2006-08-14 05:31:39 · 10 answers · asked by RepublicansAreFookingRetards 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Yes, you're right. Bush was AWOL from the Guard for about a year. It's true that no one will go on the record to say he WASN'T there. But there is no iron-clad evidence (and this includes eyewitnesses) who say that Dubya showed up for duty for a period beginning in '72 and ending in '73. Rumors generally say he was a party animal for much of that time, which jives with his pre-conversion alcohol abuse. (There are much nastier rumors, which I will not repeat here.)
Furthermore, the National Guard is and always was honorable duty. However, during the Vietnam era, it was generally seen as a way to escape combat duty, since the Guard didn't get sent over to Nam. Lots of rich kids who were done with college got strings pulled to get into the Guard, and Dubya was one of them.
Dan Rather's debacle was the best thing to happen to Bush. Because Rather's source was fraudulent, it made everyone think the whole charge was fabricated, which it wasn't. There really is evidence that Bush was a no-show (check out the sites below if interested).
But you know, you aren't going to convince anyone of that now. The fact are mostly out there. If people don't believe it yet, they never will. Give it up and move on. I agree with Kevin on that, at least. Stop looking back and keep your eye on this fall's midterm elections, and 2008 beyond that.
2006-08-16 17:32:12 · answer #1 · answered by mistersato 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So you don't consider the National Guard actual service?
If Bush is an unpatriotic coward for "avoiding active service" by joining the national guard then is Clinton a worse unpatriotic coward for leaving the country to avoid service? He never serves any of the branches until he became commander in cheif. Just curious if your consistent or just a Bush hater.
2006-08-14 12:40:17 · answer #2 · answered by JB 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I'm not sure I'd call Bush unpatriotic, but he certainly showed more cowardice than John Kerry, and has shamelessly exploited the military more than any president in memory (while cutting their benefits). I was disappointed Kerry didn't respond more forcefully to the absolutely disgraceful attacks on his service.
2006-08-14 12:36:22 · answer #3 · answered by Dunrobin 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
He served.....in the national guard.....they investigated, he was there......not a single person could verify that he was not, as Kerry and the media tried to state.....and I am sure they did all they could to find one person that would get up in front of the camera to say it....and they could not.....get over Bush....he can't run anymore....concentrate of the future, not the past
2006-08-14 13:25:06 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
no, Bush is an unpatriotic, coke snorting, lazy, not even able to do his candy a*s make work job, coward.
Where did a nice girl like me learn all this abuse? From the answers to my questions from Conservatives.
2006-08-14 12:41:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
KERRY LOST and is a LOOOOOOOSER just like you. What about Clinton's military service? OOOOOPs.......none
go inhale somewhere else
2006-08-16 08:47:36 · answer #6 · answered by pilotB 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wow. I think we have a violation of yahoo policy here. Multiple IDs for a single poster. Same asshole, different user ID.
NEOCONSAREUNAMERICANSCUM is that you?
Kerry is a communist and is Hanoi's hero. The liberal communists fall in line. Bush has an honorable discharge, Dan Blather.
2006-08-14 12:35:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
You answered your own question. NO!
2006-08-14 12:37:57 · answer #8 · answered by Azriel 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
oh,puleeeeze.you can stop beating that horse any time now.
2006-08-14 12:37:15 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
YES!
2006-08-14 13:43:50 · answer #10 · answered by bulabate 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋