Hog says
I don't know about the rest of you FOLKS... but I'm voting in 2004 not living in the Frickin Past as to whats going to happen with MY Country in the Future...
DB Responds
This is why you should think twice about bringing up Clinton's lack of military record as an arguement.
The whole military record thing in the peacetime context of 1992 and 1996 really didn't matter. Even in 2000 it really didn't matter. But now we are at war. In 2004 and the future it matters. That is why people are bringing up the Vietnam era comparisons. It's all fair in politics. People think that a candidate's war experience even if it was 35 years ago influences their war judgement in the future. That's why the Bush vs Kerry military records will remain a consideration for many.
You and other Republicans can choose to ignore it or say its not an issue. I'm sure you'd be a lot happier if Bush was able to present better documentation to defend himself beyond a shadow of doubt. Some facts is maybe enough for pundits on Fox News or the conservative talk jocks. Unfortunately Rush and Fox don't decide what the issues are on the national stage, they only influence their right wing audiences and raise issues on conservative politicians behalfs.
There's vast numbers of other information sources which point out significant gaps in the evidence presented that raise additional questions about the 1 year gap. Hence the issue remains in political play and will continue to factor in many peoples decisions. (mine included). Sometimes in politics (as in football), playing good defense is really important. Those New England Patriots know this well.
Hog, despite our political differences (which are considerable), I like your posts, respect your passions and think we would enjoy a lot of cigars together if we lived closer. I just point out that here you are being a bit inconsistent in your arguements.
DB