« Dialing for Edwards | Main | Exit Polling »
February 10, 2004
The Real Issue
I don't begrudge anyone for not wanting to serve in the Armed Forces during any war and especially Vietnam. If you believed in the war and volunteered your time -- I salute you. If it weighed on your conscience and you either did what you could to avoid serving or just got lucky and didn't get drafted, then I don't hold it against you one bit.
The problem with Bush isn't that he was AWOL from the Guard, which looks likely. The problem is that when other 25 year old men couldn't sleep because of the personal anguish they were experiencing about the war, Bush couldn't have cared less. It didn't touch him - because his father was well connected.
Here's a man who more or less admits he wasn't that serious until he was 40 years old -- after he had children, mind you -- and woke up feeling terrible after a particularly bad hangover. People change. I understand that.
But ask yourself this - was your life so unserious before you "grew up" (at age 40!) that the worst thing you'd ever personally experienced was a bad hangover?
Postscript: Richard Cohen says it better than I do.
Posted by Chris at February 10, 2004 01:07 AM
Comments
Dude, anybody who has ever had a REALLY bad hangover knows there is nothing worse.
Except a really bad hangover following the celebration of the fact that CNN called Florida for Gore...
Posted by: Jon at February 10, 2004 01:20 AM
Ha. Except most people I know who have really bad hangovers are back at it again the next weekend. CNN calling Florida for Gore and then retracting that position is probably one of the worst feelings I've ever had.
Posted by: Chris at February 10, 2004 01:22 AM
Luckily, none of that matters in the least. Bush has had four years of Presidency upon which we can judge his character.
Harping endlessly on about the (in fact unlikely) "AWOL" story is pathological.
I'd rather hear more about what Kerry or Edwards would do in the foreign policy sphere, and if Kerry has managed to mature beyond his Vietnam years.
Posted by: zachary d smith at February 10, 2004 09:42 AM
a) I think it's likely b) after one bad domestic policy proposal after another and a dubious handling of foreign policy i think kerry's got something when he tells bush to "Bring it on."
just the fact that the US makes up 90% of the "coalition" troops in iraq and pays nearly as much for the whole operation should point to a huge diplomatic blunder. hussein's removal is a plus, but the ends don't always justify the means. even 9/11 didn't change that.
Posted by: Chris at February 10, 2004 09:49 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)