[Lerkfish]

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/s...2004_0819.html


Its a very good speech, but about halfway down:

These are the values you live by, day in and day out, when you kiss your families goodbye, and head to the station � knowing full well that with the sound of an alarm, you might be called into harms way._ I know what that�s like._ And more than thirty years ago, I learned an important lesson�when you�re under attack, the best thing to do is turn your boat into the attacker. That�s what I intend to do today.


Over the last week or so, a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has been attacking me. Of course, this group isn�t interested in the truth � and they�re not telling the truth. They didn�t even exist until I won the nomination for president.


But here�s what you really need to know about them._ They�re funded by hundreds of thousands of dollars from a Republican contributor out of Texas. They�re a front for the Bush campaign. And the fact that the President won�t denounce what they�re up to tells you everything you need to know�he wants them to do his dirty work.


Thirty years ago, official Navy reports documented my service in Vietnam and awarded me the Silver Star, the Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts. Thirty years ago, this was the plain truth. It still is. And I still carry the shrapnel in my leg from a wound in Vietnam.


As firefighters you risk your lives everyday. You know what it�s like to see the truth in the moment. You�re proud of what you�ve done�and so am I.


Of course, the President keeps telling people he would never question my service to our country. Instead, he watches as a Republican-funded attack group does just that. Well, if he wants to have a debate about our service in Vietnam, here is my answer: �Bring it on.�


I�m not going to let anyone question my commitment to defending America�then, now, or ever._ And I�m not going to let anyone attack the sacrifice and courage of the men who saw battle with me.


And let me make this commitment today:_ their lies about my record will not stop me from fighting for jobs, health care, and our security � the issues that really matter to the American people.


The situation in Iraq is a mess. That is the President�s responsibility and he owes the American people an answer.

[Lerkfish]

further debunking:

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/r...2004_0819.html

[Spliffdaddy]

un-debunked>



OK, so which of these 21 swiftboat commanders supports Kerry's candidacy today?

[TheMosco]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
un-debunked>

[img] http://www.hillbillytechnologies.com/swiftboat.jpg[/img]

OK, so which of these 21 swiftboat commanders supports Kerry's candidacy today?

Is one of those 19 guys this guy?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Aug18.html

quote:
Fellow Skipper's Citation Refers To Enemy Fire

By Michael Dobbs
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 19, 2004; Page A01



Newly obtained military records of one of Sen. John F. Kerry's most vocal critics, who has accused the Democratic presidential candidate of lying about his wartime record to win medals, contradict his own version of events.


In newspaper interviews and a best-selling book, Larry Thurlow, who commanded a Navy Swift boat alongside Kerry in Vietnam, has strongly disputed Kerry's claim that the Massachusetts Democrat's boat came under fire during a mission in Viet Cong-controlled territory on March 13, 1969. Kerry won a Bronze Star for his actions that day.

But Thurlow's military records, portions of which were released yesterday to The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act, contain several references to "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire" directed at "all units" of the five-boat flotilla. Thurlow won his own Bronze Star that day, and the citation praises him for providing assistance to a damaged Swift boat "despite enemy bullets flying about him."


As one of five Swift boat skippers who led the raid up the Bay Hap River, Thurlow was a direct participant in the disputed events. He is also a leading member of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a public advocacy group of Vietnam veterans dismayed by Kerry's subsequent antiwar activities, which has aired a controversial television advertisement attacking his war record.


In interviews and written reminiscences, Kerry has described how his 50-foot patrol boat came under fire from the banks of the Bay Hap after a mine explosion disabled another U.S. patrol boat. According to Kerry and members of his crew, the firing continued as an injured Kerry leaned over the bow of his ship to rescue a Special Forces officer who was blown overboard in a second explosion.


Last month, Thurlow swore in an affidavit that Kerry was "not under fire" when he fished Lt. James Rassmann out of the water. He described Kerry's Bronze Star citation, which says that all units involved came under "small arms and automatic weapons fire," as "totally fabricated."


"I never heard a shot," Thurlow said in his affidavit, which was released by Swift Boats Veterans for Truth. The group claims the backing of more than 250 Vietnam veterans, including a majority of Kerry's fellow boat commanders.


A document recommending Thurlow for the Bronze Star noted that all his actions "took place under constant enemy small arms fire which LTJG THURLOW completely ignored in providing immediate assistance" to the disabled boat and its crew. The citation states that all other units in the flotilla also came under fire.


"It's like a Hollywood presentation here, which wasn't the case," Thurlow said last night after being read the full text of his Bronze Star citation. "My personal feeling was always that I got the award for coming to the rescue of the boat that was mined. This casts doubt on anybody's awards. It is sickening and disgusting."


Thurlow said he would consider his award "fraudulent" if coming under enemy fire was the basis for it. "I am here to state that we weren't under fire," he said. He speculated that Kerry could have been the source of at least some of the language used in the citation.


In a telephone interview Tuesday evening after he attended a Swift Boat Veterans strategy session in an Arlington hotel, Thurlow said he lost his Bronze Star citation more than 20 years ago. He said he was unwilling to authorize release of his military records because he feared attempts by the Kerry campaign to discredit him and other anti-Kerry veterans.


The Post filed an independent request for the documents with the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, which is the central repository for veterans' records. The documents were faxed to The Post by officials at the records center yesterday.


Thurlow and other anti-Kerry veterans have repeatedly alleged that Kerry was the author of an after-action report that described how his boat came under enemy fire. Kerry campaign researchers dispute that assertion, and there is no convincing documentary evidence to settle the argument. As the senior skipper in the flotilla, Thurlow might have been expected to write the after-action report for March 13, but he said that Kerry routinely "duked the system" to present his version of events.


For much of the episode, Kerry was not in a position to know firsthand what was happening on Thurlow's boat, as Kerry's boat had sped down the river after the mine exploded under another boat. He later returned to provide assistance to the stricken boa

[SimeyTheLimey]

Several people (e.g. Instapundit) have noticed that the Washington Post only seems interested in running stories examining the military records of Kerry's critics, but is not interested in getting Kerry himself to release his record. Or, of course, in looking at Kerry's odd exaggerations of his record that have already been documented. For example, the Christmas in Cambodia story, which they have been carefully ignoring.

I don't especially mind them looking at the history of the Swift Boat people, but it would be nice if these journalists would do their job a little and also look at their candidate for president. You know, maybe report all of the story and let the people decide, instead of only the half of it helpful to Kerry.

And a little humor, also via instapundit.



Glenn Reynolds makes this point that at least gives me a little hope despite the nakedly partisan reporting that has been going on lately:

WHAT'S REALLY INTERESTING about this Kerry cartoon from the Charlotte Observer is that it assumes the reader's knowledge of a story that's gotten, even today, very little coverage from the traditional media (including, based on a site search, the Observer itself). I think this says something significant about how people get news nowadays.

If it is true that people now are able to bypass the filter of the mainstream media, that's a good thing, imho.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
I don't especially mind them looking at the history of the Swift Boat people, but it would be nice if these journalists would do their job a little and also look at their candidate for president. You know, maybe report all of the story and let the people decide, instead of only the half of it helpful to Kerry.

oddly enough, you have the exact opposite opinion if candidate is Bush, whose military records you consider off-limits...now why is that?

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
un-debunked>



OK, so which of these 21 swiftboat commanders supports Kerry's candidacy today?

Though one wonders how much they were paid to take part in the ad.

The dems pioneered getting people who looked like casual people walking on the street being interviewed to talk bad about the opponent. Needless to say... it was a *commercial*... and should always be taken with a grain of salt. If not a cup full of road salt.

The version of the add I saw online didn't say they were unpaid testimonials.

Nor have any adds this campaign season that I've seen.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
oddly enough, you have the exact opposite opinion if candidate is Bush, whose military records you consider off-limits...now why is that?

You don't seem to be able to discuss anything without making it personal. We have been through this before. There are two terms that you seem to confuse. Let me help you out, again.

Military record = his service.
Military records = things that document his service.

What I opposed was attacking Bush's record when the records (notice: this is a different word) indicate there was never a reason to attack his record.

I think, however, it is not a bad idea for the media to get copies of the military records of political candidates. They way you can see if they have been making up stories like Kerry seems to have done with his Walter Mitty Christmas in Cambodia story, or Senator Harkin did with his false claims to have been a Vietnam Veteran. Link requires free registration. We shouldn't just have to take their word on what their military record was. We ought to be able to verify their claims. Not to invent things that didn't happen. But just to check their version of the facts.

Bush's record is nothing especially heroic, and he never claimed it was. His discharge papers established what he did, and when he did it. They also on their face debunked the stupid Michael Moore/Terry MacAuliffe claims that he was AWOL. Give that those records were public, there was never any need to question his record.

Kerry, unfortunately, has at best misstated his record, and at worst lied about it. The media should clear up the truth with at least the same zeal they had digging about in Bush's past.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
oddly enough, you have the exact opposite opinion if candidate is Bush, whose military records you consider off-limits...now why is that?

They were 'destroyed', along with the enron documents.

How ironic, that we have all the vietnam records in storage. Except his.

Sorry, I'm not buying it for a second. If the US is good at 1 thing it's keeping records. The US Government aknowledges sq miles worth of warehouses and bunkers around the globe with paper and disks. The military in perticular has been a premier user of the latest techniques for managing large sums of data.

I find it hard to believe they lost only his military records.

Might want to check under the presidents bed. Right next to his bad report cards, beer and porno mags.

[Dr.HermanG.]

Maybe Kerry's records are next to the bodies of the unarmed Vietnamese he shot in the back.

At least Bush didn't go to Vietnam to start building his political career.

We're really f*cked when the best choices we have are Kerry or Bush.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
They were 'destroyed', along with the enron documents.

I love how there is little to no defense by Kerry (and his followers) to the allegations other than to whine about how a 527 group is challenging his version of events that he has made the focal point of his campaign. There is no debate on the issue, just a ramping up of the DNC smear machine.

Regardless, you must have missed this one.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
I love how there is little to no defense by Kerry (and his followers) to the allegations other than to whine about how a 527 group is challenging his version of events that he has made the focal point of his campaign. There is no debate on the issue, just a ramping up of the DNC smear machine.

Regardless, you must have missed this one.

Ummm... the documents everyone is looking for weren't recovered. Only some 'more' documents were recovered.

Big deal, I had a whole box of old product manuals. I found a rebate card from a product whose manual I'm trying to find. But does that do anything for me today? Nope. I need a product manual.

Originally posted by Dr.HermanG.:
At least Bush didn't go to Vietnam to start building his political career.

He just asked Daddy to help him dodge the war, as a 'true american' would.

Amazing how our president did what's considered to be one of the most dishonorable things of his time.

We're really f*cked when the best choices we have are Kerry or Bush.

Agreed 125%!

[Dr.HermanG.]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:


Amazing how our president did what's considered to be one of the most dishonorable things of his time.

But it's not dishonorable to request to be sent home, leave the military, then protest against the very people one was serving with prior?

If the war in Vietnam was unjust and dishonorable then it can't come to pass that avoiding service was necessarily a bad thing, eh?

[placebo1969]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
They were 'destroyed', along with the enron documents.

How ironic, that we have all the vietnam records in storage. Except his.

Sorry, I'm not buying it for a second. If the US is good at 1 thing it's keeping records. The US Government aknowledges sq miles worth of warehouses and bunkers around the globe with paper and disks. The military in perticular has been a premier user of the latest techniques for managing large sums of data.

I find it hard to believe they lost only his military records.

Might want to check under the presidents bed. Right next to his bad report cards, beer and porno mags.

Some of my father's military records were lost in a fire along with other veterans. I'm at work right now and don't have time to research it, but there is a group of WWII veterans who should be getting a certain medal, but are having trouble because of destroyed (fire) records. My dad was able to help one friend through the red tape to get the process started, however.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by Dr.HermanG.:
But it's not dishonorable to request to be sent home, leave the military, then protest against the very people one was serving with prior?

If the war in Vietnam was unjust and dishonorable then it can't come to pass that avoiding service was necessarily a bad thing, eh?

wow. don't pull a muscle.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Dr.HermanG.:
But it's not dishonorable to request to be sent home, leave the military, then protest against the very people one was serving with prior?

If the war in Vietnam was unjust and dishonorable then it can't come to pass that avoiding service was necessarily a bad thing, eh?

But that's not breaking a federal law.

Besides. It's one thing to go to war, and decide it's bad.

But look at Bush waffling.

It was bad when he had to go. So bad he had to dodge the draft. But he's fine with deploying troops at will. And under his and Ashcroft's will they are prosecuting military personnel who don't report for duty.

I think you had it right before:

We're really f*cked when the best choices we have are Kerry or Bush.

Demonhood anyone?

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Dr.HermanG.:
But it's not dishonorable to request to be sent home, leave the military, then protest against the very people one was serving with prior?

If the war in Vietnam was unjust and dishonorable then it can't come to pass that avoiding service was necessarily a bad thing, eh?

Man, you've set some sort of record for pretzel logic. Kerry volunteers, spends a year on a ship, ends up in combat for four months, follows orders and kills the enemy, exhibits bravery, gets out in accordance with regulations, says the war and some of his own actions were wrong (a point on which many combat vets agreed), and this is used as a rationale for Bush avoiding the draft?

Why not just say "I disapprove of Kerry's anti-war activities"? That would be fine - a lot of people disapproved of them. The extra twists and turns of logic aren't really necessary.

[Dr.HermanG.]

He requested to leave. Then he came back, got married, and thus was prevented from going back using the same loophole Cheney used. Not only that but then he proceeded to stab all the servicemen in the back by laying claim of widespread and coordinated execution of war crimes. Then he builds a political career out of denying the existence of any POW-MIA, works feverishly to restore ties to the Vienamese government so that the Forbes family can reap the rewards, then he runs for President as if he's some great war hero further adding insult to injury to the very veterans he stabbed in the back eons ago.

Doesn't that bother you?

My sister and brother who serve in the military think Kerry is the worst pile of sh1t to ever consider being CIC given his disgusting past of running away under fire, turning his back on his fellow soliders, then accusing them of committing war crimes.

My brother is in Iraq right now, has been since day one, but he isn't being the coward that Kerry was. He has yet to complain or ask to be sent home. That's courage and honor.

If this was John McCain you wouldn't hear a peep out of me due to his service and hardship while in the service.

To be honest about all this I'm just sick and g*ddamn tired of this issue being an issue some 40 years later. When the hell are we as a nation going to move on beyond the freaking Vietnam War?

[Spliffdaddy]

So why is it that 19 of 21 fellow swift boat commanders do NOT support Kerry for president today?

You guys can talk until you're blue in the face, but there's no spinning that fact.

[Dr.HermanG.]

Originally posted by zigzag:


Why not just say "I disapprove of Kerry's anti-war activities"?

It's not just his anti-war activities that I disapprove of.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by Dr.HermanG.:
He requested to leave. Then he came back, got married, and thus was prevented from going back using the same loophole Cheney used. Not only that but then he proceeded to stab all the servicemen in the back by laying claim of widespread and coordinated execution of war crimes. Then he builds a political career out of denying the existence of any POW-MIA, works feverishly to restore ties to the Vienamese government so that the Forbes family can reap the rewards, then he runs for President as if he's some great war hero further adding insult to injury to the very veterans he stabbed in the back eons ago.

Doesn't that bother you?

My sister and brother who serve in the military think Kerry is the worst pile of sh1t to ever consider being CIC given his disgusting past of running away under fire, turning his back on his fellow soliders, then accusing them of committing war crimes.

My brother is in Iraq right now, has been since day one, but he isn't being the coward that Kerry was. He has yet to complain or ask to be sent home. That's courage and honor.

If this was John McCain you wouldn't hear a peep out of me due to his service and hardship while in the service.

To be honest about all this I'm just sick and g*ddamn tired of this issue being an issue some 40 years later. When the hell are we as a nation going to move on beyond the freaking Vietnam War?

why was the swift boat book published and the ad distributed, then?

I think the other poster is right, the REAL objection to Kerry is what he did when he returned politically. But the repubs must attack his record while serving, which really isn't the issue, its a misdirection. And honestly, it's backfired badly. I think they would have done better to simply say they didn't like his postwar politics and leave it at that.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
So why is it that 19 of 21 fellow swift boat commanders do NOT support Kerry for president today?

You guys can talk until you're blue in the face, but there's no spinning that fact.

Why is it nobody saw Bush show up for duty in the National Guard gig his father set up for him?

Lots of records exist keeping track... but nothing with him in it. Nobody can vouch for him. Not even friends have come forward.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Dr.HermanG.:
It's not just his anti-war activities that I disapprove of.

Fine. It's still a rather elaborate twist of logic to justify Bush's actions because of anything Kerry said or did.

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
So why is it that 19 of 21 fellow swift boat commanders do NOT support Kerry for president today?

You guys can talk until you're blue in the face, but there's no spinning that fact.

Maybe they're Republicans. Or Libertarians. Or Green Party members. Or Anarchists. Who knows?

Just because you're in the war with somebody doesn't mean you have to support every political position they endorse.

Just as not supporting someone doesn't mean you think he's not qualified to be CIC. (there may be too many double negatives in there to make sense)

50% of those eligible don't vote in America. Does that mean both Kerry and Bush are not qualified? No. Non-support isn't a reason to disqualify someone.

[Dr.HermanG.]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
why was the swift boat book published and the ad distributed, then?

What the hell control do I have over that? Why don't you contact the people who wrot the book?

But the repubs must attack his record while serving, which really isn't the issue, its a misdirection.

I don't want a CIC who ran away when things got tough, ran home, lied about what the soldiers were doing, THEN has the audacity to want to be the CIC.

And honestly, it's backfired badly.

Yep, running as a war hero when one isn't surely has made Kerry look like a fool.

[Dr.HermanG.]

Originally posted by zigzag:
Fine. It's still a rather elaborate twist of logic to justify Bush's actions because of anything Kerry said or did.

I'm not justifying what anyone did on the basis of what Kerry did.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Dr.HermanG.:
I don't want a CIC who ran away when things got tough, ran home, lied about what the soldiers were doing, THEN has the audacity to want to be the CIC.

But a guy who ran away at the thought of having to go to war, then destroy his records... is better?

IMHO at least Kerry has war experience.

Bush is a draft dodger. That's the bottom line. Then he had the audacity to want to be the CIC, and he even had the audacity to go after someone who unquestionably did serve (though didn't like war). On top of that... Bush now likes war. Though he's not pushing his daughters to enlist.

[Dr.HermanG.]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
But a guy who ran away at the thought of having to go to war, then destroy his records... is better?

I see nothing wrong with wanting to avoid war personally. If was OK for Clinton to serve then it must be OK for Bush to serve.

I just don't like people who run away in the heat of battle like Kerry did. McCain didn't and if McCain were the Democratic nominee I'd be campaigning for him in a heartbeat.

IMHO at least Kerry has war experience.

Yes, experience at having a tough choice and running away.

Bush is a draft dodger.

So was Clinton. Clinton was worse because he didn't even serve in the National Guard.

[TheMosco]

Originally posted by Dr.HermanG.:
I see nothing wrong with wanting to avoid war personally. If was OK for Clinton to serve then it must be OK for Bush to serve.

I just don't like people who run away in the heat of battle like Kerry did. McCain didn't and if McCain were the Democratic nominee I'd be campaigning for him in a heartbeat.



Yes, experience at having a tough choice and running away.



So was Clinton. Clinton was worse because he didn't even serve in the National Guard.

Clinton isn't in this election...

[Dr.HermanG.]

You think?

[tie]

Interesting that Kerry has denounced the MoveOn ad attacking Bush's avoiding service. While Bush has refused to denounce the Swift boat ad. Bush just lacks character.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Dr.HermanG.:
I see nothing wrong with wanting to avoid war personally. If was OK for Clinton to serve then it must be OK for Bush to serve.

So it's Ok, to cheat the system, break the law... then lie about it.

But it's a bad thing to believe 'war is hell'?


I think this officially beats anything that ever got Ca$h banned, hazed, or persecuted, as this might be the most off the wall nutty statement given here so far.

And people think Zimphire can be irrational.

[Dr.HermanG.]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
So it's Ok, to cheat the system, break the law... then lie about it..

Evidently it's OK because that is what Kerry did.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
But look at Bush waffling.

What waffling? He's put everything out there n moved on.

It was bad when he had to go. So bad he had to dodge the draft.

When was GWB drafted? One can't be a draft dodger unless one was first drafted.

But he's fine with deploying troops at will. And under his and Ashcroft's will they are prosecuting military personnel who don't report for duty.

And what's your problem with this? It's their job.

Feel free to rejoin the topic whenever you see fit.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
So it's Ok, to cheat the system, break the law... then lie about it.

Proof?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by tie:
Interesting that Kerry has denounced the MoveOn ad attacking Bush's avoiding service. While Bush has refused to denounce the Swift boat ad. Bush just lacks character.

Too funny. Kerry waits many months and says nothing. He allows his attack dogs to bark. Including by the way, his own party chairman. Did he say anything then? No. Then suddenly when he is the target of an ad that questions his record, he becomes interested in calling off attack ads.

How convenient.

[Dr.HermanG.]

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Proof?

Where are Bush's records that he served? He hasn't provided them to date.

He doesn't have anything to vouch for his service. I'd love to see what you have to show otherwise.

[Dr.HermanG.]

I suppose the photo of him in uniform was faked?

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
Where are Bush's records that he served? He hasn't provided them to date.

He doesn't have anything to vouch for his service. I'd love to see what you have to show otherwise.

Honorable discharges - see how they are awarded. Furthermore, Bush never made his years of service the hallmark of his political being like Kerry has of his 4-month tour for the past 30 years.

[Dr.HermanG.]

Four years ago everyone knew Bush's records were incomplete. It didn't matter then. It doesn't matter now.

But a yellow bellied coward who ran away from the war, turned coat on his brothers, and then wants to be CIC 30 years later? Major problemo.

[Zimphire]

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Honorable discharges - see how they are awarded. Furthermore, Bush never made his years of service the hallmark of his political being like Kerry has of his 4-month tour for the past 30 years.

Actually, they were a key part of his last campaign. At least here in the North East, that was a focus of his campaigns in the beginning.

Originally posted by Dr.HermanG.:
Four years ago everyone knew Bush's records were incomplete. It didn't matter then. It doesn't matter now.

But a yellow bellied coward who ran away from the war, turned coat on his brothers, and then wants to be CIC 30 years later? Major problemo.

So if you go there, serve, then decide it's bad... that's cowardly.

But not even showing up isn't abandoning?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=abandon

Well, in the english language, it is.

And last election, we didn't have the details we have now. People were trying to figure out how the F*** you can become one of the first to bankrupt an oil company (guaranteed profit here in the US), and still call yourself a 'succcessful businessman'.

[Dr.HermanG.]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
So if you go there, serve, then decide it's bad... that's cowardly.

Yes, especially when it was highly unusual to have an officer sent back home at his request. It's not like he lost a leg or get some massive injury.

I wonder, how many Americans did what Bush did versus how many officers ran away from Vietnam, went home, got married, then testified that war crimes were widespread? Not only that but denied the existence of POWs-MIAs so that a cousin could sign a multi-billion dollar contract with a former enemy?

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
And last election, we didn't have the details we have now. People were trying to figure out how the F*** you can become one of the first to bankrupt an oil company (guaranteed profit here in the US), and still call yourself a 'succcessful businessman'.

Not only do I see you transitioning the thread to another topic -- you also falsely accuse GWB of bankrupting an oil company.

Bush formed the oil company from scratch in his late 20s and sold it years later for $2 million. It's not like he walked into GE and destroyed the company. In the beginning, Bush was his company's only employee.

If starting an oil company is "guaranteed profit", why isn't everyone starting these things up?

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Dr.HermanG.:
Yes, especially when it was highly unusual to have an officer sent back home at his request. It's not like he lost a leg or get some massive injury.

I wonder, how many Americans did what Bush did versus how many officers ran away from Vietnam, went home, got married, then testified that war crimes were widespread? Not only that but denied the existence of POWs-MIAs so that a cousin could sign a multi-billion dollar contract with a former enemy?

I wonder how many violated the law, and used his Father to escape service?

Now would you support doing this for other obligations? How about criminal cases? Should a politicians child be immune from prosecution for things like Rape or Assault? Can their parents assign them to a few hours of community service instead of doing their mandatory jail sentence?

Why not? What would be the big deal?


It's just more evidence of Bush lying to America. His father went so far as to put him in the national guard because he was to much of a coward to even attempt to visit vietnam... and he still bailed.

Yet... somehow he's your hero for his bravery

Dude, your about as warped as they come.

[Dr.HermanG.]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
I wonder how many violated the law, and used his Father to escape service?

What law specifically? Felons can't be elected President you know.

Yet... somehow he's your hero for his bravery

When did I say this?

[ThinkInsane]

Let me ask you this, if they reinstated the draft tomorrow, and you got drawn, would you use your student deferment?

[Dr.HermanG.]

We could do like Coward Dean, claim we have a bad back, get a deferment, then go skiing soon afterward.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Dr.HermanG.:
What law specifically? Felons can't be elected President you know.

But they can if they are pardoned.

May want to look at what happened post-vietnam.

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
Let me ask you this, if they reinstated the draft tomorrow, and you got drawn, would you use your student deferment?

I think he answered your question.