Bush 1972 vs. Bush 2004

February 10, 2004

Comments

Stephen Bainbridge has perhaps the best take on the “Was Bush AWOL?” issue yet:

The question is not whether I want the George Bush of 1972-ish as President; the question is whether I want the George Bush of 2004 as President.

Yep.

Bithead

February 10, 2004 at 10:14 pm

Either way, Bush wins.
When I look at an incredibly rodent-looking Kerry, gazing raptly at Hanoi Jane Fonda, at a 1972 war protest, my choice is already made.
Kevin

February 10, 2004 at 11:24 pm

I’d rather party with the 1972 Bush. One suspects he was a ‘free spirit’.
Kate

February 11, 2004 at 12:26 am

If this were really the “character” issue the “Bush was Awol” pack claim it is, why aren’t we debating the month long bender Bush went in October 2001?

Oh, that’s right. That weak cowardly liar didn’t dive back into the comfort of a bottle when all hell broke loose around him.

I forgot that part.
Chris

February 11, 2004 at 10:28 am

But by the same logic, Kerry 1970 is not the same as Kerry 2004. We all grow and change, right?
James Joyner

February 11, 2004 at 10:34 am

Chris: Absolutely. Although he’s trying very hard to run as Lieutenant Kerry, War Hero rather than on his senatoril record.

—