U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-11-2007, 09:35 PM
 
Location: Coming soon to a town near YOU!
985 posts, read 2,547,121 times
Reputation: 1496

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
Nope. Draft dodgers are those who are actually drafted and don't show up. That is what happened to Clinton, but not to Bush.
Also, in many instances, those in the National Guard are among the first to serve overseas. Enrolling in the NG is a poor way to avoid serving in a war.
I respectfully submit that even by your own standards, Clinton is not a draft-dodger.

Clinton may be a "draft-avoid-er" since he worked hard to stay out of a war he didn't want to fight in (hmmm, just like all but 2 male Presidential Candidates for '08), but since he was never drafted he is not a "Draft-Dodger".
Urban Legends Reference Pages: Bill Clinton Draft Dodger?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bily4 View Post
There is evidence Bush did go to his weekend assignments for awhile, then started blowing them off regularly in 1972-1973. Technically not a draft dodger, but let's all be real. He was in no danger of being sent to war and if he had so desired could have gone over there easily enough to serve his country. Rich kids play by different rules, always have and always will.
It is rather interesting about the Guard Duty stuff w/ Bush. Gary Trudeau (writer of the comic strip Doonesbury) has offered $10,000 to anyone who can prove that Bush served during those questionable weekends. 3+ years later, no one has been able to do so. [bonus: his first cartoon was in reference to GW defending his fraternity branding a "D" onto the buttocks of a new pledge]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-12-2007, 07:06 AM
 
Location: Maine
16,334 posts, read 20,668,105 times
Reputation: 18938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
Again, serving in the National Guard is not necessarily "draft dodging."
I never said it was. Did you even read what I wrote? I said that Bush avoided the Vietnam draft by getting Daddy Warbucks to get him into the Guard. That's a big -- and I must say, a pretty obvious -- difference between folks today who joined up to serve their country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2007, 07:17 AM
 
Location: NY
2,007 posts, read 3,440,453 times
Reputation: 905
Quote:
Originally Posted by LancasterNative View Post
Agreed. He's my favorite, out of all of 'em.

Doubtful his campaign will pick up much more momentum or funds b/t now and the primaries

But I sure hope he hangs in as long as possible. His perspective is sorely needed in the debates—and in the whole political discussion, generally!

Hunter is the one guy there in the race articulating genuinely conservative, Constitutional positions on everything.
I agree completly. He HAS to get his message out there!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2007, 08:12 AM
 
1,353 posts, read 3,198,446 times
Reputation: 917
I know its not fair, but when conservative Republicans (especially those who SUPPORTED the Vietnam War like Bush, Cheney, Rove, Romney) recieve deferments, its alot more hypocritical than liberals like Bill Clinton, who opposed the war.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2007, 08:25 AM
 
1,965 posts, read 5,775,952 times
Reputation: 1272
I hate to sound crass, but let's face it- the best and brightest are less likely to have any military service nowadays. The military isn't a very attractive option. This isn't the WWII era.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2007, 08:42 AM
 
8 posts, read 15,261 times
Reputation: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by jak88 View Post
I personally think no one should become commander in chief unless they have bonified military experience.

Which presidential candidates running for office right now have military experience? Real military experience, as in they actually served our country. Flying planes at home doesn't count (Bush).
I 100% agree with you. I think to be considered for "applying for office of President of the United States" there should be more requirments..Having served in the military for at least 2 years, should be the biggest. How can you as president know what you are doing when you send troops into hostile situations, unless you have had that threat as a possibility? Other requirments, in my humble opinion, Having some sort of Leadership experience (Business owner, LEADER in politics (Head of a Dept/Commitee, Senior Senator/Congressman ...at least 2 years of College,(Maybe even a Bachelors Degree or higher should be required).....These are just thoughts. Of course, we should not make the requirments so strict that only a few people would be eligable also.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2007, 08:47 AM
 
8 posts, read 15,261 times
Reputation: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by JakeDog View Post
I hate to sound crass, but let's face it- the best and brightest are less likely to have any military service nowadays. The military isn't a very attractive option. This isn't the WWII era.
This is sad but true. I think making military service a requirment for presidental hopefuls, would help in that regard, though. If our politicans had to serve, then I think allot of americans might consider the Military not quite so stupid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2007, 08:51 AM
 
8 posts, read 15,261 times
Reputation: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by xavierob82 View Post
I know its not fair, but when conservative Republicans (especially those who SUPPORTED the Vietnam War like Bush, Cheney, Rove, Romney) recieve deferments, its alot more hypocritical than liberals like Bill Clinton, who opposed the war.
So, given the choice, would you: 1)take a defferment if one was available, or 2) go ahead and serve in a war, in which you could be killed? The fact that Clinton served and, he claims, did not support the war makes me wonder if he did much good during the conflict. I wouldn't want someone opposing the war to be watching "my 6", would he oppose shooting that guy who has a gun pointed at my back?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2007, 09:46 AM
 
1,965 posts, read 5,775,952 times
Reputation: 1272
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccalvin57 View Post
This is sad but true. I think making military service a requirment for presidental hopefuls, would help in that regard, though. If our politicans had to serve, then I think allot of americans might consider the Military not quite so stupid.
Frankly, I think it would be a terrible thing. There are a ton of ways one can gain the experience to become president, and I don't see the military as necessarily being one of the best ones. Prior to America becoming a full blown empire the military wasn't the entrenched institution it is today. John Adams, Grover Cleveland, Wilson, FDR disqualified? I don't think so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2007, 09:48 AM
 
Location: NY
2,007 posts, read 3,440,453 times
Reputation: 905
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccalvin57 View Post
So, given the choice, would you: 1)take a defferment if one was available, or 2) go ahead and serve in a war, in which you could be killed? The fact that Clinton served and, he claims, did not support the war makes me wonder if he did much good during the conflict. I wouldn't want someone opposing the war to be watching "my 6", would he oppose shooting that guy who has a gun pointed at my back?
Clinton served??? Where and when??? It's been my understanding that he ran to England.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top