Comments on: Did Curt Weldon Dodge the Draft?

By: timr

timr — Thu, 14 Sep 2006 17:50:35 +0000

OK, I enlisted in 1968 at the ripe old age of 17. In my basic training company we had 1 man who was blind in one eye(he had an artificial eye) one who weighed over 350 pounds(I think that the former gov of MI used his weight as an excuse for not being drafted) I met another combat soldier while I was in Vietnam in 1970 who was totally deaf in one ear. It took almost 4 months to get him off of combat duty(he was our machine gunner) and a job back in the rear.And, I hate to say this, but by 1970 morale was pretty well shot in most combat units because of the fact that in previous years, my tour in 68-69, were mostly volunteers, while by 1970 the combat units that I was in were mostly draftees.
Yes, I had almost 4 years in Vietnam, and a total of 12 years in the Army. I, like lots of people in the years before 1970, not only enlisted, but volunteered for for Vietnam. I liked my job in Vietnam-I was an infantry soldier 11B-no where else would I have been given so much responsibility at such a young age. When I left the Army in 1980(medically retired) I was responsible for the work and well being of 75 men, and over 500 million in equipment. When I was 19, I was personally responsible for the lives, health and well being, of an entire company of ethnic Chinese nung mercenaries, I was in charge of 150 men. A company commander as an E-4, while combat was a rush, just being in charge day to day, was also a rush. That’s why I stayed for 4 years. Going back to the US, and the peacetime Army, was like going from a color movie to one in black and white-washed out.no rush, no fun, no responsibilities. Was I scared? OH Hell yes. Lots of times.Only an idiot is not afraid, that’s how you know you are alive. But that was a different time, and a different world. And the question all young people ask, did I kill anyone. The answer, I don’t know. Mostly everyone was shooting back at people shooting at us in heavy jungle-triple canopy-and we were lucky if we could see even 20-30 feet. Was I trying to kill them? Of course I was, after all they were shooting at me. I would have to be an idiot not to have been shooting at them. Are the people in Iraq any different from those of us in Vietnam 30 years ago. I don’t think so. My oldest son 30, is in his 5th tour of the Iraq/Afghanistan theater-one of my daughters has just returned from her 1 year tour as a nurse in Iraq, my youngest daughter is in medical school(DOD medical school) and will become a Navy Dr. in June of next year, my other daughter hates the entire military, and you might be surprised to learn that all 4 of my kids, my wife, and myself are all against the war in Iraq. Just like I turned against the war in Vietnam in 1970.

By: prostratedragon

prostratedragon — Thu, 14 Sep 2006 09:52:11 +0000

Eureka Springs, AR @
154

Another thing I noticed in the Specter bill. Compensation from taxpayers to designated agents (I assume telcos and others) for forced participation in surveillance. Sounds like it pays double to be Orwelian.

Getting damn close to “information retrieval charges,” albeit en masse, aren’t we?

By: Franny Ward

Franny Ward — Thu, 14 Sep 2006 04:42:38 +0000

Taylor Marsh @ 30

Also, check out this blog post re: Weldon giving his daughter some help through his congressional office. It’s not unheard of, but this blogger isn’t very happy about it:

http://www.totallydelco.com/bl.....ariah.html

PS-Just saw P J Evans’s comment @ 28. Bingo.

Hiya Taylor, FYI Curt Weldon was Mayor of Marcus Hook, PA years ago. I posted the “Demigod or Pariah” blog post after reading about this abuse of power for his families gain in the LA Times.

As a registered Republican I am fed up with our so called parties leaders. From Washington to Delaware County, they have abandoned us, but insist on this “War On Terror”. Like the War on Drugs, etc, these things only line the pockets of the Uberwealthy, and cause thousands of deaths needlessly.

Joe Sestak from what I see is an honorable man, who will do good for US, the citizens of Delaware County. NOT go to Russia 30 times and cavort with known terrorists like Weldon had done.

Cheers.

P.S. Where’s Melanie Sloan when you need her?

By: op99

op99 — Thu, 14 Sep 2006 03:06:46 +0000

test

By: p-rex

p-rex — Thu, 14 Sep 2006 02:46:25 +0000

weldon has spent years trying to expose the able danger program, which is important and good.

unfortunately, he’s been trying to use the angle of “clinton failure” to do it, which is partisan and bad.

otherwise he’s a nutcase, and i hope sestak wins.

By: rapier

rapier — Wed, 13 Sep 2006 23:03:25 +0000

Pay attention. “Distant visual acuity of any degree which does not correct”. Almost everyone can be corrected with glasses. Back in the day, when all lenses were glass and strong corrections meant thick ‘coke bottle lenses’, there were plenty of GI’s with said lenses.

RE: Q. Who was affected by the lottery. A. Men born between Jan. 1, 1944, and Dec. 31, 1950. In other words, men who have had their 19th birthday by Jan. 1 but not their 26th.

I was born in June 51 and the lottery affected me. I took a student deferrment at 18, the draft age in June 69, and went off to college that Sept. If I got a low number I was going to be drafted. I got a safe 215.

I’m puzzled by this old FAQ. Must be a misprint.

By: Prof

Prof — Wed, 13 Sep 2006 22:35:04 +0000

After posting on Wikipedia regarding Weldon’s poor vision excuse, someone edited it out (5 hours later). The “History” there asserts:

Removing info from and link to blog; adding info found on the blog that does have a verifiable, reputable source.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/inde.....on=history

So FDL is not reputable, even when quoting from the Army Medical Fitness Standards.

Here is what I posted there earlier(which was then deleted):

However, the Army’s Medical Fitness Standards used in 1969 provide that the only cause for “medical rejection” is eyesight “which does not correct” to certain standards.[2] Cong. Weldon has not released medical records indicating whether his vision was uncorrectable in 1969. Photographs on his website show that he wears glasses today and apparently is able to function with them.[3]

Someone needs to get back over to Wikipedia and enter “reputable” web links.

Also, I guess linking to Weldon’s own website was not a “reputable” source.

Edting can be done over there at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/inde.....;section=1

By: Dick (no, not that one)

Dick (no, not that one) — Wed, 13 Sep 2006 22:10:23 +0000

If he wanted to serve, all he had to do was enlist. They would’ve taken him no matter what. The key question was whether his vision could be corrected. Apparently his could, because he’s been such a scholar on defense topics. You’ll notice the requirements for vision were that distant vision could NOT be CORRECTED to 20/20 in one eye and 20/400 in the other. 20/400 vision is so bad you can’t see the E on the chart with glasses on. My brother is blind as a bat but served in the Army for 20 years. He enlisted.

By: CLK

CLK — Wed, 13 Sep 2006 22:06:49 +0000

Wish that billboard were real! Should be all over the country-especially in areas with concentration of military personnel.

By: Prof

Prof — Wed, 13 Sep 2006 22:02:39 +0000

Moving here from accidental posting in the Blue America thread.

Short background: I posted Taylor’s information about Curt Weldon’s claims to have been rejected by the draft for extremely poor eyesight over at Wikipedia. About 5 hours later, my information was removed, on the ground that there was no verifiable link for the supposed Army Medical Fitness Standards.

Although Taylor didn’t have a web-link for the Army Medical Fitness Standards of 1969, I have found the 1998 Medical Fitness Standards online (see page 6 of Army Regulation 40-501, at page 12 of the PDF file) and their numerical standards are identical to Taylor’s hand-typed repeat of them from the 1969 standards. In addition, there are “near visual acuity” standards that require simply that the better of the two eyes be correctible to 20/40 (leaving it unnecessary for the other eye to be correctible).

There are some additional vision reasons for rejection for military service in the AR (the standards), such as astigmatism over 3 dipoters (damn! I hit 2.75)

It’s possible, of course, that Weldon’s actual physical reason for a 4-F deferment is found closer to his “little eye,” because regulation 2-14(k) excludes from military service men with:

Absence of both testicals, or unexplained absence of a testicle.

That may be taken as the very definition of a chickenhawk — someone who criticizes veterans who served, while themselves hiding from service.

(I exempt those who took principled stands against serving, and then refrain from swiftboating vets.)

But I digress. Anyone want to do a little Wikipedia-editing support work over at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/inde.....;section=1 ?

It’s easy.