The point of this thread, to me at least, seems to be to refute the notion that Bush wasn't AWOL, and not that his level of service meets with your approval. You can belittle him if you like with your "my service was tougher than his" attitude, but from where I sit it just makes you look jaded. I thank you for your service to our country and I'm sorry you didn't get the respect you deserved when you came back home, but I hope that you can some day get over it.
It seems to me that Bush puts himself on the line each and every day with the political decisions he makes. He doesn't stick his finger in the air to see if he has the right opinion and then do a poll to see what tie to wear like the last guy, a draft dodging molly coddled bed wetter, philanderer.
Whether you are aware of it or not, our country split into two halves nearly 40 years ago - those that served in that war and those that didn't. Those that didn't went on with their lives without a ripple - no sacrifice, no losses, no discomfort. School kids focused on football games and fraternities and beer. Young men went out and started making a living. The sun shone and the birds sang for them.
On the other side of the world, the other young men sweated and bled and did without. A constant river of wounded flowed through the hospital networks, hundreds of thousands whose lives were permanently changed, invisible to the rest of this country. The dead came home in aluminum cans for furtive and usually perfunctory ceremonies to be buried and mourned by their families.
See any disparity here? Any difference in levels of patriotism and commitment?
Is George Bush a better President than the slime that preceded him? Of course. But do I equate his service during the Vietnam War with the guys that took their chances for their country? No. Never.
As far as "getting over it" goes - should I? Those names on that wall in Washington were good people - better than almost all of those that so energetically want to lead us. They were friends of mine.