Why/why not should your vote sway?, Reasons for voting. Options

[*CrackedRearView*]

For example, the way Kerry prances around bragging about his three purple hearts, when in reality the first was for a piece of shrapnel the size of a rose thorn...

The second one was when he got hit with rice that exploded on a Sampan.

The third was when his buttocks got knocked against the Pilot House of his boat.

And he's proud to have requested purple hearts for such minor injuries, none of which required any loss of duty time nor hospitalization.

I don't think Kerry's (or Bush's for that matter) war record should make someone vote either Democrat/Republican this year, and I don't think either candidate should make it a point to throw it out into the public as if people should vote for that reason.

Any other's you guys can think of?

[Alpha240]

I already posted an article about this -- but yet again, no one has the brain capacity to thumb through evidence.

Insight Magazine -- Interview: Lt. Cmdr Grant Hibbard

Since you probably won't take the time to click the link, here:

But Kerry met with his immediate superior officer, Lt.Cmdr. Grant Hibbard, the next morning and requested a Purple Heart for his wound. Hibbard recalls that Kerry had a "minor scratch" on his arm and was holding in his hand what appeared to be a fragment of a U.S. M-79 grenade, the shrapnel that had caused the wound. "They didn't receive enemy fire," Hibbard tells Insight. Since this was an essential requirement for the award, the commander rejected Kerry's request. Hibbard does not remember that Kerry received medical attention of any kind and confirms that no one else on the mission suffered any injuries.

Shortly thereafter, Kerry was transferred to Coastal Division 11 at An Thoi. Apparently, Kerry petitioned to have his Purple Heart request reconsidered. Hibbard remembers getting correspondence from Kerry's new division, asking for his approval. In the hurried process of moving to a new command himself, Hibbard thinks he might have signed off on the award. If so, "it was to my chagrin," Hibbard remembers. Kerry's second commander, Lt.Cmdr. G.M. Elliott, says he has no recollection of such an event ever occurring.

Cut, and dry.

your link didn't work for me, so working with the excerpt you posted all I have to say is WHO CARES. why does it matter how Kerry got his purple hearts? atleast he went to war and fought for his country. So your claiming that all 3 of Kerry's purple hearts were unwarranted. However I find it interesting how the army enforces strict rules on receiving a purple heart. Yet, Kerry managed to receive not one or two, but THREE purple hearts without any real merit??

Taken from http://www.americal.org/awards/ph.htm
"While clearly an individual decoration, the Purple Heart differs from all other decorations in that an individual is not "recommended" for the decoration; rather he or she is entitled to it upon meeting specific criteria. "

So if Kerry really did not deserve any of his purple hearts, it's not his fault that SOMEHOW he was able to surpass any or all of the necessary requirements. I think if anyone has a problem with it they should take it up with the Army for giving him those awards in the first place.

Now back to the real topic.... I don't think that a candidate's war-related past should be a huge concern when electing the president. However, i think that he should have experience at war so he knows what he is putting american soldiers through. Therefore he will be more able to make a decision if the ends justify the means. It is especially important these days when we have american soldiers overseas.

This just inspired me to make a new topic.