Look out Conservative Radio - Air America is Here

[AlbqOwl]

I know you're just trying to nip something in the bud, but I didn't call anyone anything. I asked a question.


AFTER, I called TOT on Bush landing the airplane on a carrier. I get this.

TOT QUOTE = OOO he flew the plane not landed it big fuc/king difference, that's not lying that's an honest mistake, what you people do is lie I atleast admit when I'm mistaken.


I stated basically the same thing as you:
BWG = The document MAY not have been authentic, but the basis of the story has not been proven false.

and I get a rant:
TOT = Give me a break that's the most ridiculous piece of b.s. reasoning I've ever heard, this is how you libs reason: "well the story may not have been true but we all know it was true anyways so the fact that it was untrue doesn't matter."

A lie is a lie any way you cut it partna Rather is a lier.


Was the response to your post similar?

No matter, I'm done with that and moving on.





To be honest, I'm not sure about the wearing of the uniform, but if you are trying to insinuate that he is a veteran, he hasn't provided any proof that he is.


Source: Title 38, United States Code, Part I, Chapter 1

Paragraph 2: The term ''veteran'' means a person who served in the active military, naval, or air service, and who was discharged or released therefrom under conditions other than dishonorable

Paragraph 21: The term ''active duty'' means - (A) full-time duty in the Armed Forces, other than active duty for training

Paragraph 22: The term ''active duty for training'' means - (A) full-time duty in the Armed Forces performed by Reserves for training purposes

I did not use either the word veteran. I'm not sure if Bush did the 8 years or the 6 months active duty plus 4 years in the National Guard. (My husband did the former. Many of his buddies the latter.) But I believe an officer honorably discharged from any branch of the armed forces can wear the uniform. Certainly the Commander in Chief who served in the armed forces can wear the uniform.

Since the term 'liar' is being kicked around here, for the purpose of clarification: A "lie" is an intentional untruth intended to mislead or deceive. An unintentional untruth is not a lie but rather is a mistake or an error. Educated people know the difference.

Dan Rather therefore did not lie if he did not know the documents were forged. He didn't lie if he wasn't sure the documents were forged. However, since he had been told prior to the broadcast that the documents may have been forged, and he conveniently omitted that fact in the broadcast, he either lied as to the reliability of the documents or he was the world's most stupid news anchor.

 

[Conflict]

There's several things wrong with your post here. Not even sure where to begin. In fact I'm just not going to go through it error by error. But GWB was a commissioned officer not an enlistee. The US Military does not allow enlistees to pilot any aircraft. Bush was a Second lieutenant and he flew several aircraft, most notably an F-102 fighter jet.

Good with with your Halloween costume.

Proof in substance?

Did you see him piloting such craft or is it the legacy of "per se"?

 

[Conflict]

There's several things wrong with your post here. Not even sure where to begin. In fact I'm just not going to go through it error by error. But GWB was a commissioned officer not an enlistee. The US Military does not allow enlistees to pilot any aircraft. Bush was a Second lieutenant and he flew several aircraft, most notably an F-102 fighter jet.

Good with with your Halloween costume.

I say No.

You say Yes.

Where does the burden of proof lie?

 

[Pacridge]

Proof in substance?

Did you see him piloting such craft or is it the legacy of "per se"?

The records are very clear that he was a second luey and he flew fighter jets. I didn't see him attend Harvard either but the records are clear there too. Honestly I don't even understand what it is you're debating.

 

[Pacridge]

I say No.

You say Yes.

Where does the burden of proof lie?

Say whatever you want, not going to change any facts.

You want to believe he was an enlisted Airman and he never flew anything. Then by all means believe that, knock yourself out. You're the first persons I ever discussed this with that didn't think he was a second luey and he was a fighter pilot. Even those out that think he went AWOL at least acknowledge this fact. This site think he's a scumbag but even it agrees he did go to flight school:

http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/bush102.htm

 

[Conflict]

The records are very clear that he was a second luey and he flew fighter jets. I didn't see him attend Harvard either but the records are clear there too. Honestly I don't even understand what it is you're debating.

Oh of course our very first direct presidential legacy.. yet how dare anyone think that his father had anything to do with his success.


Nepotism.

Cronyism.

Dictation.


Your objectivity flew out the window.. you are only now assuming the role of relentles Bush apologist, in my eyes.

We, in the literate world, tend to call this a matter of absconding.

 

[Pacridge]

Oh of course our very first direct presidential legacy.. yet how dare anyone think that his father had anything to do with his success.


Nepotism.

Cronyism.

Dictation.


Your objectivity flew out the window.. you are only now assuming the role of relentles Bush apologist, in my eyes.

We, in the literate world, tend to call this a matter of absconding.

Well ya got me on that one, I guess the gig is up. You're 100% correct I'm a Bush apologist. You're just simply too smart for me. You win.

 

[Conflict]

Well ya got me on that one, I guess the gig is up. You're 100% correct I'm a Bush apologist. You're just simply too smart for me. You win.

I don't remember stating that I was the one that was too smart. I am but a humble member of this great establishment.

However, If I am wrong, as you implicate... I am not one who cannot admit my fallacy. First you must show it to me and if you can do so then you will gain nothing but my respect.

 

[BWG]

George W. Bush was a commissioned officer with an honorable discharge, and as such he is entitled to wear an official uniform and air force flight jacket anywhere he chooses even if he was not Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.

I know you did not refer to GWB as a veteran, that's why I asked. To be a veteran, you must have served on active duty. GWB did not.

Being a commissioned officer with an honorable discharge, does not automatically entitle anyone to wear an official uniform.

TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART II > CHAPTER 45 > § 771

§ 771. Unauthorized wearing prohibited
Release date: 2005-07-12

Except as otherwise provided by law, no person except a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps, as the case may be, may wear—

(1) the uniform, or a distinctive part of the uniform, of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps; or

(2) a uniform any part of which is similar to a distinctive part of the uniform of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps.

Of course there are always exceptions

TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART II > CHAPTER 45 > § 772

You may say this section allows him to wear a military uniform, but it was intended to allow veterans to wear the uniform in parades, ceremonies, etc. More specifically veterans in American Legions / VFW groups.

(e) A person not on active duty who served honorably in time of war in the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps may bear the title, and, when authorized by regulations prescribed by the President, wear the uniform, of the highest grade held by him during that war.

 

[stsburns]

I'm sure I'm going to get alot of :soap on this one! :mrgreen:

 

[stsburns]

I'm sure I'm going to get alot of :soap on this one! :mrgreen:

Come on people! Lighten up! Offense is the new Comedy! :lol:

 

[hipsterdufus]

Just and FYI

NEW YORK – January 13, 2005 – Air America Radio announced today that its flagship station, WLIB 1190 AM made impressive gains according to the Arbitron Fall 2005 Survey. WLIB successfully increased its P12+ AQH Sum-Fall by 23 percent (27,800 to 34,300). The announcement was made by Vice President/General Manager of WLIB 1190 AM Scott Elberg.

Randi Rhodes, host of “The Randi Rhodes Show,” beat WABC’s Sean Hannity in New York with a 3.3 share to Hannity’s 3.0 share in the Men 25-54 demographic (3-7 p.m.). In addition, Rhodes beats Hannity in the Men 25-54 (3-6 p.m.) demographic, receiving a 3.3. share to Hannity’s 2.9. Randi saw great success overall in the Fall 2005 book, with a 22% increase in P12+ AQH (50,100 to 60,900), a 6% increase in A25-54 AQH (32,900 to 34,900)and an impressive 59% increase with Men 25-54 (17,800 to 28,300).

“The Al Franken Show” also showed strong signs of growth according to the Arbitron Fall 2005 Survey. For Persons 12+ he increased his AQH by 56%(47,700 to 74, 600); increased his share from a 1.4 to a 2.3; and increased his TSL by 53%. In the key demographic 25-54 “The Al Franken Show” increased its AQH by 36%(32,600 to 44,400) and also went from a 1.7 share to a 2.4; the show’s TSL received a 32% increase.

Al Franken beat WOR’s Bill O’Reilly’s AQH/Share and TSL with P12+, A25-54 and M25-54 for his overall show and for their shared hour. 12n-3pm, Al achieved a 2.4 Share with A25-54, where O’Reilly’s affiliate WOR-AM achieved only a 0.8. With Men 25-54, WLIB also outperforms WOR with a 4.0 Share vs. WOR’s 0.4 Share. During the overlapping hour of 2pm-3pm, Franken reaches a 2.3 share with Persons 12+ where O’Reilly earns a 2.1. With Adults 25-54, Franken again has a 2.3 share, O’Reilly only a 0.8. Franken also defeated O’Reilly in TSL and Cume, with 1hr higher A25-54 TSL, nearly double A25-54 Cume (74400 vs 38400), and more than twice O’Reilly’s TSL and Cume with Men 25-54.

http://www.airamericaradio.com/press