Posted on 01/27/2006 10:21:06 AM PST by LK44-40
This just proves that a lot of retards have a place to congregate on the web.
Show me a link proving this. I recall a news conference during the TANG thing when McClellan was asked that question, and he said that Bush has never claimed that he volunteered for Nam. Of course, if you could show me the proof otherwise, I'd concede your point.
I think her claim that she had never even heard any suggestion that W had volunteered to go to Viet Nam speaks volumes about the breadth of her political knowlege. It goes all the way from center left to far left.
How could she possibly do politically oriented talk shows throughout the election/RatherGate cycle and never even have heard this?
It reminds me of Pauline Kael's famous remark that surely Nixon had not really won the election because no one she knew [among her NYC chums] had voted for him.
Having "never claimed" to have volunteered is different than denying one volunteered.
The comment you cited wasn't mine, but IMHO sending her the text of or a link to the entire thread would probably be a waste of time. She would probably trash it as soon as she sees the source and realizes any mention of it would be free publicity for Free Republic. Information, however valid, which contradicts a leftist's world view and fantasy life ("fake but accurate"?) doesn't generally make it past the fog bank in their frontal lobes.
I've never heard that Bush had voluneered to go but was turned down. Any more info on this?
It's really irrelevant and tiresom.
Our president did not serve in viet nam, it needs to be dropped.
The notion that he wasn't qualified itself seems to establish its lack of credibility. Of course, like I said, I'm willing to be proven wrong. Got the proof?
If you haven't seen enough proof in this thread by now that Bush had volunteered, then I don't know what it would take to convince you.
It's called: "Grasping at straws."
does she dispute the fact that kerry went to Vietnam and came back only to betray his brothers in arms? Huh??
How about something that says that he did volunteer for Vietnam? That might convince me.
Probably....but I certainly don't!
No need. You are quoting third hand information. What Scott said is immaterial to your original claim. I'm sorry, I don't want to be argumentative, but thinking something is true is not the same as a fact and only served to obfuscate the issue. Someone just catching your post would come away with an incorrect factoid and will repost it somewhere else as fact, and then this 'fact' blurs the truth. A good rule of thumb to use when someone states 'I think' is to immediately change the channel. But FReepers should have a higher standard than a talking head, especially in the time of Google.
Well, I read the other posts. They don't say that Bush volunteered for Vietnam. They say he asked about a program that he was not qualified for, but for which if he'd been accepted, there might have been a chance he'd go to Vietnam.
So what? He volunteered for the National Guard, too. Thousands of National Guard volunteers were sent to Vietnam. That's not the same thing as volunteering for Vietnam.
Let me just say this: I'm glad Bush was smart enough not to make the baseless claim during the election that he volunteered for Vietnam because of that. If he had, Kerry might now be President.
I heard it during RatherGate.
Roger on the last. May I observe, however, that a modest man would not claim to have done a courageous or charitable act, such as serving your country, saving a drowning dog, or helping a family down on their luck; That is part of being a man. President Bush is a man. Sen. Kerry and that other dipstick Congressman Murtha are pale imitations of a man as demonstrated by their calling attention to their past laudatory actions. A real man would have let those actions speak for themselves or let others speak for him, not stand around like a young child crowing over using the toilet for the first time.
IIRC; there wasn't much need for suupersonic interceptors anywhere in the war zone....at least not on our side.
(no use for 102 or 106 there, still workhorse interceptors here when he flew for TANG.)
Me neither and neither do the Swift Boat heroes!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.