[gallo]

Some additional considerations about Vietnam service. John Kerry served two tours in combat. He began as an Ensign and left as a Lieutenant. (hopefully it isn't necessary to explain those ranks to Chancellor, since he claims to have served in the Navy) He was awarded a Silver Star (only awarded for gallantry in action), a Bronze Star (may be awarded for bravery, acts of merit, or meritorious service) - (Kerry has a "V" for valor on his), and 3 Purple Hearts. So, when he received a minor wound late in his second tour, his commander chose to reward his service with a 3rd Purple Heart (whether a minor wound or not) and send him home according to regulations. Why is that a problem for Chancellor?

But Chancellor prefers to spit on Vietnam service. Awards were handed out like candy.

A friend of mine was in the 82nd Airborne and was shot in the Dominican Republic and spent some considerable time in the hospital. Of course, he was given a Purple Heart as "candy," according to Chancellor. He was then assigned to C Co, 1st Bn, 7th Cav Reg, 1st Cav Div (Airmobile). The division was deployed to Vietnam and he took part in the action at Ia Drang. He was part of the relief force for the "lost platoon". During that action, he he was hit by a piece of shrapnel that a medic extracted with forceps, bandaged and he was returned to action (by necessity). But Chancellor believes that such wounds do not merit a Purple Heart since they are nothing more than candy, since my friend was never removed from combat duty. Thus, his Purple Heart was not earned. Later, in an action subsequent to Ia Drang, my friend stepped on a pungi stick. It penetrated through the top of his boot. He was, of course hospitalized, where the massive infection was successfully defeated. He was returned to his unit. He was also awarded his 3rd piece of candy. Unfortunately for him, only two were earned in Vietnam, so he wasn't eligible for return to the states. He finished his tour.

But, of course, two tours in Vietnam do not deserve respect because awards were passed out like candy. Silver stars, bronze stars, purple hearts - there was no merit or valor involved.

So, Chancellor, you must have lots of this candy. How about a silver star? No? How about a bronze star? No? (My brothers). How about a commendation medal? No? (my brothers, myself, and my son) How about a Purple Heart? No? (My brothers - both returned to duty after medical attention). How about an achievement medal? No? (my older brother and my son). But it's all just candy, isn't it? So do you have anything above a service ribbon for you valiant service off the coast where you were not actually in any sort of danger?

Far be it from me to slight any one's military service. Any service that ends honorably is to be respected. I am saddened that you, a veteran (or so you claim), would slight the service of one who did considerably more than you. You lounged on a ship off shore. Kerry was in combat for more considerably more than a year. And yet, you disrespect his service.

How low can one go? You imply that you have no pride in your military service since you condemn those who did more than you. Is it some sort of a guilt trip? If you have a political disagreement, then why not say so and express your reasons? It seems that you are more interested in spitting on those who served in combat, while you didn't. Is this some sort of a guilt trip? I suspect so.

Chancellor is a spitter.