Deserters shoul be jailed!
taranaki
01-23-2004, 01:35 PM
George W. Bush, A.W.O.L
In last night's Democratic Presidential debate in New Hampshire, broadcast on the Fox News (Nusciance?) Channel and ABC's Nightline, Peter Jennings went after Wesley Clark -- and me -- because I said I want to see Clark debate Bush... "The General vs. The Deserter."
Jennings, referring to me as "the controversial filmmaker," asked if Clark wanted to distance himself from me and my "reckless" remark. Clark would not back down, stating how "delighted" he was with my support, and that I was entitled to say what I wanted to say -- AND that I was not the only one who had made these charges against Bush.
The pundits immediately went berserk after the debate. As well they should. Because they know that they -- and much of the mainstream media -- ignored this Bush AWOL story when it was first revealed by an investigation in the Boston Globe (in 2000). The Globe said it appeared George W. Bush skipped out in the middle of his Texas Air National Guard service -- and no charges were ever brought against him. It was a damning story, and Bush has never provided any documents or evidence to refute the Globe's charges.
George W. Bush was missing for at least a 12 month period. That is an undisputed fact. If you or I did that, we would serve time.
Senator Daniel Inouye, Democrat of Hawaii and a World War II veteran, joined with Vietnam vets Sen. Max Cleland and Sen. Bob Kerrey to challenge Bush on the gaps in his military record. "The question is, where were you, Governor Bush? What would you do as commander-in-chief if someone in the National Guard did the same thing? At the least, I would have been court-martialed. At the least, I would have been placed in prison," Inouye said.
The Washington Post, the New Republic, and others also presented the evidence that Bush had fled from duty.
The most comprehensive piece I've seen was on Tom Paine.com with all the relevant links and documents.
There are far more important issues to deal with in this election year. Poor Peter Jennings. What was he doing on Fox? All that seems left of his Canadianess is the way he pronounced my name ("Michael Moooore"). The question he posed to Clark was typical of a lazy media looking for a way to distract the viewers from the real issues: the war, the economy, and the failures of the Bush administration. But if they want to really get into the issue of Bush and his "service record," then I say, bring it on! The facts are all there, including the empty flyboy suit.
Yours,
Michael Moore
mmflint@aol.com
www.michaelmoore.com
In last night's Democratic Presidential debate in New Hampshire, broadcast on the Fox News (Nusciance?) Channel and ABC's Nightline, Peter Jennings went after Wesley Clark -- and me -- because I said I want to see Clark debate Bush... "The General vs. The Deserter."
Jennings, referring to me as "the controversial filmmaker," asked if Clark wanted to distance himself from me and my "reckless" remark. Clark would not back down, stating how "delighted" he was with my support, and that I was entitled to say what I wanted to say -- AND that I was not the only one who had made these charges against Bush.
The pundits immediately went berserk after the debate. As well they should. Because they know that they -- and much of the mainstream media -- ignored this Bush AWOL story when it was first revealed by an investigation in the Boston Globe (in 2000). The Globe said it appeared George W. Bush skipped out in the middle of his Texas Air National Guard service -- and no charges were ever brought against him. It was a damning story, and Bush has never provided any documents or evidence to refute the Globe's charges.
George W. Bush was missing for at least a 12 month period. That is an undisputed fact. If you or I did that, we would serve time.
Senator Daniel Inouye, Democrat of Hawaii and a World War II veteran, joined with Vietnam vets Sen. Max Cleland and Sen. Bob Kerrey to challenge Bush on the gaps in his military record. "The question is, where were you, Governor Bush? What would you do as commander-in-chief if someone in the National Guard did the same thing? At the least, I would have been court-martialed. At the least, I would have been placed in prison," Inouye said.
The Washington Post, the New Republic, and others also presented the evidence that Bush had fled from duty.
The most comprehensive piece I've seen was on Tom Paine.com with all the relevant links and documents.
There are far more important issues to deal with in this election year. Poor Peter Jennings. What was he doing on Fox? All that seems left of his Canadianess is the way he pronounced my name ("Michael Moooore"). The question he posed to Clark was typical of a lazy media looking for a way to distract the viewers from the real issues: the war, the economy, and the failures of the Bush administration. But if they want to really get into the issue of Bush and his "service record," then I say, bring it on! The facts are all there, including the empty flyboy suit.
Yours,
Michael Moore
mmflint@aol.com
www.michaelmoore.com
syr74
01-23-2004, 02:06 PM
Amazing to me that Michael Moore is SO outraged over Bush's service record, but thinks the former Gen. Clark is some kind of hero...THAT is funny.
Wes Clark was releaved of command for, among other things, personal integrity issues. That may sound very simple, but in military jargon that is a very nice way of saying a very bad thing. It is not uncommon to dismiss a high ranking officer that has disgraced himself in a very low key manner...rather than bring a charges or start an inquiry and face the disgrace that his behavior would cause the military. We do not know what Clark did, but it has to have been something in the course of his duties that was so reprehensible it forced his dismissal. I would DAMN sure love to know what that is.
His military service will not help him in a campaign, his behaviour has turned it into a liability for him. Most military men I know, and EVERY grunt I know, despises the man and considers him a disgrace to the uniform. Liberals like Moore flock to him because liberals in uniform are rare, and even disgraced military service appeals to them. Say Clarks name in a room full of Marine grunts with recent surface and you are damned likely to start a fight......he is simply hated.
Clark, and his boss Clinton, have each been responsible for placing our troops in harms way...for literally nothing. In Haiti Marines were on the ground underequipped, underarmed, and way undermanned......nobody cared. In Somalia our Rangers were on the ground undermanned, underequipped, and undersupported.....a lot of them died in an effort to save money (no joke) and too few cared enough to lay the blame where it belonged. The military is still trying to figure out exactly what their objective was In Bosnia and what jackass came up with the orders. The list goes on, and on, and on. If Clark had been in command of an Iraqi invasion you can be damn sure most military guys think casualties would have been much, much higher.
Only liberals are impressed by Clark. It would be marvelous if he or Dean got the nomination. Both are completely off their rockers. And now, Senator Kerry has disgraced himself too. Claiming that US troops on the ground were engaged in the wholesale slaughter of women and children, and cutting off the ears of living prisoners. What a bunch of bullshit.
I have a lot of good friends and family members who have served in Iraq and all of them that have returned and I have spoken with think this is a total load of bullshit. They are literally at a loss for where he got this stuff. The Senator may have distinguished himself in combat during Vietnam, but he has gone out of his way to disgrace himelf since that time. If liberals think Clark's or Kerry's service is going to help them in a Presidential bid they are obviously way out of touch with the mindset of the military community in general.
The only Democratic candidate who is a sane, honest man...is old Joe. I don't like his policies, but I wouldn't want any of the rest of them to have thier fingers anywhere near a nuclear football.
Wes Clark was releaved of command for, among other things, personal integrity issues. That may sound very simple, but in military jargon that is a very nice way of saying a very bad thing. It is not uncommon to dismiss a high ranking officer that has disgraced himself in a very low key manner...rather than bring a charges or start an inquiry and face the disgrace that his behavior would cause the military. We do not know what Clark did, but it has to have been something in the course of his duties that was so reprehensible it forced his dismissal. I would DAMN sure love to know what that is.
His military service will not help him in a campaign, his behaviour has turned it into a liability for him. Most military men I know, and EVERY grunt I know, despises the man and considers him a disgrace to the uniform. Liberals like Moore flock to him because liberals in uniform are rare, and even disgraced military service appeals to them. Say Clarks name in a room full of Marine grunts with recent surface and you are damned likely to start a fight......he is simply hated.
Clark, and his boss Clinton, have each been responsible for placing our troops in harms way...for literally nothing. In Haiti Marines were on the ground underequipped, underarmed, and way undermanned......nobody cared. In Somalia our Rangers were on the ground undermanned, underequipped, and undersupported.....a lot of them died in an effort to save money (no joke) and too few cared enough to lay the blame where it belonged. The military is still trying to figure out exactly what their objective was In Bosnia and what jackass came up with the orders. The list goes on, and on, and on. If Clark had been in command of an Iraqi invasion you can be damn sure most military guys think casualties would have been much, much higher.
Only liberals are impressed by Clark. It would be marvelous if he or Dean got the nomination. Both are completely off their rockers. And now, Senator Kerry has disgraced himself too. Claiming that US troops on the ground were engaged in the wholesale slaughter of women and children, and cutting off the ears of living prisoners. What a bunch of bullshit.
I have a lot of good friends and family members who have served in Iraq and all of them that have returned and I have spoken with think this is a total load of bullshit. They are literally at a loss for where he got this stuff. The Senator may have distinguished himself in combat during Vietnam, but he has gone out of his way to disgrace himelf since that time. If liberals think Clark's or Kerry's service is going to help them in a Presidential bid they are obviously way out of touch with the mindset of the military community in general.
The only Democratic candidate who is a sane, honest man...is old Joe. I don't like his policies, but I wouldn't want any of the rest of them to have thier fingers anywhere near a nuclear football.
2strokebloke
01-23-2004, 03:23 PM
Hmmmm, GWB was missing eh? As for Clark (see above post) I believe the story was about George W. Bush going missing for a year, not about some punk who nobody cares about.
Sounds like you may have missed the entire point of the article.
Anyway, I'm sure it's not the worst thing GWB has ever done.
Sounds like you may have missed the entire point of the article.
Anyway, I'm sure it's not the worst thing GWB has ever done.
syr74
01-23-2004, 03:38 PM
No, I think got the point just fine 2 stroke. The real "poijnt" is that liberals don't really care about how reprehensible someone's behaviour might be....unless they are a conservative.
Moore, and the majority of liberals IMO could care less about any of the above mentioned items....unless they figure out how they can somehow help advance the liberal cause. The vast majority liberals are morally bankrupt, and only they seem not to know it.
The real point of the artical "Hey, here is another way to possibly get a liberal Dem elected". I am just glad that fewer and fewer people seem to be fooled by the lefts political bullshit.
Oh, and I thought I might point out that for all the hell Dems raise over this issue..The reason no action has even been taken by anyone...including many Dem officials who could start it themselves....is that there is not one document that supports the idea that he was awol. Not one document anywhere...ever.
When people claim he was awol for this period they propose that since there is so little documentation regarding his service over this period he MUST have been awol. Yep, thats their basis for reasoning....solid huh...lol. They also bring up the fact that the General in command of the airbase he was stationed at canniot recall seeing him. Okay, I have a cousin who is an active duty Lt,. Colonel in a Sepcial Forces Unit, and until he reached the level of Lt. Colonel he will tell you he virtually never saw a General...and he is active duty. Bush was just a reserve Lt. It just gets more and more ridiculous. Hey, a lady was murdered across town and since there isn't enough proof you were home and your neighbor didn't see you I am going to prosecute you for the crime even though there is not a shred of evidence you did it. How ridiculous.
The ONLY document they have found that addresses this issue is a request for verification of Lt. Bush's whereabouts for some kind of paperwork audit, and the response was that he was currently fulfilling his obligations in Texas.
But hey, who am I to stop all the entertainment the liberal machine provides by making shit up?....roflmao.
Missing any points 2 stroke?...look hard enough I am certain they have made something else up as well. By the way...EVERYTHING I said about Wes Clark and Kerry is documented fact........no mystery to anyone. Ironic how things like that matter to most conservatives but generally not to the average liberal.
Moore, and the majority of liberals IMO could care less about any of the above mentioned items....unless they figure out how they can somehow help advance the liberal cause. The vast majority liberals are morally bankrupt, and only they seem not to know it.
The real point of the artical "Hey, here is another way to possibly get a liberal Dem elected". I am just glad that fewer and fewer people seem to be fooled by the lefts political bullshit.
Oh, and I thought I might point out that for all the hell Dems raise over this issue..The reason no action has even been taken by anyone...including many Dem officials who could start it themselves....is that there is not one document that supports the idea that he was awol. Not one document anywhere...ever.
When people claim he was awol for this period they propose that since there is so little documentation regarding his service over this period he MUST have been awol. Yep, thats their basis for reasoning....solid huh...lol. They also bring up the fact that the General in command of the airbase he was stationed at canniot recall seeing him. Okay, I have a cousin who is an active duty Lt,. Colonel in a Sepcial Forces Unit, and until he reached the level of Lt. Colonel he will tell you he virtually never saw a General...and he is active duty. Bush was just a reserve Lt. It just gets more and more ridiculous. Hey, a lady was murdered across town and since there isn't enough proof you were home and your neighbor didn't see you I am going to prosecute you for the crime even though there is not a shred of evidence you did it. How ridiculous.
The ONLY document they have found that addresses this issue is a request for verification of Lt. Bush's whereabouts for some kind of paperwork audit, and the response was that he was currently fulfilling his obligations in Texas.
But hey, who am I to stop all the entertainment the liberal machine provides by making shit up?....roflmao.
Missing any points 2 stroke?...look hard enough I am certain they have made something else up as well. By the way...EVERYTHING I said about Wes Clark and Kerry is documented fact........no mystery to anyone. Ironic how things like that matter to most conservatives but generally not to the average liberal.
2strokebloke
01-23-2004, 03:49 PM
"The majority of conservatives IMO could care less about any of the above mentioned items....unless they figure out how they can somehow help advance the conservative cause. The vast majority conservatives are morally bankrupt, and only they seem not to know it." :)
You're attacking their motives, as though conservative would never do anything to try and discredit liberals - rather than actually wondering about the point they made. Bush was missing for 12 months, he won't say where he was, and it seems nobody else knows where or what he was doing.
Nearly everything you accused them of doing just because they're liberal, one could accuse somebody of doing just because they were conservative, truth is people can do anything regardless of their political orientation.
I personally don't like M. Moore, but that doen't mean he hasn't raised and interesting, if not legitimate question about GWB's past service for this country. Where did he go? What was he doing? Why didn't he get in trouble for it?
You're attacking their motives, as though conservative would never do anything to try and discredit liberals - rather than actually wondering about the point they made. Bush was missing for 12 months, he won't say where he was, and it seems nobody else knows where or what he was doing.
Nearly everything you accused them of doing just because they're liberal, one could accuse somebody of doing just because they were conservative, truth is people can do anything regardless of their political orientation.
I personally don't like M. Moore, but that doen't mean he hasn't raised and interesting, if not legitimate question about GWB's past service for this country. Where did he go? What was he doing? Why didn't he get in trouble for it?
syr74
01-23-2004, 04:23 PM
Oh, so now it went from "he was awol" to a simpler "where was he".....How convenient. I, and IMO he, doesn't have to explain anything. The only document anyone has for that time period reports him as serving out his duty in Texas......I am sure that is good enough for him, and I know it is good enough for me. The liberal ideal that just one document isn't enough is their problem...not mine. If they want more I suppose they are just going to have to get over it.
YogsVR4
01-23-2004, 05:19 PM
Moore is as far left as you can get. Socialists think he's to liberal.
Nothing he says, regardless of who its about, shouldn't be taken seriously. They are not worth the photons it took to read.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
Nothing he says, regardless of who its about, shouldn't be taken seriously. They are not worth the photons it took to read.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
2strokebloke
01-23-2004, 05:49 PM
Nothing he says, regardless of who its about, shouldn't be taken seriously.
I think you mean that nothing he says should be taken seriously, not: nothing he says shouldn't be taken seriously, unless you believe everything he says is important, which certainly isn't true.
I love how the die-hard conservatives respond to liberal whining, by whining even louder. :biggrin:
I think you mean that nothing he says should be taken seriously, not: nothing he says shouldn't be taken seriously, unless you believe everything he says is important, which certainly isn't true.
I love how the die-hard conservatives respond to liberal whining, by whining even louder. :biggrin:
taranaki
01-23-2004, 05:54 PM
I wouldn't put Michael Moore in charge of the most powerful nation on the planet,but every country needs people like him to test the integrity of its leadership.As far as I can see,he has tested George Bush,and found a case that should be answered.As far as I am concerned,failing to turn up for your military duties is a bigger stain on a man's record than having an extra marital affair.
Flatrater
01-23-2004, 06:04 PM
Moore what a monkey's ass! What a crying whining jackass! You figure with Bush in office they could find somthing to write about besides what happened years and years ago. Moore needs to get a life!
All Moore is doing this trying to get his name in lights so he could make more money for himself! I really can care less what happened 20 years ago.Moore should be sent to Iraq qith a sign around his fat ass saying " I love Bush"!
All Moore is doing this trying to get his name in lights so he could make more money for himself! I really can care less what happened 20 years ago.Moore should be sent to Iraq qith a sign around his fat ass saying " I love Bush"!
taranaki
01-23-2004, 06:16 PM
Moore should be sent to Iraq qith a sign around his fat ass saying " I love Bush"!
But surely,if the Iraqis see Bush as their saviour from the evil empire of Saddam,they'd welcome Moore with open arms?
Don't think so.You just acknowledged that the Iraqis hate George Bush,and would harm his supporters.Now if you'd be good enough to acknowledge why they hate him so much,we'd be making some progress.
But surely,if the Iraqis see Bush as their saviour from the evil empire of Saddam,they'd welcome Moore with open arms?
Don't think so.You just acknowledged that the Iraqis hate George Bush,and would harm his supporters.Now if you'd be good enough to acknowledge why they hate him so much,we'd be making some progress.
YogsVR4
01-23-2004, 06:49 PM
I think you mean that nothing he says should be taken seriously, not: nothing he says shouldn't be taken seriously, unless you believe everything he says is important, which certainly isn't true.
I love how the die-hard conservatives respond to liberal whining, by whining even louder. :biggrin:
Thanks for the help with my misuse of the contraction. It should have been should.
In anycase, there are pleanty of die-hard conservatives that whine quite loud. They shouldn't (got it right this time) be taken seriously either.
For about the fiftieth time - I am libertarian, not conservative. I have serious issues with Republicans on taxes and social programs.
Also, I've pointed out that I've had personal interaction with Moore. The man is a dolt. Ts view of having people like him posing questions that should be answered can be accomplished by having someone at the nearest asylum write up a few.
Moore has found no case. He makes up loaded questions with idle speculation. His methodology is about the same as asking "Have you stopped beating your wife?"
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
I love how the die-hard conservatives respond to liberal whining, by whining even louder. :biggrin:
Thanks for the help with my misuse of the contraction. It should have been should.
In anycase, there are pleanty of die-hard conservatives that whine quite loud. They shouldn't (got it right this time) be taken seriously either.
For about the fiftieth time - I am libertarian, not conservative. I have serious issues with Republicans on taxes and social programs.
Also, I've pointed out that I've had personal interaction with Moore. The man is a dolt. Ts view of having people like him posing questions that should be answered can be accomplished by having someone at the nearest asylum write up a few.
Moore has found no case. He makes up loaded questions with idle speculation. His methodology is about the same as asking "Have you stopped beating your wife?"
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
TexasF355F1
01-23-2004, 07:15 PM
Moore sure seems to make a lot of noise about Bush and where he was during his military time. But did Moore ever serve?
Flatrater
01-23-2004, 07:35 PM
But surely,if the Iraqis see Bush as their saviour from the evil empire of Saddam,they'd welcome Moore with open arms?
Don't think so.You just acknowledged that the Iraqis hate George Bush,and would harm his supporters.Now if you'd be good enough to acknowledge why they hate him so much,we'd be making some progress.
Naki
Not all the Iraq people dislike Bush just the nut sacks that like to blow up their own people just so they can injury or kill an American. They hate Bush because they were born and bred to hate anything that isn't Islamic! I guess you didn't check the TV when we freed Iraq from Saddam! Run that thru a google search! Ha Ha
Don't think so.You just acknowledged that the Iraqis hate George Bush,and would harm his supporters.Now if you'd be good enough to acknowledge why they hate him so much,we'd be making some progress.
Naki
Not all the Iraq people dislike Bush just the nut sacks that like to blow up their own people just so they can injury or kill an American. They hate Bush because they were born and bred to hate anything that isn't Islamic! I guess you didn't check the TV when we freed Iraq from Saddam! Run that thru a google search! Ha Ha
2strokebloke
01-23-2004, 07:56 PM
I think you're being unfair to call people "nutsacks" just because they don't like Bush. Personally, would you like somebody that ordered your country to be blown up, just so you could be saved from having your own leader blow it up for you?
If the leader of another country sent his troops to the U.S. and bombed my house, and destroyed our infrastructure, I'd be pretty PO'd at the moment, even if the long run things turned out for the better. Plenty of people there have plenty of logical reasons to hate bush.
And it's pretty narrow minded of you (horses with blinders eating the hay, type of narrow minded) to simply say they hate him, because they're Islamic, and all they do is hate everything that's not Islamic.
If the leader of another country sent his troops to the U.S. and bombed my house, and destroyed our infrastructure, I'd be pretty PO'd at the moment, even if the long run things turned out for the better. Plenty of people there have plenty of logical reasons to hate bush.
And it's pretty narrow minded of you (horses with blinders eating the hay, type of narrow minded) to simply say they hate him, because they're Islamic, and all they do is hate everything that's not Islamic.
Flatrater
01-24-2004, 06:10 PM
I think you're being unfair to call people "nutsacks" just because they don't like Bush. Personally, would you like somebody that ordered your country to be blown up, just so you could be saved from having your own leader blow it up for you?
If the leader of another country sent his troops to the U.S. and bombed my house, and destroyed our infrastructure, I'd be pretty PO'd at the moment, even if the long run things turned out for the better. Plenty of people there have plenty of logical reasons to hate bush.
And it's pretty narrow minded of you (horses with blinders eating the hay, type of narrow minded) to simply say they hate him, because they're Islamic, and all they do is hate everything that's not Islamic.
Did I say all anti-Bush people were nutsacks? No I didn't I said the people who choose to strap a bomb to themselves blow up Innocent people just because someone told them to do it in the name of a religion! I can care less if you like Bush or not it doesn't make you a nutsack!
You call me narrow minded but you must think its ok to strap on a bomb in the name of Islam and go blow their own people up. Its not just American soliders dying, and the soliders there are doing what they were told to do. I am sure all the soliders would rather be home then be in Iraq! Do you think these little bombs are going to stop America from doing its job in Iraq? All it will do is harm more innocent people and not accomplish anything! The sooner the bombs and deaths stop the sooner the Americans will leave! Now I know what you will say that the Americans will not leave. It is impossible for us to stay there, if Bush tried to keep us there he will get voted out of office we won't allow this to happen.
Frankly I think you are more narrow minded then me. You refuse to even say anything positive about Bush all you want to do is Bush bash. I would even bet you think Clinton never lied under oath!
If the leader of another country sent his troops to the U.S. and bombed my house, and destroyed our infrastructure, I'd be pretty PO'd at the moment, even if the long run things turned out for the better. Plenty of people there have plenty of logical reasons to hate bush.
And it's pretty narrow minded of you (horses with blinders eating the hay, type of narrow minded) to simply say they hate him, because they're Islamic, and all they do is hate everything that's not Islamic.
Did I say all anti-Bush people were nutsacks? No I didn't I said the people who choose to strap a bomb to themselves blow up Innocent people just because someone told them to do it in the name of a religion! I can care less if you like Bush or not it doesn't make you a nutsack!
You call me narrow minded but you must think its ok to strap on a bomb in the name of Islam and go blow their own people up. Its not just American soliders dying, and the soliders there are doing what they were told to do. I am sure all the soliders would rather be home then be in Iraq! Do you think these little bombs are going to stop America from doing its job in Iraq? All it will do is harm more innocent people and not accomplish anything! The sooner the bombs and deaths stop the sooner the Americans will leave! Now I know what you will say that the Americans will not leave. It is impossible for us to stay there, if Bush tried to keep us there he will get voted out of office we won't allow this to happen.
Frankly I think you are more narrow minded then me. You refuse to even say anything positive about Bush all you want to do is Bush bash. I would even bet you think Clinton never lied under oath!
2strokebloke
01-24-2004, 07:27 PM
Not all the Iraq people dislike Bush just the nut sacks...
Just the the nut sacks dislike him? You sure make it sound as though in your opinion, just nut sacks, and nobody else in Iraq dislike GWB.
Am I narrow minded for thinking that people have logical reason to not like GWB?
As for Bill Clinton - I don't think I've ever said he was a great president either.
Just the the nut sacks dislike him? You sure make it sound as though in your opinion, just nut sacks, and nobody else in Iraq dislike GWB.
Am I narrow minded for thinking that people have logical reason to not like GWB?
As for Bill Clinton - I don't think I've ever said he was a great president either.
justacruiser
01-26-2004, 11:34 PM
As far as I am concerned,failing to turn up for your military duties is a bigger stain on a man's record than having an extra marital affair.
Whoah there, would this be Clinton you're speaking of? The man who was a weed-smoking, er, excuse me, weed-not-inhaling DRAFT DODGER?
Military obligation... doesn't that mean if you are drafted that you must report in order to fulfill your 'military duties'?
Whoah there, would this be Clinton you're speaking of? The man who was a weed-smoking, er, excuse me, weed-not-inhaling DRAFT DODGER?
Military obligation... doesn't that mean if you are drafted that you must report in order to fulfill your 'military duties'?
2strokebloke
01-28-2004, 12:57 PM
Bill Clinton? I thought we were talking about George W. Bush? Anyway, my thoughts are that they're both losers.
justacruiser
01-28-2004, 05:08 PM
Bill Clinton? I thought we were talking about George W. Bush? Anyway, my thoughts are that they're both losers.
What, now they're accusing Bush of deserting? I wonder when they're going to start accusations of his father being an old Nazi war criminal whos evil spawn is now in office. :/ Lame...
What, now they're accusing Bush of deserting? I wonder when they're going to start accusations of his father being an old Nazi war criminal whos evil spawn is now in office. :/ Lame...
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2025