Why do liberals mock Bush's military experience?

Question

It shocks me that they mock Bush and call him a coward that has no military experience....yet they fell in love with Bill Clinton who dodged the draft. Ok, Bush might have been in the national guard, but still. Their whole argument revolves around whether or not he failed to show up one day for a routine physical?!?! It just seems slightly hypocritical that military experience is such a huge deal today with democrats, yet they never mentioned anything to clinton during the war in kosovo, which also was not approved by the UN. where were the protests about violations of international law then? Was that acceptable because france was there too?

Answer 1

Remember what they say about magicians, etc.? Misdirection! That's what it is all about. If you stir up the pot and keep calling names, people will not pay attention to what they are doing. Believe it, most people are like sheep and are incapable of using reasoning or logic.
Also, please understand that most of the media (newspapers, TV, radio, magazines WORLDWIDE are controlled by about 5 groups of liberals) so the truth will not be told in a simple, straight forward fashion.

Answer 2

I think you ask a good and fair question. Thank you for opening a dialog. I think the mockery comes from his calling himself the “War President”. Clinton never suggested that he was a pro military type; he did say that he would support the defense of our country, but never called himself the “War President”. If he did call himself that he would know he would be a hypocrite. Well he may be a hypocrite for other reasons, but he never misrepresented his attitude toward the military.

There is more to the stigma that Bush suffers from then a routine physical missed during his stint with the Nation Guard. I wish I was more familiar with the facts, but I suggest you look in to it; try searching the “liberal” media sources and see what they have said on the subject.

What happened in Yugoslavia was one of the best things Clinton ever did, and the fact that Clinton ignored the UN was not a mistake. What Bush did was clearly a mistake. The fact that France was there or not has little to do with anything.

Answer 3

I guess both parties are hypocrites regarding whether the presidents have served in the armed forces.

Perhaps the democrats believe that Clinton did not start an unjust war, Clinton along with other leaders of concerned countries sent the troops in to stop the atrocities going on in Kosovo.

Bush, on the other hand, was itching for a fight. There was no war in Iraq. There were no WMD in Iraq. Iraq had nothing to do with the attack on the WTC. Yet Bush, for some reason (we all have our hunches on what the reasons were), started a war.

His coalition of the willing included one other G-8 nation, Britain. All the other coalition of the willing are countries that needed to have better trade relationships with the USA.

The Canadian PM, along with leaders of France, Germany, and many other European countries refused to enter into Bush's war. In hind sight, they were correct. I guess they had foresight, while Bush had intelligence reports that he commissioned.

How anyone, in hindsight, can still be onside with Bush is astounding. But then again, I would guess 99.999% of those people that are on side with Bush, believe in a virgin giving birth, a man walking on water, creating alcohol out of water alone, the list goes on.

In conclusion people will believe what they want to believe disregarding strong evidence contrary to their beliefs.

P. T. Barnum would have had a field day had he been around in these times.

Answer 4

Well, it might be that since the Republicans attacked Clinton on his experience, then maybe, and this is a bit of a stretch here, the Democrats thought it was acceptable to do the same thing to Bush, who effectively dodged the draft as well.

The bigger problem, is people, who had an irrational hatred of Clinton, went after him every chance they could get (wasting valuable tax dollars, no less) suddenly cry foul when legitimate investigations are done against a much more dangerous administration.

Answer 5

The concern is more than he didn't show up for one day, it is that he failed to show up for many months. It is also how he jumped over so many people on the waiting list to get a plumb job. It is also how the your party attacked Kerry and his purple hearts. Now there is some real hypocrisy.

Liberals did not fall in love with Bill Clinton. That is your basic right-wing propaganda. The Clintons are closer to Republicans than liberals. Clinton's support of NAFTA proved this as did his going to war. Both Clinton's support Israel's attacks on the Palestinian people. They never cared about how many Palestinians died or the years of occupation by Israel of Palestinians homeland and country. These are right-wing neo-con positions.

If Iraq is such a great cause, why don't the Bush children sign up and go. Why can their dad send of other people's children to war but his life the good life? I'd say a chip off the old man's sholders. The chicken hawks unit to send other peoples kids, mothers and fathers to war. They stay safe.

Answer 6

He failed to show up for 18 months, including a routine physical. and of course he was moved ahead of 100,000 other applicants in the Texas guard for his daddy, and his uncle. and his claim of combat experience did Texas attact Alabama while he was there?

Answer 7

When are you Rep's going to stop trying to make a hero out of Bush?!!!
He's a joke and THE whole world know that!! SO SAVE YOUR BREATH!!

Answer 8

To keep the focus off themselves & what they REALLY HAVE IN STORE FOR THE USA.. Clinton was a good-ol'boy ( ya right - he was just a distraction on the real hijinx in that White House ) so he don't count . Sell the country & compromise national security ..but liberal dems in office don't even care ..It's more than apparent & absolutely clear ..these hijackers of the democrat party..Kerry;Clinton;Pelosi:Reid;Kennedy;Gore & the rest hate our way of life..and couldn't be much more vocal about it ..Why aren't they tried for treason ? Enough's enough already .

Answer 9

The truth is, Bush's military experience would not be a big deal if the right would quit trying to make him out to be a hero because he flew a few jets over Texas.

Although I guess you can say that during his entire military experience not once did the Vietnamese attack Texas.

Answer 10

Imagine there was a Democratic politician who pulled strings to get into a FULL National Guard unit.

Imagine he did so to stay out of the war, even though he did not oppose this war, he just didn't want to risk HIS life-- let others die in his place.

Imagine he transferred to another unit so he could work on a political campaign, then didn't show up for duty.

Imagine he put himself on the Voluntary No-Fly List the night before a Mandatory Drug Test so he wouldn't have to take the test.

What would you say?

And why didn't rightists respect Al Gore's military experience? He was in thre REGULAR Army. He was in Vietnam. But since he didn't have front-line duty it's a joke?

And why did rightists have to spread lies about John Kerry's service?

Bush's military "experience" is worth not a scintilla of respect.

Answer 11

Bush's military prowess is comparable to the MBA he apparently also completed.