America but tragically their influence has faded in recent years and the
values they died for are under attack. But this election year they are
back in demand and some have said the veteran vote could decide this
election. It may have put Bush in the White House. With this in mind,
John Kerry is seldom seen with out his band of brothers and constantly
plays the” hero” card as a cornerstone of his bid for president, indeed,
as the definition of who he is. Kerry defines patriotism as “keeping
faith with those who wear the uniform of this country. He also brags
that he “defended this country as a young man”. If Missouri is the show
me state, Veterans are the show me voters ? we are not much for words,
deeds are our stock in trade. Lets look at Kerry’s deeds.

Before Kerry played his “hero” card, he played the atrocity card. When
Kerry came back from Vietnam he joined with Jane Fonda and in 1971
denounced “those who wear the uniform” as terrorists-like rapists and
assassins who “cut off heads, taped wires to human genitals and turned
up the power, cut off limbs, shot at civilians, razed villages, shot
cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks” and said he “committed
the same kinds of atrocities as thousands of others”. He made these
charges under oath. Kerry says today that he would have framed some of
what he said in 1971 differently. But he does not say he lied, which he
did, nor does he apologize. How can one properly frame the denunciations
of ones comrades in arms as modern day Genghis Khans?

The very day that Kerry was calling Vietnam veterans’ war criminals the
family of one of those “war criminals”, Michael Blanchfield, was
posthumously receiving the Medal of Honor for Michael who had thrown
himself on a grenade to save the lives of his comrades. How different
from Kerry was the way this man kept faith with those who wore the
uniform with him. How different from Kerry was the manner Michael
defended his country.

He could have attacked the war without attacking the warrior. He could
have questioned policy without supporting the communists’ claim that our
soldiers were war criminals. He could have kept faith with those who
wore the uniform with him. But he did not and he should be held
accountable.

By every measure, the Vietnam veteran has been an exceptional citizen;
but there is one disturbing statistic -- their suicide rate. In the
first 5 years after discharge the rate was 1.7 times higher than
non-veterans. After 5 years it was less. This may have been due to the
treatment the Vietnam veteran received from the media and the anti war
movement led by Kerry -- in the early years after the war. Living with
the scars of war is difficult, for some unbearable, but all veterans
suffer. The Vietnam veteran suffered physically as much, perhaps more
than any veteran of the past century, but no veteran has suffered the
mental agony of that veteran.

What Kerry/Fonda and the media elite did to the Vietnam veteran and his
family is deplorable. They opened a gash in his psyche and then rubbed
salt in it. Not just the living but also those who died and their
families who questioned if a loved one is a war criminal. And the POWs
some who believed the Kerry/Fonda cartel extended the war, increased
their torture and filled more body bags. Whether Kerry and Fonda have
blood on their hands is debatable but there is no doubt they have salt
on them.

Kerry’s “hero” card is based on medals he received in Vietnam and is
much celebrated, and unchallenged, by the mainstream media. I know many
Medal of Honor recipients who have received less publicity for their
medal than Kerry has for his. But medals don’t make a hero. It is how
one uses medals that make a hero. Every honest soldier knows that medals
are a function of circumstance, even happenstance, but most of all the
support of ones fellow warriors.

I was awarded the Medal of Honor; but my fellow soldiers who supported
me in the actions and took the time to write it up earned it. I wear it
for them, they own my medals. And every Medal of Honor recipient and
hero I know believes as I do. Medals should be a sign of patriotism, a
symbol of sacrifice, support and defense of a great nation. The highest
form of patriotism is service to our youth; heroes also wear their medal
for them to signal the importance of courage. Heroes do not use their
medals for personal political gain. As I said they are not theirs to
use.

Senator Kerry threw his medals away (or ribbons, they are symbolically
the same), a political act very difficult for any veteran to understand.
He must have been proud of them for he wore them even on his fatigues,
in violation of all regulations. But they were not his. They belonged to
those who he served. By that act he symbolically denounced his fellow
veterans -- again. Does one keep faith with those who wear the uniform
by throwing away their medals?

But perhaps most telling of his leadership qualities is his use of his
Purple hearts to abandon his band of brothers, his command, on a
technicality. Kerry may be the only person in history who took advantage
of a Navy regulation that allowed him to leave his command after 4
months for 3 purple hearts none of which ever caused him to miss a day
of duty. In my experience men fought to stay with their band of
brothers, especially commanders. All the commanders I know would get out
of a hospital bed to be with their men. Some one had to take his place;
someone probably less experienced who would have to learn the ropes.
That put his command more at risk than if he stayed. It is not hard to
understand why those who stayed in combat for the full year are upset
with Kerry.

And veterans today would be upset with Kerry’s support of Flag Burning
his non-support of weapons systems and his 12 votes against military pay
raises. But his use of veterans and misuse of his medals should bring
into serious question his loyalty, integrity and character all of which
equal leadership. He is not fit for command.