Man, do you have a LOT of time on your hands. And there are several questions that you have absolutely failed to answer:

1. Who cares about Clinton? Bush broke the law. Whether the documents Rather presented were fake or not:

1. CBS was complicit in either allowing the fake documents

to get through, wanting to curry favor with the Bush

camp, or both. Go on and try to prove to me that the

SCLM did NOT try to smear Gore and portray Bush as a

"guy you'd want to have a beer with" - OVER AND OVER.

But that will all come out as a result of this lawsuit.

2. Bush DID break the law and was AWOL. He did get placed

ahead of at least 500 other people on the waiting list

in the "champagne" unit. You don't seem to have a problem with this.

3. Multiple people have adequately answered your asinine assertions that Clinton WAS NOT accused of 'wagging the dog'. Whether his wars were "illegal" or not, you resort again to "BUT CLINTON". You neocon crybabies just can't ever seem to stop your pissing and moaning and but-Clintoning.

4. In case you were wondering, here's the real story behind Clinton's draft dodging:

* Eighteen-year old Bill enters Georgetown University and registers for Selective Service, as required by law. His status as a full-time student earns him a deferrment.

* In his senior year, Bill receives a Rhodes Scholarship to study at Oxford University.

* In February of 1968, the Federal Government eliminates draft deferments for graduate students and Bill once again becomes eligible in March of that year.

* Clinton subsequently, though family and political connections, obtains a Navy Billet from the local naval reserve unit and temporary draft protection from the Garland County Draft Board, allowing him to start at Oxford - special treatment that was not uncommon for Rhode's Scholars of the day.

* Clinton completes his first term at Oxford in December, 1969, and is ordered to report for a physical in January, which he did.

* In April 1969, Bill was ordered to report for induction. However, delays in International mail delivery resulted in Clinton receiving his orders after the induction date had passed. By this time, he had begun his second term at Oxford. Regulations allowed him to complete the term, but he must report for induction by July 28, 1969.

* Once again utilizing extensive political connections, Clinton gets accepted into the University of Arkansas ROTC program on July 17, nullifying his draft notice. Clinton would not have to enroll until he completed basic training the following year.

* In the fall of '69, Clinton opts to return to Oxford, rather than enroll in the University of Arkansas Law School. While at Oxford, Clinton contacts the draft board to drop his ROTC deferment and return to active status. By this time, regulations had changed, allowing graduate students to complete their schooling before reporting for military duty. Clinton had a high enough draft number to virtually ensure he would not be called.

Analysis:

While his conduct may have been immoral and was undoubtedly unethical, it was not illegal under the laws at that time and, thus, the conclusion drawn that he was the first pardoned criminal to serve as President is fallacious. He craftily manipulated the system, but he had the proper and legal right to do everything he did. He was never technically AWOL, never guilty of failing to report, was never a criminal under public law and, thus, was not among those pardoned by President Carter in 1977.

I trust our local ex-Marine neocon will be able to decipher my terrible use of numbering in the last post. It won't be nearly as complicated as his pedantic grasp of 1960s-1970s typewriters or MS Word formatting.

"BTW, you failed to cite a source for your "real story." Can we assume it was from some pro-Clinton spin site?"

No, unless http://www.snopes.com is a Clinton spin site.

You have been drinking the Koolaid for way too long, my man. While you say your source says the guy was there, the story I presented details every aspect of the account. Was your "source" a Bush friendly spin doctor?

Yet you refuse to believe the MULTIPLE accounts of Bush being AWOL. Nobody can seem to find where he was when he was supposed to be in Alabama. Geez, little man. Take a break from the cheetos and clean your keyboard.

Here ya go then:

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/030411.html

Nothing your Colonel says contradicts any of the facts I outlined in my first post.

Try again.

We're losing sight of the point of the article.

Let's just find out, based on the findings of this suit, what there really is to Bush's purported AWOL status.

And again, can you neocon idiots ever make a point without resorting to Clinton?

It's pathetic. And you're all a bunch of hypocrites.

You are an idiot, dude. And you've worn out your welcome with half truths and spin from obviously interested parties.

And then that. Your last question. I said that nothing in the link I sent contradicts what the FORMER Marine said. And what if I HAD indeed called him a liar? Are Marines incapable of lying? What parallel universe do you live in?

Feel free to offer your own analysis - I know you have nothing better to do. Just can't guarantee that I'll be coming back to read it.

...and obviously bored.

I'm not naming names, because chances are "he" is not using his. But for chrissake, man. Stick to the subject of the article. Better yet, just shut up and wait to see what the results of the suit are. We know he's not going to settle, so...

and BTW: call me "moonbat" and tell me who you REALLY are and you're likely to be missing some teeth really soon.