Tuesday, August 02, 2005

Jean's lie outs a fellow Republican

I was looking into Jean Schmidt's lie and discovered that people are being a little too easy on Mark Kirk. Kirk does misrepresent his service. On the Kirk for Congress website he does say he "is the only member of Congress to serve stateside during Operation Iraqi Freedom." But, meanwhile, his official government site says "He is the only member of Congress to serve in Operation Iraqi Freedom..."

Service in the United states during the GWOT qualifies you as being able to wear the GWOT Service Medal, which does not mean you served "in" Iraqi Freedom. Those who served "in" Iraqi Freedom, as I pointed out before (and the White House website says), are qualified to wear the GWOT Expeditionary Medal or the Iraq Campaign Medal. In other words, Kirk no more served in OIF than I did while serving in Afghanistan.

Here's the truth on Kirk's campaign site (Click photos for larger images.):

Here's the, um, shall we say, "distortion" on his House site:

Update: NO NO NO! The assholes asshole "Eric Qweefus" (see Shawn?) over at the "still comment free" Project Logic are quoting this comment approvingly.
Kirk of Illinois served in OIF, though not in the country of Iraq, and has never said otherwise, based on a discussion just completed with him. Contrary to other commenters here, Kirk is NOT lying.
Look. It's simple. The soldiers guarding the airports can't call themselves veterans of Iraqi Freedom. The soldiers who served with me in Afghanistan can't call themselves veterans of Iraqi Freedom. Only people who served "in country" in Iraq are Iraqi Freedom vets. It's that simple.

Update: Let's also note that Iraqi Freedom isn't mentioned in this May 4, 2005, press release from Kirk's office:
During a White House Ceremony Wednesday, President Bush officially promoted Lieutenant Commander Mark Kirk, United States Naval Reserves, to the rank of Commander in the U.S. Naval Reserve in what the Navy calls a frocking ceremony.

Joining Kirk at the ceremony was his wife, Kimberly (a former naval officer and graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy), his mother Judith Reeve, stepfather Robert Reeve, father Frank Kirk and stepmother Beverly Kirk.

"It is an honor and a privilege to stand before the Commander-in-Chief in the Oval Office and be a part of this special ceremony," said Kirk. "I am grateful that my wife and family were able to witness this memorable occasion."

Congressman Mark Kirk (R-Illinois) is the only member of Congress drilling regularly as a naval reserve officer. Originally commissioned in 1989, Kirk served as part of a squadron flying the EA-6B Prowler electronic aircraft in the skies over Kosovo during Operation Allied Force and over Iraq during Operation Northern Watch. Kirk currently serves one weekend a month and two weeks a year as the Assistant Deputy Director for Intelligence in the National Military Joint Intelligence Center for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Kirk's military experience has helped him serve his constituents well where the Navy has spent over $1 billion in new construction at Naval Station Great Lakes and plans the construction of a new joint Navy/VA hospital to be built in North Chicago.

Contact: Matt Towson, 847/940-0202, 773/454-5396.
Yes, do contact him.


Anonymous Shawn Blower said...

There's only one "asshole" at Project Logic. You seem to think it's more than one person posting.

Also, Eric fucked up. He knows he did. I don't understand why you think he should have "an admission that it was proven to be demonstably false". He removed the article, doesn't that imply that he realized it was false? He's not under any obligation to retract or apologize for anything. It's a blog, not a nationally publicized newspaper.

Eric and I are good friends and co-workers. I am not a Republican nor a Democrat, and didn't vote for either Schmidt or Hackett. I felt compelled to respond purely for your ignorance at insulting a good friend of mine.

Yes, Eric can very well stand up for himself and doesn't need my help in doing so. I just have a big mouth and like to run it.

So, for the remarks "fucking cowards" and "unethical assholes", here's a big fuck you. You are just as uninformed as Eric was when posting the letter Eric received from Schmidt's campaign PR.

Perhaps if more of the Democratic bloggers went our and voted instead of spending it behind their computer crucifying Eric's article, Hackett could have won.

12:42 PM  
Blogger Nitpicker said...

Well, I apologize for the confusion. Apparently I was wrong in thinking that Eric could share the blame with a fellow asshole, but, apparently, he's the only one. If you look through my archives, you will find several places where I admit to having made a mistake. Because it's a mistake doesn't mean that I'm any less responsible for having posted it, though, so I apologize and make corrections with a STRIKE command so that people can see where I screwed up. Just deleting it is trying to save your credibility by acting like it never happened. The behavior of an asshole if I ever heard of it.

As for Eric being a coward, I would ask that you take note that you had the ability to give me a big "fuck you" because I allow comments and won't pull it if I disagree with it, as Eric did yesterday. He's chickenshit and you know it.

1:50 PM  
Anonymous Shawn Blower said...

Take my comment and add about 300+ more and then you'll have dealt with the bullshit Eric did.

Eric's not chickenshit, he'd just rather avoid meaningless disputes. Hence why he removed the post. He still mentions it on the site, so I have to disagree with him acting like it never happened. He knows it happened, he'd just rather not be known for it.

He's a smart guy who made a stupid mistake. Live and learn.

3:00 PM  
Blogger Nitpicker said...

Look. He doesn't have to answer them all. It's telling that most all major liberal bloggers have comments sections, but so few conservatives are willing to put their arguments up to the real-time scrutiny of their readers. Hence the dearth of comments on right-wing websites.

I don't doubt that Eric's smart. I just think he should have handled it all differently. The way he did handle it made him look, in my eyes, like he was acting cowardly and unethically.

And, yes, I do think there are ethics in blogging. Just like a newspaper can't gather up every edition and burn them when they err, bloggers shouldn't just delete posts that have bad or false information in them. They should admit what they were wrong, show how they did it and explain the problem. Call me an idealist.

4:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was a submariner who spent most of 2003 in the Arabian Gulf, and I have the GWOT Expeditionary Medal (and Service Medal) even though I never set foot on the ground in Iraq. The criteria must be more general than you describe, although I'm not sure exactly what it is.

I am not a fan of Mark Kirk, but it is possible for him to be a OIF veteran without having left the USA. For example, people serving at Special Ops. command at Fort Bragg probably wear the GWOTEM.

10:18 AM  
Blogger Nitpicker said...


There are people who have deployed who qualify for the GWOTEM, but, because they did not enter Iraq or Afghanistan, still do not qualify for those expeditionary medals and are, therefore, not veterans of OEF or OIF. For example, I have a friend who got his GWOTEM for hauling his MP ass over to Europe to guard some runways. He is a GWOT vet, but, no matter where those planes were going, he simply is not a veteran of the Afghanistan campaign or the Iraq campaign. To say he is would be to say that Army supply clerks in England in 1944 should receive the African campaign medal, which, of course, they did not.

1:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Those who sit and wait (stateside) also serve. And those in country who loot, rape, kill civilians get high all the time, trade in the Black Market, whatever, serve too, or so it seems.

Too much is placed on ceremony and metals. They don't describe the man or woman.

5:30 AM  
Blogger Nitpicker said...


You clearly don't think much of military folks.

As I've said elsewhere, though, I have as much respect for the guy who serves four years in the reserves in Boston--never leaving the country--as I do for the guy who deploys. They both put on the uniform and offered to fight. But claiming to be a veteran of a war when you aren't is bullshit.

You're right about medals not describing the veteran, but some of them--like campaign medals--describe the veteran's service.

10:34 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home