• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

President Musk and Trump are both poorly raised, coddled 8 year old boys.

Second rate reporter says what?

The arc of the moral universe does not bend itself. it is up to us to bend it.

Whatever happens next week, the fight doesn’t end.

When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty. ~Thomas Jefferson

If you are still in the gop, you are either an extremist yourself, or in bed with those who are.

Jesus, Mary, & Joseph how is that election even close?

The party of Reagan has become the party of Putin.

Everybody saw this coming.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

“Facilitate” is an active verb, not a weasel word.

Washington Post Catch and Kill, not noticeably better than the Enquirer’s.

Let’s delete this post and never speak of this again.

rich, arrogant assholes who equate luck with genius

Museums are not America’s attic for its racist shit.

This year has been the longest three days of putin’s life.

After dobbs, women are no longer free.

Fuck these fucking interesting times.

No offense, but this thread hasn’t been about you for quite a while.

We need to vote them all out and restore sane Democratic government.

Welcome to day five of every-bit-as-bad-as-you-thought-it-would-be.

“Jesus paying for the sins of everyone is an insult to those who paid for their own sins.”

An almost top 10,000 blog!

Do we throw up our hands or do we roll up our sleeves? (hint, door #2)

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Foreign Affairs / Military / Stolen Valor

Stolen Valor

by John Cole|  August 1, 200510:22 am| 59 Comments

This post is in: Military

FacebookTweetEmail

While I general bemoan the overwhelming number of crime statutes on the books, here is a new one I can support:

The NCHRA applauds and supports Rep. John Salazar (D-Colo.) and his “The Stolen Valor Act of 2005,” the initiative that will help preserve the honor of men and women who have fought for the United States of America.

The Act, if made into law, will allow prosecutors to seek fines and imprisonment for those who claim in print or in speech to have received military awards and honors they have not actually received.

“Awards usually come at the expense of personal sacrifice,” said David Rice (42), President of the Coalition. “When a person seeks honor and recognition for acts of valor she or he has not performed, that person insults and diminishes the sacrifices real heroes have made, and disparages the nation’s defenders. Every act of stolen valor belittles the country’s true heroes.”

It is already against the law in the United States for people to wear specific military medals (such as the Purple Heart) they have not been awarded and have not earned. The issue came into widespread public notice two weeks ago when the official web site for the movie “Wedding Crashers” offered viewers the option of printing out a paper “Purple Heart.” Activists for veterans did not find the attempt at humor at all amusing.

It might be overkill, but I favor it.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « King Fahd Is Dead
Next Post: Palmeiro Suspended »

Reader Interactions

59Comments

  1. 1.

    KC

    August 1, 2005 at 10:40 am

    I couldn’t find the Stolen Valor Act on Thomas so I’m not sure how overkill it is. However, I definitely support the idea.

  2. 2.

    neil

    August 1, 2005 at 10:45 am

    Politics in a nutshell….

    Democrats give you a bill to punish people for claiming military awards and honors they have not actually received.

    Republicans give you a fundraising operation which gives people awards and honors they have not actually earned… ref ref
    ref

    .. and have fun mocking a veteran for earning a military honor because they don’t like his politics.

  3. 3.

    over it

    August 1, 2005 at 10:46 am

    I am for it also. My brother is in active service and my father is retired Navy.

    I was at an auction this weekend and was saddened to see a box lot of older military ‘stuff’ on the block. It included 2 Purple Hearts and many other medals that I did not recognize. The bidding went quite high….appparently because the camouflage uniforms in it were Vietnam Tiger Stripe(I guess this is rare).

    It was sad though. I think that awards like that should either stay within the family….or be retired back to the military. One should not be able to purchase them.

    So, yeah, I agree.

    —-Did you know that Patrick Denahey(sp) lied about recieving the Purple Heart? It is more common than you would think—–

  4. 4.

    Sojourner

    August 1, 2005 at 10:51 am

    Shouldn’t there also be at least social disapproval of those who belittle recipients?

  5. 5.

    Mr Furious

    August 1, 2005 at 10:55 am

    Nice in theory, but this cannot possibly be Constitutional.

  6. 6.

    Jim

    August 1, 2005 at 10:56 am

    Hypocrisy watch: while Mr. Cole extolls the virtue of a bill that would make it illegal to wear medals that one has not been officially awarded, he advertises two sites that will sell “virtually every military medal available” to anyone with a credit card.

    Personally, I think this law is unnecessary, reactionary crap.

  7. 7.

    Steve

    August 1, 2005 at 11:08 am

    I don’t see why it’s so obviously unconstitutional. You don’t have a First Amendment right to claim to be a government official if you’re not. Why do you have a First Amendment right to pretend you have a government citation if you don’t?

  8. 8.

    John Cole

    August 1, 2005 at 11:08 am

    Umm. What sites am I advertising that sell medals?

  9. 9.

    kenB

    August 1, 2005 at 11:13 am

    What sites am I advertising that sell medals?
    The Google Ads spot sometimes gives a set of military medals sites — refresh a few times and you’ll probably see it.

  10. 10.

    Sojourner

    August 1, 2005 at 11:21 am

    Does John even have control over the ads shown?

  11. 11.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 11:27 am

    It’s feelgood law. Posturing. Strikes me as very likely to be challenged in court.

    That said, I don’t see how it harms anything, as it stands. However, the idea that “belittling” becomes a crime is rather an open door to all manner of insanity. Shall we make it a crime to “belittle” other things?

    I also don’t agree that a false claim of this kind belittles true heroes. If nothing else, such a silly construct must suppose that the stature of heroes is so fragile that some drunk in a bar, lying about a medal to impress a woman, can somehow diminish that stature. Actual heroism is not something that can be diminished by the foolish behavior of others.

    Will the Belittling Police conduct raids on mental health wards, where some unforutnate soul might not only claim, but believe, that he has a medal, and brags of it regularly? Will we have “not guilty of belittling by reason of insanity” defenses?

    Please, lawmakers, spare us your sanctimonious posturing, and pay attention to things that matter.

  12. 12.

    Bernard Yomtov

    August 1, 2005 at 11:32 am

    Can we include a provision making it illegal to put purple hearts on band-aids for the purpose of mocking recipients whose politics one disagrees with?

  13. 13.

    Joel

    August 1, 2005 at 11:34 am

    I sympathize with the spirit of this, but it seems a bit much. I guess I lean towards social opprobrium as being the best response towards those who fraudulently claim to have received medals. I guess I’m one of those who thinks the best response to “bad speech” is more speech, not criminalizing certain kinds of it (as repugnant as it may be). Additionally, is there a wave of this sort of activity lately? Is a new law really necessary?

  14. 14.

    linda

    August 1, 2005 at 11:36 am

    jeez, all this over a hollywood ad campaign for a movie? but it was such a hoot when test marketed at the gop convention last year — just ask pat peale, that fine specimen of gop womanhood:

    http://www.poetryinlife.com/blog/2004/08/pat-peale-texas-delegate-some-people.html

  15. 15.

    demimondian

    August 1, 2005 at 11:48 am

    I can’t imagine that this law would stand a First Amendment challenge. It always nauseates me when I see someone claim a medal they don’t have or deserve, but I doubt that the government could meet the high bar necessary to limit false speech in this case, particularly given the political speech aspect of medal mockery.

    Seriously, John — if someone claims that Rumsfeld and Cheney deserve the “Broad Yellow Stripe of (In)Valor” for their service in Vietnam, it’s political speech. (Even if it’s stupid to make any joke which could be taken to belittle the Medal Of Honor…) There’s no way that a law like this would stand a Court challenge.

  16. 16.

    DougJ

    August 1, 2005 at 11:53 am

    It’s good to see the government finally doing something to protect symbols. This is progress, though it’s really time to get moving on the flag burning amendment.

  17. 17.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 12:06 pm

    It seems pretty likely that the bill is intended to expose the Republican shenanigans for what they were … real, honest-to-God belittling of medals, by Republicans. Belittling by all the keyboard warriors who liked to guffaw over whether one person’s wounds were as serious as somebody else’s ….. talk about degrading heroism, that’s about as bad as it gets. Salazar exposes what we already knew … that the flag of the GOP flies at the top of their flagpole, while the American flag flies somewhat lower on their pole.

    But the beneficial irony and exposure of their hypocrisy does not justify the law as proposed.

    I have to give Salazar his props, though. This is lawmaker posturing at its best, and for a good purpose. Now that we’ve all had a good laugh at the assholeness of the GOP, time to put this bill away in a drawer.

  18. 18.

    Maureen Hay

    August 1, 2005 at 12:10 pm

    ppGaz –

    This first became an issue with the large number of scam artists who preyed on the families of missing POWs. Many of them claimed military medals and experience they did not have. A law like this would give prosecuters extra tools to use in going after con artists who give themselves a fake military history. I’d support it on those grounds alone.

    The bigger problem would be what to do with mentally ill people who imagine themselves as former soldiers. Apparently, many homeless and mentally ill “vets” turn out to have no military background, or one that is very different from their claims. I know Vietnam vets who are angry at the “crazy Vietnam vet” stereotype, which they feel is driven more by mentally ill people claiming to have been in Vietnam than by the experiences of actual veterans. But if I were writing the law, I would put in some sort of exemption for people under treatment for mental disorders.

  19. 19.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 12:11 pm

    It’s good to see the government finally doing something to protect symbols. This is progress, though it’s really time to get moving on the flag burning amendment.

    See, Doug, this is why a lot of people think you are a troll who is just faking this nonsense and putting us on. Your remark is just a little too fatuous, a little too gratuitously stupid.

    I mean, if you really are that stupid, fine. Not your fault. But if you are trying to fake it, you need to be a little less obvious about it.

  20. 20.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 12:13 pm

    This first became an issue with the large number of scam artists who preyed on the families of missing POWs.

    Then we need better law, or better enforcement, against fraud. Not feelgood measures aimed too widely at something that really can’t be outlawed effectively.

    Fraud is already a crime, isn’t it? And this law works, because “fraud” here means actual injury, not “hurt feelings.”

  21. 21.

    DougJ

    August 1, 2005 at 12:16 pm

    Ppgaz, this really is quite similar to the flag burning issue. There are clearly going to be free speech issues that many liberals — and maybe even some conservatives — will have about such a law. At the end of the day, though, symbols matter to people and we need some sort of protection for these symbols. It may well be that there is no way to do this within the framework of the current constitution, in which case we certainly need an amendment.

  22. 22.

    demimondian

    August 1, 2005 at 12:20 pm

    DougJ, trolling is more effective for those fish which school. Well-schooled fish congregate, and can therefore be drawn in more efficiently than those which are more dispersed.

  23. 23.

    Blue Neponset

    August 1, 2005 at 12:21 pm

    If the Swift Boat Vets for “Truth” are to be believed, it isn’t too difficult for a person to swindle the Navy into awarding him three purple hearts and a bronze star. Since these medals are apparantly easy to obtain I don’t see why we need a law to regulates who gets to wear one.

    On a related note:

    In the future, maybe the Dept. of Defense should put a “D” for Democrat or an “R” for Republican on each medal so it is easy to determine which medals were earned and which ones were obtained under false circumstances.

  24. 24.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 12:21 pm

    At the end of the day, though, symbols matter to people and we need some sort of protection for these symbols. It may well be that there is no way to do this within the framework of the current constitution, in which case we certainly need an amendment.

    Absolutely dead wrong. Symbols need no protection, and will get no protection under your “plan.” What you want to protect are feelings, not symbols. The law is not an instrument for protecting your feelings.

    If we are going to have laws to protect feelings, then I demand a law that requires you to shut the fuck up, because you insult my sensibilities every day. I have the same rights as you to protection of my feelings. I want you silenced.

    Get it? You are wrong. You either have free speech, or you don’t. You can’t have a little bit of free speech that is constrained by whose feelings might be hurt. Or whose power might be threatened.

  25. 25.

    DougJ

    August 1, 2005 at 12:26 pm

    “You can’t have a little bit of free speech that is constrained by whose feelings might be hurt.”

    With rights, come responsibilities. I’m all for the responsible exercise of free speech, but once it becomes irresonsible, once it involves giving aid to the enemy and defiling the values of our country, then it needs to be restricted. After all, you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded movie house, so why should you be able to do the equivalent of this in other arenas.

  26. 26.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 12:31 pm

    I’m all for the responsible exercise of free speech, but once it becomes irresonsible, once it involves giving aid to the enemy and defiling the values of our country, then it needs to be restricted. After all, you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded movie house, so why should you be able to do the equivalent of this in other arenas.

    I gotta say, if you are faking this, it’s genius. Even I with my black sense of humor and imagination could fake a stupid jerk as well as you are doing. But again, if that’s really you, fine, you are what you are.

    Now …. shut up. I want you silenced. Your speech is irresponsible, and you are defiling the values of our country. I want you jailed. I want you executed.

    “Fire in a crowded theater” is not the equivalent of speaking out against the government, Doug. I’m afraid you are about 300 years too late trying to make that argument. That ship has sailed. Not the same thing, no matter how diligently you keep saying it is.

    You have no concept of what America is all about. I want executed, and then deported. Once feelgood law becomes standard, I’ll have my way. You are toast.

  27. 27.

    DougJ

    August 1, 2005 at 12:39 pm

    Ppgaz, the problem with your critique of the protection of symbols is that you’re a liberal relativist. You think that what you think is important and what the values of our society hold to be important have equal weight. You take reasonable well-defined positions — that one cannot give aid and comfort to the enemy at a time of war and that sacred symbols matter — and turn them into liberal mush by somehow equating them with personal feelings. It’s so typical of the liberal outlook, to think that how someone feels is as important as protecting the flag and supporting the country at a time of war.

    Can’t you see the clear line between what you feel and what millions of soldiers have given their lives for? Symbols matter, but your personal feelings don’t. Values matter, but liberal psychobabble doesn’t. You can’t use relativism to equate everything.

  28. 28.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 12:48 pm

    Can’t you see the clear line between what you feel and what millions of soldiers have given their lives for? Symbols matter, but your personal feelings don’t.

    You’re the best at this I’ve ever seen, man. And I’ve seen a lot, believe me.

    Symbols matter, but feelings don’t?

    Doug, what is a symbol, besides feelings?

    Symbol = Feeling

    It’s all about feelings, Doug. And mine are frazzled. I want you jailed, executed, and deported. My feelings have spoken. You are an enemy of the state. Kiss your ass goodbye.

  29. 29.

    DougJ

    August 1, 2005 at 12:50 pm

    “Doug, what is a symbol, besides feelings?”

    To quote the great Louis Armstrong “If you gotta ask, you ain’t never gonna know.”

  30. 30.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 12:56 pm

    To quote the great Louis Armstrong “If you gotta ask, you ain’t never gonna know.”

    Yeah? So humor me. What is a symbol, besides feelings?

  31. 31.

    Sojourner

    August 1, 2005 at 1:01 pm

    Please, lawmakers, spare us your sanctimonious posturing, and pay attention to things that matter.

    This is cheaper than benefits for the vets.

  32. 32.

    Sojourner

    August 1, 2005 at 1:03 pm

    Let’s face it. The Bush administration and its friends have mocked these awards through their attacks on medal-wearing vets.

    Bush topped this by giving the Medal of Freedom to the likes of Tenet and Bremer as a way of jabbing his opponents.

    These folks have brought shame on these awards because, frankly, they don’t value what the awards stand for.

  33. 33.

    mac Buckets

    August 1, 2005 at 1:09 pm

    Now if they could only pass a law to stop guys pretending to be Pittsburgh Steelers quarterbacks to pick up chicks! It belittles Ben Roethlisberger, which is certianly a federal offense on this blog.

  34. 34.

    mac Buckets

    August 1, 2005 at 1:11 pm

    The Bush administration and its friends have mocked these awards through their attacks on medal-wearing vets.

    Is John (I Forgot My Medals, So I Had To Throw His) Kerry one of Bush’s friends now?

  35. 35.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 1:14 pm

    Is John (I Forgot My Medals, So I Had To Throw His) Kerry one of Bush’s friends now?

    Sure. He and “I flew fighter jets in Alabama, and I enjoyed it” Bush are great pals.

    They get together regularly with “I had other things to do during the Vietnam war” Cheney and swap old war stories.

  36. 36.

    Gary Farber

    August 1, 2005 at 1:16 pm

    Incidentally, John Salazar, who is a couple of districts over from me, is the brother of Senator Ken Salazar, and they’re the only two brothers in Congress. John barely squeaked in to his victory, and if anyone likes him, a campaign contribution and other support would be helpful towards his re-election.

  37. 37.

    Sojourner

    August 1, 2005 at 1:17 pm

    Is John (I Forgot My Medals, So I Had To Throw His) Kerry one of Bush’s friends now?

    He earned them, he has the right to use them to make an anti-war statement.

  38. 38.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 1:22 pm

    He earned them, he has the right to use them to make an anti-war statement.

    Oh no, not if it hurts somebody’s feelings.

    Speech has it’s limits. That’s why you can’t shout “This movie sucks” in a crowded theater.

  39. 39.

    Don Surber

    August 1, 2005 at 1:24 pm

    Hmm. Now you must earn a medal in order to speak on a public matter. Why am I always the last to know when a military junta occurs?

    Seriously, an admiral had to resign an important post over a medal mixup. These are not mere smbols but rather a testament to the sacrifices made by the military. Dem, Rep, Ind, I don’t care — lay off politicizing this

  40. 40.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 1:31 pm

    Hmm. Now you must earn a medal in order to speak on a public matter. Why am I always the last to know when a military junta occurs?

    Seriously, an admiral had to resign an important post over a medal mixup. These are not mere smbols but rather a testament to the sacrifices made by the military. Dem, Rep, Ind, I don’t care—lay off politicizing this

    No, I think he said that it is fitting to have earned them, if one is going to throw them. And vice versa. Not to “speak on a public matter.”

    As for admirals resigning … this is why it is wise not to politicize these things. We are going to have a hard time passing laws which protect admirals from getting upset enough to resign.

    But more to the point … it’s the GOP that politicized the medal issue. Of course, they’ll lie, and say, oh no, we only did it because Kerry bragged about his medals.

    So, let’s see … if a medal wearer tells about his medal, then it’s okay to make fun of his medal if you are the GOP. But if someone makes fun of a GOP medal, that’s an insult to their sacrifice.

    got it.

  41. 41.

    DougJ

    August 1, 2005 at 1:40 pm

    When Kerry went on and on about his war record, shamelessly politicizing it and trying to equate it with some kind of “patriotism”, he opened himself up to fair questions about how his medals were earned and indeed, whether they were EARNED at all. He opened himself up to the wearing of the Purple Heart band-aids at the Republican convention. That was a fair form of political criticism since Kerry had moved the debate into the political sphere himself. Printing out paper Purple Hearts or having people use medals to pick up women in movies is entirely different matter — and one which is not acceptable to those who serve and honor the country.

  42. 42.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 1:49 pm

    When Kerry went on and on about his war record, shamelessly politicizing it and trying to equate it with some kind of “patriotism”, he opened himself up to fair questions about how his medals were earned and indeed, whether they were EARNED at all. He opened himself up to the wearing of the Purple Heart band-aids at the Republican convention. That was a fair form of political criticism since Kerry had moved the debate into the political sphere himself. Printing out paper Purple Hearts or having people use medals to pick up women in movies is entirely different matter—and one which is not acceptable to those who serve and honor the country.

    You’ve become a parody of yourself now, Doug.

    Really, STFU. You are ridiculous. Get out of my country.

  43. 43.

    neil

    August 1, 2005 at 1:58 pm

    Why do you guys pick on Doug? He’s one of the most consistently entertaining commenters on any blog I read.

  44. 44.

    Steve

    August 1, 2005 at 2:14 pm

    I do not understand a single argument made against this proposed law, other than the standard line that Congress should be attending to something more important (an odd argument to see Democrats making under a Republican Congress, indeed).

  45. 45.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 2:36 pm

    Why do you guys pick on Doug?

    If you are going to play Whack-A-Mole, you need a mole.

    Doug has selflessly volunteered to be our mole.

  46. 46.

    Anderson

    August 1, 2005 at 2:49 pm

    Wait … DougJ has been *serious* all this time?

    I thought he was a master of irony. How disappointing.

  47. 47.

    SeesThroughIt

    August 1, 2005 at 2:59 pm

    Why do you guys pick on Doug? He’s one of the most consistently entertaining commenters on any blog I read.

    I agree–that’s why it’s fun to egg him on sometimes. I mean, it’s not like you’re going to get anything even faintly resembling an informed idea out of him, so may as well have some fun, right? The guy is hilarious.

  48. 48.

    Dave Ruddell

    August 1, 2005 at 4:13 pm

    ppgaz wrote:

    I want you jailed, executed, and deported.

    Executed and deported? Wow, that’s cold. I mean, when you get to the point that you’re supporting the deportation of corpses, you’ve crossed a line my friend.

  49. 49.

    Otto Man

    August 1, 2005 at 4:55 pm

    When Kerry went on and on about his war record, shamelessly politicizing it and trying to equate it with some kind of “patriotism”, he opened himself up to fair questions about how his medals were earned and indeed, whether they were EARNED at all. He opened himself up to the wearing of the Purple Heart band-aids at the Republican convention.

    Seriously, you’ve got to stop. If I keep spitting out my coffee, my office will make me buy a new computer.

    I guess Kerry should’ve followed the brave example of Bush, who would never ever politicize anything to do with war. Sure, he might play dress-up and prance around an aircraft carrier with a big “Mission Accomplished” banner, but that’s nothing compared with Kerry’s gall. How dare he — serving and volunteering to go to the front, receiving several medals for valor, and then having the nerve to talk about it. For shame.

  50. 50.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 5:04 pm

    Executed and deported?

    Whatever it takes to spur him on to new heights of malapropism!

  51. 51.

    Sojourner

    August 1, 2005 at 5:14 pm

    So, let’s see … if a medal wearer tells about his medal, then it’s okay to make fun of his medal if you are the GOP. But if someone makes fun of a GOP medal, that’s an insult to their sacrifice.

    Makes perfect sense to me. Up is down, right is left.

  52. 52.

    Jess

    August 1, 2005 at 5:20 pm

    John,

    Just curious–why is this bit of legislation worth supporting, but the attempt to clean up video games a waste of time and money? I don’t have strong feelings about either one of them, but it does appear that the latter is more likely to actually improve society, thereby giving more bang for the buck (no pun intended). The former protects the sensibilities of grown men and women, while the latter attempts to improve what we’re dumping into the developing minds of our children. Shouldn’t the latter have priority?

  53. 53.

    ppGaz

    August 1, 2005 at 6:05 pm

    Makes perfect sense to me. Up is down, right is left.

    You have been assimilated. Another victory in the Global War on Libruls!

  54. 54.

    Sojourner

    August 1, 2005 at 6:30 pm

    You have been assimilated. Another victory in the Global War on Libruls!

    Do I get a medal?

  55. 55.

    mac Buckets

    August 1, 2005 at 9:50 pm

    He earned them, he has the right to use them to make an anti-war statement.

    Nope. Obviously, Kerry didn’t earn those medals — they weren’t even HIS!

    …but I was referring more to how there is no one in America who has “attacked medal-wearing vets” more than John Kerry.

  56. 56.

    Sojourner

    August 1, 2005 at 9:59 pm

    Nope. Obviously, Kerry didn’t earn those medals—they weren’t even HIS!

    Huh?

    …but I was referring more to how there is no one in America who has “attacked medal-wearing vets” more than John Kerry.

    I see. Describing the experiences of Viet Nam vets in an attempt to help America wake up to what was going on in order to put an end to needless deaths in Viet Nam constitutes an attack on “medal-wearing vets.”

    Interesting. Oh, I forgot. Black is white. Support the troops by sending them off to an unwinnable war where they can get shot. I got it.

  57. 57.

    DougJ

    August 2, 2005 at 1:56 am

    Fighting wars is patriotic. Consorting with Jane Fonda is not. I don’t care about what heroic acts John F. Kerry claims to have performed in Camobia — whooops I mean Vietnam. He is no hero. He is no patriot. Dick Cheney may have dodged the war in a way that you libruls don’t like but he knows what it takes to keep America number one and he is one helluva a patriot.

  58. 58.

    ppGaz

    August 2, 2005 at 2:41 am

    Doug, go away. You’re an ass.

  59. 59.

    Doug Sterner

    August 6, 2005 at 11:09 pm

    If you think this is fluff–it’s not. You can see more on this bill, including the underlying policy analysis paper that spurred this legislation. My wife (A Republican) wrote the policy analysis. Congressman John Salazar (a Democrat), met with her and agreed to introduce it. Presently there are 48 co-sponsors (45 Dems/3Reps), but there will be many more. The reason it is top-heavy on the Dem side is because these are Congressman Salazar’s friends and they came in quickly. We are not working the other side of the aisle and I’m sure you will see this broadly supported on both sides. For more info on this, including the endorsements, news stories (print and video), visit http://www.homeofheroes.com/herobill

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - Mike in Oly - Woodard Bay Natural Resources Conservation Area
Image by Mike in Oly (5/24/25)

Recent Comments

  • MagdaInBlack on Saturday Afternoon Open Thread (May 24, 2025 @ 6:18pm)
  • schrodingers_cat on Saturday Afternoon Open Thread (May 24, 2025 @ 6:15pm)
  • comrade scotts agenda of rage on Saturday Afternoon Open Thread (May 24, 2025 @ 6:15pm)
  • zhena gogolia on Saturday Afternoon Open Thread (May 24, 2025 @ 6:13pm)
  • Commenting at Balloon Juice since 1937 on Open Thread: Concerning Senator Fetterman (May 24, 2025 @ 6:13pm)

PA Supreme Court At Risk

Donate

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
War in Ukraine
Donate to Razom for Ukraine

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Meetups

Upcoming Ohio Meetup May 17
5/11 Post about the May 17 Ohio Meetup

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Hands Off! – Denver, San Diego & Austin

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

PA Supreme Court At Risk

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!