Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Another way to look at bu$h's "service" in the TANG

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Hailtothechimp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-04 09:11 PM
Original message
Another way to look at bu$h's "service" in the TANG
Maybe the fact that he didn't show up at all in 1972 and 1973 will sink in, but the absence of records to confirm it seems to be an opening for those who must believe him at all costs.

Maybe the fact that strings were pulled to secure him a slot won't bother those who don't have such connections but wish they did.

Maybe the fact that he was suspended for missing a physical isn't the "smoking gun" we would like to have.

Let's focus on the letter instead.

The commitment made by chimpy when he joined up was 6 years. Leaving everything else aside, he signed a letter asking to be released from these 6 years in 1973 so he could go to business school that fall. Permission was granted (I wonder how much THAT cost), but still he failed to honor his commitment. Harvard Business School was more important to him than serving his country as he had agreed to do. That shows what his priorities were, and I would suggest still are.

He puts himself and his own agenda ahead of his country. Then as now. I think his loyalists would be hard pressed to dismiss this, especially given the "stop leave" order currently in place. Could a reservist today get out of their commitment if they wanted to go to business school instead? I think not.

Does this have any chance of taking root?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TomNickell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-04 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. "Bush shirked, we're jerked." "Bush Blew; we're Screwed".
Edited on Sat Jan-24-04 09:26 PM by TomNickell
The Guard is different now. -Then- the Guard was a safe place for rich kids. -Now- it's supposed to be an integral part of the military force.

-So- a comparison of *'s record with the current treatment of Reservists isn't quite fair.

Doesn't mean we shouldn't use it, of course.

I think the legalistic argument doesn't catch. The -Fairness- argument might.

"Bush slipped out 2 years early, but he won't let these guys out even when they've done what they promised."

But that's still too long.
"Bush shirked, we're jerked."
"Bush Blew; we're Screwed".
"Early Release for every Reservist"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spotbird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-04 09:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. Very good point!
Since it is unpatriotic to even mention *'s service this issue has also been missed. Even the freepers can't deny it.

That should be the standard answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:15 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC