Regarding Richard Kane’s Wednesday letter, “Extend respect to commander in chief:” George W. Bush may be a veteran, but a veteran in name only; he is not a veteran in deed.
Many older veterans, including myself, identify Bush as the “fortunate son” who took full advantage of that privilege. And even though he was awarded a safe haven in the Texas Air Guard, the young man chose to terminate his military service assignment prior to fulfilling his military service commitment. Although terminating military service commitments early is not uncommon; this man chose to prematurely end his military service during wartime. Not exactly the kind of action expected from an oft-described American patriot. Therefore, in my opinion, his choice to terminate his military service commitment during wartime is significant and serves to validate the need to disassociate him from the legions of men and women with complete and honorable military service histories.
This free Republic needs and deserves fully committed National Guard, Reserve, and Regular military service men and women (past, present and future). We must not belittle these patriotic efforts by bestowing unwarranted honor on ambiguous men.
Wade Boyd
Marysville
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
