Help me out here. I could be way off, and I will no doubt offend somebody during this post, which I apologize for, but this has been bugging me for hours.
So I'm watching The Peoples Court today, and one of the plaintiff's described herself as "a disabled veteran." I always picture war veterans to be old men, which I realize with the gulf war and with the "war on terror" that image needs to be amended, and this woman looked to be about forty. But, hey, I don't judge. She also looks completely able-bodied.
Judge Milian is reading my mind because she asks the woman how she became a "disabled veteran." So, the woman said that she did six years of "active duty" working in "a field" (not THE field, A field) and that she was injured during physical fitness drills at various points in the six years.
Does this make her a DISABLED VETERAN? She was never in combat, never served on a line...so does she, and I'm honestly asking here, get categorized at the same level as someone who got his arm blown off in a combat zone?
2 comments:
Oh. My. God.
I totally saw that and had the same reaction! In a field? Like did she trip over an obstical and pull a hammy? Painful, yes, but I thought you had to see combat to be considered a wounded vet. If getting injured training for combat qualifies you, well, start double-timing the printin' of the medals. Maybe a black and blue heart for a sprain...
I think she lost anyway, didn't she. Ah well.
I don't know you, but I'm begining to think you're my kind of people. You, and the good Judge Marilyn Milan. Love her, even if that makes me lame!
Okay I'm glad I'm not the only one!!
And welcome to my blog :)
Post a Comment