Implied Dissent

Saturday, February 21, 2004

Here's an interesting post on the Bush as a deserter situation. Definitively learned a bit from reading it. The blogger's argument does seem a bit weak though. Maybe I'm misreading it a bit, but he seems to be arguing that Bush couldn't have been a deserter because proving it can be tough, as specific cases he dealt with did not result in a conviction, or even a charge, of desertion. I of course have no idea what happened with the Prez way back then. It sounds to me like he probably got away with some stuff but nothing nearly as major as desertion or being AWOL. It probably won't be a significant issue come November, it's probably another case of a media-driven controversy, imho. We'll see.
On a related topic, read John Kerry's testimony from 1971. Assuming he was honest, I'm not sure why people are making it out as a nearly traitorous act (other than more political games). I don't know much about military protocol, so there may be an issue here I'm missing. It's my (poor) understanding that criticizing military actions while they are still going on is a major no-no for veterans, but it seems to me if you believe that the war is immoral and that your testimony will help prevent many thousands of deaths, you testify.
Don Henley must die!
Ron Neff looks at how restraining government with a constitution is similar to controlling guns with laws. Interesting stuff.
They're making Ender's Game into a movie. Based on some of the things I've read I would be surprised if it's in the theaters before 2006, but this is very cool.


Post a Comment

<< Home