2007-02-21 17:08:04 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Proving this is hard. Because amazingly all the relevant papers were destroyed. Just bad luck I guess. When CBS thought they had found some, turned out they were duped. That doesn't mean it's not true.
But we can and should focus on all the things we DO know - bad business man (possibly corrupt), alcoholic until 40, personal insecurity issues and a god-awful way of speaking and smirking.
2007-02-21 17:25:44 · answer #1 · answered by Rob O'C 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I KNOW that Bush WASN'T a deserter and that he DIDN'T go AWOL! You libs are really TOO funny! All your politicians have to do is repeat something over and over and over and over--then you all believe it is true! Did your libs that you listen to so faithfully ever come up with any proof of that statement? Let me answer for you--NO! Unless you want to count the liberal media [Dan Rather!!!]! You people are fooled so easily!! Did you ever hear the truth--that had REAL written proof--that the period the libs claimed Bush was AWOL, he wasn't AWOL at all!?!??! Bush had actually finished all of his hours EARLY so he wasn't required to go during the time in question! When are you libs ever going to be able to think for yourselves? Does it not occur to anyone out there that when the lib politicians want you to believe something and they all repeat it MANY times, that they all use the same words exactly?!?! Coincidence? I think not! At least he wasn't a draft dodger like Clinton! But he's a lib so anything is OK to his followers--including perjury! I don't care if he was lying "just about sex"--perjury is perjury! What a joke of a president he was!!!!!
2007-02-22 01:33:11 · answer #2 · answered by jlmGranny 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I like the way you put your question. Did you know there is a big difference between AWOL and a deserter. If you are a deserter, how the hell can you go AWOL?
You answer that and I'll tell you what a big lie your question is.
2007-02-22 01:14:04 · answer #3 · answered by Kye H 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
He was AWOL, but since this didn't happen during war time desertion was impossible, He also would not have reported for a full year seeing as he was in a guard unit.
Desertion, being AWOL for more than 30 days during a time of war.
2007-02-22 01:19:41 · answer #4 · answered by kittenbrower 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Deserter and AWOL are not the same thing. yes he was absent without leave... happens every day in the military.
We could say that at least he was IN the military unlike some.
2007-02-22 01:15:21 · answer #5 · answered by sociald 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
HE was a special deserter . . . he just kinda forgot to show up and went off to campaign for his dad's friend. Totally understandable and excuseable.
It's not like his wife was about to give birth or any of those other lame excuses of the soldiers who got jail time for their offense.
2007-02-22 01:18:20 · answer #6 · answered by SWMynx 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There are advantages to having friends in high places and money to back it up. As an old Chinese poem put it, "a poor man swings for stealing a belt buckle, but, the man who steals the entire province is declared Statesman of the Year."
2007-02-22 01:13:44 · answer #7 · answered by michaelsan 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Nancy, I notice you only ask questions maybe once a week
is that when the psych ward let's you out for a day pass?
2007-02-22 01:29:04 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's our fearless leader! Did you also know he bankrupted several businesses? Now how could we have guessed he'd spend tax dollars like a drunken sailor!? AND he's an alcoholic! Yippee! That's our boy!
2007-02-22 01:20:56 · answer #9 · answered by MissWong 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
That fabrication got Dan Rather severely reprimanded and his produce fired. They could not verify the information, because it's not true.
2007-02-22 01:17:28 · answer #10 · answered by DOOM 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋