On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 06:23:02 -0700 (PDT), wrote:


And did you consider our current President's "military
experience" (getting drunk at the O-club and going AWOL, followed by
the convenient loss of all his records) valuable when weighing your
vote?

DSK


Doug, as one who was there I'll offer some additional information
regarding this subject.

Within six months or so, I am the same age as both Bush and Clinton.
I was subject to those same decisions regarding what to do about the
draft similar to each of those individuals. Falling behind in my class
because of lack of money and the neccessity to work, and losing my
deferrment, I chose to join the Marine Corp Reserves, rather than be
drafted. I thought that, if deployed, it would be better to go with
people I know who would be pretrained. If not deployed, I could
continue with my education and life in general.

Bush joined the Guard much later than I. At the time that the
alledged AWOL took place the military was in a mode of trying to dump
excess personnel. The war in Vietnam was winding down, experienced
pilots and other military specalities were coming home and there were
too many of them. Additionally, the military had just gone through an
extensive pay increase to try to get equity with private industry to
be able to compete for future people, in anticipation of the
elimination of the draft and an all volunteer, professional military.
They were trying to cut costs. I know of many people in my unit who
were advised when transferrring to a new area, that they could get out
if a unit was not conveniently located. I got the impression they
were encouraged to do that. Maybe he used influence, maybe he didn't
but it helps to know what the climate was at that time.

Clinton, OTOH just dodged the draft. Used influence to temporarily
avoid serving so he could go to England on a Rhodes scholarship with
a promise he would serve on return. He broke that promise. This was
an earlier timeframe before the winding down of Viet Nam.

I think I have more respect for those that went to Canada to avoid the
draft and a war that was ill conceived and poorly executed, than for
Clinton. After all, they gave up their lives and homes without
knowing if they could ever come back. Clinton gave up nothing, just
used influence.

My thoughts on the matter

Frank

X-No-Archive: yes

"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
news
Doug, as one who was there I'll offer some additional information
regarding this subject.

Don't confuse them with facts, Frank. You're challenging an article of
faith.

On 23 Apr 2008 14:23:01 -0500, "Dave" wrote:

X-No-Archive: yes

"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
news
Doug, as one who was there I'll offer some additional information
regarding this subject.

Don't confuse them with facts, Frank. You're challenging an article of
faith.

Not attempting to confuse, Dave. I met Doug and family on his ICW
loop and he is an intelligent and likable person. I'm simply offering
a perspective based on living through the times.

I'm not defending Bush. The use of influence to change position on a
national guard list was commonplace, so if it happened it would not
surprise me because I know others, locally, who took advantage of the
same thing. Individuals with a whole lot less stroke than the Bush
family. So his "crime" was to accept the outcome.

It was not time of fairness. If you were poor, could not afford to
continue education past high school, had no influence, could not trick
the system by taking drugs to fail the physical, you were drafted or
you joined, or you fled the country, plain and simple. Then the
lottery, then the elimination of the draft.

My comments on the "winding down" of the war are as I observed them.
Many combat pilots were coming back and the slots in guard units were
coveted, and they deserved them. If you didn't want to stay in, no
one was going to chain you to the post.

Frank

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:28:52 -0500, Frank Boettcher

said:

It was not time of fairness. If you were poor, could not afford to
continue education past high school, had no influence, could not trick
the system by taking drugs to fail the physical, you were drafted or
you joined, or you fled the country, plain and simple. Then the
lottery, then the elimination of the draft.

Certainly not news to me. I got out of school at the height of the war.
Called up my draft board and was told that unless I volunteered I would be
drafted. I told them I would sign up for OCS, and they said they'd put my
folder at the back of the drawer, and I should let them know when I had
been
sworn in. Dunno how it was in Hope, AK, but where I came from people were
expected to honor their word, and I did. Clinton didn't.

Neither did Bush. I know you hate the Clintons, but the reality is that Bush
didn't finish what he signed up for wrt to his service commitment.
Unfortunately, he learned that lesson a bit late and now we have Iraq.


My comments on the "winding down" of the war are as I observed them.
Many combat pilots were coming back and the slots in guard units were
coveted, and they deserved them. If you didn't want to stay in, no
one was going to chain you to the post.

Yes. When I got out everyone was getting early outs by a few months. I
called up the local reserve unit, and they said come if you want to, but
no
big deal if you don't want to.

Bush did "get an early out." He just stopped showing up... and remains a
chickenhawk.


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:01:11 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

Neither did Bush.

Jon,

This is a technique of yours called pointing to bad behavior to justify
other bad behavior. It's getting a bit old.

Ever hear of Johnny one-note?


You seem to think that it's reasonable to point out the bad behavior of
someone out of office, while ignoring the bad behavior of someone in office.
This is getting a bit old.

Ever hear of not facing reality?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:28:50 -0400, said:

You seem to be trying to justify your own bad behavior by pointing at
Jon's. You do the same thing he did on a regular basis, Dave.

Examples, please.


I'd say the last time you posted, but I would be accused of the same thing
you did. LOL

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 12:49:35 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

I'd say the last time you posted, but I would be accused of the same thing
you did.

And you would of course be wrong.


In that case, the last time you posted. LOL

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On 24 Apr 2008 13:45:02 -0500, Dave wrote:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:28:50 -0400, said:

You seem to be trying to justify your own bad behavior by pointing at
Jon's. You do the same thing he did on a regular basis, Dave.

Examples, please.


The " Reality Distortion Machine", once started, must obfuscate with
an absence of rationality, and insult with innuendo, ad infinitum.

You're wasting your time.

Frank

"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
...
On 24 Apr 2008 13:45:02 -0500, Dave wrote:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:28:50 -0400, said:

You seem to be trying to justify your own bad behavior by pointing at
Jon's. You do the same thing he did on a regular basis, Dave.

Examples, please.


The " Reality Distortion Machine", once started, must obfuscate with
an absence of rationality, and insult with innuendo, ad infinitum.

You're wasting your time.

Frank


As are you, yet you both persist in your fantasy land of Bush being good for
America.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 06:23:02 -0700 (PDT), wrote:


And did you consider our current President's "military
experience" (getting drunk at the O-club and going AWOL, followed by
the convenient loss of all his records) valuable when weighing your
vote?

DSK


Doug, as one who was there I'll offer some additional information
regarding this subject.

Within six months or so, I am the same age as both Bush and Clinton.
I was subject to those same decisions regarding what to do about the
draft similar to each of those individuals. Falling behind in my class
because of lack of money and the neccessity to work, and losing my
deferrment, I chose to join the Marine Corp Reserves, rather than be
drafted. I thought that, if deployed, it would be better to go with
people I know who would be pretrained. If not deployed, I could
continue with my education and life in general.

Bush joined the Guard much later than I. At the time that the
alledged AWOL took place the military was in a mode of trying to dump
excess personnel. The war in Vietnam was winding down, experienced
pilots and other military specalities were coming home and there were
too many of them. Additionally, the military had just gone through an
extensive pay increase to try to get equity with private industry to
be able to compete for future people, in anticipation of the
elimination of the draft and an all volunteer, professional military.
They were trying to cut costs. I know of many people in my unit who
were advised when transferrring to a new area, that they could get out
if a unit was not conveniently located. I got the impression they
were encouraged to do that. Maybe he used influence, maybe he didn't
but it helps to know what the climate was at that time.

Clinton, OTOH just dodged the draft. Used influence to temporarily
avoid serving so he could go to England on a Rhodes scholarship with
a promise he would serve on return. He broke that promise. This was
an earlier timeframe before the winding down of Viet Nam.

I think I have more respect for those that went to Canada to avoid the
draft and a war that was ill conceived and poorly executed, than for
Clinton. After all, they gave up their lives and homes without
knowing if they could ever come back. Clinton gave up nothing, just
used influence.

My thoughts on the matter

Frank


A bunch of bs. As though Bush didn't use his father's influence. As though
he completed his obligation. As though he wasn't a drunk.

I didn't realize that Clinton went to Canada, which last I checked was the
defacto destination for "draft dodgers."

Still fighting the same war there Frank... the one about how terrible
Clinton was. EXCEPT that he did more for this country than just about any
other president in modern times; whereas, Bush has done the worse by far.
Maybe you should blame Hillary for having enough sense of family values to
stick it out in the marriage.



--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com