# Where Was W? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 18, 2000, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342 "2000-10-18T00:12:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2000, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/21 "2000-10-18T19:49:35Z")
Interpretation aside…these are the facts I see in your link: Gore served 5 months in Vietnam. He was released from his enlistment early so that he could go to Divinity School. (did he flunk out?) I think Snopes is great for internet chain letter hoaxes and minor rumor debuking. Somehow I just don’t want to rely on them for a clarification of politics. Snopes being the last word on this issue just doesn’t cut it with me. ---
**Author:** ![Nanook\_of\_the\_North\_Shore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/bc8723/32.png) [@Nanook\_of\_the\_North\_Shore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nanook_of_the_North_Shore)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2000, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/22 "2000-10-18T20:00:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Freedom2 \* > \*\*Interpretation aside…these are the facts I see in your link: > Gore served 5 months in Vietnam. > He was released from his enlistment early so that he could go to Divinity School. (did he flunk out?) > > I think Snopes is great for internet chain letter hoaxes and minor rumor debuking. Somehow I just don’t want to rely on them for a clarification of politics. Snopes being the last word on this issue just doesn’t cut it with me. \*\* What about this part? > [@](#): > > These claims may or may not be mutually exclusive, but either way, the fact is that Al Gore was not sent to Vietnam until the very end of 1970, only seven months before his term of enlistment ended. Influence or no influence, he could not possibly have served a full year’s tour of duty in Vietnam, because he had far less than a year’s service remaining of his two-year hitch when he arrived in Vietnam. I guess the fact that he couldn’t have served a year any which way you cut it just doesn’t matter when it comes time to bash him eh? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2000, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/23 "2000-10-18T20:15:18Z")
**Freedom2:** _There is a lot of stuff on the net about both Bush/Clinton and Gore. There are allegations out there that allege Clinton dodged the draft._ Well, here at the Straight Dope we try to have higher standards than “allegations on the net”! 🙂 Here are excerpts from the [Clinton biography](http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/first.htm), _First in his Class:_ > [@](#): > > He had received the draft notice two months earlier [than summer '69] during his spring term at Oxford. […] > > While still at Oxford, Clinton had begun exploring alternatives to submitting to the draft. He had contacted a friend at Yale Law School to find out what it would take to enroll in the graduate Reserve Officers’ Training Corps program there. He had called friends back home for help arranging physicals for the state National Guard. […] > > In his first days home, it appeared that Clinton saw no choice but to submit to the draft. There was little time left. In a letter he wrote to Denise Hyland, his former college girlfriend, he revealed that he had been given a new induction date: July 28. The local National Guard and Reserve units, which had been checked out by his stepfather and his uncle, were full. “I’m going to be drafted,” he wrote to her on July 8. “There isn’t much else to say. I am not happy, but neither was anyone else who was called before me, I guess.” > > But that mood of resignation did not hold. As the July 28 deadline loomed, Clinton renewed his efforts to find an alternative to induction. He took physicals for the Air Force and Navy officer candidate schools, but failed both because of faulty vision and hearing. Finally he turned to the advanced ROTC program connected to the University of Arkansas School of Law in Fayetteville, which had no quotas and was open to law students. The program had grown rapidly in the year since graduate student deferments were eliminated. > > Lee Williams, Fulbright’s chief aide in Washington, worked the telephone from his Capitol Hill office trying to arrange Clinton’s enrollment. Williams, a graduate of the law school and a vehement opponent of the war, had tried to help hundreds of young men find alternatives to fighting in it. His papers, now part of the Fulbright Archives at the > University of Arkansas, indicate that he contacted the director of the university’s ROTC program, Col. Eugene J. Holmes, on July 16, after discussing the specifics of Clinton’s situation with one of Holmes’s assistants. […] > > Holmes later said that his meeting with Clinton involved “an extensive, approximately two-hour interview.” Clinton did not tell Holmes that he was an opponent of the Vietnam War and of the draft. The next day, Holmes took several calls from members of the Garland County Draft Board telling him that Sen. Fulbright’s office was putting pressure on them and that they needed the colonel to relieve it by enrolling Clinton in the program. Holmes decided to accept Clinton. The July 28 induction notice was nullified. The Garland County Draft Board granted Clinton a 1-D deferment as a reservist. […] > > It was not until Clinton had signed up for the University of Arkansas ROTC that he became actively involved in the anti-war movement. […] Clinton said he felt guilty and hypocritical for having the ROTC deferment. […] > > The series of events that led Clinton back to Oxford are in dispute. By Clinton’s account, he talked to Col. Holmes and gained permission to return to Oxford for the second year > since the basic training that he was required to attend before beginning advanced ROTC would not start until the following summer. Holmes said later that he allowed Clinton to return to Oxford for “a month or two,” but expected him to enroll in the law school as soon as possible. But a letter that Clinton wrote Holmes from Oxford in December 1969 in which he apologized for not writing more often - “I know I promised to let you hear from me at least once a month,” Clinton said in the letter - is the strongest evidence that Holmes was aware of and approved Clinton’s plan to go back to Oxford. […] > > No one at Oxford had expected Clinton back for a second year. […] > > Within a few weeks of his return, however, Clinton’s draft status changed once more. He decided to give up the deferment that he had worked so hard to get and resubmit himself to the draft. It is a difficult episode to sort out, muddled by Clinton’s various accounts over the years, which tend to be incomplete or contradictory, and by a scarcity of documentary evidence. […] > > The preponderance of the evidence leads in one direction: to the notion that with each passing week there were more signs that he might not get drafted even if he abandoned his deferment. […] > > Clinton’s draft records show that he held the 1-D deferment from Aug. 7 to Oct. 30, 1969. Those two dates mark the days when the Garland County board met, considered Clinton’s case and reclassified him, first from 1-A to 1-D, then back from 1-D to 1-A. These are not the dates, however, when Clinton took the actions that led to the reclassifications. According to the letter he wrote Denise Hyland, Clinton struck his ROTC deal with Col. Holmes on July 17 - three weeks before the board officially approved his 1-D deferment. Similarly, it seems certain that he notified the draft board that he wanted to give up his deferment and be reclassified 1-A sometime before the official Oct. 30 draft board action. […] > > He had, whatever his motivations, exposed himself to some degree of risk by asking to be reclassified. If the lottery came, his draft fate would depend on a number. […] > > Two months later, on the first day of December 1969, the first draft lottery since World War II began at 8:02 p.m. in a small conference room at the Selective Service System headquarters in Washington. Clinton’s birthday brought him luck that night. Aug. 19 was the 311th day picked. The yearly quota for 1970 was predicted to be about 350,000 men, which would be filled at least 100 numbers short of Clinton’s No. 311. Although he was theoretically draftable for another year and at times he told friends that his draft board might still get to him, he was, in reality, free.[…] So the real story seems to be that, although Clinton certainly pulled all the strings he could to obtain deferments (as did many other potential draftees, including Quayle and Dubya), he did nothing illegal to avoid the draft. In fact, he even voluntarily took the risk (although a much smaller risk than previously) of being drafted after he got the deferment, by renouncing the deferment and asking to be reclassified A-1. Bottom line: Clinton did not take a particularly consistent or principled course of action with respect to military service. But if he’s to be called a “draft dodger”, then so are Quayle and Bush Jr. \*Clinton removed any stigma of NO military service. \* Actually, only 29 of our presidents have done any military service at all. ---
**Author:** ![Phil\_15](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Phil\_15](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Phil_15)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2000, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/24 "2000-10-18T20:21:05Z")
David B said: > [@](#): > > OK, fine. Then why not just say that? Why go through all the duck & cover if there is a legit explanation? Because its still not PC, David. There are a ton of vetern’s orgs out there that would look at any excuse unfavorably and although I suspect (IMHO) that a large percentage of these kind of groups tend to be leaning more Republican, I would not be surprised if a goodly number from both sides of the aisle have shied away from the indiscresions of their youth. ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2000, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/25 "2000-10-18T20:47:11Z")
This strikes me as being rather odd. There are plenty of Bush apologists in the media who have written consistently in his defense since his announced candidacy. I read their columns often. Why is the first reasonable explanation for Bush’s absence that I have _ever_ heard espoused by someone on an internet message board? Sam Stone cannot have been the first person to dream this excuse up. And Sam, as reasonable as it sounds, can you demonstrate your authority on this subject sufficiently for me to believe you on faith? It seems that you do know about US military aircraft, but the unwritten practices of the Air Guard seem a bit more recherche. MR ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2000, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/26 "2000-10-18T20:58:08Z")
**Kimstu** OOOOoooooo… What an objective breath of fresh air his biography is…🙂 From the [Amazon.com](http://Amazon.com) book reviews… > [@](#): > > Who exactly is Bill Clinton, **and why was he, of all the brilliant and ambitious men in his generation,** the first in his class to reach the White House? > [@](#): > > and therefore knows that Clinton was, according to them, not lying when he said he “never inhaled”; his classmates devoted hours to teaching Bill to inhale, but he just couldn’t do it. Anybody who spends time creating a story to shore up the “I didn’t inhale line” loses any claim to objectivity. However…even they say… > [@](#): > > precisely what he did to elude the draft It seems to me that Clinton is a fairly polarizing figure. I think Clinton is the type of subject that people see in completely different ways. Some people see this guy as a hero, some see him as a traitor to the country. (I think he is neither) But…History will show him coming into office in '92 with the Democrats in control of the house and the Senate, and leaving the party shattered in 2000. > [@](#): > > Actually, only 29 of our presidents have done any military service at all. 29? So approx 70% of our presidents were in the military. I had to all the way back to 1945 to Roosevelt to find the last president without service. Almost half a century. I think that counts as a trend. There were 9 straight Presidents that had military service. I think it is fair to say that people took a person’s military service record much more seriously 15 years ago than they do today. I remember when Clinton was elected in '92. His service record WAS an issue. You don’t hear anything about Bush or Gore’s records in the main stream media today. It just simply is not an issue anymore. ---
**Author:** ![David\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2000, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/27 "2000-10-18T21:30:52Z")
Freedom2 said: > [@](#): > > I think Snopes is great for internet chain letter hoaxes and minor rumor debuking. Somehow I just don’t want to rely on them for a clarification of politics. Snopes being the last word on this issue just doesn’t cut it with me. OK, great. Do you have any _evidence_ that anything snopes said is incorrect? Or should we just ignore it 'cus you don’t like his conclusion? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2000, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/28 "2000-10-18T23:51:58Z")
Maeglin: I don’t know where you’re getting your information, but the info I gave was pretty much the Bush Campaign explanation. From _The Washington Post_ > [@](#): > > “I was there on a temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one period of time,” he said. “I made up some missed weekends.” > > “I can’t remember what I did, but I wasn’t flying because they didn’t have the same airplanes. I fulfilled my obligations.” > > In May, retired Gen. William Turnipseed, the former commander of the Alabama Guard unit, said Bush did not report to him, although the young airman was required to do so. His orders, dated Sept. 15, 1972, said: “Lieutenant Bush should report to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed, DCO, to perform equivalent training.” > > “To my knowledge, he never showed up,” Turnipseed said last month. > > Bartlett said Bush recalls seeing then-Col. Turnipseed. The campaign aide suggested that because Bush was not a pilot, his commander might not remember him. So here’s what they say happened: Bush asks to be transferred to Alabama to help work on a political campaign for Senator Blount. The Guard transfers him. He gets to Alabama, and discovers that he is not trained to fly any of the aircraft they have. He is put on ‘paper shuffling duty’. While there, his aviation medical expires, canceling his flight status. Bush’s claim is that the Commander does not recall him because Bush was not on flight duty, and therefore doesn’t show up in the records for active pilots. Nor would he appear on the commander’s ‘Radar Scope’ because he wasn’t actively flying. He was just another paper pusher on a large base. While researching this, I came across a couple of the websites claiming that Bush skipped his service. The main claim is that he was a serious alcoholic or drug abuser. They claim that he ‘refused’ to take his physical because it would have shown traces of drugs or alcohol. This is a ludicrous claim. First, all Bush would have had to do was stop drinking and taking drugs for a couple of days. It wasn’t like these were on-the-spot physicals without warning. Second, the reason for his not taking the physical is much easier to understand: He was pulling duty where there were no airplanes to fly, in a place with a shortage of flight surgeons, and saw no reason to take the flight physical. End of story. Of course Bush may well have been on a one-year bender this whole time. I have no evidence for that. What I do know is that the evidence that he shirked his guard duties is pretty shallow, and involves believing in a large conspiracy of Guard Officers, since in fact Bush was promoted in 1972 and was given an honorable discharge in 1973. The Colonel in Alabama may not remember seeing him, but there is absolutely no record of any disciplinary action against Bush, and plenty of evidence that he was a decent Aviator and Guardsman. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2000, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/29 "2000-10-19T00:36:33Z")
We should all give this whole Vietnam thing a rest. Look: Just about every kid back then did what he could to stay out of Vietnam. Gore and Bush both appear to have done their best to avoid being grunts in the mud, but I probably would have to. And what they both did appears to be legal. Gore actually wound up in Vietnam as a journalist. When he was sent there, he could have wound up in combat. There were a number of journalists killed in Vietnam. So give the guy some credit for that. Bush wound up in a guard unit flying dangerous fighters. He actually volunteered to go to Vietnam and was turned down for lack of flight time. His unit was on active rotation status and could have been sent to Vietnam at any time. I brought this up in another thread, but I want to point out again that flying an F-102 is not exactly a ‘cushy safe job’. These fighters were very dangerous, and more people died in accidents in them than were killed in combat. In fact, Bush’s chance of being killed in the Guard at home was probably higher than the chance of his being killed as a random draftee. Sure would have been a lot more fun, though. I just looked at the accident stats from the DoD. Since 1979, 3,877 Air Force personnel have been killed in accidents. That’s over twice as many as were killed in Vietnam. ---
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2000, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/30 "2000-10-19T01:22:19Z")
Thank you for providing a sense of perspective here, Sam. As for most people arguing about who did what to get out of getting killed in Vietnam, if you really expected people to vote based on that, McCain would have won in a landslide. Rather, it’s just a way of badmouthing the candidate you dislike. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2000, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/31 "2000-10-19T04:30:48Z")
Let me just add that the military draft was not administered by Almighty God but by the same US government that the right-wingers are so fond of bashing. And in case you hadn’t heard, the draft was _abolished_ in 1973, just a few years after these guys went through what they did. Vietnam wasn’t World War II. Why are we being so ridiculously selective about how we remember it? The overwhelming consensus is that the country made a huge mistake in getting involved in Vietnam, but a guy who managed to avoid being victimized by that tragic historical event is a rat if and only if he later runs for president. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2000, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/32 "2000-10-19T17:46:51Z")
**Freedom2** , I didn’t say that _First in his Class_ is an objective biography. But I have no evidence for disbelieving the detailed and circumstantial statements it makes about the specifics of Clinton’s experience with the draft, or its conclusion that he did not evade the draft illegally (and therefore is not a draft dodger). If you have any such evidence, I’d like to see it. You said: _I remember when Clinton was elected in '92. His service record WAS an issue. You don’t hear anything about Bush or Gore’s records in the main stream media today. It just simply is not an issue anymore._ What about the _Washington Post_ article cited just a few posts after yours, and the one that inspired the OP? ---
**Author:** ![pldennison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/9fc29f/32.png) [@pldennison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pldennison)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2000, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/33 "2000-10-19T18:18:00Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Freedom2 \* > [B29? So approx 70% of our presidents were in the military. I had to all the way back to 1945 to Roosevelt to find the last president without service. Almost half a century. I think that counts as a trend. There were 9 straight Presidents that had military service. I think it is fair to say that people took a person’s military service record much more seriously 15 years ago than they do today._\* Well, first of all, I don’t think we should count Reagan. Sure, he wore a uniform and had a rank, but does spending the entire war making movies really count as “military service”? He was hardly “in the military” the way JFK or Bush Sr. were in the military. Hell, he had to become President to risk being shot at. Also, maybe the “half century” thing is accounted for by the fact that, from 1941-1974, we were pretty consistently involved in overseas military conflicts, meaning there were more people in the military then anyway; and there was also an active conscription, meaning people served whether they wanted to or not? I think maybe both of those facts _may_ just play into it. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2000, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/34 "2000-10-19T19:03:59Z")
Besides, the US constitution, holy of holies, doesn’t require the president to have served in the military, does it? ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2000, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/35 "2000-10-19T20:09:00Z")
**pldennison** > [@](#): > > Well, first of all, I don’t think we should count Reagan. He was either in, our he wasn’t. My point was that a politician needed to have his ass covered on the military issue up until Clinton. Reagan was a Captain, his ass was covered. > [@](#): > > Also, maybe the “half century” thing is accounted for by the fact that, from 1941-1974, we were pretty consistently involved in overseas military conflicts, meaning there were more people in the military then anyway; and there was also an active conscription, meaning people served whether they wanted to or not? I think maybe both of those facts may just play into it. I agree. That just adds a little meat to my arguement that up until Clinton you had to have political cover on the military issue. **Kimstu** > [@](#): > > What about the Washington Post article cited just a few posts after yours, and the one that inspired the OP? Just becasue there was an editorial in the Washington Post does not mean this is an issue in the election. Social Security, Gun Control, Medicare, Tax Cuts etc… are ISSUES in this campaign. Clinton’s military service was an issue in '92. > [@](#): > > or its conclusion that he did not evade the draft illegally (and therefore is not a draft dodger No problems there. I will from now on refer to Clinton as a Draft Eluder.🙂 I think people here are misinterpreting where I coming from, so here is my position: Since President Roosevelt every politician who wanted to be President needed to have “POLITICAL COVER” on the military issue. IOW, they needed to have SOME type of military service. Clinton shattered this requirement. Not only did he not serve in the military, but he _ELUDED_ service and protested the war. By Clinton being elected, it helped erase the stigma of no military service from the national political scene. This has helped the likes of Bush and Gore, both of whom were arguably (by the other side) the beneficiary of preferential treatment. The Vietnam War sucked, and many people tried to find ways around being an infrantry soldier on the ground in Vietnam. I am making no moral judgements of Clinton, Bush or Gore here. I do however, stand by my assertion that Clinton smashed down a perceived barrier to being President. ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2000, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/36 "2000-10-21T05:39:23Z")
> [@](#): > > Well, first of all, I don’t think we should count Reagan. Sure, he wore a uniform and had a rank, but does spending the entire war making movies really count as “military service”? Hey, those movies can be hell to make. 😃 I think Freedom’s point was “he had military ‘experience’”, and that it wasn’t until Clinton came along that people stopped giving a hoot about whether or not a candidate had joined up or not. ---
**Author:** ![David\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2000, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/37 "2000-11-01T14:26:41Z")
> **[MSNBC News - Breaking News and News Today | Latest News](https://www.msnbc.com/)** > > MSNBC breaking news and the latest news for today. Get daily news from local news reporters and world news updates with live audio & video from our team. ``` "The Boston Globe reported Monday that a group of Vietnam veterans in Alabama have offered a $3,500 reward for anyone who can verify Bush’s claim that he performed service at a Montgomery unit in 1972, when Bush was in Alabama working on a political campaign. So far, the Globe reported, no one has come forward. There are no records of Bush’s service and the commanding officer of the unit Bush was assigned to told the newspaper that he never saw him. Bush was also suspended from flight duty during this period for not taking his annual flight physical. A Bush campaign spokesman acknowledged to the Globe that he knows of no witnesses who can verify that Bush attended the drills. ``` Advertisement However, the Globe also quoted Major Thomas A. Deall of the Air Reserve Personnel Center that officials there believe, after looking at Bush’s records, that he did meet minimum drill requirements before his discharge. Bush has declined the Globe’s requests for an interview on the subject." Declined requests for an interview, eh? Gosh, I wonder why… That story also has a link to the Boston Globe story. [Edited by David B on 11-01-2000 at 08:28 AM] ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2000, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/38 "2000-11-01T16:02:21Z")
I just don’t get it. It’s a real pity that this is happening too late to make a real difference. Ditto Larry Flynt’s sword affidavits regarding Bush’s supposed abortion. MR ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2000, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/39 "2000-11-01T16:03:26Z")
Sword Affidavits? Band name, anyone? _Sworn_ ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2000, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342/40 "2000-11-01T18:22:50Z")
David, I’m surprised at you. You’re actually buying into what amounts to a conspiracy theory, on the evidence of a partison group that can’t find anyone who specifically remembers Bush? We have as alternate evidence the fact that Bush was given an honorary discharge, was promoted a grade during this period, and that the actual military people involved believe that he served out his term properly. As for not completing his flight medical, he was stationed on a base that did not have any aircraft that he could fly. There was no reason to maintain his flying status, and there were no aviation medical examiners readily available. So he let his medical lapse. This would have ‘suspended’ him from flight duty, but this is not in any way a punishment or a negative mark. It’s just an administrative note that says Pilot Bush may not sign out aircraft until his medical is complete. This story got started because someone interviewed the man who was base commander when Bush was there, and the guy said he had no recollection of him. But there’s an easy explanation for this: Bush was not on flying status, so he was given make-work assignments that pushed him into the background, whereas the Commander thought it was funny that he couldn’t remember Bush because he could remember all his other pilots. He apparently didn’t realize that Bush was not a pilot at the time. The most likely scenario here is that Bush showed up, they had little for him to do, and they simply said, “Stay out of our way and try and make yourself useful.” The problem was that Bush was trained as an F-102 pilot, but there were none to fly at his new base and it was not worth re-training him on the new jets because he only had a short time of enlistment left. So he wouldn’t have been trained for anything other than monkey-work. Bush probably responded by showing up a couple of times, not finding much to do, and then skipping. No one would have cared because he was a short-termer at this time, and earlier in his career he racked up far more duty hours than was required, because of his training and flying of F-102’s. Y’know, you guys on the left have been rolling your eyes over all the conspiracy theorists that came out of the woodwork against Clinton, but now you’re engaging in the same thing. Apply a little critical thinking, will you? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/where-was-w/37342.md?page=3)