[Randy Cunningham Photo] The Unauthorized Randy “Duke” Cunningham Page

Randy “Duke” Cunningham Forum

  Forum Index
 Where Are Duke's Backers?
Author: Paul 
Date:   2006-01-11 11:44:24

Where are all those Cunningham backers and defenders that accused us of being Left Wing dilatants for reporting that Duke was a fake and a fraud? Where are those that told us that the Del Mar house deal was an above board real estate transaction. That the Rolls-Royce and home in Rancho Santa Fe were normal for a U.S. Congressman (However, my Congressman lives in a $250,000 home and drives a beat up Caravan - almost an embarrasement compared to the Duke!)

Where are his defenders that accused us of being un-American because we were attacking a Vietnam era MiG Ace and holder of the Navy Cross and Silver Star? As for those of us that are former Naval Aviators, that we were spreading these lies simply because we were jealous of Cunningham’s feats?

Come on bu••heads, defend him! Tell us again that a MiG Ace should get a pass for his criminal conduct . . . .

 Re: Where Are Duke's Backers?
Author: David Dickey 
Date:   2006-01-11 13:01:21

Paul - I was just reading your pre-1999 posts and wondering what those "anti-liberal" idiots are thinking now. Son, you were way ahead of your time.

Isn't it all you can do to see if some of those e-mail addresses are still active and send them a "what do you think of Duke now" e-mail? You took some pretty abusive hits back then, when, as far as the eastern part of the country was concerned, Duke was still the Top Gun. Although most of the harsher ones were written by cowards with no names.

I would like to hear the Limbaugh and Hannity spin on this but I can't stand to listen to their tripe.

The Teapot Dome may yet be surpassed by the time this debacle has played out. I think we are only early in the first quarter. Stay tuned.

Keep up the good work.

 Re: Where Are Duke's Backers?
Author: Paul 
Date:   2006-01-11 14:03:58

Thanks David . . . I do truly believe that this entire sorted matter is giong to make the Teapot Dome look like chump change. The only thing in common is that both occurred under 'publican presidents. Am I surprised?

I still believe that Cunningham has the best legal counsel, O'Melvany and Myers are pretty hot. His lawyers, got the picture, and said, "Duke, cop a plea, cooperate, wear a wire up you kazoo, whatever needs to be done." "Because, if they get you for everything, you will never see your grandkids, 'cuz you are going to die of old age in prison, homie."

He'll likely get 3 or 4 years, and a chance at a life after prison. If they were to have had the chance to slam him with 20-years, he would have never made it out . . . except in a box.

Yes, good attorneys; and I applaud him for listening to them. Because this thing is going to develop dozens, upon dozens of charges for the each of the rest of the folks playing in this musical chairs game, left with out a chair, now that the musica has stopped.

Thank Dan Anderson - he's da man! The citizens of this country should thank him, he has performed a great service to our democracy. This site is viewed by everyone including congress, media, the white house, justice department and just plane folk on both side of the issue.

I also feel a little sadness (not!) for his defenders who so went on a limb only due to their admiration for his Aviator feats so many years ago, and his right wing b.s., boy did they bet wrong!

Tailhook and the Naval establishment abandoned him, left his sorry behind twisting in the wind. That should tell his admirers something. With them he had taken on the ultimate slam, he is a “non-person.”

I was prepared to walk a very fine line at this past Tailhook Reno. But the word was out, “ain’t nothing to talk about.” “He’s a mort.” "He's a dot" (So far away, you can only see a small dot)

 Re: Where Are Duke's Backers?
Author: R. Middlemas 
Date:   2006-01-13 10:08:19

With regards to this subject, most often times I tried (at times, mightily) to keep the context of the issues centered squarely on what Duke did, not what he is. I don't have to like someone to respect and support them. Sometimes an SOB is just the thing to get the job done.

Of the many things I have learned though, one of them stands out. You cannot hope to change people's minds.

What I mean is, no matter what corner I was ever able to back a person into, most often using their own flawed logic or statements, it didn't matter....for they were going to believe what they had the inclination to believe anyway.

I think the reason those folks who posted so passionately and frequently (true, more often that not with lack of perception and of focus) in Duke's defense in the past is that their "team" took a hit. Nothing more.

I feel neither joy at Duke's demise nor satisfaction...yet. I will admit some momentary happiness at the moment I learned of Duke's surrender.

What interests me now is if he will truly pay of his transgressions.

 Re: Where Are Duke's Backers?
Author: Paul 
Date:   2006-01-13 13:07:05

Ah, R. Middlemas, ever the sage . . . well spoken.

I am sorry, I have carried some angst for him. The Navy treated his differently, and he too full advantage of it. What he did on several occasions would get a reserve officer, he was a reserve officer, released from active duty within 24-hours. But not Cunningham, he pulled a "pass."

But the guy could fly the a/c there isn't any getting around that. Popping 5-MiGs, many could have done it, but did not have the wonderful opportunity that he had.

What people do not realize is that the MiGs did not often fly. When they were parked on the ground, believe it, we could not hit them. I flew over Kep and several other NVA air fields from time-to-time when they were not coming up to engage us. There the MiGs sat in plain view . . . but for most of the war, they were off-limits to attack while on the ground.

When the MiGs did come up it was to make a point like creating propaganda that would help Li Doc To (sp?) in the Paris Talks. Also remember that others were shooting down MiGs during this period. Cunningham happened to be in the right place on 3 different occasions and had that unexcelled ability to move the a/c around the energy egg in the sky so very well. Thus, he got his well deserved kills.

But my problem with his defenders was their community position that "Because he was an Ace, 1) He never would have done what we said happened; and/or 2) If he did it, because he is an Ace, he should get a pass. Well, Cunningham has been getting passes for years, and he just plain ran out of air speed and passes with these transgressions. His quickness to plead out stunned many that I know. But then like I said, he has very good attorneys that saw the end game and got him out of further harm's way.

As I said earlier, the proof of the pudding is that the Navy and Tailhook cut him lose . . . that speaks volumes. Because Cunningham was very good for the Navy.

 Re: Where Are Duke's Backers?
Author: R. Middlemas 
Date:   2006-01-17 09:27:29

Paul: No worries with regards to your angst for Duke. You, as one who truly knows, have every right to your feelings and I make no judgment.

I know well how the wheels of politics and PR roll. It is how it has always been. Duke was a symbol-and a useful one at that- of and for many, for many years. So much so that, perhaps, Duke started to believe all that has been said about him.

Knowing all that, though, does not mean one has to like it. Clearly we all have our problems with Duke, beyond the legal mess he finds himself in.

I, for one, am most angered at him for his abuse of his image in the Navy. Never having served, one might find this odd. I tell you it is not.

For whom do young kids look up to if not the heroes in our armed forces and others? What is the most powerful and awe inspiring sight a child will see, and then want to emulate? That of a fireman? Sure. Perhaps a police officer? Sure. Most often, it a person in uniform. Doubly so a war ace that fly's. How many young people have elevated Duke only to feel foolish for doing so.

Count myself as one. It renders a person feeling stupid, ignorant and disillusioned. Damn the Duke for that.

 Re: Where Are Duke's Backers?
Author: Paul 
Date:   2006-01-17 23:28:47

Absolutely R. Middlemas, Duke started to believe his own press releases and stories. . . 300 missions in 1 tour and 3 months of another, b.s!

He was/is an ego maniac. The defense contractors and lobbyists played him like a puppet, pulling the strings and making him dance and doing these very stupid things. When this all quiets down they will find other rubes.

It most of all p.o.'s me how he dishonored the uniform and the code of honor of the Naval Officer.

 Re: Where Are Duke's Backers?
Author: Elie Cramer 
Date:   2006-01-19 19:16:06

So Paul (what's your last name???) HOw many missions did you fly? How many migs have you shot down?
What gives you the right to stand in his shoes?
You and the rest of the leftist scum, who so hate this country, can go @!#$ yourselves, along with Hanoi Jane.

 Re: Where Are Duke's Backers?
Author: Paul 
Date:   2006-01-19 22:09:32

Thank you Elie . . . a defender! However, you did not defend Dandy’s actions, you performed the usual rightest attack, you attacked the messenger. Come on Elie, tell us that Duke, who pleaded guilty, should be let off the hook.

My last name: Everyman
How many missions: 154
How many MiGs did I shoot down: 0
What gives me the right to stand in his shoes: Ma'am if you have read the posts, my standing in Dandy's shoes is the furtherest thing from my life.

1. Leftist scum etc.: Does that make you rightest flotsam?

2. About our angst at Cunningham (Ellie I have known him since the late 1960s at NAS Miramar) how does that tell you that we hate this country?

3. If you believe that Cunningham should get a pass because of his "Aceness" does that mean that Delay(De-Lay), Abramhoff and the also that are also going to be caught up in this mess should go to prison because they are not Aces?

4. Are you pumping that rightest b.s. that no one with opposing views can discuss them in a public form? Suppress all descent if it runs in opposition to the rightest view/mentality?

Now Elie, let's put away the personal attacks, and you tell me(us) :

1. What you think of Cunningham having taken bribes?

2. Tell me what you think of it being uncovered on this site first?

3. Tell me what you think of the content of the updates that this site constantly posts first?

4. Do you believe that Cunningham should get a pass for his confessed and convicted of crimes.

But Elie Cramer, different from you, I applaud and welcome your views. It is our right, even if you and I did not shoot down andy MiGs and you did not fly any combat missions, to voice our views.

Please come back often. We need a good laugh from time-to-time.

Paul Everyman

P.S. Elie – Did you attend one of those Lava Lamp parties? Come on, you can tell us . . . . (over)

The Fine Print: The above comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way (Communications Decency Act, 47 USC § 230). In compliance with the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998, we do not accept postings from children under 13 years of age. Privacy notice: messages posted to this forum are public. Trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. The rest copyright © 2001-2012 Dan E. Anderson. All rights reserved.


[Blue Ribbon] [Bottom 5% Web Site] Copyright © 1996-2012 Dan E. Anderson. All rights reserved.
This page is not authorized or approved by anyone, but I hope you enjoy it. About this website.

If you have comments (hate mail, praise, jokes, corrections, constructive criticism, or destructive criticism), please send me (Dan Anderson) a secure private message. You can read other people's comments here.

[Best viewed with 20/20 vision]