deserter in chief

[rone]

(via ratphooey) I'm not Michael Moore's biggest fan, but you should read this. Money quote (from MoveOn.org):

Bush was apparently absent without official leave from his assigned military service for as little as seven months (New York Times) or as much as 17 months (Boston Globe) during a time when 500,000 American troops were fighting the Vietnam War. The Army defines a "deserter" — also known as a DFR, for "dropped from rolls" — as one who is AWOL 31 days or more.

I don't see how anyone can vote, in good conscience, for George W. Bush given this information, added to all of the things he's done. If he's done such a good thing for Iraq, he can go run for president there. We don't want him here anymore.

Comments

[lots42.livejournal.com]

The local goverment agency...some employees there can't even find my info reliably. One time I wasn't in the computer at all, five minutes later I was.

My point? Goverment records aren't the most reliable of sources. I'll need more to condemn Bush

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

OK... tell me what's so great about Bush. Go ahead.

[lots42.livejournal.com]

His willingness to actually DO things concerning the problems facing the country.

[ex-askesis860.livejournal.com]

What's his plan for the deficit? Or unemployment? How does he plan to handle this country we're suddenly in possession of? Those are real problems. All I've seen so far is catastrophically stupid action taken against imaginary problems (Iraq, the fourth amendment, the plight of the rich, the Clean Air Act, excess benefits for soldiers, etc.). Yeah, he's DOING things, but do any of them really need doing?

Also, Bush's absenteeism during his service in the Texas Air Guard is much better documented than one Moore quote at a partisan site. The President has even addressed it himself - apparently he had to go work on a political campaign. Much like his crimes at Harken Oil and his drunk driving arrest, these things are a matter of public record.

[pootrootbeer.livejournal.com]

Anyone can DO things. It's ESSENTIAL to make sure they're the RIGHT things before doing them.

Bush has a mixed record on "thinking before acting".

[(Anonymous)]

The things that worry me most about him aren't his service absenteeism. It's the deficit, unemployment, future likely bankrupting of the Social Security System by his policies, and the questionable practice of refunding taxes while expanding the budget. I would rather pay my taxes and not let the economy fall apart.

I am also really aggravated about the exporting of jobs out of this country; however, I think that if that is caused by NAFTA, both the Democrats and the Republicans are to blame. Is anyone in either party going to reverse that? Isn't half of Silicon Valley unemployed now because of that? Many of the largest American companies' tech support phone lines are located now overseas. I miss the lower unemployment rate we had before Bush came into office but I'm not sure if it's his fault or would have happened the same under Gore. I'm not sure how far 9/11 impacted the things I tend to blame on Bush, which might have happened to any president. -lisa

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

Like, what, an imminent invasion by Iraq?

Or do you mean a willingness to actually DO things concerning the problems facing the country... things that don't help or actually harm?

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

It's hard to blame NAFTA for the tech job exodus, since the jobs are going to India and other Asian countries, not Canada and Mexico.

[tongodeon.livejournal.com]

Factcheck.org has a good, fact-filled article (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=131) about whether Bush is a deserter or not.

My opinion is that Bush may or may not have missed some time, but if he did go missing it apparently wasn't a big enough deal for the Army to file paperwork or keep a record of the problem. When he left the National Guard he didn't get DFR for going AWOL as implied by Moore: he "requested and was granted special permission to end his six-year hitch eight months early."

There are enough huge, non-debatable problems with Bush that we don't need to waste our time pursuing minor or fictional ones. Doing so dilutes the message and undermines credibility on other issues.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

That site rules. Thanks, Søren.

I shoulda stuck by my "Michael Moore is a windbag" guns.

[lots42.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure what you're getting at. By 'willingness to do things' I mean unlike Clinton who just mouthed empty platitudes whenever more American soldiers died and then fired off a few missiles when things got heated

[lots42.livejournal.com]

That's the first I heard about Harken Oil and Bushie actually giving an explanation for his absence.

For this I blame Communists. Damn Reds

[lots42.livejournal.com]

I agree with you fully

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

Uhh. Do you wanna run a count of how many American soldiers died during 8 years of Clinton versus 3 years of Bush? You can also look up anti-terrorism efforts during Clinton's second term versus the first year and a half of Bush.

[tongodeon.livejournal.com]

That site rules. Thanks, Søren.

Factcheck.org kicks much ass on all sides. I've seen them raking pretty much everyone over the coals without regard to party at one time or another. That's my only political affiliation: I'm in the "stop the bullshit and just tell me what's actually going on" party. And currently that party is DEFINITELY not the one Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld are in.

you mean like

[vardissakheli.livejournal.com]

DOing things about, say, the specific warnings from Clinton's security advisers about Bin Laden and airplanes back when he first took office?

[palecur.livejournal.com]

He spends like a thing there isn't an appropriate metaphor for. A drunken sailor would at least get laid instead of flinging cash into the gutter.

He's weak as all get-out on free trade. The steel and airline protectionism makes me seethe.

While the OMGPATRIOTACT stuff can get pretty exaggerated, and it is, it's pretty safe to say he's not the hugest booster of individual liberties.

I'm still voting for him.

Why?

Two reasons.

Imprimis:

A genuine commitment to breaking down and reshaping the culture that breeds terrorists. Blaming our crappy foreign policy for terrorism is insufficent; where are the Guatemalan, German, Japanese, Colombian terrorists? The Italian fanatics blowing themselves up in shopping malls? There's a long list of regions with arguable grievances of similar, if not greater, scope vs. the US. 'Ask yourselves why they hate you' does not suffice. There are specific pathological things wrong with this specific culture, and the conquest of Iraq is a critical first step in the decades-long process of destroying that culture and replacing it with something less relentlessly inimical. The President is the only person standing for election this cycle that has a strong commitment to that process, and I consider it vital to the long-term well-being of the nation.

Secundus:

Judicial appointments. The judiciary has become a de facto legislative branch; judicial fiat reshapes and flat-out creates more and more of our laws. I want to restrain that trend, or failing that, balance the courts with roughly equal activism on both sides. Strict constructionists would be ideal, but I'm not going to hold my breath on that one. I consider four years of Democratic judicial appointments an unacceptable risk. Republican judiciary appointments have a spotty record of partisanship (coughSoutercough), but Demo judiciary appointments are a lot more reliably (to me) bad.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

"A genuine commitment to breaking down and reshaping the culture that breeds terrorists."

That's pretty much utterly wrong. The attempt to "break down" the culture that breeds terrorists will fail. Look at Israel and how well they've done in that department. What Bush has done in the last 3 years doesn't make me feel any safer. And also consider how his administration grievously ignored any anti-terrorist information passed on by the Clinton administration.

Constructionism is an attempt to regard the Constitution as holy writ, and it should be considered pass´. If you want to see a restrained judiciary, maybe we should start with a legislative branch that passes cleaner and smarter laws, instead of crap that has riders hanging on it like the leech scene in "Stand By Me", or poorly thought-out crap like the Communications Decency Act.

How bad is Bush? I registered as a Democrat last week. That's how bad he is.

[tongodeon.livejournal.com]

Another good article about Bush-as-deserter. (http://slate.msn.com/id/2094496/)

The jist is more or less the same as the one that FactCheck.org reported: he didn't exactly remain on active duty once he went to Alabama, but it's definitely not clear-cut butand lack of incriminating documentation to the contrary, the honorable discharge essentially exonerates him.