Full Blumenthal Video: "I served during the Vietnam era...."

[Clio the Leo]

At Same '08 Speech, Blumenthal More Correctly Describes Miltiary Record

Earlier this week, the New York Times ran a story about the ambiguous way Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal describes his military service. In the Times' strongest example of Blumenthal's misrepresentations, he says, "when I served in Vietnam."

But as the Associated Press points out today, in a longer version of the speech -- which has been posted on the YouTube page of one of Blumenthal's Republican opponents since the Times story broke -- the attorney general also describes his military service more accurately, saying he "served in the military during the Vietnam era, in the Marine Corps."

The more accurate description comes a couple minutes before the incorrect "I served in Vietnam." Although Blumenthal served in the Marine Corps Reserves for six years during the Vietnam War, he was never deployed overseas.

A spokesman for the Times did not immediately return a request for comment.

Watch the long version:

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/at_same_08_speech_blumenthal_more_correctly_descri.php?ref=fpb

[Beetwasher]

1. Yup, This Was A Total Hit Piece. Egregiously So

Shame on the NYT.

[BrklynLiberal]

3. I agree...and sadly, there are those right here on DU who would have had him tarred and feathered

...yesterday!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4386589

[Cha]

7. Once some get ahold of something that

is promoted by the corporatemedia..they take it as the whole truth and nothing but the truth and it spreads like a toxic waste dump.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

31. It's the phony "support the troops" crowd.

The ones that would tear a vet limb from limb if they thought he had embellished his record, when in reality he hadn't.

[ShortnFiery]

33. Yes, many here criticizing him are veterans themselves.

Sorry, no sale because we do SUPPORT THE TROOPS ... All the Way! Airborne! ;)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

34. I doubt it.

[ShortnFiery]

35. You doubt too much. I've not had one day in my life ...

when I wasn't either a Dependent Child, Dependent Wife or Active Duty Military Soldier. Even now, I'm in touch with the military community as my husband is retired from the Marine Corps.

Semper Fi :patriot:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

36. Blumenthal actually is a veteran.

He doesn't just play one on the internet.

[ShortnFiery]

38. Yes, we're both veterans, but I never claimed to have served where I have not.

THAT is something that is wrong. I have no doubt that Blumenthal has done many GOOD ACTS for veterans. However, lying about your service does not speak well of basic character. I say he needs to bow out for the sake of the party. They could find someone else to run.

[CTyankee]

42. on what basis do you assume he wouldn't do better things for veterans?

He has declared his support for veterans again and again and again over 20 years time. Why wouldn't you believe he would do the same thing for CT as its U.S. Senator? Or doesn't that really matter to you?

[ShortnFiery]

44. Please refer to post # 41 for my response? eom

[CTyankee]

45. How does your resentment affect what Blumenthal actually DID for veterans?

And, by the way, do YOU actually LIVE in CT?

[ShortnFiery]

47. How do your blinders fit? Anyone with a "D" after his name can do no wrong?

If you lie about your military service, I don't care if you claim to be a democrat, I will not vote for you. As I mentioned earlier, my older brother barely returned with his life. So yes, I hold resentment for men who claim to have been in Vietnam but were, in reality, at home - safe and warm.

Yes, I resent such lies and I'm not the only democratic veteran who feels this way.

It's that simple. :shrug:

[CTyankee]

48. So Blumenthal's actual service to these people (who needed help)

doesn't COUNT? REALLY?

REALLY?

Are you KIDDING?

C'mon, Shortn fiery, just get real here. This is a man who has helped people you claim you want help for. He actually has a track record.

Please...

[ShortnFiery]

49. No, that's what makes his lie tragic. He has done much good. However, he lies.

We have to wonder what else he may lie about?

Yes, it's a shame because he has a good record but time will reveal that he's lied about this more than once.

No, I don't live in CT but he's no longer a viable candidate.

The sooner we realize this fact, the sooner we can get someone else to fill his place.

[CTyankee]

52. Do you have a better candidate? If not, hello Senator McMahon cuz she gots LOTS of money!!!

I'll be sure to credit YOU for helping her join Joe LIeberman as one of our two Senators...thanks SO MUCH...

[ShortnFiery]

55. Hey, I'm just stating my thoughtful opinion. I could be wrong.

I think it's wrong to lie about your military service. Sorry, maybe he'll do just fine? :shrug:

[Jade Fox]

2. How much damage has this hit piece done?

[babylonsister]

15. A lot...

from yesterday, and he was way ahead prior to this story breaking:

Connecticut Senate Race Moved to Toss Up

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/05/18/connecticut_senate_race_moved_to_toss_up.html

[benld74]

4. And I was an Anti-Vietnam Protester at the same time - BUT I was only in High School

Being in the effin reserves back then was NOTHING! You can ask anyone who actually was sent over. Dont take an anti-vietnam protesters word,,,

[CTyankee]

5. I think this is interesting. He says the two phrases in the same speech.

If he were a determined, crafty, conniving liar why would he be so confused? Deliberate liars plan their lies, they don't undermine them with conflicting statements of fact.

Common sense tells me that he wasn't a liar, but he did mis-speak (perhaps revealing an inner wish that he had been in Vietnam). To believe that he deliberately lied is to believe that he didn't want to help veterans and that clearly is not the case. He has helped veterans. His record speaks for itself.

[BrklynLiberal]

6. Guess there are some who are totally deaf to anything but what they choose to believe

How disappointing to find that there are people like that on BOTH sides....they don't bother to find facts...just believe anything they are manipulated into believing by whatever medium gets to them first..

[RaleighNCDUer]

8. since his first statement was that he served in the Vietnam era,

it seems plain that he meant to say 'served during Vietnam' in the second statement. No sane person would lie about such an easily proved fact - even Bush didn't do that. He only lied about finishing his service after carefully scrubbing the record and destroying files that said otherwise.

[karynnj]

63. He did lie about be willing to go

when he in fact had checked that he did not want that kind of assignment. His people glorified his TANG experience, going on about the dangers of flying those jets. There were seriously people arguing that because Kerry was on the ground in Vietnam only 4 months and because he signed up for the swiftboats when it was less dangerous that his service was less than the courageous Bush, TANG fighter pilot who really really wanted to go to Vietnam.

The argument that Kerry did not intentionally sign up for a dangerous, stupid mission that made the sailors sitting ducks was one of the stupidest attacks in 2004. The source for that information was .. Kerry, when asked by Doug Brinkley. It actually fits more the picture I have of John Kerry that he would choose the fast, little boats where he could be in charge that were doing coast guard type things. Given his love of other cultures, diplomacy and his fluent French that sounds like a pretty good match. When it turned out to be what it was he did an excellent job safe guarding his crew.

[HereSince1628]

17. An often overlooked patholody is "survivors' guilt"

I think it is at least as common as combat PTSD and probably more common.

95 guys served in support of every 5 guys who were "on the line" during Viet Nam.

To have been aware of those dying, let alone, to have an acute awareness that you weren't taking the same chances of as a gu 'on the line' creates a real and repeatedly revealled psychological burden. Fake records, fake medals, fake war stories. While everyone I served with hoped to live it, to have actually 'gotten off easy' turns out to be psychologically hard for many.

What did you do in the war grandpa? Some find it hard to say-- I sorted mail, I delivered the Stars and Stripes, I checked diesel generators to be sure they were producing electriciy, I designed and built latrines, I sprayed barracks and mess halls for cockroaches, I checked out books at the base library...

Myself? I wasn't really different. I fixed teletype and I volunteered for our QRF (quick reaction force) as it was the only way I could get a weapon assigned to me. I was reasonably ok at popping flares from a mortar. With much bravado we referred to our squad as the 'Power and Light Co." And in reality, I thought the war was a waste and that repelling down walls was very very stupid training for guys based on a flat plain in a unit that didn't have helocopters or multi-story buildings. Given the chance I spent my all time plugged into my stereo gear, sampling the local herb, and just plain living for my DEROS calendar counting down to day ZERO.

[Cha]

9. KR..waiting to here from NYT.

[jefferson_dem]

11. They are defending their "hit job"

Times defends posting of clipped Blumenthal video

The New York Times, in a statement sent my way, is now defending its decision to run a shorter version of an explosive video of Richard Blumenthal in 2008 falsely claiming service in Vietnam -- even though a longer version shows he accurately represented his service during the same speech.

When The Times first broke the story Monday night, it included a clip of Blumenthal claiming he "served in Vietnam." But today the Associated Press unearthed a longer video showing that he earlier described himself as "someone who served in the military during the Vietnam era in the Marine Corps."

So why didn't The Times publish the longer vid with the quote of him getting it right? Times spokesperson Diane McNulty emailed a response, claiming the longer vid doesn't change the story:

The New York Times in its reporting uncovered Mr. Blumenthal's long and well established pattern of misleading his constituents about his Vietnam War service, which he acknowledged in an interview with The Times. Mr. Blumenthal needs to be candid with his constituents about whether he went to Vietnam or not, since his official military records clearly indicate he did not.

The video doesn't change our story. Saying that he served "during Vietnam" doesn't indicate one way or the other whether he went to Vietnam.

I agree that Blumenthal getting the quote right earlier in the speech doesn't change the fact that he misled about his service later in that same speech. And its true that The Times uncovered other examples of Blumenthal appearing to mislead about his service, or at least not doing anything to correct misimpressions about it.

But the 2008 speech is by far the single most damning piece of evidence against Blumenthal.

The other quotes are just not quite as conclusive. And the fact that he got it right, if narrowly so, earlier in the speech raises at least the possibility that he didn't intend to mislead later on, even if it doesn't prove this one way or the other.

Even if you don't believe the longer video is exculpatory in any way, as The Times says, there's no conceivable reason for leaving out the fuller context and letting readers make the call for themselves. It seems obvious that when dealing with a story this explosive, you would want to err on the side of more context, rather than less.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/times_defends_posting_of_clipp.html

[BrklynLiberal]

13. Yesterday..on two different radio shows, I heard Raymond Hernandez categorically deny that the story

had been given to him by the McMahon campaign.. He was almost crying when he spoke of his "dogged" and "tireless" research that led to this "discovery. He was asked, directly, point blank, if the information had been fed to him, and he denied it...absolutely.

Too bad the McMahon campaign did not know they were supposed to deny giving it to him. They actually bragged about how they spoon fed it to the NYTimes.

[karynnj]

64. He needs to be fired, not defended

His lie is more essential to his job, than the misstatement Blumenthal made to his. This story was political dynamite and he and his editor knew it. They should have REALLY done the leg work, which should have included looking at all the existing biographies the Blumenthal ever oked and speaking to the veterans organizations who knew him for decades. Most volunteered that he never told them he was a vet. Not to mention, the entire tape should have been included and in the article, when they quoted the errant comment, it is relevant that he clearly stated AT THAT VERY EVENT that he never went to Vietnam.

[Cha]

16. Thanks..I hope

Blumenthal will work through this..the Vets appreciate what he's done for them.

[jefferson_dem]

12. Hiccup...

Dupe. Sorry. :hi:

[old mark]

10. The clip I saw - several times-showed only the "when I was in Vietnam" part, and NEVER

made mention that the speech had a previousl reference - I saw this several times on MSNBC Tuesday.

Wonderful media.

mark

[BrklynLiberal]

14. The very definition of a "hit piece".

[still_one]

18. Of course it is a hit piece, but Blumenthal did mislead, and did so several times

He admitted he misspoken about his service, and did not correct the record

Obviously, I want the Democrat to win in Connecticut, and he will be our nominee, but for quite some time now he allowed the myth of his service in Viet Nam to continue, and did nothing to correct the record until now, and that was wrong and pathetically stupid

[CTyankee]

20. The question as I see it is this. Should this completely disqualify Blumenthal

for the U.S. Senate? When you add up the times he said he was "in" Vietnam against his saying he did not serve in Vietnam and against his provable record in CT using his office for the betterment of veterans, showing his respect by attending the military funerals and send offs, making speeches that are anti Bush wars, and railing against the abuse of veterans who have been egregiously wounded and whose injuries were not fully taken care of. At the end of the day, what do you have on your ledger sheet?

Please do this calculation...

[ShortnFiery]

41. I was a pre-teen back when things really heated up in Vietnam. Those feelings about those

who skipped-out or served as then was termed "weekend warriors" still rub raw with some Vietnam Veterans.

I remember the resentments and don't think highly of anyone who would exaggerate their 70s *RESERVE* service as the real deal - combat service. That's just something you just DO NOT lie about. It's toxic because of the fact we LOST that war.

[CTyankee]

46. REALLY, because we LOST the war? Maybe that war was just not to be won?

Have you ever considered that?

[still_one]

54. It was not a winable war, which implies we lost, same thing

At the time Congress had no problem sending other people's son's to fight and die for an unknown cause

It was a mess, which we seem to have not learned our lesson even today

[still_one]

51. It is too late for him to drop out, this is what they have to work with /nt

[RaleighNCDUer]

66. How many times did he say he served IN Vietnam, and how many times

did sloppy reporters SAY he said he served in Vietnam when he actually said he served DURING Vietnam?

I've seen only one specific time when he said he served in Vietnam - the others were 2nd hand interpretations by the media.

I don't know how many times I've been mis-interpreted, and people thought I was in Vietnam, even though I never said it. I was a Marine, '74 - '76. I have a Vietnam Service ribbon, as I was a Vietnam era veteran. Closest I ever got to it was Hong Kong. I was with a MAC squadron in Okinawa, which had been in Vietnam. Half the guys in the unit had been in Vietnam. Not me.

But after a while I got tired of clarifying that every time I opened my mouth. If someone made that assumption, I let them. Anyone who was close enough to me to be important knew the truth, and I didn't lie. I did, occasionally use the public "we" which could easily be misinterpreted, such as "we didn't know what we were doing in Vietnam", speaking as a nation. That could be interpreted as "we" who were there didn't know what we were doing - though that's not what I meant.

I don't really believe that as a public figure he intentionally lied about serving IN Vietnam - he might have misspoken, saying "in" rather than "during" or "in Vietnam" rather than "in the Vietnam era", or some such. It is just too damn easy to find the truth (unless your father is a CIA connected congressman who can destroy official records) for anyone to lie about something like this and expect to get away with it.

[KittyWampus]

58. No, actually Blumenthal misspoke. Big difference. And you are making shit up.

[karynnj]

65. It is not clear that he misspoke "several times"

This is this only direct quote that seems to unambiguously say this. The fact that the writer used it, knowing that it was very clearly corrected unambiguously elsewhere and didn't feel the need to add that mitigating information, likely means that that was all they had.

As to correcting the errors of the media that did not come from him, I don't think any politician goes far out of their way to correct non-negative errors unless it comes up when they are speaking to them.

How many accounts did you see that referred to Hillary Clinton or John Kerry as valedictorian of their college class - something neither of them was or claimed to be. The reason is they were given the honor of making a valedictory speech at graduation. In Kerry's case it was a recognition of his having won a national award for his speeches and debates and for having been the star for his 4 years. In Hillary's, it was because she was the class President. (In both cases, the reasons they were given the speeches actually show skill in areas more related to their eventual careers than simply having the highest GPA.) Should they have had staff call every time the wrong assumption was made and they were called the smartest in their class (which grades not withstanding they could well have been)?

[elocs]

19. He did say that he served during the Vietnam era before saying he served in Vietnam,

but there is a big difference between the words "during" and "in" and it changes the perceived meaning of anyone listening. "In" Vietnam clearly infers that he was actually and physically in Vietnam.

I also think he puffs up his own military experience to cozy up with vets. I was a draft age male during the Vietnam war and everyone then clearly understood what it meant for a guy to try and join the National Guard or the Reserves at that time--it clearly meant that they were trying to get out of going to Vietnam. Now that clearly made sense at the time and I fault no guy for doing that, but to have a political career decades later and try to tout Guard or Reserve military service as equivalent to that of the veterans who actually did go to Vietnam is silly. I am sure any Vietnam war vet would tell people that Guard or Reservists, weekend warriors, where not highly thought off by the regulars.

[CTyankee]

21. As Attorney General of CT, did Blumenthal help veterans?

Please answer this question...

[elocs]

25. He could certainly have helped vets without having to pimp or pump up his own military record.

What was the point of doing that? To make himself one of the guys?

[ShortnFiery]

22. "I also think he puffs up his own military experience to cozy up with vets. "

It's not working for me. He should opt out and fade into political obscurity.

[CTyankee]

23. Is his service as AG on behalf of CT veterans "working for you"?

Dick walks the walk. He has been dedicated in his career as AG to helping veterans and there are plenty of them here in my state of CT who will tell you that. Do you believe them?

[elocs]

27. Then what exactly is the point of puffing up his own military experience?

Couldn't he have walked the walk and helped the vets that way as well? It certainly would have been refreshingly honest.

Let's be honest here, if this was a Republican who said this and behaved like he was one of the warriors when he served in the Guard or Reserves, then DU would be all over him.

[CTyankee]

29. Not if that theoretical "republican" had walked the walk. But the funny thing is, they DON'T.

Look, if you really want to crucify Dick Blumenthal you gotta look at what you are doing, what you are destroying. I am just asking you to reflect upon your words and look at what we are up against. If you just love the words "Republican Senator Linda McMahon", then I would understand...

[elocs]

30. The words I love would be the truth. Will he become more truthful after becoming a Senator?

Or just a better and more careful liar?

[CTyankee]

39. OK, so a lotta times the truth is what he DID not what he said.

It made a real difference in the life of these veterans who were depending on him. Who are YOU to say that what he did for them was wrong? REALLY.

HE went to bat for these folks, not YOU. HE stood up for them, not YOU. He helped them materially, in their daily life, not YOU.

Well....????

[KittyWampus]

60. He isn't puffing up his record. He misspoke. The question, to be honest, is why you pursue this bull

shit even though it's been debunked.

[ShortnFiery]

32. My older brother was seriously wounded in 1968. He almost didn't make it back from Vietnam.

My dad was wounded during WWII and I'm an Army (non-combat) Veteran.

Perhaps I have a little clout with my family background as well as my own experience within the military?

Given that: I, and I surmise a significant number of other veterans, despise combat PRETENDERS, regardless of their political party.

[CTyankee]

53. And based on his record, do you believe that Dick Blumenthal would NOT help your father and

your older brother if he had the power to do so?

Yes or no.

[dionysus]

61. ROFL, yes, enormous clout...

:spray:

[elocs]

26. I would have given him so much more credit if he had minimized his own military experience

while doing everything he could to help the veterans, especially the vets who actually served in war.

[Jennicut]

28. Yeah, that is gonna help us keep this seat here in CT.

Who is our replacement here? They must have name recognition and lots of money. Linda McMahon is pouring millions into her campaign and has spent a huge chunk of change already. My main goal is to keep her out of that seat. If Blumenthal polls better then any replacements, well, he should stay.

[CTyankee]

50. I think so, too. Let's see what happens. I can't believe how many DUers hate him.

It's just strange. He's been on the side of the angels for a very long time. I have no doubt he loves the veterans and I'm sure you don't either. Here is our best chance for a senate seat and DU is ready to give it away...this is really awful...

[Jennicut]

57. Well, you have to live here to get it. All politics is local.

Some people wonder why certain Senators or Reps vote for certain people...you know what they are like after a few years. With Blumenthal I think he has been AG since I was in high school! I am 34 so that was quite a long time. His rep just doesn't fit into what many names people here are calling him.

Also, it depends on how voters in Connecticut feel about it. We need to see more polling in another week or two.

[KittyWampus]

59. It's obvious he misspoke and some DU'ers can't admit to being wrong.s

[karynnj]

67. The media is completely inconsistent on this

Here is a present day example. Scott Brown routinely refers to "being in the military" and "his 3 decades of military experience" - arguing that it makes him an asset to the Armed Services Committee. (I don't know most of the backgrounds - but Reed, Webb and McCain would likely find those comments pretentious.)

But, the NYT owned Boston Globe, in a long fluff piece about Brown's awesome National Guard service included this quote with no comment:
Brown describes himself as “probably one of the most qualified soldiers in the entire Massachusetts ,’’ having been an enlisted man and trained in infantry, airborne, and quartermaster duties and joining the Judge Advocate General’s Corps in 1994."
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/07/guard_service_a_key_to_candidate_brown/?page=3

Now many in the MA NG served in Iraq and Afghanistan - that should make them a tad more qualified than Brown, who never saw combat.

Gee, maybe it's because the Boston media never before had a Senator, who actually served.

[OHdem10]

24. Please shower Tweety with Emails, Tweets or whatever.

Please advise him to read the AP story which made this correction.
He is still sitting there saying Blumenthal lied.

Truth is McMahon Opposition Research fed the false story
to NYT. Apparently the NYT did not fact check very well.

[flamingdem]

37. Tweety seems to be set against him per show today nt

[CTyankee]

40. HELLO, you Blumenthal haters, here is your wake-up story!

WILL you ever learn?

Oh, good god....

[Dawson Leery]

43. Chris Matthews is vile.

He is hell bent on getting Blumenthal out of this race.
:mad:

[CTLawGuy]

56. not surprising

the media wants to maximize interest in what would otherwise be a dull race. Combine that with the absence of any means of holding media accountable in any way, and you get distorted hit pieces like this masquerading as "news."

[madmom]

62. "Actions speak louder than words", I have heard that statement since I was

old enough to know what it meant. So why does it mean nothing now? I don't know the whole back story ( haven't followed that closely) BUT if his actions during his tenure as AG are as people from CT have said, why not let him continue doing these good deeds? :shrug:

[CTyankee]

68. Oh, thank you MadMom, so much!

We liberals and progressives REVERE Dick Blumenthal for his outstanding service on behalf of the people of CT! I have known about him for over 20 years of his service to the people.

I got to know him better when I worked for Planned Parenthood of CT because he and his wife, Cindy, raised money for our fundraiser in CT annually in April.

He has a TRACK RECORD of accomplishments on behalf of the state, the people, the middle class, of CT against the vested interests, the polluters and the banksters.

WE will lose a GREAT GUY if we let this smear continue!

Please help us STOP THIS outrage against a great candidate for U.S. Senator from CT!

Thank you!