September 01, 2004

• If I remember from the MeFi thread correctly, it's okay in the American army to wear medals that your unit has won, even if you weren't there at the time. Or, uh, something. It seems like a little bit of a non-issue to me.
• I really don't understand American politics.
• Well maybe now they'll shut up about Kerry ceremonially throwing away medals that weren't his.
• A closer look at Dubya's medals I am ten fearless ninjas
• hey, so did paul hamm.
• lol wedge!!!
• Since when did Georgie-boy actually earn anything?
• I think the real scandal is that unibrow. It's not really a unibrow, I don't think, but that is just not flattering.
• It is not an issue at all. It is completely irrelevant and silly. However, in light of the claims and ploys regarding John Kerry's service, the meaning of it changes significantly. Do the Democrats take the intellectually honest route and ignore it, or do they stoop and make an issue out of it? While I am not pleased with the Democrats' batting average on such questions, I believe that Bush will win precisely because the Republicans do not entertain intellectual honesty when making any campaign decisions. If this were the other way around, photos of Kerry wearing improper medals or ribbons would be all over the news.
• Either the Democrats are utterly incompetent at running campaigns, or they are systematically shut out of the media. Tell me which is the likely reason. (I'll accept "both".)
• All of the above.
• tensor - How anyone can still call it the "liberal" media is beyond me.
• oh sure, you liberals would say that. I don't see how this thread instills the necessary fear into our daily lives to vote Unpublican. TERRORISTS people!!
• This doesn't seem to be getting any traction in the mainstream American media... I've been checking all the usual sources, CNN, NY Times, etc.
• Bush is just another word for cunt.
• This Snopes thread has a few interesting posts: In the late 60's I served in an AF unit that had previously won the award. As I recall, there was a constant running argument over whether "we who were not there" when it was awarded - should wear the ribbon. As several posters have pointed out, it's not an award anyone would go to great pains to point out. ... When we had uniform inspections half the time "we who were not there" got gigged for wearing the damn thing and the other half of the time we got gigged for not wearing it! Another poster links to the "pertinent Air Force regulation" (PDF), which would seem to indicate that he shouldn't have been wearing the award. But, the rules might have been different back then. And, as anyone who works in a large bureaucracy can attest to, the regulations that get made at the top often have very little to do with what happens amongst the rank-and-file...
• I participated in the original thread on DemocraticUnderground.com. I then asked several friends who served or are serving in the military if this is a big deal, and all of them, regardless of political affiliation, said, "No." That's why it's not getting traction in the media. It's true he didn't earn it; it's true he shouldn't have worn it; it's true there are sigificant penalties for doing what he did, but it was a fairly common practice for people to wear this particular ribbon if their unit had won the award in the recent past. In Bush's case, he came in in '68 and the unit had won the award in '66. I would love to snag him on something, but this is much ado about not too much.
• well poop.
• not a big deal? why'd that one guy kill himself when newsweek was going to do the story about his wearing medals he didn't earn? remember?