Create an Account
username: password:
 
  MemeStreams Logo

MemeStreams Discussion

search


This page contains all of the posts and discussion on MemeStreams referencing the following web page: Spokesman Defends Bush's Military Service. You can find discussions on MemeStreams as you surf the web, even if you aren't a MemeStreams member, using the Threads Bookmarklet.

Spokesman Defends Bush's Military Service
by k at 3:13 pm EST, Feb 11, 2004

Elonka wrote:
] To be honest, even if it was true (and I don't believe it is),
] it wouldn't have an impact on my opinion. Someone cut school
] for a day? Big whoop.

[ With all due respect, this isn't about skipping school. It's about reneging on a sworn promise to serve in the United States Armed Forces. If this is true, it means that the President is a man who couldn't find it in himself to commit fully to the National Guard, an honorable position that nonetheless was a gift from god compared with fighting in a foreign war. For such a man to talk to *anyone* about patriotism, honor, or duty, much less command this generation of soldiers to wage war is outrageous.

I'm as skeptical as anyone about this situation... it seems to me like much ado without much data, but it's not about nothing. If it comes out as fact, then we're talking about hypocracy of the worst sort -- the kind in which people die under orders from a false leader. If it comes out to be nothing, then we can reprimand the accusers, demand their apology, and then move on. But to claim it's unimportant is completely absurd and does a disservice to those who don't equivocate their dedication to the oaths they take. -k]


 
RE: Spokesman Defends Bush's Military Service
by Elonka at 6:45 pm EST, Feb 11, 2004

I would still need much more proof that something was wrong, before I would worry about this. Yes, I agree that serving in the armed forces is a solemn responsibility, and that once someone gives their word to do something, that whether or not they keep their word is important.

But the concept of AWOL-ness has flexibility to it, which is why I bring up the school-cutting analogy. It could mean disappearing without notice from serious required duty, or it could mean getting caught in a paperwork SNAFU. I served six years in the USAF myself, and I think I was probably AWOL at one point or another, because of communications mixups. So I'd talk to my supervisor, we'd figure out what went wrong, and life went on. Even if true, AWOL doesn't necessarily mean prison-time.

Like Bush said, he got an honorable discharge from the military. If there would have been a serious problem back then, he would not have received an honorable discharge.

And again, this was thirty years ago, and he's been through multiple investigations since then, including running for governor, and when he ran against Gore. If there would have been a serious problem, it would have come up in that process.

Just because someone is accused of something, doesn't mean that it should be taken seriously. Especially in an election year, when all kinds of unfounded and hyperbolic accusations are made on a routine basis. And trying to drag up something this vague, that happened decades ago, before the man was even in office, and *especially* without proof, still just strikes me as silly.


 
RE: Spokesman Defends Bush's Military Service
by ryan is the supernicety at 8:50 am EST, Feb 12, 2004

inignoct wrote:
] Elonka wrote:
] ] To be honest, even if it was true (and I don't believe it
] is),
] ] it wouldn't have an impact on my opinion. Someone cut
] school
] ] for a day? Big whoop.
]
] [ With all due respect, this isn't about skipping school.
] It's about reneging on a sworn promise to serve in the United
] States Armed Forces. If this is true, it means that the
] President is a man who couldn't find it in himself to commit
] fully to the National Guard, an honorable position that
] nonetheless was a gift from god compared with fighting in a
] foreign war. For such a man to talk to *anyone* about
] patriotism, honor, or duty, much less command this generation
] of soldiers to wage war is outrageous.
]
] I'm as skeptical as anyone about this situation... it seems
] to me like much ado without much data, but it's not about
] nothing. If it comes out as fact, then we're talking about
] hypocracy of the worst sort -- the kind in which people die
] under orders from a false leader. If it comes out to be
] nothing, then we can reprimand the accusers, demand their
] apology, and then move on. But to claim it's unimportant is
] completely absurd and does a disservice to those who don't
] equivocate their dedication to the oaths they take. -k]

I totally agree with k's analysis. It is all symptomatic of a larger problem. I see all kinds of opinions across memestreams concerning politics, but there is something to be said about the general character of a politician. And the American people need to see this man for the [insert various stories of impropriety concerning the President here] kind of person he is. [Here is where I cut myself off from the rant.] And the same goes for any political candidate. Because you know if Dean were the nominee, the Repubs would be going after him for his medical discharge.


 
RE: Spokesman Defends Bush's Military Service
by BridgetAG at 7:12 pm EST, Feb 12, 2004

I am no fan of the Bushes but it doesn't seem like a major issue to me. It has been accnowledged that W was a child of privilege, that he got into Yale based on his legacy status and not on grades. His Dad was Gov of Texas and Head of the CIA. Does anyone think that the wheels didn't get greased somewhere along the way? Come on!

I think we expect an unrealistic amount of purity from our leaders. Bill Clinton had his women thing, so W got out of his reserve time. I'd rather we focus on the web of connections between the Pres, his Cabinet and the oil industry, THAT might have some impact on his choices as President.

There is no one so pure that there is no inconsistency in their life by the time they are 60.(Even Jimmy C. admitted "lusting in his heart", which was out of bounds for him) If you have lived a life so within the box that no one can find fault, well, I don't think you have the flexibility and mental reliance to be our Leader.


 
RE: Spokesman Defends Bush's Military Service
by Laughing Boy at 1:30 am EST, Feb 14, 2004

inignoct wrote:
] Elonka wrote:
] ] To be honest, even if it was true (and I don't believe it
] is),
] ] it wouldn't have an impact on my opinion. Someone cut
] school
] ] for a day? Big whoop.
]
] [ With all due respect, this isn't about skipping school.
] It's about reneging on a sworn promise to serve in the United
] States Armed Forces. If this is true, it means that the
] President is a man who couldn't find it in himself to commit
] fully to the National Guard, an honorable position that
] nonetheless was a gift from god compared with fighting in a
] foreign war. For such a man to talk to *anyone* about
] patriotism, honor, or duty, much less command this generation
] of soldiers to wage war is outrageous.
]
] I'm as skeptical as anyone about this situation... it seems
] to me like much ado without much data, but it's not about
] nothing. If it comes out as fact, then we're talking about
] hypocracy of the worst sort -- the kind in which people die
] under orders from a false leader. If it comes out to be
] nothing, then we can reprimand the accusers, demand their
] apology, and then move on. But to claim it's unimportant is
] completely absurd and does a disservice to those who don't
] equivocate their dedication to the oaths they take. -k]

The repubs lambaseded Clinton as a "draft dodger" then crucifided him for becoming commander in chief. Turn-a-bout is fair play.

Kids - don't believe what the history books tell you. Go ask someone - ANYone that served in 'Nam. They will tell you someone drafted into the Guard dodged the draft as well, because you had to have big political connections to get into the guard.

Now if W not only got favored into the NG because of daddys political connections, but went AWOL for an extended period of time, we have a SERIOUS problem...

LB


Spokesman Defends Bush's Military Service
by Elonka at 11:56 am EST, Feb 11, 2004

] President Bush's spokesman said Wednesday that Democrats
] who continue to demand more proof that the president
] reported for National Guard duty in Alabama are "trolling
] for trash."

I agree. This whole AWOL thing feels absurd to me. Some Democrats are trying to stir up trouble over something vague that may or may not have happened OVER THIRTY YEARS AGO? Come on. If this is the best they can do, then Bush definitely deserves re-election.

To be honest, even if it was true (and I don't believe it is), it wouldn't have an impact on my opinion. Someone cut school for a day? Big whoop.

This is one of the reasons I never want to run for office. I mean, I know I'm a good person, I'm smart, I'm ethical, I do my homework, I've got no police record more serious than the occasional speeding ticket, and I believe strongly in doing the right thing for the community, instead of for myself. But gawd, if my life were opened to public scrutiny, I know I'd stand zero chance.


There are redundant posts not displayed in this view from the following users: Laughing Boy, brill.
 
 
Powered By Industrial Memetics