Quote:
|
Did he fulfill it in the manner he should have? No, not by a long shot but it beat Slick Willie's record by several hundred miles
|
Huh? Maybe we read different articles. Allow me to summarize:
<b>Clinton</b>
- Clinton is about to graduate college and has a Rhodes Scholarship, something only a very few people get.
- He pulls political strings so that he can can go to graduate school, because he doesn't want to serve in vietnam, a war which he has always publicly opposed.
- Later on, he fudges the facts about exactly what happened.
<b>Bush</b>
- Bush is about to graduate college
- He takes a pilots test and gets a score so low that he would never get in normally.
- His father pulls strings to get him into the air national guard and pull to the top of an 18-month long queue.
- Four years into his six years of service, he skips out, informing no one and ignoring his orders. He did this perhaps to avoid a random drug test that he might fail, since he was using cocaine around that time.
- He pulls strings to get an honorable discharge 8 months before his service is up.
- He fudges the facts afterwards.
Again, you said the clinton facts were interesting in light of the "criticisms" that bush is taking in the war on terrorism. How are the bush facts suddenly not interesting at all? So the fact that bush didn't fulfill his military obligations in the manner that he "should have" (your words) is meaningless?
Personally, you're losing all credibility with me on this one, LD. I've admitted that clinton did some ethically questionable things, but certainly not to the extent of your original post. The fact that you can't do the same for Bush makes you look hypocritical.