Question for people who hate Clinton and like Bush

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 26, 2003, 1:09 pm

Clinton did not have the respect of the people in the military who served under him while president. Because of 2 things i guess: the gays in the miltary thing and the fact that he went to Oxford in London prolonging graduate study to avoid being drafted.

Bush used political influence to gain entry into the National Guard, but has the 100% total devotion of the military.

From reading the article above, i honestly think i probably would have really liked Bush in his 20s. He seems like a really normal guy. I know i would have taken advantage of my family's political connections to avoid going to Vietnam.

I am just wondering why that doesn't bother people, the way it really raised the ire of those who despised Clinton. Is there a great distinction between keeping an education deferrment and joining a cushy National Guard unit that will never call you into active duty? Or is that article above inaccurate as well?

edit: maybe an important distinction is how the soldiers and their families view the support that the 2 different administrations gave to them regarding their pay/quality of life etc.

Gurugurumaki · Post by **Gurugurumaki** » March 26, 2003, 1:15 pm

I would say it all comes down to party lines, Democrat or Republican.

/shrug

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » March 26, 2003, 1:19 pm

The way I see it is that it isn't Bush himself that the military forces like, but the people he has surrounding him. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powel, etc..., because they are seen by many to be the best men in the country to lead up anything to do with the military.

Kluden · Post by **Kluden** » March 26, 2003, 1:22 pm

I believe the military hatred of Clinton had more to do with his budgeting of funds to the military branches, more than his draft dodging. So I would make that "three reasons". This I know for fact from the "horses mouth" as they say.

I personally dislike both of the two men listed, and believe that each is guilty of dodging the draft...each in their own ways. But as always, I fail to see the correlation of presidential duties vs. draft dodging...so I don't judge either on that issue.

Best part about that article...is the mental image of Dubya coming home drunk, and challenging his daddy to a fight...too damn funny.

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » March 26, 2003, 1:48 pm

You look at the history of the US, the first person to do something like this is always treated badly, the second is usually treated like, so-and-so did it, so what. Yes it's partly a Demo/Repub things, but mostly it's a US mentality thing

Atokal · Post by **Atokal** » March 26, 2003, 2:06 pm

Voronwë wrote:
I am just wondering why that doesn't bother people, the way it really raised the ire of those who despised Clinton. Is there a great distinction between keeping an education deferrment and joining a cushy National Guard unit that will never call you into active duty? Or is that article above inaccurate as well?

Couple of things I would mention here Voro, first that when GWB signed up with the National Guard there was no guarantee that the war in Vietnam would be concluded before he had the necessary hours in flight to qualify for combat.

Second it seems that GWB did nothing to alienate himself from his peers, he is constantly referred to as a very likeable guy who on a personal level never used his fathers success as a stepping stone.

Unfortunately there is not a comparable article regarding Clinton to gage this opinion against.

Cheers

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » March 26, 2003, 2:13 pm

Atokal wrote:
Voronwë wrote:
I am just wondering why that doesn't bother people, the way it really raised the ire of those who despised Clinton. Is there a great distinction between keeping an education deferrment and joining a cushy National Guard unit that will never call you into active duty? Or is that article above inaccurate as well?
Second it seems that GWB did nothing to alienate himself from his peers, he is constantly referred to as a very likeable guy who on a personal level never used his fathers success as a stepping stone.

Cheers

Except go AWOL?

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » March 26, 2003, 3:03 pm

Bush served... Clinton didn't. It's really that simple.

In December 1969, George W. returned to Houston to hone his skills and eventually fly solo on the all-weather F-102, firing its weapons and conducting intercept missions against supersonic targets. He learned with a verve that impressed his superiors, becoming the the first hometown graduate of the 147th's newly established Combat Crew Training School. The group's public relations office celebrated his solo flight in March 1970 with a press release that began:

"George Walker Bush is one member of the younger generation who doesn't get his kicks from pot or hashish or speed. . . . As far as kicks are concerned, Lt. Bush gets his from the roaring afterburner of the F-102."

...and from whence the AWOL comment?

Bush graduated from Combat Crew Training School on June 23, 1970, having fulfilled his two years of active duty.

Bush used his family connections to avoid service in Viet Nam. No doubt. However he did it in a way that is acceptable to conservatives and I think America in general.

Atokal · Post by **Atokal** » March 26, 2003, 3:09 pm

Pherr the Dorf wrote:
Atokal wrote:
Voronwë wrote:
I am just wondering why that doesn't bother people, the way it really raised the ire of those who despised Clinton. Is there a great distinction between keeping an education deferrment and joining a cushy National Guard unit that will never call you into active duty? Or is that article above inaccurate as well?
Second it seems that GWB did nothing to alienate himself from his peers, he is constantly referred to as a very likeable guy who on a personal level never used his fathers success as a stepping stone.

Cheers
Except go AWOL?

Didn't see that in the article, perhaps you could quote the passage that says he went AWOL.

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » March 26, 2003, 3:18 pm

I would search harder for a million more links but here are the basics.
http://awol.gq.nu/AWOL_Globe%20series.htm

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » March 26, 2003, 4:04 pm

I think your AWOL comment was a bit of overstatement...

''Well, then it comes rating time, and someone says, `Oh...he hasn't fulfilled his obligation.' I'll bet someone called him up and said, `George, you're in a pickle. Get your ass down here and perform some duty.' And he did,'' Lloyd said.

That would explain, Lloyd said, the records showing Bush cramming so many drills into May, June, and July 1973. During those three months, Bush spent 36 days on duty.

I spent a year in the Army Reserves in 1981 and they were very lenient about drill participation.

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » March 26, 2003, 4:11 pm

Clinton related...

Wednesday, March 26, 2003
LITTLE ROCK, Ark; Former President Clinton said Americans should support President Bush and U.S. troops in the war against Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82209,00.html

To me this is the first thing Clinton has said in years that deserves respect. Yet, I found myself wondering, "What's in it, for him?".

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 26, 2003, 4:13 pm

maybe Haliburton is building his Presidential Library.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » March 26, 2003, 4:27 pm

My own personal like and dislike (neither is storng enough to call hate or love, I reserve those for personal and intimate associations) has nothing to do with whether Bush or Clinton served or not.

I can look at George Bush and expect that he believes what he is telling me.

When I look at Bill Clinton I see a blank fog behind his eyes. He is a hollow shell waiting to be filled (idealogically speaking) and that scared the living shit out of me.

In short, I may diss someone for making stupid decisions, but I will admire them for having the balls to tackle the situation. Fence sitting and trying to do the popular thing sickens me.

Raistin · Post by **Raistin** » March 26, 2003, 5:09 pm

If you miss guard/res. drill now you go to jail. They dont fuck around anymore. Up till the first time we went to Iraq, the effects of not going to drill weekends was very , nonthreating.

If you miss 1day with out letting them know why *like a death, and well....thats pretty much it*, they will call the county police, and they will put you in jail for 2 weeks. Fine you 250 dollars, and reduce you in rank. You do it again, you get busted back to E-1, go back to jail, 500 dollar fine. Last time is 30 days in jail, 1000 dollar fine, and a bad discharge from the service.And since it was the worst discharge, you wont be able to get any goverment jobs, any programs, and pretty much look like a peice of shit.

Even if Bush was caught AWOL he wouldnt have spent time in jail or anything. His daddy and friends would have pulled him out and save face. Id much rather have a president going to school to advoid war, as compared to joining some slack ass do nothing guard unit, by having daddy influance some buddies because of money, and go AWOL.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 26, 2003, 5:27 pm

Fallanthas wrote:My own personal like and dislike (neither is storng enough to call hate or love, I reserve those for personal and intimate associations) has nothing to do with whether Bush or Clinton served or not.

I can look at George Bush and expect that he believes what he is telling me.

When I look at Bill Clinton I see a blank fog behind his eyes. He is a hollow shell waiting to be filled (idealogically speaking) and that scared the living shit out of me.

In short, I may diss someone for making stupid decisions, but I will admire them for having the balls to tackle the situation. Fence sitting and trying to do the popular thing sickens me.

Yes far be it for elected government officials to try and do the popular thing. When Bush does it he is a paragon of democracy and when Clinton did it he was a gladhanding kiss ass worried about his image.

I will reiterate that I wish you were smart enough to realize how stupid you sound.

Marbus · Post by **Marbus** » March 26, 2003, 5:49 pm

I think Bill said what he said yesterday because it was the right thing to say. After being in the hot seat for 8 years I think he understands people getting upset and blaming someone for something that shouldn't be an issue. Although I haven't seen him but once since he became President I know that he is a person who likes to be liked. I think all the stuff with Monica and people getting bent out of shape hurt him personally, at least that is my opinion. After being their I don't think he would ever do the same to another President. Plus, as I said, he was just being a good American.

Marb

Wulfran · Post by **Wulfran** » March 26, 2003, 6:15 pm

Yes far be it for elected government officials to try and do the popular thing.

That is a trap: people don't always like what is best for them or what is needed. An example: no one likes taxes, yet they are a necessary evil to fund the operations of governments.

We elect our governments/leaders because we follow the same general ideology and think that our candidate is someone we trust to make decisions on behalf of us (be it on a municipal, state/provincial or federal level). Someone who governs solely according to the polls isn't worrying about what is right for their electorate, they are worried about what is right for thier own career, and if their electorate is uninformed on an issue, it can blow up in their face.

An election is a popularity contest, good governance is not.

Millie · Post by **Millie** » March 26, 2003, 6:21 pm

I love how people claim Bush is so "honest" and "belieavable," simply because he speaks slowly, stumbles over words, and squints OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS. He does that because he has trouble reading the TelePrompter, not because he's being honest.

I guess being really stupid is an asset for Bush, because people find it charming. It's funny how Americans see things that way. When you're too smart for your own good, it works against you. People are intimidated by you, or they find your arrogant and unlikeable. When you're stupid, on the other hand, other stupid people have no problem relating to you. They see you as "down to Earth," approachable, and honest.

I can guarantee you that Bush has no personal opinion about anything his speechwriters hand him. Hearing him fumble his way through the speeches, I wonder on occasion whether he even practices reading them beforehand. But ultimately, he just goes up on stage and says what he's been advised to say. He's no different from any other politician in that regard.

The difference between Clinton and Bush is that Bush has the dumb Everyman quality about him. The average American can relate to him. That's just the luck of being born stupid; you don't even have to try to gain affection.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 26, 2003, 6:22 pm

you can't compare income tax to policy decisions.

Neost · Post by **Neost** » March 26, 2003, 7:09 pm

Bill is toeing the line for his return to the Whitehouse.

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » March 26, 2003, 7:54 pm

Millie wrote:I can guarantee you that Bush has no personal opinion about anything his speechwriters hand him. Hearing him fumble his way through the speeches,

Bullshit.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 26, 2003, 8:00 pm

So why is that considered bullshit Metanis while this quote is considered gospel for you?

When I look at Bill Clinton I see a blank fog behind his eyes. He is a hollow shell waiting to be filled (idealogically speaking) and that scared the living shit out of me.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 26, 2003, 8:11 pm

Metanis wrote:
Millie wrote:I can guarantee you that Bush has no personal opinion about anything his speechwriters hand him. Hearing him fumble his way through the speeches,
Bullshit.

http://www.veeshanvault.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3220

Denadeb · Post by **Denadeb** » March 26, 2003, 8:39 pm

Voro the biggest reason has to do with how each party funds the military. Most of the time the Republicans fund us OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS better than the Democrats. The thing with Gays was also a big thing against Clinton but other than the gay thing its more a party type of thing.

Republicans tend to be good for military and Democrats arn't thats about the extent of it.

Hoarmurath · Post by **Hoarmurath** » March 26, 2003, 8:40 pm

First off, I apologize for making a post regarding the original topic of this thread.

I served in the Army for several years under both George Bush (the first) and Clinton and my personal opinion was that people disliked Clinton because he wanted to reduce military spending. People liked Bush because he was all for increasing military spending. I honestly think that it is as simple as that. All of the other factors just helped to polarize someone's opinion.

Bottom line, military personnel tend to like presidents that increase military spending, and dislike those who reduce it.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 26, 2003, 9:03 pm

makes sense =)

what raised the question for me was seeing how well Bush was received at the speech in Tampa this morning.

Silvarel Mistmoon · Post by **Silvarel Mistmoon** » March 26, 2003, 9:15 pm

Clinton did dodge the draft and he protested against the military on foreign soil.
He made it clear he was anti military. He even wanted the Marines at the White House to be dressed in Civies and no saluting. That is a insult to a Marine.
He was not trusted knowing these things.
His Don't ask Don't tell policy came out only after he took a trip to a Air Craft Carrier in Norfolk VA and saw up close how these guys live and the privacy they don't have.

GB was in the National Guard where at least if they called up the National Guard for overseas he would still be serving his country as well as at home if they were needed during that time.

Drakoslay123 · Post by **Drakoslay123** » March 26, 2003, 10:11 pm

GB was in the National Guard where at least if they called up the National Guard for overseas he would still be serving his country as well as at home if they were needed during that time.

Just wondering...would Bush still join the National Guards if the U.S. already calling them to the front line? What are the chances of calling the national guards to the front line anyways?

Drakoslay

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » March 26, 2003, 10:30 pm

Kelshara wrote:So why is that considered bullshit Metanis while this quote is considered gospel for you?

Millie was lying, just like Clinton. That's Bullshit in my book.

I can guarantee you that Bush has no personal opinion about anything his speechwriters hand him.

Time Magazine recently did an article about the speechwriting process for George W. and he is firmly in control of the process and the content.

I would be happy to link that content however it appears to be considered Premium and is not free.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 26, 2003, 10:39 pm

Metanis wrote:Time Magazine recently did an article about the speechwriting process for George W. and he is firmly in control of the process and the content.

I would be happy to link that content however it appears to be considered Premium and is not free.

Whatever. You're wrong.

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » March 26, 2003, 10:44 pm

kyoukan type-R wrote:
Metanis wrote:Time Magazine recently did an article about the speechwriting process for George W. and he is firmly in control of the process and the content.

I would be happy to link that content however it appears to be considered Premium and is not free.
Whatever. You're wrong.

AM NOT!

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » March 26, 2003, 11:05 pm

http://www.awolbush.com/

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » March 27, 2003, 12:15 am

Forthe wrote:http://www.awolbush.com/

OMG! I hate Clinton... but I don't devote a web site to a tiny slice of his life!

More proof the LEFT hates Bush with unparallelled passion!

That's good in my book! We are getting to you!

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 27, 2003, 12:26 am

There are about 500 books and 50,000 websites written about clinton from conservative morons blaming him from everything from 9/11 to AIDS. Rush Limbaugh built a career from fatass loudmouthed nobody to fatass loudmothed celebrity 100% based solely around ranting about Clinton. You aren't seriously this blind?

Millie · Post by **Millie** » March 27, 2003, 1:38 am

Metanis wrote:
Millie wrote:I can guarantee you that Bush has no personal opinion about anything his speechwriters hand him. Hearing him fumble his way through the speeches,
Bullshit.

What a meticulousy worded and well thought out response. I applaud you, sir. You're really making your side of this argument look good!

Millie · Post by **Millie** » March 27, 2003, 1:41 am

Metanis wrote:
Kelshara wrote:So why is that considered bullshit Metanis while this quote is considered gospel for you?
Millie was lying, just like Clinton. That's Bullshit in my book.

Lying about what? The fact that Bush receives his speeches from a team of writers, and doesn't really have any intelligent or heartfelt opinion about what he's saying?

How is that a "lie?" Can YOU prove me wrong? By prove me wrong, I mean with facts and logical reasoning. That might be a little difficult for you.

Millie · Post by **Millie** » March 27, 2003, 1:43 am

Silvarel Mistmoon wrote:GB was in the National Guard where at least if they called up the National Guard for overseas he would still be serving his country as well as at home if they were needed during that time.

Bush wormed his way into the National Guard BECAUSE they weren't being sent to Vietnam. Do you get it yet?

Millie · Post by **Millie** » March 27, 2003, 1:45 am

Silvarel Mistmoon wrote:Clinton did dodge the draft and he protested against the military on foreign soil.
He made it clear he was anti military. He even wanted the Marines at the White House to be dressed in Civies and no saluting. That is a insult to a Marine.

I hate to break it to you, but the U.S. is not a fascist country, or even a military state. We, as citizens, have the right not to approve blindly of everything our government is doing. (Please Read: The Bill of Rights if you disagree). We're not a nation of Marines, and we aren't second-class citizens in the presence of Marines. We don't have to defer to their wishes.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » March 27, 2003, 11:00 am

I agree with OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS of whats been said. Republicans spend OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS on military and generally, Democrats do not. Obviously, being in the military you would like whomever gives you the most money/job security. When you add the needless and petty "my side is always right and yours is always wrong" attitude that infests the American public in regards to politics, it's rather clear cut.

When I asked my uncle about these questions (a marine for 15+ years) he said "Marines don't like faggots and Clinton did." Then, out of curiousty, I asked him about the civilian clothing issue and if that would bother him. He said "Why the hell are you asking me such a stupid question like that? Marines don't bitch, we do as we're told. That's our job."

I really don't like my uncle. He's kind of a dick. I see him about 3 times a year and that's three times too many IMO.

Gurugurumaki · Post by **Gurugurumaki** » March 27, 2003, 11:03 am

Fairweather Pure wrote:He said "Why the hell are you asking me such a stupid question like that? Marines don't bitch, we do as we're told. That's our job."

Sounds like hes bitching about the gays in the military, but WAIT, he doesnt bitch.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » March 27, 2003, 11:08 am

Clinton did dodge the draft and he protested against the military on foreign soil.

I think there's a huge difference between not participating in a war you don't believe in and simply joining a service that you know you'll be safe in.

Also, Clinton protested against the war, not the military. Huge difference.

Gurugurumaki · Post by **Gurugurumaki** » March 27, 2003, 11:26 am

Fairweather Pure wrote:
Clinton did dodge the draft and he protested against the military on foreign soil.
I think there's a huge difference between not participating in a war you don't believe in and simply joining a service that you know you'll be safe in. Also, Clinton protested against the war, not the military. Huge difference.

Problem with the US military is some of these people joined for scholarship money for college, and now they have to go fight a war. I saw on CNN where a reporter asked approx 50 military personel how many were there for school money and 90% raised their hands. What does this have to do with anything.../shrug. Just interesting.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » March 27, 2003, 11:47 am

Problem with the US military is some of these people joined for scholarship money for college, and now they have to go fight a war. I saw on CNN where a reporter asked approx 50 military personel how many were there for school money and 90% raised their hands. What does this have to do with anything.../shrug. Just interesting.

Every friend I know that joined the military or is currently in the military was for college money. One imparticular is against the war but is bound and determined to live up to his end of the military contract. He always knew it was a possibility and he rolled the dice. He ships out next week leaving behind a newborn son and a wife of a little over a year. He's a good man doing the right thing.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » March 27, 2003, 5:06 pm

Tell em he has our best wishes Fair.

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » March 27, 2003, 5:54 pm

Millie wrote:
Metanis wrote:
Millie wrote:I can guarantee you that Bush has no personal opinion about anything his speechwriters hand him. Hearing him fumble his way through the speeches,
Bullshit.
What a meticulousy worded and well thought out response. I applaud you, sir. You're really making your side of this argument look good!

I worked hard finding a word I was sure you would understand...

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 27, 2003, 6:18 pm

Really? because to me it sounded like you were just irrationally disagreeing because you are a partisan automatron incapable of thinking for yourself.

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » March 27, 2003, 6:34 pm

kyoukan type-R wrote:Really? because to me it sounded like you were just irrationally disagreeing because you are a partisan automatron incapable of thinking for yourself.

/sarcasm on

Hmmmm, thinking for yourself? You Liberals give me such convincing role models.

/sarcasm off

Gurugurumaki · Post by **Gurugurumaki** » March 27, 2003, 6:38 pm

kyoukan type-R wrote:Really? because to me it sounded like you were just irrationally disagreeing because you are a partisan automatron incapable of thinking for yourself.

take out automatron and put in autobot, much more effective~

Silvarel Mistmoon · Post by **Silvarel Mistmoon** » March 27, 2003, 11:08 pm

I hate to break it to you, but the U.S. is not a fascist country, or even a military state. We, as citizens, have the right not to approve blindly of everything our government is doing. (Please Read: The Bill of Rights if you disagree). We're not a nation of Marines, and we aren't second-class citizens in the presence of Marines. We don't have to defer to their wishes

Yes we as citizens have those rights, you missed the point, those in the military at the time didn't appreciate Americans standing on foreign soil protesting them it is insulting IMO and that fact he couldn't stand the sight of thier uniforms and at the same time these young men would defend him because it is their duty. It's a insult to their parents that he was disgusted with the uniforms that their sons wear proudly.

Yes he was against the military Fairweather that is one reason he wanted the Marines dressed in civies, he didn't want to have military men around him. I can't speak for your uncle but I have never met a Marine that was not proud of their corp and proud to wear their uniform.

Also a lot of military and family members and veterns have a problem following a commander in chief that has protested against military.

I would also like to say that while we are not a fascist country, or even a military state, these men and women are the ones that will protect this country for us and I think they should feel that the government is behind them 100%, they deserve that much.

This from that link

He didn't dodge the military. But he didn't volunteer to go to Vietnam and get killed, either."

Unlike him and many others my father did volunteer so that hopefully he would keep one young kid from being sent over there. Dad said to my grandmother, "If more men my age would volunteer then maybe the wouldn't send in those young kids"

VeeshanVault

Question for people who hate Clinton and like Bush

Question for people who hate Clinton and like Bush

Re: Question for people who hate Clinton and like Bush

Re: Question for people who hate Clinton and like Bush

Re: Question for people who hate Clinton and like Bush