Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Home Front: Culture Wars

Illinois Congressman Phil Hare (D) Puffs Military Resume, Turns Mean When Exposed

2010-06-09

The latest accusations leveled against the congressman are enough to make one question not just his qualifications to serve in the United States Congress, but whether he would be fit to lead a Boy Scout troop.

Hare has repeatedly called himself a veteran.' In fact, he joined the reserves during the Vietnam era and was never called to active service. By most legal definitions of the word, and most importantly to most real veterans themselves, a former reservist is not entitled to call himself a veteran. When a former reservist uses their honored word, real veterans get touchy, and understandably so. If such a deception doesn't qualify as a case of full-blown stolen honor, it's certainly matter of taking out an extended, zero-interest loan against the honor of those men and women who earned the title.

Ken Moffett, a constituent of Hare's from Moline, Illinois and an actual veteran, asked the congressman to stop describing himself using the term to which in Moffett's and many a veteran's view Hare is not entitled. The congressman's reaction was so offensive that Moffett was moved to pen a letter to Blake Chisam, committee staff director and chief counsel of the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (Ethics). The following excerpt from that letter, dated June 2, 2010, describes what Moffett says happened during his encounter with Hare:

After I pointed out that according to the law he is not a veteran, he became very upset and demanded to know my name. I refused to tell him my name, saying that this was about his claim of being a veteran and not about me.

Mr. Hare then told one of his aides who was with him, to follow me to my car and get my license plate number so he could find out who I was. I have since been told that Mr. Hare's daughter works for the DMV.

I then asked Mr. Hare if he was going to stop telling people that he was a veteran. Mr. Hare again demanded to know my name, and again told his aide to get my name or to follow me to get me license number so he could find out who I was, so he could tell the former reservists what I said.

I asked Mr. Hare if he as a public official was going to use his official office to run name checks on private citizens, in order to intimidate them into not asking questions he did not want to answer.

As Mr. Hare was turning to walk away from me he paused, and turning back to my direction, he glared at me intently, and while leaning forward pointed his finger at me, and in a threatening and intimidating manner said, I'll find out who you are!'

Posted by: Anonymoose

#7 Do we really want to reserve the term Vet to combat veterans?

My answer is: depends. If you're a politician, using the words "I served during Vietnam" (when your total military experience was at 'Toy Dri Ve')is puffery at the very least.

Don't forget the field-day certain parties had over G.W. Bush's service.

Posted by: Pappy 2010-06-09 22:31

#6 I'd be inclined to cut him a little teeny tiny bit of slack if he weren't such an arrogant asshole. He's the one who said about Obamacare's unconstitutionality: "I don't care about the constitution"
see this youtube

f*ck him. I just lost my slack-giving-ability

Posted by: Frank G 2010-06-09 18:57

#5 Dogsbody,
Notice what it says: "In fact, he joined the reserves during the Vietnam era and was never called to active service."
In other words, he probably never served on active duty, other than his annual two weeks for training (what we used to call ACDUTRA).
I, too, was a Naval Reservist. I enlisted in 1969, and served three years active duty between 1970 and 1973. I was lucky - I was on an East coast ship and we never got sent to 'Nam.
I am a veteran. But I served three years active duty. I never claim that I was a combat veteran, but I am a Viet Nam era veteran.
The congress critter apparently never served on active duty. There is a difference.

Posted by: Rambler in Virginia 2010-06-09 18:08

#4 This thing with definitions of service is getting a little extreme. I served 4 years in the Navy. Vietnam era volunteer. A true volunteer, I would never have been drafted. Never deployed to VN as I worked with ASW. Never fired a shot except on the range. My big overseas deployment was Canada LOL!
I consider myself a veteran. I never call myself a combat vet but I am a veteran and as things turned out, it was as safe as serving in a reserve unit that was never activated. As far as I am concerned, you take the oath, you do your time honorably, reserve or active, then you are a vet. In this day and age, with call ups effecting reserve units left and right, the distinction being made here is pernicious. Do we really want to reserve the term Vet to combat veterans? To exclude reservists? To exclude the guy who obays orders and ends up pushing paper in some office.
To paraphrise Patton on duty in war, "Somebody ends up shoveling shit in Louisiana".

Posted by: Dogsbody 2010-06-09 17:24

#3 Lest we forget, Mr. Hare is the one who exclaimed at a town hall mean that he doesn't care about the Constitution.

Posted by: Grenter, Protector of the Geats 2010-06-09 14:56

#2 Sounds to me like a clear case of voter intimidation. We really should bring back dueling, and make sure congress critters are not only not immune, but can't weasel out without automatically being disbarred from office and paying huge fines for the rest of their lives.

Posted by: Silentbrick 2010-06-09 14:22

#1 What a LOSER.....why do these asshats think they have to this? it's wrong and makes them look oh so stupid. I tried to get to his website but no luck to leave him a note.

Posted by: armyguy 2010-06-09 13:11

00:00