I enlisted in 1973. I am a Vietnam *era *veteran, and I get preferential hiring points for Fed jobs, but I am *not *a Vietnam veteran. I know the difference. I’m guessing these assorted folks who “misspoke” also know the difference. I have no respect for those who lie like that - they’re trying to cash in on the service and sacrifices of others.
Depending on how early in the year you enlisted, can you even say that? The peace treaty was signed in January of that year, IIRC.
According to the
Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance Act
In the reserves, and was appointed a Second Lieutenant some 26 days later. I can only assume that boot camp was accelerated in 1937. He did not assume active duty until 1942, well after his career in movies had peaked.
Strictly speaking anybody who was in the Armed Forces between 1954 and 30 April 1975 is considered a Vietnam-era veteran.
EDIT: Ah, I didn’t see that somebody had posted the actual statute. My apologies.
Interesting. I, too, am a Judge Advocate in the Army Reserve. Like Sen. Graham, I was mobilized for a short duration in support of OIF/OEF, and spent a few days doing the same thing–writing wills, POAs and providing legal advice.
For my efforts, I received a medal early (I would have received it after 10 years in the Reserve, anyway) with a “M” device. I don’t think I would ever make the claim that I was a OIF/OEF veteran. While it might technically be true, I didn’t make the same kind of sacrifices my friends & colleagues did.
Yes, but you had other risks that the combat troops didn’t. Carpal tunnel syndrome, computer eye strain, and possibly even tennis elbow. Oh, the HUMANITY!! 
Service is service. Anyone who serves honorably in any branch of the forces deserves the respect and admiration befitting any vet, be it the guy in the foxhole or the guy behind the desk. Hell, even the benchwarmers are part of the baseball team, aint they?
You left out the dreaded paper cut! Hey, someone has to be in the rear with the gear…
Thanks, I think… 
I am actually deploying in a month for a year’s worth of service–not to a combat zone, but to a very high-profile area for JAGs. So, no more warming the benches for me!
Charlottesville? DC?
Were you a WAC, or were women integrated into regular Army at that point? Did you wear the Pallas Athene brass?
Gitmo?
And Limbaugh’s “one brown eye” kept him out.
He’s a lying scum, same as Blumenthal. See, I’m bipartisan!
This whole thing seems to be sloppy reporting by the NYT. They took a story from a political campaign and ran it with hardly any research. All the CT news agencies have been scouring their archives looking for instances of Blumenthal saying he was in combat and are only coming up with instances of accurate accounts of his time in the reserves. These two posts by a CT political report state the case against the NYT pretty well:
http://blogs.courant.com/colin_mcenroe_to_wit/2010/05/nyt-on-blumenthal-is-that-all.html
http://blogs.courant.com/colin_mcenroe_to_wit/2010/05/the-flaws-in-the-nyt-blumentha.html
I was Navy, an avionics technician, repairing the S-3A communications and navigation systems and training others to do the same. I couldn’t go to sea, but I was definitely regular Navy. Then I got a commission and eventually completed just over 11 years of active duty before becoming a weekend warrior for a couple of years.
I continue to serve the Navy as a civilian - I’ll have a total of 36 years in July.
Worst. User. Name. Ever.
I’m content to condemn both Blumenthal and Graham as lying sleazebags, neither of whom I’d vote for given the opportunity.
The OP however strikes me as a pathetic tu quoque, citing a 12-year-old instance of falsifying a military record to make us think that poor Mr. Blumenthal is getting the short end of the stick for merely having made “possible slips of the tongue in a speech”.
What bullshit. He lied multiple times to make people think he’d served in Vietnam, never bothered correcting the falsehoods after they were published (though he was very alert to press mentions in general) and had the gall to surround himself with veterans at a press conference while claiming that others were impugning his record of military service.
This is a guy who demeaned antiwar protestors by repeating that urban legend about soldiers getting spat on when they returned from Vietnam.
*At a veterans event in Shelton, Conn., for example, he said, “When we returned from Vietnam, I remember the taunts, the verbal and even physical abuse we encountered,” according to a 2008 Connecticut Post story.
Blumenthal, 64, joined the Marine Reserve in 1970 and served six years, none of it overseas. He put in much of his time in Washington, where he took part in such projects as fixing a campground and working on a Toys for Tots drive, according to the Times."*
It’s hard to understand how RT feels this guy is worth defending, even considering that he’s a Democrat and the fate of the free world depends on electing every Democrat possible, no matter what slimebags they are.
Gee, I hadn’t been aware of my defense of Blumenthal. Could you please enlighten me?
Well, at this point it’s gone well beyond tu; it’s a definite vous, with (besides Blumenthal) two ex-Presidents, two sitting Senators, and now a U.S. Representative running for Senate in Illinois, all guilty of the same thing.
My point is that this should, by all rights, cease being about Blumenthal specifically, and has to start being about the class of politicians who’ve engaged in essentially the same conduct. You have to take 'em as a group, unless one group member’s conduct is much more egregious than that of the others.
If you want to go down this road, could you please make it in the other thread, where I won’t actually have to repeat the argument I originally made, and your decision to distort it rather than grapple with it will be readily apparent?
Thank you very much.