« Not What I Needed | Main | Loaf of Bread, Jug of Wine, and Thou »
February 20, 2004
A Different Kind of Hero
According to today's WashTimes, John Kerry wasn't quite the war hero he's been made out to be by the left. And as John Hawkins also notes, neither was their other poster child Max Cleland. I find the left's constant touting of their 'heroism' incredibly offensive....because I know a different kind of hero.
I once knew a man named John. John was a kind soul, a left-leaning tree-hugging environmentalist. He was a friend of mine. He & I disagreed on many subjects, but I had a helluva respect for his intelligence and always enjoyed visiting with him. John's appearance could be more than a little startling, as he was criss-crossed with horrible burn scars everywhere visible and was missing many of his fingers. I knew he was a Vietnam vet, but I never asked, because I was raised to believe that is rude, and John never volunteered much about how he was injured. I later found out what happened from a friend of his.
John was in 'Nam, and one day a phophorus grenade was lobbed into a group of soldiers. John, being a quick-thinking kind of fellow, grabbed the grenade and ran to throw it away from his comrades. He saved a lot of lives, but at a horrible cost to himself. He didn't like to talk about it, but I gathered from what little he did say that he had endured multiple surgeries but was still in pretty much constant severe pain. Several years ago, John committed suicide. I miss him, but I can understand why he did.
There are a lot of men out there like John. Men like one of my ex's friends who daily struggles with the after-effects of Agent Orange. Men like my sister's next-door neighbor who left his family to fight in Desert Storm, and is now coping with Desert Storm Syndrome. Men like my father, who lost an eye and almost his life in Korea, but came home, raised a family and farmed all his life despite the inoperable shrapnel in his knee. Men who did their duty and sacrificed for our country, and then quietly went on with their lives as best they could. Those are my heroes.
John Kerry and Max Cleland are not.
Posted by Rita at February 20, 2004 08:27 AM
Comments
Rita,
I'm certainly not a fan of Kerry's constantly touting his Vietnam experience as if he was some super-heroic figure. But Cleland has never really done that--although I must admit that he's remained silent when others have done it for him.
Cleland has always been pretty self-deprecating about the accident that could have ruined his life. And he gave years of honorable service to his fellow veterans once he came home.
Posted by: James Joyner at February 20, 2004 08:41 AM
I don't disagree that Mr. Cleland himself is very clear about how he was injured and I'm glad to hear he has worked on behalf of his fellow veterans. But I still have a problem with the left using him for their own ends (which was my point, however badly made) while leading people to believe otherwise about his injuries. And I still think his relative silence in the face of that doesn't speak too well for him.
But that's just my opinion.
Posted by: Rita at February 20, 2004 09:04 AM
He was actually head of the VA for a time.
And I agree on the Left's misuse of him in this way. Oddly, he apparently was quite open about the situation and the voters in Georgia generally knew the truth about his tragic accident. The Democratic leadership either didn't know or care about the truth, obviously.
Posted by: James Joyner at February 20, 2004 09:29 AM
One issue that is lost in the recounting of Max's accident is how incredibly dangerous and difficult military service is, even in peace time duty. It is impossible to perform many of these activities without risk to life and limb, not withstanding the added liability of the enemy shooting at you....
Posted by: Bill at February 20, 2004 09:41 AM
I've read what Kerry actually said in front of Congress and it seemed pretty respectful of American soldiers generally. He did say that the war was a loser, and being stuck in an obvious losing war was driving some soldiers insane, causing them to commit horrid crimes. But he was never disrespectful of U.S. soldiers in what he said.
I think its unfair to pretend he somehow is respeonsible for the anti-soldier sentement. Most of the speech was about how U.S. policy was abusing decent soldiers -- sending them over and over into impossible battles, letting them die.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. There seems to be a weird misconception among both pro and anti-Kerry camps that Kerry's heroism or lack of has something to do with his electability.
Obviously, neither side paid attention in the last election, when wussy GWB beat the pants of clearly heroic McCain. Heroism doesn't win elections.
Posted by: Aaron Butler at February 20, 2004 10:24 AM
I concur with Mr. Butler. It's a nice story about "John" the hero. I am sure there are many stories like that. Personally I don't see how it matters whether you're John the tree-hugger or John the presidential candidate (or both at the same time).
Even if one concedes the point--that Kerry and Cleland were not war heroes--I don't know where that leaves us. Ok, so exactly zero war heroes are running for president in 2004. Now what?
However, to many voters, having served in the armed forces is important because it reflects a willingness to sacrifice for your country. I think that's it. It's not so much about how many limbs you lost and why. So if Kerry touts his service, he's not doing anything unreasonable. Bush Sr., Dole, and McCain all did the same thing.
Finally, query whether Bush's carrier deck landing was not the more boastful TV-ready show of heroism compared to Kerry discussing his military service. Mind you, I am merely noting here that this kind of machismo is part of American politics, probably because it works.
Posted by: Mitchell at February 21, 2004 11:08 AM