hope for a Commander In Chief with more honor and character. The 98 surviving heroes deserve better than he has shown.


I've read the citations and still say this issue is plain stupid. BTW, I suspect the secret service would be the first to say that "since 1953 no other President has had" a similar security problem.

kb27_99
01-30-2009, 05:07 PM
I've read the citations and still say this issue is plain stupid. BTW, I suspect the secret service would be the first to say that "since 1953 no other President has had" a similar security problem.


Lets see,
*He was born outside of the country!
*Raised as a Muslum
*Will not wear a american flag pendant on his chest
*Willing to meet with our enemys
*and wants to take from the working and give to the lazy

He DOESNT have a security problem, HE IS A SECURITY PROBLEM!!!!!!

Wake up!


Cheers,

Kevin

Steve Amrein
01-30-2009, 05:10 PM
I've read the citations and still say this issue is plain stupid. BTW, I suspect the secret service would be the first to say that "since 1953 no other President has had" a similar security problem.

Your saying he has a higher risk because.......

M Remington
01-30-2009, 05:20 PM
Lets see,
*He was born outside of the country!
*Raised as a Muslum
*Will not wear a american flag pendant on his chest
*Willing to meet with our enemys
*and wants to take from the working and give to the lazy

He DOESNT have a security problem, HE IS A SECURITY PROBLEM!!!!!!

Wake up!


Cheers,

Kevin

Kevin,

Your post is offensive. But, your attitude is what convinced the majority of Americans to vote for Barack Obama.

You need to stop listening to the kooks on the far right. . .

1. Obama was born in Hawaii (the last time I looked, that was a state).
2. He spent a couple of years in a school in a Muslim country. Also, is there something wrong with being a Muslim. To be a good American, one must be a Christian????
3. I doubt if George Washington wore a flag on his chest, either. Somehow during the Bush administration, we became unAmerican if we didn't "sport" the flag and unChristian if we didn't thump the Bible. The Founding Fathers would have a real problem with both.
4. Diplomacy is the the technical term for meeting with your enemies.
5. Nowhere in Obama's speeches or writings do I see any indication of wanting to give to the lazy. He may want to help people who can't help themselves, but there's nothing wrong with that. If so, you probably think it was okay for a 93 year old WWII veteran to freeze to death because he couldn't pay his electric bill.

Tolerant and compassionate regards,

M Remington

kb27_99
01-30-2009, 05:34 PM
Kevin,

Your post is offensive.

M Remington

Offensive to who? I named no name just quoted Yardley. So if anyone should be offended it would be him.


Cheers,


Kevin

WindyCreek
01-30-2009, 05:34 PM
While this issue makes a good headline, my question is who has a better track record of supporting veterans health care and supporting veterans.
There is talking the talk and making the dance and then there is walking the walk to take action to support veterans. Time will tell.

Good points by the way this just came in, didn't take too much time to tell where this administration is headed:

OMB Directs 'Substantial' Cut to FY-10 Budget Plan; Pentagon to Appeal
The Obama administration has directed the Defense Department to pare back the fiscal year 2010 budget package prepared last year by the Pentagon, which added more than $60 billion -- including nearly $20 billion for weapon systems and modernization efforts --
to the spending plan before President Bush left office, according to Pentagon officials.

http://defensenewsstand.com/insider.asp

kb27_99
01-30-2009, 05:38 PM
Also, is there something wrong with being a Muslim.

M Remington



Last time i checked other religous groups weren't tring to kill americans in massive numbers for no reason. JMO


Cheers,

Kevin

YardleyLabs
01-30-2009, 06:22 PM
Your saying he has a higher risk because.......

See the following:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27724965/

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/20/inaugural.security/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-potok/threats-against-obama-gro_b_159105.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=4918487

Draw your own conclusions.

Henry V
01-30-2009, 06:35 PM
Good points by the way this just came in, didn't take too much time to tell where this administration is headed:

OMB Directs 'Substantial' Cut to FY-10 Budget Plan; Pentagon to Appeal
The Obama administration has directed the Defense Department to pare back the fiscal year 2010 budget package prepared last year by the Pentagon, which added more than $60 billion -- including nearly $20 billion for weapon systems and modernization efforts --
to the spending plan before President Bush left office, according to Pentagon officials.

http://defensenewsstand.com/insider.asp

First, let's be clear that a cut to the defense department does not equate to a cut in veterans benefits. Second, the Bush administration left the new president a unprecedented deficit which will require spending cuts. Since the defense budget makes up as big a piece of the federal budget (21%) as any other (see http://www.cbpp.org/4-20-07tax2-f1.jpg) and another 60% of the budget is virtually untouchable there will have to be cuts to defense. Oh, and it sures looks like a bunch of the stimulus package is aimed at military infrastructure too.

Henry V
01-30-2009, 06:45 PM
..... The issue here is character, these men showed it. It is humbling to stand in their shadows. No matter how much paint you put on this "issue" it is still ugly. As I mentioned in 4 years we can hope for a Commander In Chief with more honor and character. The 98 surviving heroes deserve better than he has shown.
I have all the respect in the world for veterans and I would bet the President and VP do to.
What a contrast here, this President is accused of having little character or respect for the military just because he did not go to the dance and sent his VP instead (whose son is serving). On the other hand we had Mr. "5 deferments but I am a hawk" Cheney and Mr. "my dad served honorably but I did not report for guard duty because I had other things to do" Bush who supposedly have more character on these issues. Talk about a double standard.

YardleyLabs
01-30-2009, 07:16 PM
Of course, the ultimate double standard has to do with how we treat "citations" for heroism based on the identity of the hero. This one sticks in my mind:

"For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action while serving as Officer in Charge of United States Navy Patrol Craft Fast 94 and officer in Tactical Command of an operation in the Republic of Vietnam. On 28 February 1969, Patrol Craft Fast 23, 43 and 94, in conjunction with Underwater Demolition Team 13 and Vietnamese Regional and Popular Forces personnel, conducted an operation on the Ca Mau Peninsula as part of Operation SEA LORDS. While transiting the Bay Hap River en route to an insertion point along the Dong Cung River, these craft with thirty Regional/Popular Force personnel embarked in each unit came under heavy enemy small arms fire from the river banks. The Officer in Tactical Command, Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY directed his units to turn to the beach and charge the Viet Cong positions. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY expertly directed the fire of his craft at the fleeing enemy while simultaneously coordinating the insertion of the embarked troops. While the Regional and Popular Forces conducted an area sweep, Patrol Craft Fast 43 remained on station to provide fire support and Patrol Craft Fast 23 and 94 moved upstream to investigate an area from which gunshots were coming. Arriving at the area, Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY's craft received a B-40 rocket close aboard. Once again Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY ordered his units to charge the enemy positions and summoned Patrol Craft Fast 43 to the area to provide additional firepower. Patrol Craft Fast 94 then beached in the center of the enemy positions and an enemy soldier sprang up from his position not ten feet from Patrol Craft Fast 94 and fled. Without hesitation Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY leaped ashore, pursued the man behind a hootch and killed him, capturing a B-40 rocket launcher with a round in the chamber. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY then led an assault party and conducted a sweep of the area while the Patrol Craft Fast continued to provide fire support. After the enemy had been completely routed, all personnel returned to the Patrol Craft Fast to withdraw from the area. While backing off the beach, these units again came under a hail of fire, this time from the opposite river bank. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY immediately coordinated the firepower of his units and supressed the enemy fire. Later, after disembarking personnel, and while exiting from the Bay Hap River, the Patrol Craft Fast were again under fire. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY immediately maneuvered his craft through several strafing runs which completely silenced the enemy. As a result of this operation, ten Viet Cong were killed and one wounded with no friendly casualties. In addition, numerous sampans, structures and bunkers were destroyed as well as confiscation of substantial quantities of combat essential supplies. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY's devotion to duty, courage under fire, outstanding leadership, and exemplary professionalism directly contributed to the success of this operation and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the Unites States Naval Service."

It became the target of a group of self-proclaimed "patriots" whose lying tactics have become a verb in our language. Those circulating this particular attack across the Internet were the same ones supporting the swift boaters in their activities. And for those who want to rehash the details of this citation with the fabrications circulated at that time, I include the Snopes citation for one of the more prominent attacks: http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/service.asp.

WindyCreek
01-30-2009, 08:03 PM
Nice try but.......... John Kerry did not receive the Medal of Honor, only the Medal of Honor citations contain the word intrepidity. Is the citation from his Naval Records he refused to release?

On the other hand Senator Bob Kerry did receive the Medal of Honor. I'm sure that is one of the 98 citations you read.

http://www.cmohs.org/recipients/living_cites_kl.htm

BTW I have the highest respect for all Veterans who served honorable. I served 30 years on active duty and in more than one conflict.


Of course, the ultimate double standard has to do with how we treat "citations" for heroism based on the identity of the hero. This one sticks in my mind:

"For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action while serving as Officer in Charge of United States Navy Patrol Craft Fast 94 and officer in Tactical Command of an operation in the Republic of Vietnam. On 28 February 1969, Patrol Craft Fast 23, 43 and 94, in conjunction with Underwater Demolition Team 13 and Vietnamese Regional and Popular Forces personnel, conducted an operation on the Ca Mau Peninsula as part of Operation SEA LORDS. While transiting the Bay Hap River en route to an insertion point along the Dong Cung River, these craft with thirty Regional/Popular Force personnel embarked in each unit came under heavy enemy small arms fire from the river banks. The Officer in Tactical Command, Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY directed his units to turn to the beach and charge the Viet Cong positions. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY expertly directed the fire of his craft at the fleeing enemy while simultaneously coordinating the insertion of the embarked troops. While the Regional and Popular Forces conducted an area sweep, Patrol Craft Fast 43 remained on station to provide fire support and Patrol Craft Fast 23 and 94 moved upstream to investigate an area from which gunshots were coming. Arriving at the area, Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY's craft received a B-40 rocket close aboard. Once again Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY ordered his units to charge the enemy positions and summoned Patrol Craft Fast 43 to the area to provide additional firepower. Patrol Craft Fast 94 then beached in the center of the enemy positions and an enemy soldier sprang up from his position not ten feet from Patrol Craft Fast 94 and fled. Without hesitation Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY leaped ashore, pursued the man behind a hootch and killed him, capturing a B-40 rocket launcher with a round in the chamber. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY then led an assault party and conducted a sweep of the area while the Patrol Craft Fast continued to provide fire support. After the enemy had been completely routed, all personnel returned to the Patrol Craft Fast to withdraw from the area. While backing off the beach, these units again came under a hail of fire, this time from the opposite river bank. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY immediately coordinated the firepower of his units and supressed the enemy fire. Later, after disembarking personnel, and while exiting from the Bay Hap River, the Patrol Craft Fast were again under fire. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY immediately maneuvered his craft through several strafing runs which completely silenced the enemy. As a result of this operation, ten Viet Cong were killed and one wounded with no friendly casualties. In addition, numerous sampans, structures and bunkers were destroyed as well as confiscation of substantial quantities of combat essential supplies. Lieutenant (junior grade) KERRY's devotion to duty, courage under fire, outstanding leadership, and exemplary professionalism directly contributed to the success of this operation and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the Unites States Naval Service."

It became the target of a group of self-proclaimed "patriots" whose lying tactics have become a verb in our language. Those circulating this particular attack across the Internet were the same ones supporting the swift boaters in their activities. And for those who want to rehash the details of this citation with the fabrications circulated at that time, I include the Snopes citation for one of the more prominent attacks: http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/service.asp.

YardleyLabs
01-30-2009, 08:08 PM
Nice try but.......... John Kerry did not receive the Medal of Honor, only the Medal of Honor citations contain the word intrepidity. Is the citation from his Naval Records he refused to release?

On the other hand Senator Bob Kerry did receive the Medal of Honor. I'm sure that is one of the 98 citations you read.

http://www.cmohs.org/recipients/living_cites_kl.htm

BTW I have the highest respect for all Veterans who served honorable. I served 30 years on active duty and in more than one conflict.

I assumed all would know that the citation was for the silver star. I was not implying it was the Medal of Honor. Both evidence a high degree of selfless heroism and both deserve our respect.

WindyCreek
01-30-2009, 08:16 PM
I'm quite aware of veterans benefits, I am a veteran.

And your solution for National Defense is? A 10% cut to the overall budget which is what is proposed will translate to decreased readiness and some day brave Americans will be once again asked to do heroic deeds. They as they always have will deliver but the issue is at what price.

Stateside infrastructure creates jobs in Congressional districts but does not do much good on the battlefield. The mission of the military is to deter first and if necessary fight and win our wars, the later comes on battlefields.


First, let's be clear that a cut to the defense department does not equate to a cut in veterans benefits. Second, the Bush administration left the new president a unprecedented deficit which will require spending cuts. Since the defense budget makes up as big a piece of the federal budget (21%) as any other (see http://www.cbpp.org/4-20-07tax2-f1.jpg) and another 60% of the budget is virtually untouchable there will have to be cuts to defense. Oh, and it sures looks like a bunch of the stimulus package is aimed at military infrastructure too.

Patrick Johndrow
01-30-2009, 08:19 PM
I think it is just about par for the course with this guy

WindyCreek
01-30-2009, 08:42 PM
I'm curious, are you a Veteran?

Also what was Joe Biden's status during Vietnam (4F for a medical condition but was on the swim team in college)? How long did President Obama serve? Just because there is not a draft does not mean you can't serve?


I have all the respect in the world for veterans and I would bet the President and VP do to.
What a contrast here, this President is accused of having little character or respect for the military just because he did not go to the dance and sent his VP instead (whose son is serving). On the other hand we had Mr. "5 deferments but I am a hawk" Cheney and Mr. "my dad served honorably but I did not report for guard duty because I had other things to do" Bush who supposedly have more character on these issues. Talk about a double standard.

AmiableLabs
01-30-2009, 08:50 PM
Just so we're clear. The $42 million number was the cost of the parties themselves under Bush and was paid for by contributions, not taxpayers. Another $100 million or so was paid for security by taxpayers. Bush's inauguration was unusual because most Presidents play down their second inaugural while Bush spent much more. About 300,000 attended, or 100,000 fewer than attended his first. There was very little criticism at that time and most of that stemmed from a single Congressmen.
False. Criticism came from all over, not just the left blogosphere like Salon.com, etc., but also the New York Times. (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/clay-waters/2009/01/16/nyts-inauguration-hypocrisy-bush-chided-2005-obama-free-party)


The comparable number for Obama is about $45 million for the parties themselves, a cost that was also paid by contributors. The final bill for security is not yet known but should be higher than for Bush since there were more than five times more people attending (1.5 - 2 million).
Excluding the security costs for both the 2005 and 2009 inaugurations, the cost of the 2009 inauguration was more than three times the cost of 2005, roughly $150+ for 2009, and less than $50 for 2005. LINK (http://www.tampabays10.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=98442&catid=8) Not surprising since the 2009 Inauguration was for four days and the 2005 for one day.


There was a lot of criticism of the costs of Obama's inauguration -- mostly in the form of Conservative complaints that the media were not complaining about it.
False. There was virtually NO complaining by the right about the cost of the 2009 inauguration or the media not reporting it. Rather the complaints from the right were almost entirely limited to complaints about the hypocrisy on the left for criticizing 2005 while condoning 2009.


MSNBC, which typically fawns over Obama as much as Fox fawned over Bush, was the source of the mistaken comparison of the party-only cost for Bush's inauguration to the party plus security cost for Obama.
That is a straw dog erected by Media Matters and has been disproved by many sources.

YardleyLabs
01-31-2009, 05:44 AM
False. Criticism came from all over, not just the left blogosphere like Salon.com, etc., but also the New York Times. (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/clay-waters/2009/01/16/nyts-inauguration-hypocrisy-bush-chided-2005-obama-free-party)

I was able to find one opinion piece and one news story in the NYTimes. I also found one AP story. The Washington Post published posted, but buried, an opinion poll where the majority of Americans indicated that they would have preferred a more modest inaugural in 2005. What did you find?



Excluding the security costs for both the 2005 and 2009 inaugurations, the cost of the 2009 inauguration was more than three times the cost of 2005, roughly $150+ for 2009, and less than $50 for 2005. LINK (http://www.tampabays10.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=98442&catid=8) Not surprising since the 2009 Inauguration was for four days and the 2005 for one day.

The story you link to is based on the mis-information published on MSNBC, The Daily News, etc., all without any fact checking. It compares the cost of the parties paid for by contributions for the Bush inauguration with the cost of security, clean-up and other costs for Obama. A preliminary accounting may be found at http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/inauguration.htm. The overall cost for Bush was $150-160 million. The cost for Obama, including comparable items should end up higher than that because of the larger number of people attending. For comments on the MSNBC/Media Matters confusion see http://mediamatters.org/countyfair/200901180004. The estimates I hae seen so far are around $170 million but I would expect it to go higher.




False. There was virtually NO complaining by the right about the cost of the 2009 inauguration or the media not reporting it. Rather the complaints from the right were almost entirely limited to complaints about the hypocrisy on the left for criticizing 2005 while condoning 2009.

Really?

NY Daily News:

Obama's inauguration is most expensive ever at $160 million

It will take Barack Obama less than a minute to recite the oath of office -- and when he's done dancing at the inaugural balls Jan. 20, the price tag for his swearing-in festivities could approach $160 million.
Obama's inaugural committee is in the midst of raising roughly $45 million in private funds, exceeding the $42.3 million President Bush spent in 2005. In 1993, Clinton spent $33 million when Democrats returned to the White House for the first time in 12 years.
The Dail Mail (linked to by The Drudge Report):
Bush declares a 'state of emergency' in Washington as cost of Obama's swearing-in ceremony soars to £110m


The Drudge Report: http://www.drudgereport.com/i/gray.gif Bush declares 'state of emergency' as cost of Obama's swearing-in ceremony soars... (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1115942/Bush-declares-state-emergency-cost-Baracks-swearing-ceremony-soars-110m.html)

FLASHBACK: Lefties outraged at cost of Bush inauguration... (http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2005/01/20/media_on_inauguration)

Newsmax.com:
Obama Inaugural Most Expensive in History

Despite the recession, Barack Obama’s inauguration will be the most expensive ever and could approach $160 million — nearly four times what George Bush’s inauguration cost four years ago.

etc., etc., etc. I have found more than 100 stories compaining about the cost ranging from Hannity's histrionics to almost every right wing blog on the Internet.



That is a straw dog erected by Media Matters and has been disproved by many sources.
Bull.....