[kalthalior]

To Rex, regarding the President:

Regarding the "Bush was AWOL", from National Guard Magazine
"the most comprehensive media review of Bush's military records concluded that while he, "served irregularly after the spring of 1972 and got an expedited discharge, he did accumulate the days of service required for him for his ultimate honorable discharge." The review was done by Georgemag.com, the Online Version of the magazine founded by the late John F. Kennedy Jr. Guardsmen say Bush's service record is not unusual."

I'll note as a veteran myself that nobody I ever heard of that went AWOL got an honorable discharge.

Regarding he "lied about drunken driving", from Robert A. George
of the New York Post, 11/3/00:

"There is no evidence yet that Bush has lied about this incident. And, of course, for the boomer media, the actions matter little; the chief question is, Did the individual lie or dissemble? In truth, it seems that Bush was pretty aboveboard in his handling of it. In this post-Clinton moment, the principal lesson we are asked to accept is that Dubya was "straightforward" about his past. This columnist would have preferred hearing about this incident a year ago � and coming from the Republican candidate himself."

It appears you are 0-2 so far about the President lying, and it gets better:

he "lied about Harken", from columnist Byron York:

"In June 1990, Bush sold two-thirds of his stake � 212,000 shares � at $4 for a total price of $848,000. At the time of the sale, Harken was moving into a period of financial difficulties. In the months following Bush's sale, the company announced a quarterly loss and the stock price went into a long, slow decline; by the end of 1990, it was $1.25 a share."

However, York goes on to state:

"Bush denies any wrongdoing and has often said he was unaware of the difficulties within Harken. "He thought he was selling into good news," spokeswoman Karen Hughes told The American Spectator, adding that if Bush had waited to sell the stock he could have earned considerably more than he got. That would, however, have required his waiting at least a year; it was not until June 1991 that Harken got back up to $4 a share. By September 1991 it briefly hit $8 a share.
In 1991 the Securities and Exchange Commission investigated the sale and took no action against Bush or anyone else. "I don't remember a lot about it, other than there wasn't a lot about it," says William McLucas, who was the SEC enforcement chief at the time. "The facts just didn't support any judgment that this was something that would result in a serious enforcement proceeding." "

So he sold in June '90 for $4, it went as low as $1.25 in Dec. '90, but by Sep. '91 it was over $8.
I fail to see a problem here, unless it was that he sold too early. Also note the statement from the SEC.

Perhaps you should investigate things a little more closely before repeating things to find out if they're really true.