From today's Boston Globe
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/08/bush_fell_short_on_duty_at_guard/

Bush fell short on duty at Guard
Records show pledges unmet
By The Globe Spotlight Team | September 8, 2004

This article was reported by the Globe Spotlight Team -- reporters Stephen Kurkjian, Francie Latour, Sacha Pfeiffer, and Michael Rezendes, and editor Walter V. Robinson. It was written by Robinson.


In February, when the White House made public hundreds of pages of President Bush's military records, White House officials repeatedly insisted that the records prove that Bush fulfilled his military commitment in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.

But Bush fell well short of meeting his military obligation, a Globe reexamination of the records shows: Twice during his Guard service -- first when he joined in May 1968, and again before he transferred out of his unit in mid-1973 to attend Harvard Business School -- Bush signed documents pledging to meet training commitments or face a punitive call-up to active duty.

He didn't meet the commitments, or face the punishment, the records show. The 1973 document has been overlooked in news media accounts. The 1968 document has received scant notice.

On July 30, 1973, shortly before he moved from Houston to Cambridge, Bush signed a document that declared, ''It is my responsibility to locate and be assigned to another Reserve forces unit or mobilization augmentation position. If I fail to do so, I am subject to involuntary order to active duty for up to 24 months. . . " Under Guard regulations, Bush had 60 days to locate a new unit.

But Bush never signed up with a Boston-area unit. In 1999, Bush spokesman Dan Bartlett told the Washington Post that Bush finished his six-year commitment at a Boston area Air Force Reserve unit after he left Houston. Not so, Bartlett now concedes. ''I must have misspoke," Bartlett, who is now the White House communications director, said in a recent interview.

And early in his Guard service, on May 27, 1968, Bush signed a ''statement of understanding" pledging to achieve ''satisfactory participation" that included attendance at 24 days of annual weekend duty -- usually involving two weekend days each month -- and 15 days of annual active duty. ''I understand that I may be ordered to active duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory participation," the statement reads.

Yet Bush, a fighter-interceptor pilot, performed no service for one six-month period in 1972 and for another period of almost three months in 1973, the records show.

The reexamination of Bush's records by the Globe, along with interviews with military specialists who have reviewed regulations from that era, show that Bush's attendance at required training drills was so irregular that his superiors could have disciplined him or ordered him to active duty in 1972, 1973, or 1974. But they did neither. In fact, Bush's unit certified in late 1973 that his service had been ''satisfactory" -- just four months after Bush's commanding officer wrote that Bush had not been seen at his unit for the previous 12 months.

Bartlett, in a statement to the Globe last night, sidestepped questions about Bush's record. In the statement, Bartlett asserted again that Bush would not have been honorably discharged if he had not ''met all his requirements." In a follow-up e-mail, Bartlett declared: ''And if he hadn't met his requirements you point to, they would have called him up for active duty for up to two years."

That assertion by the White House spokesman infuriates retired Army Colonel Gerald A. Lechliter, one of a number of retired military officers who have studied Bush's records and old National Guard regulations, and reached different conclusions.

''He broke his contract with the United States government -- without any adverse consequences. And the Texas Air National Guard was complicit in allowing this to happen," Lechliter said in an interview yesterday. ''He was a pilot. It cost the government a million dollars to train him to fly. So he should have been held to an even higher standard."

Even retired Lieutenant Colonel Albert C. Lloyd Jr., a former Texas Air National Guard personnel chief who vouched for Bush at the White House's request in February, agreed that Bush walked away from his obligation to join a reserve unit in the Boston area when he moved to Cambridge in September 1973. By not joining a unit in Massachusetts, Lloyd said in an interview last month, Bush ''took a chance that he could be called up for active duty. But the war was winding down, and he probably knew that the Air Force was not enforcing the penalty."

But Lloyd said that singling out Bush for criticism is unfair. ''There were hundreds of guys like him who did the same thing," he said.

Lawrence J. Korb, an assistant secretary of defense for manpower and reserve affairs in the Reagan administration, said after studying many of the documents that it is clear to him that Bush ''gamed the system." And he agreed with Lloyd that Bush was not alone in doing so. ''If I cheat on my income tax and don't get caught, I'm still cheating on my income tax," Korb said.

After his own review, Korb said Bush could have been ordered to active duty for missing more than 10 percent of his required drills in any given year. Bush, according to the records, fell shy of that obligation in two successive fiscal years.

Korb said Bush also made a commitment to complete his six-year obligation when he moved to Cambridge, a transfer the Guard often allowed to accommodate Guardsmen who had to move elsewhere. ''He had a responsibility to find a unit in Boston and attend drills," said Korb, who is now affiliated with a liberal Washington think tank. ''I see no evidence or indication in the documents that he was given permission to forgo training before the end of his obligation. If he signed that document, he should have fulfilled his obligation."

The documents Bush signed only add to evidence that the future president -- then the son of Houston's congressman -- received favorable treatment when he joined the Guard after graduating from Yale in 1968. Ben Barnes, who was speaker of the Texas House of Representatives in 1968, said in a deposition in 2000 that he placed a call to get young Bush a coveted slot in the Guard at the request of a Bush family friend.

Bush was given an automatic commission as a second lieutenant, and dispatched to flight school in Georgia for 13 months. In June 1970, after five additional months of specialized training in F-102 fighter-interceptor, Bush began what should have been a four-year assignment with the 111th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron.

In May 1972, Bush was given permission to move to Alabama temporarily to work on a US Senate campaign, with the provision that he do equivalent training with a unit in Montgomery. But Bush's service records do not show him logging any service in Alabama until October of that year.

And even that service is in doubt. Since the Globe first reported Bush's spotty attendance record in May 2000, no one has come forward with any credible recollection of having witnessed Bush performing guard service in Alabama or after he returned to Houston in 1973. While Bush was in Alabama, he was removed from flight status for failing to take his annual flight physical in July 1972. On May 1, 1973, Bush's superior officers wrote that they could not complete his annual performance review because he had not been observed at the Houston base during the prior 12 months.

Although the records of Bush's service in 1973 are contradictory, some of them suggest that he did a flurry of drills in 1973 in Houston -- a weekend in April and then 38 days of training crammed into May, June, and July. But Lechliter, the retired colonel, concluded after reviewing National Guard regulations that Bush should not have received credit -- or pay -- for many of those days either. The regulations, Lechliter and others said, required that any scheduled drills that Bush missed be made up either within 15 days before or 30 days after the date of the drill.

Lechliter said the records push him to conclude that Bush had little interest in fulfilling his obligation, and his superiors preferred to look the other way. Others agree. ''It appears that no one wanted to hold him accountable," said retired Major General Paul A. Weaver Jr., who retired in 2002 as the Pentagon's director of the Air National Guard.

Texans for Truth began running the following ad yesterday featuring Alabama Air Guard Veteran Lieutenant Bob Mintz testifying that he and everyone he knows have no recollection of seeing W in the 187th Air National Guard in Montgomery, Alabama during the time W says he served.

http://www.texansfortruth.com/

Script for Ad Featuring Alabama Air Guard Veteran Lieutenant Bob Mintz

Opens with text: Was George W. Bush AWOL in Alabama?

Visual: Bob Mintz sitting in front of an American flag.

Mintz: "I heard George W. Bush get up there and say, 'I served in the 187th Air National Guard in Montgomery, Alabama.'"

"I said, 'Really, that was my unit? And I don?t remember seeing you there.' So I called my friends and said, 'Did you know that George Bush served in our unit?' and everyone said, 'No I never saw him there.'"

Text: Tell us whom you served with, Mr. President.

Mintz: "It would be impossible to be unseen in a unit of that size."

Text: George Bush has some explaining to do.

Voice over and text: Texans for Truth is responsible for this advertisement.

And from the NY Times:

TIMES NEWS TRACKER

Topics
Alerts
Bush, George W (http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=per&v1=BUSH%2C+GEORGE+W&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=BUSH%2C+GEORGE+W&rt=1%2Cdes%2Corg%2Cper%2Cgeo)


Air National Guard (http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=org&v1=AIR+NATIONAL+GUARD&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=AIR+NATIONAL+GUARD&rt=1%2Cdes%2Corg%2Cper%2Cgeo)


Vietnam (http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=geo&v1=VIETNAM&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=VIETNAM&rt=1%2Cdes%2Corg%2Cper%2Cgeo)



President Bush claims that in the fall of 1972, he fulfilled his Air National Guard duties at a base in Alabama. But Bob Mintz was there - and he is sure Mr. Bush wasn't.

Plenty of other officers have said they also don't recall that Mr. Bush ever showed up for drills at the base. What's different about Mr. Mintz is that he remembers actively looking for Mr. Bush and never finding him.

Mr. Mintz says he had heard that Mr. Bush - described as a young Texas pilot with political influence - had transferred to the base. He heard that Mr. Bush was also a bachelor, so he was looking forward to partying together. He's confident that he'd remember if Mr. Bush had shown up.

"I'm sure I would have seen him," Mr. Mintz said yesterday. "It's a small unit, and you couldn't go in or out without being seen. It was too close a space." There were only 25 to 30 pilots there, and Mr. Bush - a U.N. ambassador's son who had dated Tricia Nixon - would have been particularly memorable.

I've steered clear until now of how Mr. Bush evaded service in Vietnam because I thought other issues were more important. But if Bush supporters attack John Kerry for his conduct after he volunteered for dangerous duty in Vietnam, it's only fair to scrutinize Mr. Bush's behavior.

It's not a pretty sight. Mr. Bush was saved from active duty, and perhaps Vietnam, only after the speaker of the Texas House intervened for him because of his family's influence.

Mr. Bush signed up in May 1968 for a six-year commitment, justifying the $1 million investment in training him as a pilot. But after less than two years, Mr. Bush abruptly stopped flying, didn't show up for his physical and asked to transfer to Alabama. He never again flew a military plane.

Mr. Bush insists that after moving to Alabama in 1972, he served out his obligation at Dannelly Air National Guard Base in Montgomery (although he says he doesn't remember what he did there). The only officer there who recalls Mr. Bush was produced by the White House - he remembers Mr. Bush vividly, but at times when even Mr. Bush acknowledges he wasn't there.

In contrast, Mr. Mintz is a compelling witness. Describing himself as "a very strong military man," he served in the military from 1959 to 1984. A commercial pilot, he is now a Democrat but was a Republican for most of his life, and he is not a Bush-hater. When I asked him whether the National Guard controversy raises questions about Mr. Bush's credibility, Mr. Mintz said only, "That's up to the American people to decide."

In his first interview with a national news organization, Mr. Mintz recalled why he remembered Mr. Bush as a no-show: "Young bachelors were kind of sparse. For that reason, I was looking for someone to haul around with." Why speak out now? He said, "After a lot of soul-searching, I just feel it's my duty to stand up and do the right thing."

Another particularly credible witness is Leonard Walls, a retired Air Force colonel who was then a full-time pilot instructor at the base. "I was there pretty much every day," he said, adding: "I never saw him, and I was there continually from July 1972 to July 1974." Mr. Walls, who describes himself as nonpolitical, added, "If he had been there more than once, I would have seen him."

The sheer volume of missing documents, and missing recollections, strongly suggests to me that Mr. Bush blew off his Guard obligations. It's not fair to say Mr. Bush deserted. My sense is that he (like some others at the time) neglected his National Guard obligations, did the bare minimum to avoid serious trouble and was finally let off by commanders who considered him a headache but felt it wasn't worth the hassle to punish him.

"The record clearly and convincingly proves he did not fulfill the obligations he incurred when he enlisted in the Air National Guard," writes Gerald Lechliter, a retired Army colonel who has made the most meticulous examination I've seen of Mr. Bush's records (I've posted the full 32-page analysis here (http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/opinion/lechliter.pdf)). Mr. Lechliter adds that Mr. Bush received unauthorized or fraudulent payments that breached National Guard rules, according to the documents that the White House itself released.

Does this disqualify Mr. Bush from being commander in chief? No. But it should disqualify the Bush campaign from sliming the military service of a rival who still carries shrapnel from Vietnam in his thigh.


Texans for Truth began running the following ad yesterday featuring Alabama Air Guard Veteran Lieutenant Bob Mintz testifying that he and everyone he knows have no recollection of seeing W in the 187th Air National Guard in Montgomery, Alabama during the time W says he served.

http://www.texansfortruth.com/

Who cares? Give it up. He did more than Clinton, right? Further, why didn't Dole win over Clinton? Why didn't Carter beat Reagan? Why didn't Bush I beat Clinton? It's not that important to voters, and it's even nutty for Democrats to be pushing this issue now, given their support for Clinton.

If you want to make the presidency all about who has better military record, that's fine. I can propose some dandy candidates for you.

Who cares? Give it up. He did more than Clinton, right? Further, why didn't Dole win over Clinton? Why didn't Carter beat Reagan? Why didn't Bush I beat Clinton? It's not that important to voters, and it's even nutty for Democrats to be pushing this issue now, given their support for Clinton.

If you want to make the presidency all about who has better military record, that's fine. I can propose some dandy candidates for you.

Because W was for the Vietnam War but made damn sure he wasn't one of the 58,193 American soldiers who died there. Now he's gotten us into a war without end under false pretenses. Perhaps if he'd served in Vietnam he wouldn't have been so eager to put American soldiers in Iraq, and sacrifice them for, at the very least, a questionable cause.

I can't believe you don't see the relevance. Clearly, a good president does not need to have served in the military. But, if Bush and Cheney are going to attack Kerry for his service to our country, is it not fair and, indeed, necessary for their service to be scrutinized?

If Bush just said that all this was in the past, like his drunken stupors and cocaine use, it couldn't have become an issue. Republicans have been VERY vocal about Kerry's war record (how about those Purple Heart bandaids).

So, if we're going to weigh who sacrificed more, Bush's martini military service can't but be relevant.


Who cares? Give it up. He did more than Clinton, right? Further, why didn't Dole win over Clinton? Why didn't Carter beat Reagan? Why didn't Bush I beat Clinton? It's not that important to voters, and it's even nutty for Democrats to be pushing this issue now, given their support for Clinton.

If you want to make the presidency all about who has better military record, that's fine. I can propose some dandy candidates for you.

Because W was for the Vietnam War but made damn sure he wasn't one of the 58,193 American soldiers who died there. Now he's gotten us into a war without end under false pretenses. Perhaps if he'd served in Vietnam he wouldn't have been so eager to put American soldiers in Iraq, and sacrifice them for, at the very least, a questionable cause.

So, are we to assume that no one can effectively serve as Commander in Chief unless he served in Vietnam? Isn't that the logical extension or the principle of what you are arguing?

Also, how many Vietnam vet legislators voted for the war? We know Kerry did...

So, are we to assume that no one can effectively serve as Commander in Chief unless he served in Vietnam? Isn't that the logical extension or the principle of what you are arguing?

Also, how many Vietnam vet legislators voted for the war? We know Kerry did...

It's not a logical extension. The Bush campaign went on the offensive, even though the bulk of the Administration didn't serve in the military, and smeared and attacked Kerry who did. W's military service, or lack thereof, would not be a major topic if the Swift Boat liars hadn't made Kerry's service fair game. Nonetheless, there are lessons to be learned from Vietnam, and clearly W didn't learn diddly.

You're misrepresenting Kerry's vote and the vote in general but, regardless, my point is that W, as leader of this great country, is clearly out of his depth. If W wasn't born, to quote Ann Richards' comment about Bush, Sr., with "a silver foot in his mouth," with his flimsy record of service and accomplishment he wouldn't be elected dogcatcher in most localities.

Who cares? Give it up. He did more than Clinton, right? Further, why didn't Dole win over Clinton? Why didn't Carter beat Reagan? Why didn't Bush I beat Clinton? It's not that important to voters, and it's even nutty for Democrats to be pushing this issue now, given their support for Clinton.

If you want to make the presidency all about who has better military record, that's fine. I can propose some dandy candidates for you.

was this your opinion regarding the swift boat ads? i don't think so.

bush and his crew made what kerry did in vietnam an issue. since kerry's service, or lack of as they have characterized, is fair game, then it only seems relevant that bush's conduct during the same time is also fair game.

I can't believe you don't see the relevance. Clearly, a good president does not need to have served in the military. But, if Bush and Cheney are going to attack Kerry for his service to our country, is it not fair and, indeed, necessary for their service to be scrutinized?

If Bush just said that all this was in the past, like his drunken stupors and cocaine use, it couldn't have become an issue. Republicans have been VERY vocal about Kerry's war record (how about those Purple Heart bandaids).

So, if we're going to weigh who sacrificed more, Bush's martini military service can't but be relevant.

Trouble is, even at my anti-Bush worst, I can't blame Bush when it is really the leadership at the guard that should be held accountable.

My father was drafted, he went for the physical. They told him they'd call in three days. They never called. He never asked any questions. He never served. I'm quite certain he would have gone when called. Same situation with Bush- NOBODY really took guard duty seriously as anything other than a ticket out of serving overseas. Most of us would have done the same thing. Let us face the truth that there were all sorts of bogus student deferments- that hardly any male students during the Vietnam era ever flunked out of college (and that grade inflation occurred for that very reason). I don't think Bush ever trumpeted his guard duty- and it was McCain that called it as an issue last primary- Bush's attention was centered around defending himself.

I don't think Bush ever trumpeted his guard duty-

never trumpeted it? when he ran for congress in 1978, he was putting out campaiugn literature that claimed he had served in the air force, ferchrissakes.

edit: i hate the way the quote function cuts off words.

that should read "air force".

Trouble is, Bush actively avoided service and then lied about it because it is inconsistent with his PR about being a tough, pro-military cheerleader.

Your father was under no obligation to call the military and ask them why he wasn't being called up.

Bush signed a contract that allowed him to learn how to fly at taxpayer's expense with the condition that if he did not fulfill the contract, he would be liable to being sent to active duty.

Bush refuses to acknowledge that strings were pulled for him to get into the Guard, then lied about his service, or lack thereof, even stating that he was in the Air Force when, in fact, he flew for two years and then never again, didn't show up for a required drug test which should have immediately sent him to Vietnam.

It's not his fault that he wasn't punished for it, but his behavior shows a remarkable disregard for personal responsibility (a supposed Republican principle), courage and honor.


Trouble is, even at my anti-Bush worst, I can't blame Bush when it is really the leadership at the guard that should be held accountable.

My father was drafted, he went for the physical. They told him they'd call in three days. They never called. He never asked any questions. He never served. I'm quite certain he would have gone when called. Same situation with Bush- NOBODY really took guard duty seriously as anything other than a ticket out of serving overseas. Most of us would have done the same thing. Let us face the truth that there were all sorts of bogus student deferments- that hardly any male students during the Vietnam era ever flunked out of college (and that grade inflation occurred for that very reason). I don't think Bush ever trumpeted his guard duty- and it was McCain that called it as an issue last primary- Bush's attention was centered around defending himself.

It's not a logical extension. The Bush campaign went on the offensive, even though the bulk of the Administration didn't serve in the military, and smeared and attacked Kerry who did. W's military service, or lack thereof, would not be a major topic if the Swift Boat liars hadn't made Kerry's service fair game. Nonetheless, there are lessons to be learned from Vietnam, and clearly W didn't learn diddly.

You're misrepresenting Kerry's vote and the vote in general but, regardless, my point is that W, as leader of this great country, is clearly out of his depth. If W wasn't born, to quote Ann Richards' comment about Bush, Sr., with "a silver foot in his mouth," with his flimsy record of service and accomplishment he wouldn't be elected dogcatcher in most localities.

Show me even one instance of Bush attacking Kerry's military record. He's stated nothing but praise. That's a false premise for your argument.

Show me even one instance of Bush attacking Kerry's military record. He's stated nothing but praise. That's a false premise for your argument.

He doesn't say 'Bush,' he says 'the Bush campaign.' As long as we're splitting hairs.

Show me even one instance of Bush attacking Kerry's military record. He's stated nothing but praise. That's a false premise for your argument.

:o

You're kidding, right? You must think those of us who disagree with you are idiots.

Rove, Hughes... the W machine are masters of the whisper campaign. Bush didn't personally attack McCain in 2000 either. But ads and whisper campaigns ran on the campaign's behalf, when it looked like McCain was about to lock up the nomination, alleging he'd fathered the "colored" South Asian daughter he and his wife had adopted, that McCain was a little "crazy" from his days in the Hanoi Hilton, that his wife was a pillpopper...

Lechliter said the records push him to conclude that Bush had little interest in fulfilling his obligation, and his superiors preferred to look the other way. Others agree. ''It appears that no one wanted to hold him accountable," said retired Major General Paul A. Weaver Jr., who retired in 2002 as the Pentagon's director of the Air National Guard.

Shouldn't he have been called up, like all the others, to serve out his obligation in Iraq???

He doesn't say 'Bush,' he says 'the Bush campaign.' As long as we're splitting hairs.

Other than unproveable "whisper campaign" allegations, are there any attacks on Kerry's record directly attributable to someone under the control of Bush?

I think there are two somewhat distinct areas of discussion, too. One is the record itself, the second is whether Kerry lied about it. The latter is a more legitimate target, I'd think.

Other than unproveable "whisper campaign" allegations, are there any attacks on Kerry's record directly attributable to someone under the control of Bush?


No, no longer under his control anyway, I believe they've all been forced to resign from the campaign. :-)

Other than unproveable "whisper campaign" allegations, are there any attacks on Kerry's record directly attributable to someone under the control of Bush?

I think there are two somewhat distinct areas of discussion, too. One is the record itself, the second is whether Kerry lied about it. The latter is a more legitimate target, I'd think.

Benjamin Ginsberg resigned as national counsel for the Bush campaign after disclosing that he had provided legal advice to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. (Ginsberg also represented Bush in the 2000 Florida recount.)

Other than unproveable "whisper campaign" allegations, are there any attacks on Kerry's record directly attributable to someone under the control of Bush?

I think there are two somewhat distinct areas of discussion, too. One is the record itself, the second is whether Kerry lied about it. The latter is a more legitimate target, I'd think.

whether Bush lied about meeting his Guard obligation. Yep. Agree 100 percent.

Other than unproveable "whisper campaign" allegations, are there any attacks on Kerry's record directly attributable to someone under the control of Bush?

I think there are two somewhat distinct areas of discussion, too. One is the record itself, the second is whether Kerry lied about it. The latter is a more legitimate target, I'd think.

How about Lee Atwater's death bed admission about all of the "dirty tricks" he controlled through such "whisper campaigns" and the lives he destroyed in the name of getting his man elected? In the court of law I believe death bed confessionals can be used as evidence. Do you feel that this rises up to sufficient level. Mr. Rove worshipped at the alter of Mr. Atwater and knows all of the tricks and uses them with deft skill. You know this Doug, you may deny it here on the board, but you know it is the case.

when he ran for congress in 1978, he was putting out campaiugn literature that claimed he had served in the air force, ferchrissakes.






Yes, but he lost that election... but seriously, you are correct, but I think he learned from all that- I think he has been more evasive and kept a lower profile in recent years. Clearly he was AWOL in my book- but I guess I rather expect that.

How about Lee Atwater's death bed admission about all of the "dirty tricks" he controlled through such "whisper campaigns" and the lives he destroyed in the name of getting his man elected? In the court of law I believe death bed confessionals can be used as evidence. Do you feel that this rises up to sufficient level. Mr. Rove worshipped at the alter of Mr. Atwater and knows all of the tricks and uses them with deft skill. You know this Doug, you may deny it here on the board, but you know it is the case.

is delusional, in denial or just plain silly. Before you jump on me, let me rush to add that anyone who denies collusion between Kerry campaign and moveon.org is delusional, in denial or just plain silly. Obviously the candidates themselves will be insulated from the collusion, but for Pete's sake -- of COURSE it happens. (Let me rush to add further that, while it might be illegal, other than that I see nothing whatsoever wrong with it. I LIKE wide-open politics, free speech and association, all that).

C'mon Doug, you know it's true. We're all grownups here. You can admit it.

Who cares that he wouldn't serve in a war he wanted America to fight despite being able-bodied, capable of operating a military jet and having no other obligations at the time? Who cares that he signed on to serve far below his demonstrated capacity and didn't even fulfill <i>that</i> commitment? Who cares that he continues to dodge the truth of these matters?

The issue is not Vietnam. The issue is character. I see in that pattern of behavior a man of weak and self-serving character. I see a man who will not stand up for principles that he professes.

All hat, no cattle.

Who cares that he wouldn't serve in a war he wanted America to fight despite being able-bodied, capable of operating a military jet and having no other obligations at the time? Who cares that he signed on to serve far below his demonstrated capacity and didn't even fulfill <i>that</i> commitment? Who cares that he continues to dodge the truth of these matters?

The issue is not Vietnam. The issue is character. I see in that pattern of behavior a man of weak and self-serving character. I see a man who will not stand up for principles that he professes.

All hat, no cattle.


My point about "who cares" is really that I don't think anyone will not vote for Bush because of this. If you don't like him, there are plenty of other more substantial reasons. I can't see this even being 1 straw, much less the last straw in anyone's voting decision. If you like Bush, this is nothing more than a gnat of an issue.

My point about "who cares" is really that I don't think anyone will not vote for Bush because of this. If you don't like him, there are plenty of other more substantial reasons. I can't see this even being 1 straw, much less the last straw in anyone's voting decision. If you like Bush, this is nothing more than a gnat of an issue.

It is no fun playing defense is it?

It is no fun playing defense is it?


I've been playing defense here for four years!

This isn't an issue much worth defending. Not even a blip on the screen of important or decisive issues. Meaningless to anyone who would even consider voting for Bush. Some Dems might think they can get some mileage out of it, but it's pure circle jerk.

My point about "who cares" is really that I don't think anyone will not vote for Bush because of this. If you don't like him, there are plenty of other more substantial reasons. I can't see this even being 1 straw, much less the last straw in anyone's voting decision. If you like Bush, this is nothing more than a gnat of an issue.

While Doug isn't totally spinless (not spineless) on this issue, I'd like to refresh people's memory ... As I recall, Doug has been in the "who cares" camp the whole time on National Guard vs. Viet Nam service.

My point about "who cares" is really that I don't think anyone will not vote for Bush because of this. If you don't like him, there are plenty of other more substantial reasons. I can't see this even being 1 straw, much less the last straw in anyone's voting decision. If you like Bush, this is nothing more than a gnat of an issue.

And have no doubt, not fulfilling his military service and lyingabout it, informs his performance prior and post 9/11 and will resonate in voters minds, especially key swing voters. This is not a man who relishes taking responsibility but would rather assign blame to others. All Americans who work for a paycheck, which is most of us, know that this man does not have their interests at heart.

I've been playing defense here for four years!

This isn't an issue much worth defending. Not even a blip on the screen of important or decisive issues. Meaningless to anyone who would even consider voting for Bush. Some Dems might think they can get some mileage out of it, but it's pure circle jerk.

Are you saying you can't rely on BILL105 to get your back?

You say it doesn't matter. And for you I am sure it doesn't but raw meat is raw meat. The press may feel that it might be time to put Bush through the ringer, give him a September equivalent to the August that Kerry had. You and I know that many are just sheep and it will matter to the sheep.

He was also in the "liars are unfit to lead and should be impeached" camp. Was.

uh oh! kinda puts a kink in your armor. heh heh

Former Guardsman: Bush served with me in Alabama

A retired Alabama Air National Guard officer said Friday that he remembers George Bush showing up for duty in Alabama in 1972, reading safety magazines and flight manuals in an office as he performed his weekend obligations.
"I saw him each drill period," retired Lt. Col. John "Bill" Calhoun said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press from Daytona Beach, Fla., where he is preparing to watch this weekend's big NASCAR race.

"He was very aggressive about doing his duty there. He never complained about it. ... He was very dedicated to what he was doing in the Guard. He showed up on time and he left at the end of the day."

Calhoun, whose name was supplied to the AP by a Republican close to Bush, is the first member of the 187th Tactical Reconnaissance Group to recall Bush distinctly at the Alabama base in the period of 1972-1973. He was the unit's flight safety officer.

The 69-year-old president of an Atlanta insulation company said Bush showed up for work at Dannelly Air National Guard Base for drills on at least six occasions. Bush and Calhoun had both been trained as fighter pilots, and Calhoun said the two would swap "war stories" and even eat lunch together on base.

Calhoun is named in 187th unit rosters obtained by the AP as serving under the deputy commander of operations plans. Bush was in Alabama on non-flying status.

"He sat in my office most of the time — he would read," Calhoun said. "He had your training manuals from your aircraft he was flying. He'd study those some. He'd read safety magazines, which is a common thing for pilots."

Democrats have asked for proof that Bush, then a 1st lieutenant with the Texas Air National Guard, turned up for duty in Alabama, where Bush had asked to be assigned while he worked on the U.S. Senate campaign of family friend Winton "Red" Blount.

Pay and medical records released by the White House this week failed to quash allegations that Bush shirked his Guard responsibilities. (Related story: Bush's driving records disclosed)

The 187th's former commander, retired Brig. Gen. William Turnipseed, has said he doesn't remember Bush ever turning up on base, and more than a dozen members of the 800-person unit, including its commander, told The Associated Press this week they have no recollection of Bush. Critics have made much of the fact that the White House has failed to produce anyone who could remember seeing Bush there.

Calhoun said he contacted Texas GOP leaders with his story in 2000 when the issue was raised just before the November general election.

"I got on the phone and got information and called Austin, Texas, and talked to the Republican campaign. They said I was talking to the campaign manager," he said. "I told him my story and said I would be glad to provide information to that effect. At that time they said ... The story is not true. And we don't think it's got enough weight to stay out as a story.' And they said, 'But if it does we'll call you back.' And I never heard from them again."

Last week as the issue raged again, Calhoun sent an e-mail to the White House offering to tell his story. "I got a response back, one of those automatic responses," he said. It wasn't until his wife contacted Georgia GOP officials that Calhoun's name surfaced.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Friday that the White House was not making any effort to try to locate people who might have served with Bush. He also accused reporters of trying to raise new lines of questioning, beyond whether Bush served in Alabama.

Critics have suggested that Bush used his family connections to get the safe Guard assignment ahead of thousands of others. But Calhoun said Bush never mentioned his congressman father while they sat together at Dannelly.

"I knew he was working in the senatorial campaign, and I asked him if he was going to be a politician," said Calhoun, who is a staunch Republican. "And he said, 'I don't know. Probably.'"

Calhoun has not made any donations to Bush this election season or during the 2000 season, according to campaign finance records.

uh oh! kinda puts a kink in your armor. heh heh

.

Nope. But it makes me laugh to see you defend the man on the same grounds you used to impugn his opponent.

Can you spell h-y-p-o-c-r-a-c-y?

i havent questioned whether or not kerry showed up for duty on a swift boat. i'm sorry to say he apparently did. but its what followed his service that really tarnished his vietnam tours.

i havent questioned whether or not kerry showed up for duty on a swift boat. i'm sorry to say he apparently did. but its what followed his service that really tarnished his vietnam tours.

keep 'splainin Lucy.

So, are we to assume that no one can effectively serve as Commander in Chief unless he served in Vietnam? Isn't that the logical extension or the principle of what you are arguing?

Also, how many Vietnam vet legislators voted for the war? We know Kerry did...


Anyone remember all that hay the Republicans made against Clinton as a draft dodger? This is payback in the political fun and games department. The Republicans are as culpable as the Democrats in this sort of campaign. Counting coup.

hey bill, it's funny that calhoun said he remembered bush as being in alabama at times when bush himself has admitted he wasn't there.

keep trying though. the wheels are fast coming off the wagon.

hey bill, it's funny that calhoun said he remembered bush as being in alabama at times when bush himself has admitted he wasn't there.

keep trying though. the wheels are fast coming off the wagon.

do you remember where you were 30 years ago? i didnt think so.

:p Calhoun, who is a staunch Republican.

Your unattributed cut and paste was reported in newspapers on 2/14/04. A lovely Valentine's Day present from a former lover perhaps?!? :p

On 2/16/04, the NY Daily News was reported that

The only seemingly credible witness to vouch for Bush is retired Lt. Col. John (Bill) Calhoun, who insists he saw Bush report for weekend duty in Alabama. But Calhoun's memory seems about as spotty as some of the military documents.

Calhoun, of Atlanta, initially said he saw Bush report for Guard duty "eight to 10 times for roughly eight hours at a time from May to October 1972." Later, he said he saw Bush report for drills "on at least six occasions."

And in an interview this weekend with the Daily News, Calhoun said he saw Bush attend "at least four drills."

Bush's records credit him with two days in October and two in November.

Calhoun, 69, a former National Guard supply officer, attributed the varying numbers to reporters' confused interpretations, and said the Guard defines a "drill" as a weekend of duty in the one-weekend-per-month cycle. "So if I saw him at six drills, that's 12 days," Calhoun said.

Calhoun's explanation was even knocked yesterday by retired Texas Air National Guard Lt. Col. Albert Lloyd Jr., who Bush picked in 2000 and again recently to review his records and vouch that he met his Guard obligation.

"Two days make a 'drill weekend,' not a drill," said Lloyd.

do you remember where you were 30 years ago? i didnt think so.


How is this different than Kerry being either in or not in Cambodia 30 years ago.

Please tell BILL I am sure that this will be riveting.

How is this different than Kerry being either in or not in Cambodia 30 years ago.

Please tell BILL I am sure that this will be riveting.

i wasnt there but i would think being in cambodia on christmas having memories SEARED, SEARED into my psyche would be easily remembered.

do you remember where you were 30 years ago? i didnt think so.

if i had the son of a wealthy family, prominent politician and head of the cia in my seventh grade class, i think i would remember if i had seen him.

i wasnt there
that statement says it all bill.

that statement says it all bill.


were you by chance on an air force base in alabama in the 60's?

were you by chance on an air force base in alabama in the 70's?

BILL I admire your moxy trying to defend the undefendable using arguments that you used against Kerry, but even a child knows that the light socket can shock them after a few attempts.

BILL I admire your moxy trying to defend the undefendable using arguments that you used against Kerry, but even a child knows that the light socket can shock them after a few attempts.

really, since light sockets are at eye level for you i guess you know that all too well.

really, since light sockets are at eye level for you i guess you know that all too well.
typical neocon...when cornered resort to personal insults. remember this thread the next time you accuse the "libbies" of doing the same.

typical neocon...when cornered resort to personal insults. remember this thread the next time you accuse the "libbies" of doing the same.

your problem with reading and comprehension is evident. please read the post before mine to see who resorted to what.

your problem with reading and comprehension is evident. please read the post before mine to see who resorted to what.
hey at least TMB was trying to talk about Kerry while illustrating your pigheadedness about Kerry's Vietnam service.

In his first interview with a national news organization, Mr. Mintz recalled why he remembered Mr. Bush as a no-show: "Young bachelors were kind of sparse. For that reason, I was looking for someone to haul around with." Why speak out now? He said, "After a lot of soul-searching, I just feel it's my duty to stand up and do the right thing."


He's just "speaking out now"?

And former Guard Pilot Bob Mintz -- who was with the Alabama unit at the time -- says the base was all abuzz about a politically-connected Lieutenant coming in. But Mintz claims he never saw Mr. Bush -- and expects the newcomer would have stood out.

"I just don't see how you could, ah, walk into a military squadron of people who are intimately familiar with each other and their jobs and things and not recognize him as a stranger, ya know?" said Mintz.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/14/politics/main600360.shtml

and from yesterday:

"But like their Republican counterparts, Texans for Truth has a credibility problem. While the chief accuser, former Alabama Guard pilot Bob Mintz, says in the ad it would have been impossible for Mr. Bush to have gone unnoticed, in an interview earlier this year with CBS News, Mintz admitted he's not a smoking gun.

"I cannot say he was not there," Mintz said. "Absolutely positively was not there. I cannot say that. I cannot say he didn't do his duty."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/09/politics/main642197.shtml

is delusional, in denial or just plain silly. Before you jump on me, let me rush to add that anyone who denies collusion between Kerry campaign and moveon.org is delusional, in denial or just plain silly. Obviously the candidates themselves will be insulated from the collusion, but for Pete's sake -- of COURSE it happens. (Let me rush to add further that, while it might be illegal, other than that I see nothing whatsoever wrong with it. I LIKE wide-open politics, free speech and association, all that).

C'mon Doug, you know it's true. We're all grownups here. You can admit it.

Speaking of Moveon.org...


Texans for Truth is an arm of DriveDemocracy, an Austin-based organization that got its initial funding from the liberal group MoveOn.org. Affiliates of MoveOn.org — MoveOn PAC and MoveOn Voter Fund — have spent about $7 million since March 1 on anti-Bush TV ads.

DriveDemocracy is run by Glenn Smith, who managed the unsuccessful 2002 Texas gubernatorial campaign of Democrat Tony Sanchez. Smith is a former managing director at the consulting firm Public Strategies. That firm employs former Texas governor Ann Richards, a Democrat whom Bush beat in 1994. Mark McKinnon, the Bush-Cheney campaign's ad czar, is on leave from the same firm.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-09-07-texas-ad_x.htm

and

The Democratic Party is partnering with MoveOn.org, People for the American Way,
Campaign for America's Future, and dozens of other groups representing millions
of Americans to organize a massive public mobilization. On Wednesday, May 14,
join us by calling and emailing your representatives in Congress to let them
know that the majority of Americans oppose more irresponsible tax cuts that go
overwhelmingly to the wealthiest sliver of Americans.

http://www.democrats.org/wvc/weekinreview/200305120002.html

How is this different than Kerry being either in or not in Cambodia 30 years ago.



It's different because Kerry told his lie on the floor of the Senate (among other places) in order to influence legislation. In order to deny aid to the Contras, specifically. Kerry was linking (the false) lie by Nixon with what Reagan was claiming about the Contras.

It's different because Kerry told his lie on the floor of the Senate (among other places) in order to influence legislation. In order to deny aid to the Contras, specifically. Kerry was linking (the false) lie by Nixon with what Reagan was claiming about the Contras.

Seems a rather astute analogy considering Reagan's Central American policy.

Seems a rather astute analogy considering Reagan's Central American policy.

If he had framed it as an analogy, it wouldn't be an issue. He stated it as fact.

Are you saying you can't rely on BILL105 to get your back?

You say it doesn't matter. And for you I am sure it doesn't but raw meat is raw meat. The press may feel that it might be time to put Bush through the ringer, give him a September equivalent to the August that Kerry had. You and I know that many are just sheep and it will matter to the sheep.

When did the press put Kerry through the ringer? They were out front trying to discredit the SBVT as much as possible. They've done all they can to ignore the whole thing.

Compare that to how they treated Barnes (60 Min. II) and Kitty Kelly (3 straight days on the Today show) and the "memos".

And have no doubt, not fulfilling his military service and lyingabout it, informs his performance prior and post 9/11 and will resonate in voters minds, especially key swing voters. This is not a man who relishes taking responsibility but would rather assign blame to others. All Americans who work for a paycheck, which is most of us, know that this man does not have their interests at heart.

If Kerry got 2 of his PHs under false pretenses and then used the PH's to get out of VN early (when his crew wouldn't have been able to), abandoning his "Band of Brothers", did he fulfull his military service?

When did the press put Kerry through the ringer? They were out front trying to discredit the SBVT as much as possible. They've done all they can to ignore the whole thing.

Compare that to how they treated Barnes (60 Min. II) and Kitty Kelly (3 straight days on the Today show) and the "memos".


Funny stuff. Funny funny blatantly myopic partisan stuff.

If Kerry got 2 of his PHs under false pretenses and then used the PH's to get out of VN early (when his crew wouldn't have been able to), abandoning his "Band of Brothers", did he fulfull his military service?

Kerry, by all reputable accounts, served in Vietnam heroically. By lampooning his heroic service in battle, his Bronze and Silver Stars and 3 Purple Hearts, the Swift Boat Liars and the rabid Repubs defame the service of all Vietnam Veterans. You'd think they'd be a little pissed that the President and the Vice-President did all they could to avoid going to 'Nam, refused to go into combat, let others serve and die in their places, even though each fully supported the war. Sound familiar?

Kerry, by all reputable accounts, served in Vietnam heroically. By lampooning his heroic service in battle, his Bronze and Silver Stars and 3 Purple Hearts, the Swift Boat Liars and the rapid Repubs defame the service of all Vietnam Veterans. You'd think they'd be a little pissed that the President and the Vice-President did all they could to avoid going to 'Nam, refused to go into combat, let others serve and die in their places, even though each fully supported the war. Sound familiar?

Who's lampooning?

1st PH: Kerry's own journal entry, several days after he was wounded, states that they hadn't been shot at yet.

3rd PH: Rassmann's account of how he and Kerry blew up a rice cache in the morning, when there was no enemy fire, states that Kerry got wounded in his rear. The butt injury is included on Kerry's PH citation.

If anyone defamed the service of all Vietnam Vets, it's someone who manipulated the system to get out of combat early, leaving his "Band of Brothers" behind, and then make the kind of claims Kerry did before the Senate.

The answer to all of this is for Kerry to release all of his records. If he's so heroic, what's he waiting for?

Who's lampooning?

The situations of W and Kerry during the Vietnam-era are polar opposites. W was a drunkard, a cocaine freak, whom his parents worried was out of control; Kerry volunteered to serve and put himself, LITERALLY, into dangerous waters.

More importantly, the directions they'd take us in the next four years are completely different. Under W, our economy would continue to drift, the deficit rise, salaries continue to decrease (except for CEOs, who saw their salaries increase last year over 20%), fear would spread, the Supreme Court would drift even further to the right, etc., etc.

Looks like you already have access to Kerry's "journals." As far as I know, Kerry has released all of his records.

Who's lampooning?

1st PH: Kerry's own journal entry, several days after he was wounded, states that they hadn't been shot at yet.

3rd PH: Rassmann's account of how he and Kerry blew up a rice cache in the morning, when there was no enemy fire, states that Kerry got wounded in his rear. The butt injury is included on Kerry's PH citation.

If anyone defamed the service of all Vietnam Vets, it's someone who manipulated the system to get out of combat early, leaving his "Band of Brothers" behind, and then make the kind of claims Kerry did before the Senate.

The answer to all of this is for Kerry to release all of his records. If he's so heroic, what's he waiting for?


The fact of the matter is, the very same people who are making these claims contradict their own official Navy service records. They won't release their own records either. They contradict their recent public statements of support for Kerry. Their credibility is shot.

O'neil himself was hired originally by the Nixon administration to destroy Kerry. The man holds a 30 year old grudge against Kerry for the things he said after the war. Kerry was quoting facts of atrocities that where told to him by other soldiers. If atrocities like My Lai didn't occur, then I'd say O'neil had a point. But these and other atrocities did occur. Kerry didn't dishonor the soldiers who fought in Vietnam, the soldiers who commited those atrocities dishonored their fellow soldiers.

Let me ask you this question, was Kerry supposed to keep his mouth shut about the atrocities? Just turn a blind eye to the killing, raping...etc. of civilians??? Is that what you'd want from someone who served their country?

Kerry was smart enough, and brave enough, to oppose a needless war when it wasn't a popular thing to do. It's been proven that the anti-war protests actually contributed to shortening the war. One could argue that Kerry saved thousands of lives with his protests.

At least Kerry fulfilled his duty to his country. He was wounded thrice, and save a man's life. What was Bush doing???

Now, how about discussing real issues:

1.8 million jobs lost during first three years in office. Bush stands to be the first president since Hoover and the great depression to have a net job loss for his term.

1.3 million additional poor people.

48 million people without health insurance.

300,000 children left behind due to Bush underfunding the No Child Left Behind initiative.

Yet, he has spent more money than any president before him. He took a $167 annual surplus and turned it into a $500 billion annual deficit. Of which he's already spent $4.3 trillion out to 2008. Even the conservative think tanks are up in arms about this. http://www.nypress.com/17/31/news&columns/WilliamBryk.cfm

Asleep at the wheel during the worst attack on US soil. Bush was on vacation 42% of the time during his first eight months in office. He held only one meeting on terrorism during his first eight months in office. Failed to attack al queda when the CIA finally confirmed their responsibility in the attack on the USS Cole. When asked why Bush failed to attack al queda by Bob Woodward, Bush said "I was tired of swatting flies" and "It wasn't his or his administration's focus." These quotes are found in Woodward's book "Bush at War." Now he is basing his 2004 campaign on the very same attack which his own failures contributed to.

Bush's isolationist foreign policies have destroyed US credibility world wide.

Bush's unnecessary preemptive war in Iraq has taken the lives of over a thousand brave American soldiers, it has handicapped 7,000 brave US soldiers, and has taken about 20,000 lives of innocent Iraqis.

How do you get all four reasons for war wrong?
-No WMDs
-No Chemical/Biological Weapons
-No UAV's
-No revitalized nuke program

Statistically speaking, it isn't possible unless there's an agenda. Like Dick Cheney's unprecidented visits to the CIA just after 911. Cherry picking data and ignoring dissenters. Like when someone from the White House called General Wes Clark and asked him to say it was Iraq behind 911. Clark asked for evidence and they never called him back. Even Bush was smart enough to question the evidence and yet he still knowingly sent troops into Iraq without sufficiant body armor.

I haven't even mentioned his own failure to fulfill his commitment to the Air Naitonal Guard.

W was a drunkard, a cocaine freak, whom his parents worried was out of control; Kerry volunteered to serve and put himself, LITERALLY, into dangerous waters.


1. Bush has admitted he used to drink.
2. You have no evidence about the cocaine usage.
3. That's Kerry myth # 283. Kerry volunteered for Swift-boat duty before they were
patrolling on the rivers.

Kerry initially hoped to continue his service at a relatively safe
distance from most fighting, securing an assignment as "swift boat"
skipper. While the 50-foot swift boats cruised the Vietnamese coast a
little closer to the action than the Gridley had come, they were still
considered relatively safe.
"I didn't really want to get involved in the war," Kerry said in a
little-noticed contribution to a book of Vietnam reminiscences published
in 1986. "When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do
with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling and that's what I
thought I was going to be doing." But two weeks after he arrived in Vietnam, the swift boat mission changed
-- and Kerry went from having one of the safest assignments in the
escalating conflict to one of the most dangerous. Under the newly launched
Operation SEALORD, swift boats were charged with patrolling the narrow
waterways of the Mekong Delta to draw fire and smoke out the enemy.
Cruising inlets and coves and canals, swift boats were especially
vulnerable targets.

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/061603.shtml



Looks like you already have access to Kerry's "journals." As far as I know, Kerry has released all of his records.

The journal references are from his approved biography "Tour of Duty" by Brinkley. Only Brinkley has seen the journals. And, Kerry continues to refuse to release all of his records.

Some of the mystery surrounding exactly what happened on the Bay Hap River in
March 1969 could be resolved by the full release of all relevant records and
personal diaries. Much information is available from the Web sites of the Kerry
campaign and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, and the Navy archives. But both the
Kerry and anti-Kerry camps continue to deny or ignore requests for other
relevant documents, including Kerry's personal reminiscences (shared only with
biographer Brinkley), the boat log of PCF-94 compiled by Medeiros (shared only
with Brinkley) and the Chenoweth diary.
Although Kerry campaign officials insist that they have published Kerry's full
military records on their Web site (with the exception of medical records shown
briefly to reporters earlier this year), they have not permitted independent
access to his original Navy records. A Freedom of Information Act request by The
Post for Kerry's records produced six pages of information. A spokesman for the
Navy Personnel Command, Mike McClellan, said he was not authorized to release
the full file, which consists of at least a hundred pages.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21239-2004Aug21.html

and

The Kerry campaign says it has now released all relevant documents. Without Kerry's Privacy Act waiver, there's no way to confirm that. But if the Globe has not seen everything worth seeing, it's not for lack of trying.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/bush/articles/2004/09/13/equal_looks_at_military_service/

I guess we'll just have to take Kerry's word for it. ;)


More importantly, the directions they'd take us in the next four years are completely different. Under W, our economy would continue to drift, the deficit rise, salaries continue to decrease (except for CEOs, who saw their salaries increase last year over 20%), fear would spread, the Supreme Court would drift even further to the right, etc., etc.

Gosh, this sounds an awful lot like fear-mongering. Doesn't it?

I don't have nearly enough time left today to respond to everything you said, but I can give you my sources (as requested).

PH #1 not happening during combat:

Mr. Kerry has claimed that he faced his "first intense combat"
that day, returned fire, and received his "first combat related
injury."
A journal entry Mr. Kerry wrote Dec. 11, however, raises
questions about what really happened nine days earlier.
"A cocky feeling of invincibility accompanied us up the Long Tau
shipping channel because we hadn't been shot at yet, and Americans
at war who haven't been shot at are allowed to be cocky," wrote Mr.
Kerry, according the book "Tour of Duty" by friendly biographer
Douglas Brinkley.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040825-125217-7993r.htm

PH #3 (tush wound not happening during combat):

As they were heading back to the boat, Kerry and Rassmann decided to blow up a
five-ton rice bin to deny food to the Vietcong. In an interview last week,
Rassmann recalled that they climbed on top of the huge pile and dug a hole in
the rice. On the count of three, they tossed their grenades into the hole and
ran.
Evidently, Kerry did not run fast enough. "He got some frags and pieces of rice
in his rear end," Rassmann said with a laugh. "It was more embarrassing than
painful." At the time, the incident did not seem significant, and Kerry did not
mention it to anyone when he got back on the boat. An unsigned "personnel
casualty report," however, erroneously implies that Kerry suffered "shrapnel
wounds in his left buttocks" later in the day, following the mine explosion
incident, when he also received "contusions to his right forearm."
Anti-Kerry veterans have accused Kerry of conflating the two injuries to
strengthen his case for a Bronze Star and Purple Heart. Kerry's Bronze Star
citation, however, refers only to his arm injury.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21239-2004Aug21.html

Maybe so (Bronze Star), but the after-action report that led to the 3rd PH refers to both injuries.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/Spot_Kerry.pdf

Gosh, this sounds an awful lot like fear-mongering. Doesn't it?

d'oh, to compare and contrast the military records of Bush and Kerry, is like comparing a wooden nickel to real American legal tender.

You happily label my tirade about the direction this administration is leading the country fear-mongering, why not tell us what this administration is doing that is making this country a better place?

Who cares? Give it up. He did more than Clinton, right? Further, why didn't Dole win over Clinton? Why didn't Carter beat Reagan? Why didn't Bush I beat Clinton? It's not that important to voters, and it's even nutty for Democrats to be pushing this issue now, given their support for Clinton.

If you want to make the presidency all about who has better military record, that's fine. I can propose some dandy candidates for you.

it's not about his military record. it's about his personal character, his truthfullness, how he handles responsibility. in short, it's whether he's the sort that one would want as the leader of the greatest free country in the world.

so he shirked his duty. lots of other guys did the same thing. but this particular man has been lying, misleading, and refusing to be held accountable or pay the consequences for his actions for years. that's the story of this guy's entire life, his personal life, in business, and now as president.

it's not about his military record. it's about his personal character, his truthfullness, how he handles responsibility. in short, it's whether he's the sort that one would want as the leader of the greatest free country in the world.

so he shirked his duty. lots of other guys did the same thing. but this particular man has been lying, misleading, and refusing to be held accountable or pay the consequences for his actions for years. that's the story of this guy's entire life, his personal life, in business, and now as president.

It's not about his military record. You put it well. But how DID he get an "honorable discharge"?

US News & World Report: "Some experts say they remain mystified as to how Bush obtained an honorable discharge. Lawrence Korb, a former top Defense Department official in the Reagan administration, says the military records clearly show that Bush 'had not fulfilled his obligation" and "should have been called to active duty.'"

"But how DID he get an "honorable discharge"?"

Very easy to explain. .........His last name is BUSH.

But how DID he get an "honorable discharge"?


how did his drug and alcohol criminal record get expunged?how did he get into yale and harvard business school? how did arbusto oil get saved from failure? how did harken energy avoid collapsing? how did he get an ownership stake in the texas rangers?


his daddy, his daddy's friends, and $$$$$$$$$.

how did his drug and alcohol criminal record get expunged?how did he get into yale and harvard business school? how did arbusto oil get saved from failure? how did harken energy avoid collapsing? how did he get an ownership stake in the texas rangers?


his daddy, his daddy's friends, and $$$$$$$$$.

He got by with a little help from his friends...
He gets by with a little help from his friends...

from the current issue of Rolling Stone.

Alabama Getaway

What Dubya was doing when he was supposed to be serving in the National Guard

By PAUL ALEXANDER

One day in the late fall of 1972, James Pryor Smith walked into the roomy two-bedroom house that belonged to his aunt, Elizabeth Dickerson, an elderly woman who was confined to a nursing home, and he could hardly believe his eyes. Located in the heart of Cloverdale - an exclusive, old-money neighborhood in Montgomery, Alabama - the house, his son Neil remembers now, "was a total wreck." A chandelier was badly damaged, there were holes in the wall and the place was full of empty liquor bottles. "The cleaning bill alone was $900," Neil Smith says, "which was no small thing in 1972." One detail about the mess stood out. "The bedding had to be hauled out into the street," says Jackson Stell, a friend of Pryor Smith. "Pryor said there must have been no sheets on the bed, the mattress was so horribly soiled."
"The trash and damage clearly came from drunken partying," says Mary Smith, who was married to Pryor at the time. "Pryor was very specific that this was related to booze."

Pryor Smith was livid. He had rented out his aunt's house in May as a favor to a family friend who knew Winton "Red" Blount, a construction magnate who became one the richest men in Alabama before being appointed postmaster general by President Nixon. The twenty-six-year-old tenant - his name was George W. Bush - had sounded like a reliable young man. He was a Yale graduate who came from a good family. His grandfather, Prescott Bush, had been a United States senator from Connecticut. His father, George H.W. Bush, was a former congressman from Houston who had gotten rich in the Texas oil business. Young Bush was coming to Montgomery to serve as the state organizational director of Blount's United States Senate campaign. After Pryor Smith had the house cleaned and repaired, he sent a bill to Bush - twice. Bush never responded.

The period from may 1972 until May 1973 would come to be called Bush's "missing year." But the only thing Bush appeared to be missing during that year was his National Guard duty. He was, at that point, a twenty-six-year-old college graduate still searching for something to do with his life. An idle young man such as himself might have seemed like an ideal candidate for conscription - after all, when Bush had graduated from Yale four years before, more than 500,000 young American men were serving in Vietnam.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the way a young man dealt with the question of Vietnam was the crucible in which the character of an entire generation was revealed. Like John Kerry and Al Gore, you could volunteer for military service. Like Bill Clinton, who had deep-seated doubts about the way the war was being handled, you could express your misgivings openly. Like Dick Cheney, you could use deferments to keep yourself out of the draft. And for the privileged few whose family had the power to pull strings, like George W. Bush, there was the National Guard. In later years, the Guard occupied a large part of the country's fighting force, but during the Vietnam era, fewer than one percent of the fighting force came from the Guard. Entrance into the Guard, then, meant you were virtually guaranteed not to see combat duty in Vietnam.

So while Bush knew what he wasn't going to have to do - fight in Vietnam - the young man had not dealt with the problem of what he was going to do with himself. That spring, Bush had quit his job at Stratford of Texas, an agricultural conglomerate based in Houston. Jimmy Allison, an old friend of his father's from Midland,Texas, had been named campaign manager of Winton Blount's senatorial campaign in Alabama. Bush's father wanted Allison, who owned the newspaper in Midland, to take George W. along with him. But Bush Jr. had an obligation to serve in the National Guard, which required him to show up on a regular basis for drills.

At first, Bush tried to transfer to an Air Force reserve unit, the 9921st, based in Montgomery, that was all but out of business. "We were as low on the totem pole as you got," says Reese Bricken, commander of the 9921st, who approved Bush's request on May 26th, 1972. "We were not even paid. The unit only existed so that some of us could earn enough points to qualify for retirement."

It seemed like the perfect solution for Bush: He'd take care of his obligations with the absolute minimum responsibility. But two months later, in July, the Air Force regional personnel office in Denver threw a wrench in his plans: He needed to be in an active unit, not the inactive 9921st. After all, the United States military had spend almost $1 million training him to fly fighter jets. He couldn't just go to Alabama and serve with a bunch of aging reservists waiting to draw their pensions.

So Bush's attempt to game the system had faltered. In September he asked to be transferred to the 187th Fighter Group of the Alabama Air National Guard. That request was approved, but on September 29th he was suspended from flying because, earlier in the year, he had missed his annual physical exam.

He was paid for just two days of Guard duty: October 28th and 29th. He never reported to any of the commanding officers he was ordered to report to. Only one Guard veteran from the 187th had vague memories of meeting him, and that guardsman had the timeline all wrong: He placed the future president in the 187th months before he was supposed to have shown up. To those with whom he worked in the Blount campaign, Bush seemed to regard his Guard service as a nonissue. "I have no memory of him talking about the Guard," says Devere McLennan, who worked on the campaign, first as a youth director and then as a staffer trying to woo disaffected Democrats to support Blount. "I think I had to run him to the cleaners to get some military uniforms once, but I never saw him wearing a uniform."

Indeed, when questioned, Bush would not even talk about the Guard. "I had been told that George was a lieutenant in the National Guard," says C. Murphy Archibald, a nephew by marriage of Winton Blount, who was working on his uncle's campaign. "I had been a lieutenant in the Army, served fifteen months in Vietnam, and I tried to talk to Bush about the Guard, but he wouldn't talk about it. At that point, Vietnam was constantly being discussed, but George just changed the subject."

Still, even with his free pass keeping him out of harm's way, George W. Bush did not fulfill his obligation to attend Guard drills on a regular basis while in Alabama. Exactly what was he doing? For one thing, he was drinking heavily. "You had a bunch of guys and girls in their twenties just out of college - what do you think happened?" says McLennan. " We probably kept the state liquor store in business."

Bush arrived in Montgomery in early May 1972. In political campaigns, the state organizational director is a vital position, since he is the conduit to the county chairmen, who are responsible for getting out the vote on a grass-roots level. Bush started his work at a slow time for the campaign. By late spring, Blount had already won his party's nomination. It wouldn't be until the end of the summer that the campaign - his opponent would be the legendary Alabama senator John Sparkman - kicked into high gear.

When he got to Montgomery, Bush lived with other staffers in an apartment paid for by the campaign. After he'd moved out of that apartment into the house in Cloverdale, he still made use of an amenity supplied by Blount: the tennis courts on the Blount estate. "I was learning how to play tennis at the time," McLennan says, "and George hit me a million tennis balls. He was a much better player than I was, but he was patient. We played a lot of tennis at Red Blount's house."

Bush had a regular group of drinking buddies he hung out with, and during his stay in Alabama he was said to have dated an array of local young women, among them Emily Marks - "One of the most beautiful women you have ever seen," McLennan says - and Baba Groom, the estranged wife of writer Winston Groom, who years later would write Forrest Gump.

Throughout the summer, Bush maintained his heavy social life. By September his behavior had become a problem. "Here's the thing that stood out," says Murphy Archibald, who arrived to work on his wife's uncle's campaign in September. "People were glad to have me there. They said, to a person, 'You are going to like Jimmy Allison, but why did he bring this young guy with him?' The general feeling was that it was strange that someone of Allison's competence would have someone who didn't seem very interested in the campaign."

According to Archibald, Bush regularly didn't show until noon or later, and then would leave four or five hours after that. He'd spend most of those few hours in his office with the door closed. When he did talk to the staff - and he made the rounds each day as soon as he came in before he locked himself away - his conversation was often disconcerting. "I found it so strange that in that position - in a United States Senate campaign - this guy who was twenty-six years old would come in and good-naturedly talk about how plastered he had gotten the night before. It was usually in the context of saying, 'I'm sorry to be coming in so late, but last night I really knocked them back.' He was very comfortable about talking about how drunk he got."

By late September it became obvious that Bush was performing his job so badly that changes had to be made. The county chairmen were talking to Bush on the phone, they were telling him what they needed in terms of support and campaign materials, and then nothing was happening. Finally, a substantial amount of Bush's responsibilities were turned over to Archibald, who marveled at how Bush seemed to assume no liability for his behavior - and knew he didn't have to.

"George had one story he told a lot," Archibald says, "and the story was about how he was always getting picked up by the police in New Haven during his time at Yale, and how they would always let him go when they found out his grandfather was Prescott Bush. When he told this story, George would always laugh as if it was the funniest joke. The first time I heard it, I said, 'Who's Prescott Bush?' And he said, 'My grandfather - the United States senator from Connecticut.' I thought it was stunning. He knew he was bulletproof because of his family. I had never seen someone with such a well-defined sense of being 'above it.' And it was not so much because of his money as his family."

In the end, Blount lost badly to Sparkman, who pulled almost two-thirds of the vote. Sparkman was such a towering political figure in Alabama that probably no Republican could have defeated him - not even one of the state's richest businessmen. Still, Bush's work on the campaign, such as it was, had been noted. "I heard what people were talking about," says Tom Blount, Blount's son, who was living in Washington, D.C., at the time. "I knew the guy was screwing around."

On Election Night, following Blount's concession speech, Bush drove Tom Blount to his father's house. "It was just the two of us," Tom Blount says. "Personally, I didn't like him. I thought he was real full of himself, and I had heard that he was making his way with all the ladies in town, which was fine, but I thought he was a little immature about it. I remember very clearly asking him - we were driving into the gates of my father's house - where he went to school. Then he did this fake 'Oh, shucks, man, I went to Yale,' like he was embarrassed by it. I thought this was so pretentious. I looked down at his cowboy boots and jeans and thought, 'Not my type.' "

Later that night, according to an article published in Salon, Bush would return to downtown Montgomery from the Blount estate, get drunk, urinate on a parked car and yell obscenities at police officers.

Eight years after the Blount campaign, when George H.W. Bush ran for president, Winton Blount supported John Connally instead of Bush. "The Bushes were not happy about it," Tom Blount says. "Barbara was not real pleasant when she heard my daddy was supporting Connally. She really is the force behind that family."

Toward the end of the Blount campaign, Bush began dating a young woman named Mavanee Bear. He seems to have continued dating her after the campaign was over. It is not clear, then, exactly when he returned to Ellington Air Force Base, in Houston, to continue his Guard training. He was paid for four days of duty in November, none in December. In January 1973, he was paid for six days. But by January 6th, 1973, he had returned to Montgomery, for on that date he reported to the Maxwell Air Force Base to have a dental checkup. It would be the only documented visit that he made to a military facility in Alabama, even though he had been living in the state since May.

In February and March 1973, he would not be paid for any days in the Guard. Then he put in a flurry of days of paid duty: two in April, fourteen in May, five in June and nineteen in July. Around this time, to further complicate matters, William Harris and Jerry Killian, his commanding officers in Texas, wrote about the period of May 1st, 1972, until April 30th, 1973: "Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of the report" because "a civilian occupation made it necessary for him to move to Montgomery, Alabama. He cleared this base on 15 May 1972. . . ." Later, the authenticity of certain Killian memos would come into question, but this memo was not one of them.

On September 5th, 1973, Bush requested in writing an early release from the National Guard so he could attend Harvard Business School. On September 18th, the Guard approved his request. Then, on October 1st, even though he had signed up for a six-year stint in the Guard to avoid the draft, Bush received an honorable discharge after finishing only "five years, four months and five days towards obligation." Bush did not even bother to sign his discharge papers. "Not available for signature" was written in the blank space where his signature should have been.

"Bush would return to downtown Montgomery from the Blount estate, get drunk, urinate on a parked car and yell obscenities at police officers."

Yup, that's georgy all right.

"Bush would return to downtown Montgomery from the Blount estate, get drunk, urinate on a parked car and yell obscenities at police officers."

Yup, that's georgy all right.

I like this little tidbit: W did not even bother to sign his discharge papers. "Not available for signature" was written in the blank space where his signature should have been.

He would have, except he was hung over.

He would have, except he was hung over.

This anecdote tells a lot about his character as well.

"George had one story he told a lot," Archibald says, "and the story was about how he was always getting picked up by the police in New Haven during his time at Yale, and how they would always let him go when they found out his grandfather was Prescott Bush. When he told this story, George would always laugh as if it was the funniest joke. The first time I heard it, I said, 'Who's Prescott Bush?' And he said, 'My grandfather - the United States senator from Connecticut.' I thought it was stunning. He knew he was bulletproof because of his family. I had never seen someone with such a well-defined sense of being 'above it.' And it was not so much because of his money as his family."