Funny how he leaves out the shit coulter flat-out made up (going out for beer, etc) and claims she was merely making the point that his wounds weren't from combat
Gazette-Mail has a liberal slant
Editor:
I’ve subscribed to your paper since I retired from the military and moved here in 1999. I enjoy reading the opinions of columnists, liberal and conservative. Unfortunately, your Sunday paper rarely (if ever, actually) prints a column from a conservative commentator, although they often are attacked by your liberal columnists, as was Ann Coulter in this week’s paper. Don’t you think the reader might benefit from being able to read Ms. Coulter’s article and deciding for themselves if what she said was wrong or unfair? I’ve read the article in question. Her comments are factually correct. Democrat politicians have portrayed Max Cleland as receiving his wounds in battlefield combat as if he were a war hero. Max Cleland did what every private in the military is trained not to do. He picked up from the ground a piece of unexploded ordnance. His wounds are proof of why they’re taught that. He has no Purple Heart.
There is only so much anti-Bush, anti-military and other rhetoric that any thinking person can stand. Your paper has an obvious liberal slant to it. You are doing a disservice to the public.
J.D. Pendry
(who once again proves my time-tested old theory: people are fucking stupid)
http://www.sundaygazettemail.com/section/Editorials/2004042427