Amid all the upset about Mark Kirk's claim to have been named "Intelligence Officer of the Year" for 1999, now belatedly corrected on the Congressman's campaign website, I cannot help but notice that all the criticism seems to coming from people who hold military personnel in contempt, and who never themselves served.
My view is that it's the sort of unfortunate error that occurs when a civilian campaign aide is inadequately supervised by someone who understands the military. It appears to have been a misguided effort to render an actual award into terms more accessible to civilians, rather than to make the Congressman appear more "puffed up" than he ought.
(For the record, I achieved the rank of Sergeant in the Air Force, and Staff Sergeant in the Air Force Reserve, and earned the Air Force Achievement Medal, the Air Force Good Conduct Medal, and the Army of Occupation Medal, for my service with the U.S. Army of Occupation in West Berlin, 1982-85. I am not a combat veteran.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
From what I have read, it appears that Kirk did intentionally exaggerate his military record. Not only that, but he also puffed up his "teaching credentials" to boot. Personally, I think Mark Kirk is a pathetic weasel, but Alexi Giannoulias is worse.
Mark Kirk isn't alone. It seems everytime I go to a bar, I am the only ex-Army guy who didn't serve in the Special Forces or Delta Force.
Such is life.
(Former Spec4, 14 Romeo BSFV crewmember, no combat, but still had lots of fun in the Green Machine).
Post a Comment