View Single Post
  #24  
Old 01-08-2004, 12:19 PM
dissention's Avatar
dissention dissention is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 26,612
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by strandinthewind
Interestingly, I support Bush's right to say I am not answering anything about my life before age 21 (or whenever). Yet, you gotta wonder about what happened before then.
Interestingly, Bush likes to call his drunk driving a "youthful indiscretion," but he was in his thirties at the time. Also, he was *convicted* of drunk driving with three other people in the car, as reflected in legal documents. He was an alcoholic who continued to drink well after his arrest. When he was called for jury duty in 1996, he conveniently forgot to mention his criminal conviction on the jury pool form and came up with a cockamamie excuse for why he shouldn't be called for jury duty. He was also arrested for disorderly conduct in 1966 and flatly denied that he was arrested after 1968. That proved to be a lie. Not only was arrested, he was convicted. However, he told the public that he never went to court for the drunk driving and that it was taken care of the night that it happened. That's another lie; he had two court dates and got continuances twice. He didn't pay the fine until a month and a half later, not that same night. They were going to put his ass is jail overnight, but someone paid the $500 bond to keep him out, as reflected in legal papers. The fact that he changed his drivers license number in 1995, at the height of his political career at the time, is also highly suspicious. In fact, because of his drunk driving in Maine, his license was suspended for two years in that state. Let's also not forget his past with cocaine.

We can spin it all we want, but the fact is that his dodge-drafting during Vietnam was and is highly suspicious. He's unaccounted for for lengthy periods of time, some of his former staff from when he was governor have claimed that his records were doctored by the Bush camp, former officers from the Texas National Guard claim the same thing, the public portion of his records that would have been released under an FOIA request have turned up completely missing, he used his family's power to avoid everything that he didn't want to do, etc. If he served as well is he supposedly did, then why are all of these inconsistencies turning up? It makes no sense, but the Right will spin it to make him look saintly.

Shrub has some major issues with credibility.
__________________

Reply With Quote