You know, I have to say, I've never thought war wounds were all that funny.
Some people appear to see the humor.

I wonder how everyone whose loved ones actually went overseas to get shot at feels?
------------------
-- AMERICANS --
TROOPS KILLED IN AFGHANISTAN: 133 (Aug. 2004)
SERIOUSLY INJURED: 504 (Aug. 2004)
TROOPS KILLED IN IRAQ: 966 (Aug. 2004)
SERIOUSLY INJURED: 3,657 (Aug. 2004)
U.S. CIVILIANS KILLED
IN AFGHANISTAN [10] AND IRAQ [45]: 55 (May 2004)
SERIOUSLY INJURED: 95 (May 2004)
------------------
Democrats on Tuesday accused GOP leaders of organizing the demonstration that made fun of Kerry's three Purple Hearts, but Republican spokesman Jim Dyke said, "It was the act of an individual, not the party."
Republican Chairman Ed Gillespie asked delegate Morton Blackwell of Arlington, Va., on Monday to quit handing out the bandages, Dyke said. The bandages carried the message: "It was just a self-inflicted scratch, but you see I got a Purple Heart for it."
Democrats seized on the bandages as another example of Republicans disrespecting military service, coming on the heels of the attacks on Kerry by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
"They insulted the United States of America, even though the president belatedly supported the combat record of John Kerry," said Rep. Charles Rangel of New York, a military veteran himself.
The bandages were visible on some delegates Monday afternoon but not by Monday night during convention speeches. Blackwell had distributed about 250 bandages.
Kerry won three Purple Hearts, a Silver Star and a Bronze Star in Vietnam. The group sponsoring television ads challenging his wartime record contends Kerry's own fire caused the wound that brought his first Purple Heart. Navy records and other veterans don't support the charge.
Retired Gen. Merrill McPeak, former Air Force chief of staff, said the president should denounce the bandages.
Some people appear to see the humor.

I wonder how everyone whose loved ones actually went overseas to get shot at feels?
-- AMERICANS --
TROOPS KILLED IN AFGHANISTAN: 133 (Aug. 2004)
SERIOUSLY INJURED: 504 (Aug. 2004)
TROOPS KILLED IN IRAQ: 966 (Aug. 2004)
SERIOUSLY INJURED: 3,657 (Aug. 2004)
U.S. CIVILIANS KILLED
IN AFGHANISTAN [10] AND IRAQ [45]: 55 (May 2004)
SERIOUSLY INJURED: 95 (May 2004)
------------------
no subject
Date: 2004-08-31 07:38 pm (UTC)RepubAnon
-Alchoholics Anonymous for people that have an alcohol problem;
Republicans Anonymous for people that keep voting Republican...
no subject
Date: 2004-08-31 08:34 pm (UTC)it truly is one of the most offensive things i've ever seen.
no subject
Date: 2004-08-31 10:16 pm (UTC)your posts are fascinating. i am astounded at the hypocrisy (well not really) and the level to which the mudslinging has sunk. the purple band-aid horror is absolutely one of the most insensitive fiascoes of any election season that i can recall in my adult lifetime. i think you should send this post to the white house, the rnc host committee, colin powell, bob dole, john mccain (even though he has "spoken out" against the swift boat campaign, he surely can do more, esepecially now that he's behaved like a good little doggie and done his duty for bush), etc. and revisionist rudy as well. hell, also send it to ron silver, who must seriously be on meds to have convinced himself so thoroughly that w. should remain in office another four years, so much so that he was compelled to switch teams and actually speak at this convention.
where are all the voices denouncing this, and why isn't it being covered properly? it's disgusting and disgraceful.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 06:17 pm (UTC)Nonetheless... Is Kerry who he claims to be?
He has paraded his purple hearts as a contrast to the assumed lesser service of the pres. When I first heard this I thought, probably as many did, that his service was worthy of my considering him as commander-in-chief. Some reports called him a swift boat captain, others a commander. Undoubtedly this was impressive to many.
Promoting his service as a reason to vote for him should bring scrutiny upon his service. Was he a leader his "brothers" would follow?
Now we have a fairly credible group of "brother's" signatures claiming his war wounds are not what they seem. They clearly have an axe to grind and they certainly have the right to their own freedom of expression. Maybe they are just sour grapes. Maybe this is all a big conservative conspiracy!
Even if not all these claims are not true, they certainly merit investigation by open-minded intelligent voters.
Some items that are rather blaring to me:
Apparently he arrived in Vietnam as a junior grade Lieutenant, not a captain or commander as erroneously reported in the media. As I understand it, he left there in less than five months with the same rank, after being wounded three times. That seems like a lot of wounds in a very short time. Was his service area that dangerous? Maybe so. I wonder if those around him were wounded as often. If the record shows they weren't, perhaps they just didn't report their wounds.
When he returned home due to his wounds, none of which were life threatening, he co-founded an anti-war group and went on a very public war protest speaking tour (of sorts). His apparent claims of having participated in "war crimes" is notable. It seems he villianized his "brothers" left behind fighting. He spoke before committees that have the written records of all he said. The things he claimed are very difficult to prove. Many now claim they were an exaggeration at best, outright lies for publicity at worst. Maybe his crew mates don't want further scrutiny into their own crimes! Who knows?
My beef with it is this. Why didn't he run as the anti-war protester that he was and is? Did the party determine that a war hero would play better with the public? I'm not sure it does. I think enough anti-war voters exist to remove our current president. Can a man simultaneously be a war hero and an anti-war protester? Perhaps, but such duality is difficult to trust for most. I want to know who I am voting for.
Just for the record: I remember tidbits about Vietnam in the news when I was an adolescent. I have friends and family who have served. I never have. I don't know if I would have protested if I was of age. It wasn't a war to be proud of but pulling out didn't do the Vietnamese any good either. Look at their current condition. Would they be better off had we finished the job? OPINION: We need to get out of the current war as quickly and cleanly as possible. Timing is the key! We mustn't leave them worse than they were found.
I am not republican or democrat. I have a lot of trouble aligning with any group, whether "progressive" liberals or "traditional" conservatives. I believe each individual must consider and vote for which candidates are best for themselves, their children and the future of this great nation. We must not accept rhetoric as truth. All claims that are not substantiated are just rumors. In this, the (mis)information age, loads of provable data exists, for truth seekers to make informed decisions. It is a shame we must wade through so much garbage to get to the truth.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-04 07:51 pm (UTC)I'm afraid that everything that appears past this phrase suffers from its company.