Max Cleland is at Bush's Ranch in Crawford, TX!

[Rooster71]

Listening to CNN, Max Cleland is currently at the Bush "ranch" in Crawford, TX demanding to give Bush a letter in person. Cleland is demanding Bush help straighten out the lack of respect for combat veterans. Will Bush meet with him? Or will he just hide and give some canned statement later?

In case anyone here is unfamiliar with Max Cleland, he is a former Congressman who lost a past election to a Republican as a result of a Republican smear campaign against Cleland's patriotism. By the way, Cleland lost three limbs in Vietman. But that didn't stop the Republican smear.

[cardcounter0]

Bush is scared Max will use his one remaining limb and beat the [censored] out of him.

[MaxPower]

[ QUOTE ]
By the way, Cleland lost three limbs in Vietman. But that didn't stop the Republican smear.

[/ QUOTE ]

He only lost those three limbs so he could get sent home early and then use pity to further his political career. He kept one arm so he could still shake hands and sign bills if he ever becomes president.

If you didn't get all your news from the liberal media you would know that by now.

Mega Dittos.

/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[cardcounter0]

Not only that, but he depended on the TAXPAYER to fly him home, instead of supporting American Business and buy a ticket. Typical behavior of the liberal welfare state bums.

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
By the way, Cleland lost three limbs in Vietman. But that didn't stop the Republican smear.

[/ QUOTE ]

He only lost those three limbs so he could get sent home early and then use pity to further his political career. He kept one arm so he could still shake hands and sign bills if he ever becomes president.

If you didn't get all your news from the liberal media you would know that by now.

Mega Dittos.

/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
His injuries were only minor limb-loss, not a serious loss of limbs. Probably self inflicted. In order to get the real story, I must listen to Limbaugh and find the "Amputee Veterans For Truth" website.

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
By the way, Cleland lost three limbs in Vietman.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do we know those wounds weren't self-inflicted?

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
By the way, Cleland lost three limbs in Vietman.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do we know those wounds weren't self-inflicted?

[/ QUOTE ]
If you listened to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity like any red-blooded freedom-loving American should, you would know that the whole "amputee" act is just a cheap stunt done for Cleland's own political gain.

You can also check the "Amputee Veterans For Truth" website for the real story.

[riverflush]

This thread has me giggling...good job guys.

[cardcounter0]

I've heard from several sources that the loss of limbs was self-inflicted. What proof do we have that they were not?

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
I've heard from several sources that the loss of limbs was self-inflicted. What proof do we have that they were not?

[/ QUOTE ]
Official records say the loss of limbs was due to "enemy attack", whatever that means. Since there is no video showing the so-called "enemy attack", I have no other choice than to believe the wounds were self-inflicted.

"Enemy attack" is a favorite excuse used by liberals to describe this sort of self-promoting loss of limbs.

[cardcounter0]

I have heard several eyewitness accounts from people who can't recall any enemy attacks ever occuring. It is obvious that Max Cleland is lying about ever being in Vietnam. How dare he smear the name of the Brave Men who went AWOL from the National Guard and never left the States, by claiming he was under 'enemy attack'.

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
I have heard several eyewitness accounts from people who can't recall any enemy attacks ever occuring. It is obvious that Max Cleland is lying about ever being in Vietnam. How dare he smear the name of the Brave Men who went AWOL from the National Guard and never left the States, by claiming he was under 'enemy attack'.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have seen interviews with decorated Vietman vets who were bravely fighting in Vietnam (in different parts of the country) when this supposed "enemy attack" occurred. None of them remember Cleland.

What is Cleland trying to hide? What is his motive? Saying that you were supposedly under "enemy attack" is one thing, but using these self-inflicted injuries to besmirch the character of a brave man like Bush is another. How dare they.

[cardcounter0]

Max Cleland is trying smear every Vet who ever served in the armed forces at any time by claiming that every last one of them committed self-inflicted wounds. How can the liberal left wing media report anything this lying liar says?

[vulturesrow]

Max Cleland wounds were in fact self inflicted and were not received in combat action. Yes he served honorably. Its just funnny to read this thread when it is well known how Cleland received his wounds.

As for him going to Bush's house, it was a political stunt pure and simple without genuine motive behind it.

[cardcounter0]

While disembarking from a transport helicopter, Capt. Cleland reached for a grenade he believed had become dislodged from his web gear. Later it was discovered that the grenade belonged to a young soldier new to the theater. That soldier had improperly prepared the grenade pin for easy detonation and had dropped it while coming off the helicopter. The grenade exploded and severely injured Capt. Cleland.

Yeah, that is some self-inflicted wound. Hope some POS doesn't run into you while driving drunk, and you self inflict a car accident on yourself.

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
Max Cleland wounds were in fact self inflicted and were not received in combat action. Yes he served honorably. Its just funnny to read this thread when it is well known how Cleland received his wounds.

As for him going to Bush's house, it was a political stunt pure and simple without genuine motive behind it.

[/ QUOTE ]
How dare a shady figure such as Cleland try a stunt like this. This sort of cheap political dirty trick casts a cloud over real heroes who served their country, like George W. Bush.

[cardcounter0]

That prick Cleland, blowing off his arm and legs in such a funny manner, and then expecting sympathy from a Brave Pilot like George W. Bush. Treat liberal scum bags like Max with dignity? Why everyone knows he pulled that stunt just so he could become a senator 30 years later.

[MaxPower]

[ QUOTE ]
Later it was discovered that the grenade belonged to a young soldier new to the theater. That soldier had improperly prepared the grenade pin for easy detonation and had dropped it while coming off the helicopter. The grenade exploded and severely injured Capt. Cleland.


[/ QUOTE ]

Let me guess. That young soldier was .... John Kerry.

[eLROY]

Freakin' hilarious stuff! You gotta love it.

Max is having fun, I'm having fun, Bush is having fun...

Just make sure there aren't any sharp objects lying around, that Cleland guy's got bad luck!

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
That prick Cleland, blowing off his arm and legs in such a funny manner, and then expecting sympathy from a Brave Pilot like George W. Bush. Treat liberal scum bags like Max with dignity? Why everyone knows he pulled that stunt just so he could become a senator 30 years later.

[/ QUOTE ]
What really chaps my ass is thinking about the 20 year period when George W was building successful oil companies and toiling to build the American dream by the sweat of his brow, this low-life Cleland was just sitting around in his wheelchair scheming on how he can use his disability for cheap political gain. Sickening.....

[MaxPower]

[ QUOTE ]
Silver Star Medal Citation[9]

Captain Cleland distinguished himself by exceptionally valorous action on 4 April 1968 … during an enemy attack near Khe Sanh.

When the battalion command post came under a heavy enemy rocket and mortar attack, Captain Cleland, disregarding his own safety, exposed himself to the rocket barrage as he left his covered position to administer first aid to his wounded comrades. He then assisted in moving the injured personnel to covered positions.

Continuing to expose himself, Captain Cleland organized his men into a work party to repair the battalion communications equipment, which had been damaged by enemy fire.

His gallant action is in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service, and reflects great credit upon himself, his unit and the United States Army.

Grenade Explosion Accident. In his own words, [10]

On April 8, 1968, I volunteered for one last mission. The helicopter moved in low. The troops jumped out with M16 rifles in hand as we crouched low to the ground to avoid the helicopter blades. Then I saw the grenade. It was where the chopper had lifted off. It must be mine, I thought. Grenades had fallen off my web gear before. Shifting the M16 to my left hand and holding it behind me, I bent down to pick up the grenade. A blinding explosion threw me backwards.

[/ QUOTE ]

[vulturesrow]

LOL Aw you and rooster are so cute when you get all indignant. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Love the way you put words in my mouth too. You want to argue semantics, fine. But he did pick up the grenade and it wasnt caused by enemy action.

The letter is just a weak to attempt to pressure Bush. Bush has already condemned all the 527s..I dont hear kerry condemning any of the liberal ones...

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
LOL Aw you and rooster are so cute when you get all indignant. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Love the way you put words in my mouth too. You want to argue semantics, fine. But he did pick up the grenade and it wasnt caused by enemy action.

The letter is just a weak to attempt to pressure Bush. Bush has already condemned all the 527s..I dont hear kerry condemning any of the liberal ones...

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course Bush "condemned" them. Being the moral icon that he is, Bush always does what appears to be the "morally correct" thing. The Bush people and Bush's supporter buddy (who is funding the ads) probably had this "condemning" pre-planned. Sort of like the "I don't know who Ken Lay is" statement.

You have quite an imagination. You said Cleland's injuries were "self-inflicted", but then when you see the real story you say we put words in your mouth. The difference between wounds that are "self-inflicted" and wounds not caused by enemy action are much more than semantics.

[cardcounter0]

Didn't Bush sign the legislation that created 527s in the first place?

[Jimbo]

[ QUOTE ]
Didn't Bush sign the legislation that created 527s in the first place?

[/ QUOTE ]

Honk! Wrong again, would you care to try door number two? That would have been your dear liberal friend President Clinton in 2000.

Jimbo

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
You said Cleland's injuries were "self-inflicted", but then when you see the real story you say we put words in your mouth. The difference between wounds that are "self-inflicted" and wounds not caused by enemy action are much more than semantics.

[/ QUOTE ]

No matter what BUsh says you guys will find some way to attack it. So whatever.

AS for Cleland, did he or did he not pick up that grenade? If I pick up a gun and it goes off and it wounds me, is it not self incflicted?

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You said Cleland's injuries were "self-inflicted", but then when you see the real story you say we put words in your mouth. The difference between wounds that are "self-inflicted" and wounds not caused by enemy action are much more than semantics.

[/ QUOTE ]

No matter what BUsh says you guys will find some way to attack it. So whatever.

AS for Cleland, did he or did he not pick up that grenade? If I pick up a gun and it goes off and it wounds me, is it not self incflicted?

[/ QUOTE ]
You could say that, but it would really be a huge stretch. If I went out to eat tonight, got food poisoning and died, it could be said that I died from something that was "self-inflicted". I ate the food, so I did it to myself!

[elwoodblues]

My take on the whole Cleland thing is that it was a pretty cheap stunt. It's fine entertainment, but that's about it. It really reminds me of something Michael Moore would do. I like Moore quite a bit, but I know that a lot of what he does is geared toward getting a particular emotional response. In my opinion, it makes for cheap political theater.

Doesn't change the fact that I'm still voting for him.

[cardcounter0]

No, the all time prize for Cheap Political Theater goes to:

<insert drum role>
<sound of tearing of the envelope>

George W. Bush for his wonderful performance imitating an acutal jet pilot in his flight suit on the flight deck of an aircraft carrier.

That should make up for the screw up on the Best Political Prop Award when it was mistakenly awarded to the crew of the ship, when in fact, the administration staff had created the "Mission Accomplished" banner.

Accepting the award for the President, will be Sen. John McCain, who seems to be doing everything for the President these days.

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]
George W. Bush for his wonderful performance imitating an acutal jet pilot in his flight suit on the flight deck of an aircraft carrier.


[/ QUOTE ]

I know the truth hurts but did you forget that President Bush is an actual fighter pilot? Not to mention he is the Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces. I know details like this are easy to forget so I offered a gentle reminder.

[elwoodblues]

Can't they both be cheap political theatre? I tend to think so.

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
George W. Bush for his wonderful performance imitating an acutal jet pilot in his flight suit on the flight deck of an aircraft carrier.


[/ QUOTE ]

I know the truth hurts but did you forget that President Bush is an actual fighter pilot?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, training on obsolete jets and then bravely defending the Gulf Coast against Mexican invasion was a tough job. It made him the battle-hardened warrior that he is today.

[cardcounter0]

Bush was TRAINING to be a pilot, never completed it, and was GROUNDED halfway thru it. Sorry, that doesn't make you a pilot.

Here is the document grounding him for not showing up for physical

http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/grounded.gif

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]
Bush was TRAINING to be a pilot, never completed it, and was GROUNDED halfway thru it. Sorry, that doesn't make you a pilot.


[/ QUOTE ]

You might be funnier than Jay Leno, just how many times must you fly an aircraft in order to become a pilot in your humble opinion?

[Wake up CALL]

I might add one more thing, your link states that he was suspended from flying status due to failure to take a medical exam. How, pray tell, can one be suspended from flight status if one is not a pilot in the first place?

[cardcounter0]

More times than you need to snort a line of coke to become a coke addict.

Now I know why Rush repeats himself over and over:
Bush was TRAINING to be a pilot, he did NOT complete his
training, he was GROUNDED, he was not a PILOT.

One more time:
Bush was TRAINING to be a pilot, he did NOT complete his
training, he was GROUNDED, he was not a PILOT.

Let's have Hannity take over:
Bush was TRAINING to be a pilot, he did NOT complete his
training, he was GROUNDED, he was not a PILOT.

Now all the FOX NEWS spin masters together:
Bush was TRAINING to be a pilot, he did NOT complete his
training, he was GROUNDED, he was not a PILOT.

Starting to sink in?

[cardcounter0]

I guess if you never show up, don't take the training, and miss your physical -- even if you are the son of a Senator -- The National Guard says you ain't no pilot!

Here is his annual report. "UNOBSERVED" marked in every catagory.
http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/doc4.gif

Never was a pilot. Did not complete training. Grounded from flying.

(I used real short sentences so you could understand.)

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
I might add one more thing, your link states that he was suspended from flying status due to failure to take a medical exam. How, pray tell, can one be suspended from flight status if one is not a pilot in the first place?

[/ QUOTE ]
If he is in training, like cardcounter's earlier post stated.

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I might add one more thing, your link states that he was suspended from flying status due to failure to take a medical exam. How, pray tell, can one be suspended from flight status if one is not a pilot in the first place?

[/ QUOTE ]

Poor poor Rooster, you don't really believe that cardcounter has any clue at all of Lt Bush's training regimen nor his status as a pilot or a trainee? Give me a break, I am stating that cardcounter is incorrect. Nowhwere has he shown that Bush was in training and not already a pilot.

Try websters dictionary for the definition of a pilot if it will help.

Pilot: a person who flies or is qualified to fly an aircraft or spacecraft

In other words once you are up in the sky turning those knobs, depressing those pedals and twisting that wheel, you are a pilot.

If he is in training, like cardcounter's earlier post stated.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Wake up CALL]

I'll offer you one more hint. Check out March 1970 when then Lt. Bush got his Pilots wings.

[vulturesrow]

Rooster,

That document (the medical grounding) isnt proof of anything except that he missed his flight physical. You are required to get one once a year during your birth month. It doesnt matter what the reason is. Once youre past the last day of your birth month you are automatically grounded from flying until you get your physical completed. It has to be documented as well. Really this paper doesnt prove much except that Bush missed his flight physical. That couldve happened for any number of reasons. But it is not a permament removal from flight status. Getting stripped of flight status is a very serious matter (at least for us in the Navy but I dont think the AF or ANG is much different). It isnt something that can just be arbitratily done. There would be a lot more paperwork if Bush was stripped of flight status.

As for the not observed fitness report, there is any number of reasons why he couldve received that. In general though, commanding officers tend to do this when their is no real reason to give said individual a fitness report other than the fact is required on a yearly basis. I believe the end date of this report is close to when Bush was getting out. His CO may just have not felt like doing it. If the Bush truly had been AWOL then the fitness report wouldve reflected that.

Anyhow I am sure someone will have some nitnoid point to pick out of what I said but I am speaking from experience. Take it or leave it.

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
Rooster,

That document (the medical grounding) isnt proof of anything except that he missed his flight physical. You are required to get one once a year during your birth month. It doesnt matter what the reason is. Once youre past the last day of your birth month you are automatically grounded from flying until you get your physical completed. It has to be documented as well. Really this paper doesnt prove much except that Bush missed his flight physical. That couldve happened for any number of reasons. But it is not a permament removal from flight status. Getting stripped of flight status is a very serious matter (at least for us in the Navy but I dont think the AF or ANG is much different). It isnt something that can just be arbitratily done. There would be a lot more paperwork if Bush was stripped of flight status.

As for the not observed fitness report, there is any number of reasons why he couldve received that. In general though, commanding officers tend to do this when their is no real reason to give said individual a fitness report other than the fact is required on a yearly basis. I believe the end date of this report is close to when Bush was getting out. His CO may just have not felt like doing it. If the Bush truly had been AWOL then the fitness report wouldve reflected that.

Anyhow I am sure someone will have some nitnoid point to pick out of what I said but I am speaking from experience. Take it or leave it.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'll have to take it or leave it. This is outside my area of knowledge. So many posts end up with a discussion of Kerry's Vietnam service vs. Bush's National Guard service.

I saw an opinion poll last week that showed Bush losing in all major categories of issues, with the exception of fighting terrorism. The poll was regarding issues only, not likeability, personality or character of each candidate. This suggests why it is in the GOP's best interest to dwell on what Kerry was doing 35 years ago and stay away from discussing actual issues.