NYT hits Blumenthal again on service explanation
posted at 2:55 pm on June 17, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
The New York Times hasn’t surrendered yet on its pursuit of Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal and his serial fabulism regarding his military service. The Democratic nominee for the US Senate gave an interview with the Connecticut Mirror in which Blumenthal claimed that he assumed the Marines could ship him to Vietnam even if he did enlist in the Reserves. NYT reporter Raymond Hernandez says that sounds fishy as well:
At one point in the interview, Mr. Blumenthal, a Democrat, said he joined the Marine Corps Reserve in April 1970 knowing that reservists could be activated for service in Vietnam. “I did not want to avoid service,” he said. “I did realize reservists could be called up, and that it was something that I wanted to do.”
But military experts said there was no expectation that reserve units would be activated at the time Mr. Blumenthal enlisted, particularly given how drastically public opinion had turned against the war.
In fact, President Richard M. Nixon had begun in 1969 to reduce the American troop presence in Vietnam and transfer more responsibility for fighting to the South Vietnamese, said James E. Westheider, a history professor at the Clermont College campus of the University of Cincinnati who has written about Vietnam.
“By the time he was in the service, if he was in the Marine Reserves, he was not going to Vietnam,” Mr. Westheider said.
Hernandez also reports that Blumenthal misrepresented his position in the draft lottery, which also goes to motivation:
In the interview, he discussed the number he received in the draft lottery in 1969, just a few months before he enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve, according to the article.
His number in the December 1969 draft lottery, according to the Selective Service, was 152. People with numbers as high as 195 in that lottery were eligible to be drafted.
Blumenthal offered his draft-number explanation as a way to show that he didn’t enlist in the Reserves to avoid combat. Since the number was supposedly too high for any real chance of being drafted, Blumenthal claimed, his enlistment in the Marines was entirely motivated by a desire to serve his country. However, another expert consulted by the Times disputes that contention and Blumenthal’s lack of recollection of his exact number:
David Curry, a professor at the University of Missouri, St. Louis, who is an expert on the Vietnam draft, said Mr. Blumenthal’s lottery number would have been cause for worry for someone who did not want to be drafted.
“I’d say he had a medium-level lottery number,” Mr. Curry said. “It’s not really a safe number. But once he joined the Reserves, he would not have been eligible for being drafted.”
Mr. Curry, who served in Vietnam, also questioned how anyone could forget his draft number. “I find it hard to believe that anyone would forget their lottery number,” he said. “I am betting if I call my colleagues who were in that same lottery,” he said, “every one of them would know their draft number.”
Blumenthal had five deferments prior to this, so quite obviously he wanted to avoid the draft. However, so did a lot of young men at the time, including Dick Cheney, who had an equal number of deferments. There is nothing wrong with seeking legal avenues of avoiding the draft, especially when it results in honorable service to the country, as it did with Blumenthal and with George W. Bush, whose Reserve status became controversial in 2004.
However, the difference between Blumenthal and the other two men is that Blumenthal appears to consistently misrepresent his motivations and his actions. This is less clear in this instance than in the original reporting done by the Times on this story, though, and gets into the murky area of motivations rather than concrete actions. If the actual instances of Blumenthal lying about being in Vietnam rather than serving as a stateside reservist during Vietnam didn’t move the needle in polling, a debate over motivation seems less than promising. It may provoke more stumbles from Blumenthal when pressed, at category for which the Mirror interview certainly seems to qualify.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air


Bobby Jindal: Paternalistic, big-government liberalism is the biggest loser here

Super Nannies: EU bans olive oils, Germany ponders Autobahn speed limit






Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
He’s a ‘stand up’ man.
Schadenfreude on April 17, 2013 at 12:42 PM
If the peeps in NY want him I say power to the peeps.
Limerick on April 17, 2013 at 12:44 PM
Your city, your problem AP. Just keep him away from my state.
NotCoach on April 17, 2013 at 12:45 PM
Clearly not Ed or Rudy’s city anymore.
NYC deserves so much more.
Jabberwock on April 17, 2013 at 12:45 PM
I think he will come up a little short.
VegasRick on April 17, 2013 at 12:45 PM
Go ahead NYC, vote him in.
You know you want to – why hide it at this point?
Just go Full Monty.
ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse on April 17, 2013 at 12:45 PM
Well,I never thought this day would arrive,
imagine that,in this day and age,
a “Weiner Poll”!!
canopfor on April 17, 2013 at 12:46 PM
“And when I’m elected Mayor, I’ll send photos of my genitals to everyone!”
BobMbx on April 17, 2013 at 12:47 PM
Another suspicious package story.
petefrt on April 17, 2013 at 12:47 PM
Kalifornia will appear conservative by comparison, if this schlong fetishist gets elected in NY :)
jimver on April 17, 2013 at 12:47 PM
New York City deserves a Weiner.
They’ve been led by weiners and douches for over half a century, Rudy Guiliani the lone exception.
wildcat72 on April 17, 2013 at 12:50 PM
We’re Number One!
We’re Number One!
Seth Halpern on April 17, 2013 at 12:50 PM
I hope he wins just because then I would absolute incontrovertible proof that America is dead and I could just give up and move on with my life
Smoochy32 on April 17, 2013 at 12:53 PM
An enterprising hawker at Yankee Stadium could make a fortune selling weiners & nuts.
Limerick on April 17, 2013 at 12:53 PM
The jokes about New York will be non-stop. C’mon, vote him in. You know you want a domineering liberal pervert to tell you who’s boss.
DanMan on April 17, 2013 at 12:53 PM
I guess New Yorkers want more Weiner
redguy on April 17, 2013 at 12:55 PM
C’mon, everyone knows dicks are very popular in NYC.
Weiner-boy is a perfect fit.
novaculus on April 17, 2013 at 12:55 PM
I.e., blogger wants self-writing posts by 2028.
rbj on April 17, 2013 at 12:55 PM
If Weiner wins, he’ll give new meaning to the phrase “The Big Apple”.
(Hold for applause)
Thank you, thank you. I’m here until Friday. Don’t forget to tip your waiter.
madmonkphotog on April 17, 2013 at 12:55 PM
Just ate, man.
lol — substance does not include character, then. Check. Inviting friends and family to measure your personal-bidness is tiresome “dirty laundry.”
. . . wait. I’m remembering the picture. NVM. There is a dirty laundry connection.
Axe on April 17, 2013 at 12:56 PM
The Drudge Report last week: Will Weiner Rise Again?
The Drudge Report today: Wiener’s poll rising in NYC mayor race…
(Read that out loud… “poll” sounds the same as “pole”)
ITguy on April 17, 2013 at 12:56 PM
You know, if there are still any Republicans in New York City, this might create an opportunity for one of them to get elected mayor, if the Democrats decide to nominate a man best known for tweeting lewd photos of himself.
I realize that the Republican Party is known for taking any opportunity to lose an election, but if the Democrats want to try that instead in NYC this year, we should be prepared.
J.S.K. on April 17, 2013 at 12:57 PM
Too bad that his name is not spelled Wiener. That w/b perfect for him.
Schadenfreude on April 17, 2013 at 12:57 PM
Ironically, it seems appropriate to quote Karl Marx:
No, I won’t be surprised if the next NY Mayor’s motorcade includes a Weinermobile.
Drained Brain on April 17, 2013 at 12:58 PM
Nate Silver, prognosticator of prognosticators; says this actually is a terrible poll for the Weiner.
https://twitter.com/fivethirtyeight/status/324340079025848320
reddevil on April 17, 2013 at 12:58 PM
And we’d finally have “Giant Douche” vs “Turd Sandwich”!
wildcat72 on April 17, 2013 at 12:59 PM
Peter King needs to run.
ktrush on April 17, 2013 at 12:59 PM
I think Weiner can pull it off.
Go-Weiner-Go!
Pork-Chop on April 17, 2013 at 12:59 PM
Democrats just love to be ruled by philandering imbeciles.
tom daschle concerned on April 17, 2013 at 12:59 PM
New Slogan: Enjoy Good Health-Eat Your Honey-But Don’t Eat Weiners.
MaiDee on April 17, 2013 at 1:00 PM
Urban hillbillies. :-)
Punchenko on April 17, 2013 at 1:01 PM
Weiner is up for the challenge.
realitycheck on April 17, 2013 at 1:02 PM
Seriously, just how stupid are the folks in NYC?
Nevermind I answered it myself = NYC!
D-fusit on April 17, 2013 at 1:02 PM
What? Doesn’t the DIABLO in office now count?
Dexter_Alarius on April 17, 2013 at 1:03 PM
Further proof of NY stupidity….. he will be a great addition to their history of Bloomberg, Cuomo, and Schumer.
ultracon on April 17, 2013 at 1:05 PM
Megyn Kelly just reporting an additional 2 suspicious letters sent to Congress.
CoffeeLover on April 17, 2013 at 1:05 PM
Anthony Weiner will do for New York what Rahm Emanuel has done for Chicago……….namely Jack and S**t and Jack’s left town!
pilamaye on April 17, 2013 at 1:05 PM
We need to get a copy of Weiner’s “selfie” & blow it up into posters, with WEINER scrolled on it.
Blake on April 17, 2013 at 1:06 PM
So, AP, I know nothing of NYC politics, who’s the odds on favorite to the least amount of damage to you folks living there.
Cindy Munford on April 17, 2013 at 1:06 PM
he had Flaccid approval….
ToddPA on April 17, 2013 at 1:06 PM
Weinerrific!!!
Finally someone with some cajones in politics, oh wait it’s someone else on the left, nevermind.
PappyD61 on April 17, 2013 at 1:06 PM
He certainly damages the donk brand so maybe we should root for him…
Blake on April 17, 2013 at 1:08 PM
Either Quinn or Lhota need to contact the women to whom Weiner sent pictures of his weiner, get copies of the photos, and spread them over the Internet–with a caption “This is what Anthony Weiner will do to our city”.
Anyone for a good ol’ Weiner roast in the Big Apple?
Steve Z on April 17, 2013 at 1:09 PM
If he wins.. it just shows that democrats have the highest moral standards demanded of any politician………. if they’re in the republican party.
theirs?
Well nobody’s perfect..
mark81150 on April 17, 2013 at 1:11 PM
Would the Big Apple become the Big Banana?
Steve Z on April 17, 2013 at 1:12 PM
Just what we need, another high profile smug jerk liberal distorting the issues on a national stage..
mark81150 on April 17, 2013 at 1:12 PM
Does anything hurt the Democrat brand after the Lion of the Senate?
Cindy Munford on April 17, 2013 at 1:15 PM
Hey, he has the balls to stand up to big soda and he isn’t afraid to show them.
Happy Nomad on April 17, 2013 at 1:16 PM
And, with the potential of this nitwit being the next mayor of New Yawk City, they wonder about the lack of a “bipartisan moment” after Boston.
RADIOONE on April 17, 2013 at 1:17 PM
Unfortunate, but who even cares about NYC anymore?
DarkCurrent on April 17, 2013 at 1:17 PM
I care not. Mayor is a local office.
Good for you New York City.
Stand erect and proud and say it out loud …..
We DESERVE A. Weiner.
Carnac on April 17, 2013 at 1:18 PM
Oh, I don’t know. A serial rapist in the White House for eight years is probably a contender.
Happy Nomad on April 17, 2013 at 1:18 PM
Part of that was due to the msm who never aired the footage of him drunk and stumbling around. The man was an alcoholic and was never sober.
Blake on April 17, 2013 at 1:21 PM
Breitbart had a copy of the photo. Maybe, who ever took over his business or his wife will release it.
Blake on April 17, 2013 at 1:22 PM
Then again, a photo of any old dick will suffice as a “representation.” But people would prefer to see the real deal so they can laugh.
Blake on April 17, 2013 at 1:23 PM
Might as well e
rlect him; it’s not like NYC is going to elect anybody better.M240H on April 17, 2013 at 1:23 PM
Oh, this is an easy one. He’s a celebrity and that’s all that matters in this attention span deficient, addled society.
kim roy on April 17, 2013 at 1:27 PM
Former Giuliani deputy Joe Lhota’s the likely GOP nominee. He ran operations at Madison Square Garden and last year got credit from the NYC media for having the agency prepared to avoid damage to their rolling stock when Hurricane Sandy struck, as well as getting most bus and subway lines back running within 1-2 weeks of the storm.
It was that action and the support he got that led Lhota to step down as MTA boss to run for mayor as a Republican. But we are now 24 years since the last time NYC voters actually elected the Democratic Party’s nominee as mayor, and some 18-19 year-olds who can vote this November will never have lived a day of their lives in New York with an official Democrat in City Hall. Weiner getting nominated might give Lhota a chance, but liberal NYers by now have forgotten or never remembered the worst of the Dinkins era, so I would guess they’re going to get to relive them a couple of years from now.
jon1979 on April 17, 2013 at 1:29 PM
Weiners?
Aren’t they simply an amalgamation of lips, t_ts, and a$$holes?
Not a good mix unless we’re talking about Sophia Loren back in the day…
Polish Rifle on April 17, 2013 at 1:29 PM
How many will vote for him as the last act they do as they leave the state?
kurtzz3 on April 17, 2013 at 1:32 PM
http://liabulaong.typepad.com/.a/6a0120a96def31970b0133f443eaac970b-500pi
Seth Halpern on April 17, 2013 at 1:34 PM
Hey, why pick on him? New York voters always seek the finest qualities and character in their candidates for office and once they find someone with a sterling set of attributes, they then reject them and vote for the opposite qualities in the most morally corrupt competitor.
Don L on April 17, 2013 at 1:35 PM
I think Weiner is the magic Republicans need in NYC.
Sanford is doing his best in SC, so it’s only fair for sex-addicted political karma to throw a bone in the other direction.
amazingmets on April 17, 2013 at 1:35 PM
Cool, another reason NYC is going down the toilet.
Tater Salad on April 17, 2013 at 1:50 PM
Obviously, there are bigger d!cks in the race than Weiner.
Dexter_Alarius on April 17, 2013 at 1:58 PM
Oscar Meyer needs to change their jingle………
ultracon on April 17, 2013 at 2:01 PM
Yep, there is no intelligent life in NY. Bloomberg for multiple terms and now this fool. And please stop calling Bloomberg a Republcan. He scammed the dumb -ass voters into thinking he would continue Giuliani’s work. They wanted an adult at the helm after 911.
Alabama Infidel on April 17, 2013 at 2:12 PM
Dick.
kirkill on April 17, 2013 at 2:20 PM
Speaks volumes about the voters in NYC.
rplat on April 17, 2013 at 2:33 PM
No, he doesn’t just damage the Democrat brand . . . he confirms it.
rplat on April 17, 2013 at 2:39 PM
Low info voters thinkin’ he’s the full package.
LetsBfrank on April 17, 2013 at 2:41 PM
Tomorrow’s headlines today:
WEINER OUT IN FRONT!
Socratease on April 17, 2013 at 2:41 PM
I have a vewy gweat fwiend in Wome called ‘Biggus Dickus’.
exhelodrvr on April 17, 2013 at 2:44 PM
fify :-)
LetsBfrank on April 17, 2013 at 2:59 PM
Heh.
ITguy on April 17, 2013 at 3:38 PM
Doesn’t NYC already have a dick for a Mayor?
mojo on April 17, 2013 at 4:22 PM
Sadly, I have to conclude that the citizens of New York City are just stupid.
RebeccaH on April 17, 2013 at 6:59 PM
New Yorkers, especially around 9/11, should consider his wife’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
His idiotic personal behavior is the least of his issues.
virgo on April 18, 2013 at 1:19 AM
Too bad it’s to late to get William Marcey “Boss” Tweed back.
Tammany Hall ran the city better than the baboon collection they have had recently.
Christine rampaging lesbian Quinn versus Anthony pull my Weiner. What choices. Goodbye New York.
Spots the Dog on April 18, 2013 at 6:47 AM
Seriously, New Yorkers.
Are you THAT stupid?
You get what you deserve, then. I will not be visiting your city ever again.
Sponge on April 18, 2013 at 12:57 PM