I wasn't aware he never served. I was always thought his books romanticized the military, though on a technical level he excelled. RIP Mr. Clancy
He was exempted from the draft because he was in college, and yet he still tried to join and was turned down. I don't see how that indicates he tried to avoid the war, not that I would blame him if he did.
Yeah, because there were no conservatives smearing Kennedy (all of them), after they died... As for the topic. I liked Cancy's works, especially his older ones. The newer stuff felt a bit preachy. I also like several of the games his work inspired.
Why? I think one of the great strengths of this country is that the civilians control the military, not vice-versa, and that you do not need to serve in the military in order to determine policy.
What site was that? Moveon.org? Newsflash: When you say "Clancy was never seen wearing glasses" (direct quote, your words) it isn't an "illogical response" to show any of the hundred of photos of him wearing glasses or having glasses draped around his neck.
RIP Clancy, gonna miss the stories. Bad taste OP, takes a lot of balls to attack a person who cant in any way reply to you. Especially when you are making extremely false statements. If you actually did any research, which liberals never do and is pretty much the main reason they are always wrong, it would have taken you literally 2 minutes to find that Clancy joined the Army Reserve Officers Training Corps but due to his nearsightedness that required him to wear very thick prescription glasses, he was deemed ineligible for service in the military. But of course a liberal cares very little about facts, they just avoid them because its a nuisance of their attempt to bash someone who is a republican. Now take that tidbit of info back to your liberal circle jerk forum so they can learn some truth on the matter.
I'm not a conservative but I enjoyed some of his books. I don't generally check a person's politics before deciding whether I want to read what they wrote. A good read is a good read. End of.
Considering, the sins of the Kennedys, versus those of Clancy, which might seem more relevant? Not defending Republicans, but one is a political family, the other a writer.
You know......the OP pissed me off because like you I don't like dead people being attacked. But then you end your post with the unwitting ironical statement "a liberal cares very little about facts"- ironic because that statement shows that you care very little about facts. This blind partisanship, these partisan goggles that some people wear- that paints everyone that they disagree with politically- continues to bemuse me. I just really don't understand how you- or anyone on the far right or far left can be so befuddled by your politics that you chose to paint those you disagree with that way.
how is it that i care little about facts when i presented facts to prove the OP is not being intellectually honest? and considering the past of those OP's posts its not hard to see which side he stands on and as to why he made this thread. Lastly considering many examples i have seen, since i have been paying attention to politics, liberals straight up jumping the gun without facts and trying to paint a whole group of people as terrorists and what not, yes i speak a lot of truth that liberals really dont care much about facts when its something they dont agree with or when they are pushing their agenda. and just for giggles, i do get on right wing ass bags as well, dont care much for their politics or how they do many of the things left wingers do but in their own words and beliefs.Hell if you havent noticed i have a problem with both sides of the aisle and dont care much for our government as a whole.
Or LASIK? My uncle had it...he went from the edge of legally blind to 20/30. Also note: I just looked, and in MANY of the pictures I saw, Clancy wears what look like prescription (auto-darkening) sunglasses.
Ever think that maybe...he was FARSIGHTED?! Or had an astigmatism? And Clancy DID! Yer point? Since there are many pictures of him with glasses...DUH! Could have been as simple as being blind in one eye...or tunnel vision...or even poor night vision.
My uncle technically DIDN'T meet the standards...but he used the familiar strategy of memorizing the chart. (He was 20/25 with his Coke-bottle glasses and qualified "expert" with a rifle.) Now, he's 20/30 WITHOUT glasses after eye surgery.
The three indoor pics show him wearing what look like prescription glasses with auto-darkening lenses. (In fact, they look like the same pair in all three pics.) From the top left pic (the only one showing any real detail), they DO look rather thick...and note: with modern lenses, they DON'T need to be that thick anymore. They're not cheap...but Clancy could certainly afford them!
They loved him...he always did a private book signing at the Groton naval base, and it was always MOBBED. And note: he ALWAYS stayed until everyone had gotten their book signed!
This is what you said: But of course a liberal cares very little about facts, they just avoid them because its a nuisance of their attempt to bash someone who is a republican.. That of course would apply to some liberals, and of course to some conservatives. But that statement says 'a liberal' which would include all liberals. And that statement is just clearly false- because it doesn't apply to all liberals, and frankly doesn't apply any more to liberals than to conservatives. Making that claim just shows a partisan blindness, and really diminishes anything else you might say.
Clancy deserves credit for inventing a whole new sub-genre, the "techno thriller", and he did this largely without a whole lot of real experience and knowledge of the field since he mainly sold insurance before he took up writing. ("I made a lot of stuff up", he admitted himself. Quite creatively really, as it turned out, because the Russians thought he must have had inside info on how they made submarines from the descriptions in "RED OCTOBER") OTOH he was, with all due respect, at best a mediocre writer, who became popular largely because Reagan liked him. (Naturally enough he was a staunch Republican). Many writers in the field he originated were better than him and deserved more success, but that is the nature of the business sometimes. One well-known critic said that his main talent was "being able to describe an F-22 raptor as affectionately as Gustav Flaubert described Madame Bovary" Not to seem to be running him down but I doubt very highly he'll be all that missed and/or remembered since the bottom fell out of TT's about 5 years ago and shows no signs of revival. I guess the 25-30 million dollars he made will have to console his family as best it can. He wasn't a bad person and deserved better than to die at 66, but many do. RIP
not really Jeff because there are many counts i can use to back up my claim on how liberals do not wait for facts or just blow right past them. i.e. Gabby Giffords shooter- right away tried to blame it on right wing extremists and were 100% sure it was one...except they were very very wrong. Newtown Shooter-again trying to say it was a right wing extremist,no hesitation to wait to find out the truth, then once again proved wrong on every aspect. Colorado movie theater shooter-Did a quick google search of the name James Holmes, came up with a Tea Party member with the same name and without any further info went with it claiming,ONCE AGAIN, that this was a right wing extremist shooter. Well it was all fine and dandy until they found out it was the wrong Holmes and this one once again had nothing to do with anything right wing. T.Martin/Zimmerman trial- Tried to paint Zimmerman as a white, racist republican gun toting murderer of a little boy. Only when the facts they didnt wait for came out it is well known that Z was a hispanic, registered democrat and T.Martin was not a little boy by any means. some of the biggest stories and atrocities we have seen in the news lately, all were tried to be pinned on right wingers by the lefty media and the liberal audience ate it up and ran with it as well. All the assumptions they thought were 100% facts turned out to be false because they didnt want to wait for info to come out because in those cases agenda was much more important than fact and trying to sway people into a partisan shouting match was the goal. yeah i know republicans have had their (*)(*)(*)(*) wrong as well, because they tried to say Lanza was a registered democrat when his shooting had nothing to do with politics as it was a case of lunatic behavior. But when it comes to false reporting, liberals these days truly take the cake. You i can agree arent so bad most of the time Jeff, yes you are a pretty hardcore liberal but i have seen you be very reasonable in debates. But as for many of the rest of here, i dont know how many times I alone have laid waste to liberal debaters by simply catching them in lies. Maybe if there were more liberals like you things would be a little better. But until then, we are gonna have more of this kind of thread on here.
Still waiting for Jeff to tell me when and what branch of the military he served in. He conveniently keeps forgetting to respond. It couldn't be because you are nothing more than a massive, disgusting, hypocrite... could it?
Even when corrected to the max, my left eye is still legally blind. As I said, they called me back in after the regular physical for a 3 hour long exam on just my left eye. They assumed I was trying to fake it. I wasn't.
