Blumenthal is a dumb liar.

[Parkbandit]

At a ceremony honoring veterans and senior citizens who sent presents to soldiers overseas, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut rose and spoke of an earlier time in his life.

“We have learned something important since the days that I served in Vietnam,” Mr. Blumenthal said to the group gathered in Norwalk in March 2008. “And you exemplify it. Whatever we think about the war, whatever we call it — Afghanistan or Iraq — we owe our military men and women unconditional support.”

There was one problem: Mr. Blumenthal, a Democrat now running for the United States Senate, never served in Vietnam. He obtained at least five military deferments from 1965 to 1970 and took repeated steps that enabled him to avoid going to war, according to records.

The deferments allowed Mr. Blumenthal to complete his studies at Harvard; pursue a graduate fellowship in England; serve as a special assistant to The Washington Post’s publisher, Katharine Graham; and ultimately take a job in the Nixon White House.

In 1970, with his last deferment in jeopardy, he landed a coveted spot in the Marine Reserve, which virtually guaranteed that he would not be sent to Vietnam. He joined a unit in Washington that conducted drills and other exercises and focused on local projects, like fixing a campground and organizing a Toys for Tots drive.

Many politicians have faced questions over their decisions during the Vietnam War, and Mr. Blumenthal, who is seeking the seat being vacated by Senator Christopher J. Dodd, is not alone in staying out of the war.

But what is striking about Mr. Blumenthal’s record is the contrast between the many steps he took that allowed him to avoid Vietnam, and the misleading way he often speaks about that period of his life now, especially when he is speaking at veterans’ ceremonies or other patriotic events.

Sometimes his remarks have been plainly untrue, as in his speech to the group in Norwalk. At other times, he has used more ambiguous language, but the impression left on audiences can be similar.

In an interview on Monday, the attorney general said that he had misspoken about his service during the Norwalk event and might have misspoken on other occasions. “My intention has always been to be completely clear and accurate and straightforward, out of respect to the veterans who served in Vietnam,” he said.

But an examination of his remarks at the ceremonies shows that he does not volunteer that his service never took him overseas. And he describes the hostile reaction directed at veterans coming back from Vietnam, intimating that he was among them.

In 2003, he addressed a rally in Bridgeport, where about 100 military families gathered to express support for American troops overseas. “When we returned, we saw nothing like this,” Mr. Blumenthal said. “Let us do better by this generation of men and women.”

At a 2008 ceremony in front of the Veterans War Memorial Building in Shelton, he praised the audience for paying tribute to troops fighting abroad, noting that America had not always done so.

“I served during the Vietnam era,” he said. “I remember the taunts, the insults, sometimes even physical abuse.”

Mr. Blumenthal, 64, is known as a brilliant lawyer who likes to argue cases in court and uses language with power and precision. He is also savvy about the news media and attentive to how he is portrayed in the press.

But the way he speaks about his military service has led to confusion and frequent mischaracterizations of his biography in his home state newspapers. In at least eight newspaper articles published in Connecticut from 2003 to 2009, he is described as having served in Vietnam.

The New Haven Register on July 20, 2006, described him as “a veteran of the Vietnam War,” and on April 6, 2007, said that the attorney general had “served in the Marines in Vietnam.” On May 26, 2009, The Connecticut Post, a Bridgeport newspaper that is the state’s third-largest daily, described Mr. Blumenthal as “a Vietnam veteran.” The Shelton Weekly reported on May 23, 2008, that Mr. Blumenthal “was met with applause when he spoke about his experience as a Marine sergeant in Vietnam.”

And the idea that he served in Vietnam has become such an accepted part of his public biography that when a national outlet, Slate magazine, produced a profile of Mr. Blumenthal in 2000, it said he had “enlisted in the Marines rather than duck the Vietnam draft.”

It does not appear that Mr. Blumenthal ever sought to correct those mistakes.

In the interview, he said he was not certain whether he had seen the stories or whether any steps had been taken to point out the inaccuracies.

“I don’t know if we tried to do so or not,” he said. He added that he “can’t possibly know what is reported in all” the articles that are written about him, given the large number of appearances he makes at military-style events.

He said he had tried to stick to a consistent way of describing his military experience: that he served as a member of the United State Marine Corps Reserve during the Vietnam era.

Asked about the Bridgeport rally, when he told the crowd, “When we returned, we saw nothing like this,” Mr. Blumenthal said he did not recall the event.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/nyregion/18blumenthal.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEl0wMmyZ2Q

Too funny.

[Cephalopod]

http://scottjberry.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/backpedaling3.jpg

ENGAGE BACKPEDALLING!

What a jackass.

[Elsymir]

He is allowed to say he served in the Vietnam Era. It is a factual statement. It's a tad disingenuous of course, but there isn't anything unusual about getting deferrments to finish school. They were clearly allowed deferments, he didn't break laws or anything.

I'm not sure why being in the Marine Reserve matters, since werent we just about throwing everything and the kitchen sink into Vietnam at some point? Seems the article is more interested in painting the guy as a chickenhawk coward than just displaying the facts and allowing people to make the decision.

But yeah, claiming he was leg deep in Vietnam shooting at Charlie is outright bull. He clearly didn't -serve in Vietnam-.

[AnticorRifling]

Yeah that would be like me saying I was in the Iraqi war. Sure I was in the Marine Corps during the war but I never went to the sandbox with my brothers. To state as such is to be a douche bag.

[Cephalopod]

He didn't break any laws and I don't think he's a coward. If he actually said this: “When we returned, we saw nothing like this”, he's just a liar and a jackass.

[Anebriated]

“We have learned something important since the days that I served in Vietnam,”

To me that states he was on the soil of Vietnam. He served with the US Marines and it might have been during the time of the Vietnam war but unless he was physically there he should not have used that phrase.

That said I dont think theres anything majorly wrong with it. Id like to see a list of all the people who have political power who did some form of war-dodging. The list would be long and distinguished... just like my johnson.

[RichardCranium]

That said I dont think theres anything majorly wrong with it. Id like to see a list of all the people who have political power who did some form of war-dodging. The list would be long and distinguished... just like my johnson.

Good one Slider.

[Anebriated]

Good one Slider.

Thanks Iceman.

[Parkbandit]

To me that states he was on the soil of Vietnam. He served with the US Marines and it might have been during the time of the Vietnam war but unless he was physically there he should not have used that phrase.

That said I dont think theres anything majorly wrong with it. Id like to see a list of all the people who have political power who did some form of war-dodging. The list would be long and distinguished... just like my johnson.

You don't see a problem with it? Really? He stated that he was in Vietnam.. when in reality he begged repeatedly for deferrals.. so he could be the swim team captain at Harvard.

Well, Harvard said that they have no record of him in that capacity either..

Call me old fashioned.. I just think that someone like Attorney General should not be a pathological liar.

[Parkbandit]

http://scottjberry.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/backpedaling3.jpg

ENGAGE BACKPEDALLING!

What a jackass.

The news conference he had to explain it was hilarious.

[Elsymir]

Is article jaundiced? Yes.
Is target asshole for claiming to have served in Vietnam when he didnt? Also yes.

[Parkbandit]

Is article jaundiced? Yes.
Is target asshole for claiming to have served in Vietnam when he didnt? Also yes.

Jaundiced? It's a Democrat and it's the NY Times.

[Anebriated]

You don't see a problem with it? Really? He stated that he was in Vietnam.. when in reality he begged repeatedly for deferrals.. so he could be the swim team captain at Harvard.

Well, Harvard said that they have no record of him in that capacity either..

Call me old fashioned.. I just think that someone like Attorney General should not be a pathological liar.

did you even read what I posted before trying to call me out? The one phrase I used was "I dont see anything majorly wrong with it". Do I like it? not really. Am I surprised by a politician lying? no.

[BriarFox]

Yeah, he's a jackass. However, so was Bush, and for a similar reason.

[Drew]

Take back what you said about Bobmuhthol.

[Parkbandit]

Yeah, he's a jackass. However, so was Bush, and for a similar reason.

:rofl:

When I posted this story.. I even thought "Wonder which liberal will be all 'Buuut Bush!'. My money was on one of the many faces of Ashliana... but thanks for stepping up in It's place.

[Parkbandit]

did you even read what I posted before trying to call me out? The one phrase I used was "I dont see anything majorly wrong with it". Do I like it? not really. Am I surprised by a politician lying? no.

I read what you posted.

I think there is a gigantic difference between draft dodging and draft dodging and then years later claiming you were in the war you were effective in dodging.

[kookiegod]

I read what you posted.

I think there is a gigantic difference between draft dodging and draft dodging and then years later claiming you were in the war you were effective in dodging.

^ This...

Gimme a break, I could care less if he missed the draft or bought his way out (see W), or if Clinton smoked the weed while mistress number whatever sucked the presidential cock (if he had just admited it!).

He got caught in a pattern of deception, it wasn't a one time thing and that is a problem.

~Paul

[Anebriated]

So the big story is a politician lied? In other news a bear just shat in the woods.

Again. I don't like what he said, I'm just not surprised.

[Celephais]

So the big story is a politician lied? In other news a bear just shat in the woods.

Again. I don't like what he said, I'm just not surprised.

Good point, we should never point out when politicians lie.

[BriarFox]

:rofl:

When I posted this story.. I even thought "Wonder which liberal will be all 'Buuut Bush!'. My money was on one of the many faces of Ashliana... but thanks for stepping up in It's place.

Briarfox: And Bush.
Parkbandit: Shit, I knew you'd say that. I cannot defeat your perfect comparison, but I'll mock you for it anyway.
Briarfox: ...

[Cephalopod]

Good point, we should never point out when politicians lie.

I'm glad we're all in agreement. I was getting tired of hearing about it, frankly. Hearing about politicians lying makes me itchy, I'd rather just watch cartoons.

[Anebriated]

It's nit-picking something that happened at a good event. I haven't once said I like it but in the big scheme of things how big of a problem is this?

Question, would you rather have someone who has a solid educational background who served in a reserve capacity in the position or someone who has less schooling but served in the military on foreign soil?

[RichardCranium]

Question, would you rather have someone who has a solid educational background who served in a reserve capacity in the position or someone who has less schooling but served in the military on foreign soil?

Someone who doesn't twist words to make it sound like he was in a war he was never in, who isn't a lawyer, or both.

[Celephais]

So do we have a finite amount of news we can report?

Here's a question, would you rather he not get called out on it? Would you rather have someone who has a solid educational background who served ina reserve capacity but doesn't attempt to deceive people into thinking he served on foreign soil.

It's not the fact he hasn't served on foreign soil, it's the fact that he's attempting to make people think he has. His remarks about "Oh I didn't mean it like that" are bullshit.

[Cephalopod]

It's nit-picking something that happened at a good event. I haven't once said I like it but in the big scheme of things how big of a problem is this?

Question, would you rather have someone who has a solid educational background who served in a reserve capacity in the position or someone who has less schooling but served in the military on foreign soil?

I have no issue with his actual service. I think it's great he served in a reserve capacity.

It seems clear to me, though, that he was trying to present himself as something he is not, and that's what the problem is. If he hadn't been trying to pass off that he had been in combat in Vietnam, this would be a non issue.

But when he says 'This isn't what we came home to'... he's implying he did something he did not, and it's degrading to those who actually DID. This is especially true with regards to how some returning Vietnam vets really were treated after the sacrifices they made. To pretend that he had that same experience is a huge lie.

[Parkbandit]

Briarfox: And Bush.
Parkbandit: Shit, I knew you'd say that. I cannot defeat your perfect comparison, but I'll mock you for it anyway.
Briarfox: ...

Perfect comparison? Are you really this dumb or are you just pretending to be? Read the thread title... it's not "ZOMG Blumental is a draft dodger!" Here's a quote that would clue in almost anyone.. if you still need help, let me know and I can walk you through it:



I think there is a gigantic difference between draft dodging and draft dodging and then years later claiming you were in the war you were effective in dodging.

Now.. if you have some source (other than Dan Rather) that shows Bush claimed he was in a war where he wasn't.. and when he came back , he wasn't treated fairly, then you might just have a good comparison. In the meantime, this looks more like:

PB: Blumental is a fucking piece of shit lying sack
BR: {Democrat in trouble... employ DIVERSINARY TACTIC #1} BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUT BUSH!!
PB: Wait, what?

[Parkbandit]

I have no issue with his actual service. I think it's great he served in a reserve capacity.

It seems clear to me, though, that he was trying to present himself as something he is not, and that's what the problem is. If he hadn't been trying to pass off that he had been in combat in Vietnam, this would be a non issue.

But when he says 'This isn't what we came home to'... he's implying he did something he did not, and it's degrading to those who actually DID. This is especially true with regards to how some returning Vietnam vets really were treated after the sacrifices they made. To pretend that he had that same experience is a huge lie.


Exactly.

I'm not sure why this is so difficult to understand. Is it because he has a (D) behind his name?

[caelric]

Exactly.

I'm not sure why this is so difficult to understand. Is it because he has a (D) behind his name?

Well, yeah. People in general, on both sides in the R/D battle of politics, are gladly willing to overlook shortcomings of their guy, and quick to point out shortcomings of the other guy.

Republicans do it all the time, just as much as do Democrats.

You are suprised at this?

[BriarFox]

Perfect comparison? Are you really this dumb or are you just pretending to be? Read the thread title... it's not "ZOMG Blumental is a draft dodger!" Here's a quote that would clue in almost anyone.. if you still need help, let me know and I can walk you through it:

http://orpheus.ucsd.edu/speccoll/dspolitic/pm/11027cs.jpg

[Keller]

I'm not sure it's splitting hairs to distinguish between someone who is a draft-dodger and someone who lied about serving in a war.

It's a pretty big difference.

[BriarFox]

As I recall, Bush originally claimed he had "military service" and made a huge deal of that picture of him with his fighter jet, until records came out that showed that he enjoyed a rear echelon, "sit-on-your-thumbs" position.

[Cephalopod]

Here's how I see it: regardless of any other past politician's behavior or party, I don't care for this guy and his particular lies.

Now someone go make a thread about that (R) who had an affair with his staffer.

[Keller]

As I recall, Bush originally claimed he had "military service" and made a huge deal of that picture of him with his fighter jet, until records came out that showed that he enjoyed a rear echelon, "sit-on-your-thumbs" position.

He didn't say "military service in Vietnam" though.

That's the point. He was misleading, but not dishonest.

[BriarFox]

Here's how I see it: regardless of any other past politician's behavior or party, I don't care for this guy and his particular lies.

Now someone go make a thread about that (R) who had an affair with his staffer.

Yeah, like I said in my first post, he's a jackass. However, trying to use his jackassery as a comment on the whole Democratic party is hypocritical, since a much more prominent Republican (W), did something similar.

[BriarFox]

He didn't say "military service in Vietnam" though.

That's the point. He was misleading, but not dishonest.

This guy does seem to have eventually gone a bit far, but in most of his comments, you'll notice that he only suggestively links concepts, but adroitly avoids claiming he was there. So I disagree; the two are very similar.

[Cephalopod]

Bush's issue is well documented (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_military_service_controversy), and is why PB made the Dan Rather reference.

Bush never really lied about his military service, although his spokespeople were not entirely forthcoming about his military past and whether or not he fulfilled his duty obligations.

[Parkbandit]

Yeah, like I said in my first post, he's a jackass. However, trying to use his jackassery as a comment on the whole Democratic party is hypocritical, since a much more prominent Republican (W), did something similar.

Who is talking about the entire Democratic Party? We're discussing Blumenthal.. which is why the thread and story is about.. you guessed it.. Blumenthal. In fact, you were the first to dismiss it and point to Bush, saying he did the exact same thing... which we all agree was a really stupid comparison.

[Anebriated]

I have no issue with his actual service. I think it's great he served in a reserve capacity.

It seems clear to me, though, that he was trying to present himself as something he is not, and that's what the problem is. If he hadn't been trying to pass off that he had been in combat in Vietnam, this would be a non issue.

But when he says 'This isn't what we came home to'... he's implying he did something he did not, and it's degrading to those who actually DID. This is especially true with regards to how some returning Vietnam vets really were treated after the sacrifices they made. To pretend that he had that same experience is a huge lie.

I agree to an extent. The use of 'we' is very misleading and I will have to go back and re-read the article when im not on my phone. Is the military not a brotherhood though? Every single person I know or have met who has served time claims so and I would imagine you would agree. Its similar to a sports fan using a phrase like 'we won the championship' with one of you smartasses coming back with 'oh yeah? what team do you play for?'. It just sounds like he is trying to relate to the people he is presenting to and used a poor choice of words.

[Parkbandit]

Wait... so before he was just another lying politician... Now he simply misspoke?

Oooooookay...

[Anebriated]

Wait... so before he was just another lying politician... Now he simply misspoke?

Oooooookay...

you are hellbent against him, Im simply arguing the other side. I just dont have my panties bunched as tight on the topic.

[Anebriated]

My point is this, if he had simply said “We have learned something important since the days that I served in [the] Vietnam [era],” then there is no issue here. Is there a difference? yes there is but I dont know if its worth shitting on a guy who still served whether you like him or not. Im guessing you dont which is why this is such a hot topic for you.

[BriarFox]

Who is talking about the entire Democratic Party? We're discussing Blumenthal.. which is why the thread and story is about.. you guessed it.. Blumenthal. In fact, you were the first to dismiss it and point to Bush, saying he did the exact same thing... which we all agree was a really stupid comparison.

I always have to break things down for you. Here's another "PB Breakdown:"

1) You're talking about the Democratic Party; it's implicit in the fact that you posted this story.

2) I didn't dismiss his error; I said he's a jackass.

3) I drew the comparison as a way of countering your implication.

4) No, we don't all agree. I'm sure ParkBandit Werld is an awesome place, though.

[Parkbandit]

I always have to break things down for you. Here's another "PB Breakdown:"

1) You're talking about the Democratic Party; it's implicit in the fact that you posted this story.

2) I didn't dismiss his error; I said he's a jackass.

3) I drew the comparison as a way of countering your implication.

4) No, we don't all agree. I'm sure ParkBandit Werld is an awesome place, though.

1) Incorrect. I am speaking specifically about 1 individual. Nothing more.

2) You attempted to marginalize it by bringing up Bush. Notice how 2 other Liberals handled it properly in this thread.

3). I think we can all agree that it was a poor comparison, since this thread isn't about draft dodging.. it's about lying and fabricating a man's past.

4). It is.

[Parkbandit]

you are hellbent against him, Im simply arguing the other side. I just dont have my panties bunched as tight on the topic.

Not really. I just find your multiple explanations flawed instead of simply calling it like it is.. a pathetic attempt by a man to rewrite his past into something it never was... a guy who is the top law enforcement person in the state and who wants to be a Senator.

[BriarFox]

1) Incorrect. I am speaking specifically about 1 individual. Nothing more.

2) You attempted to marginalize it by bringing up Bush. Notice how 2 other Liberals handled it properly in this thread.

3). I think we can all agree that it was a poor comparison, since this thread isn't about draft dodging.. it's about lying and fabricating a man's past.

4). It is.

1) Implicit bias.

2) Suppositional rationalization.

3) Misunderstood relationality.

4) Have fun.

[Anebriated]

Not really. I just find your multiple explanations flawed instead of simply calling it like it is.. a pathetic attempt by a man to rewrite his past into something it never was... a guy who is the top law enforcement person in the state and who wants to be a Senator.

In my defense I did write out one of my earlier posts that he might have miss spoke but I wanted to reword the post and forgot to put it back in. I went looking for it to quote myself before i realized it... shrug.

[Parkbandit]

1) Implicit bias.

2) Suppositional rationalization.

3) Misunderstood relationality.

4) Have fun.

1) Again, incorrect. The story is about a single person.. not about a party.

2) Buuuuuuuuuuuut Bush!!

3) I've illustrated how it was a bad comparison. You've chosen to defend your bad comparison. It's so bad that you forced Keller to agree with me. That in itself should clue you in.

4) I always do. Reality is great.. you should give it a try once in a while.

[BigWorm]

Briar, I'm not one to jump on the same bandwagon as PB, but I am going to have to agree with him here. At the very least, Blumenthal is intentionally using ambiguous language. As far as I know, Bush never tried to imply that he served in a war zone at any time.

I will agree that PB harping on Blumenthal for taking deferments and ending up in the National Guard is pretty hypocritical considering Bush did pretty close to the same thing, but the key is that Bush never tried to hide that and paint himself in a different light.

[AnticorRifling]

AFK going to fight in nam for a few days so when I run for office I can say I fought in nam. Be back soon.

[caelric]

Is the military not a brotherhood though? Every single person I know or have met who has served time claims so and I would imagine you would agree.

As an active duty military person, with both officer and enlisted time, I think I might be somewhat qualified to comment on this.

Yes, the military is a brotherhood. Sure, we sometimes look down on other services, and the reserves/NG, but in the end, we are all brothers/sisters.

One thing we don't like, and more clearly, hate with a passion, is fakers. This includes the fake medal wearers, and also includes the fakers who claim to have been to places they were not, and/or seen combat, when they have not.

So, this includes Blumenthal who falsely claimed to have served in combat in Vietnam. I would never have voted for him in the first place, but this causes me, and most other military folks, to lose all respect for him.

I did not vote for John Kerry, but I respect him and his service. I do not respect Blumenthal, not in the slightest. He is a faker, and a liar. Most military people I know agree with this principle.

[AnticorRifling]

As an active duty military person, with both officer and enlisted time, I think I might be somewhat qualified to comment on this.



Depends, what branch are we talkin :)

Also I agree with most of the above post.

[caelric]

Depends, what branch are we talkin :)


Semper Fi, asshole......

[AnticorRifling]

Reported!

[Parkbandit]

I will agree that PB harping on Blumenthal for taking deferments and ending up in the National Guard is pretty hypocritical considering Bush did pretty close to the same thing, but the key is that Bush never tried to hide that and paint himself in a different light.

Once again.. you've missed the point. Show me where I was "harping" on taking the deferments... because that has never been the point of this article or the reason why I chose to post it. Mentioning it doesn't mean harping... stop reading something into this that isn't there. Look at the title of this thread I created for the entire reason why I posted this.

[Anebriated]

The biggest issue in this thread is the fact that someone who is trying to run for Senate lied about being on the soil during what is considered to be a huge mistake to begin with. Even people who fought in the war were fighting for false pretenses and didnt want to be there(fuck communism, go USA!). 57,000+ deaths and no resolution, and to top it we are still trading with them. Almost worse, he did it by pulling family connections(most likely) that all politicians seem to have to keep his involvement at a minimum. Its a very valid argument and is sure to lose him a LOT of voters who served time during the war.



I just like to argue.

[Taernath]

Blumenthal should be issued a swift kick in the balls.