Bush's National Guard Service - FULL story

Yeah... and copperfield does REAL magic in his show.

Clinton's economic progress was the stuff of artificial crutch, propaganda, and hand waiving.

Towards the end of his 8 year reign, the economy actually started to self adjust to reflect reality - aka we went into a huge recession.

Only Bush didn't commit treason and consort with the communist enemy during the vietnam war... kerry did.

www.gup20.com/CommieJohnKerry.gif

Moreover, Bush actually put in more hours and time than he was required too, while Kerry still owes over 200 days to the Navy.

 

Barbarian on Clinton:
I called him a liar. You seem to have an odd idea of "apologist." Granted, he did a lot of good things for the economy, and to restore American influence in the world, but he's a mess morally.

Illusions are one thing. But eight years of record prosperity is no illusion. Neither, unfortunately are his character flaws. If you didn't hate him so much, you could be more objective about his good points and his bad ones.

Sorry, that's hand-waving on your part. In fact, even conservative economists gave him high marks for his handling of the economy. If you think deficit reduction isn't an important goal consider America when the deficits were coming down, and now, when they are skyrocketing. Would you like some numbers? I can show you from the Statistical Abstract of the United States how unemployment follows the deficit.

Gee, and it took eight years to get here. In fact, I can remember the republicans huffing and squealing that we would quickly go into a recession if Clinton's package passed. It took eight years and a massive tax cut to put it in the toilet. Isn't about time you admitted that the economy is messed up because Bush didn't bother paying the bills on time?

Barbarian on Clinton and Bush:
I called it evasion. He found a way to avoid serving in Vietnam. So did Bush. Neither one of them had the moral fiber to put themselves in harm's way for their country, as Kerry did.

 

MadMan's post sheds some good light on the Bush Guard duty issue. However, I tend to agree with you in principle here about 'what happened 30 years ago'. However, the part that DIDN'T happen 30 years ago... the part we can look to now... does matter - that is the way the candidates deal with their past mistakes.

Kerry has lied and tried to cover up his past indiscretions. Bush has said "yes, I made mistakes, I put them in the past and changed". Kerry's behavior today regarding his past only serves to prove that he is still the same as he was 30 years ago - lying on official reports to cover up his mistakes is the same as him lying about his past to cover it up. </font>[/QUOTE]How true! Kerry was and still is not one to be trusted in any way, shape or form! He would sell his own wife out to the competitor and then sell her for a penny! Anyone who meets with commies and has his picture in their halls of fame, and who's wife supports directly or indirectly communist causes doesn't need to be leading this country! We already had someone close, and that was Slick Willy! Do we want another of his kind in the White House?

AVL1984

 

It's kind of refreshing to see an old-fashioned faux red-baiter on the board.

 

Uh-oh sports fans... there's an important detail that can be dug up from the depths of an AP story where it was buried... According to this same paper cited by Galatian, the commander who was referenced as pressuring for "sugar coating" Bush's records... had retired 1.5 years before the date of the memo.

The only question now is if CBS is going to come clean and let its "investigation" be looked into.

My guess is that if the documents came from someone close to Kerry or the DNC then CBS will hold out to the bitter end. If they can blame it on some hoaxster then they will roll over on them.

His daughter came out and said that he was lying to support his political ambitions and a book he plans to write.

You are soooo right.

In typically lib style, you report a half truth: Rasmussen has not shown a significant Bush bounce.

If the Clinton presidency proved anything it is that an expanding economy is what solves the federal deficit. Neither tax increases nor the type of spending cuts that can actually be made in discretionary spending can reduce the deficit.

 

Barbarian observes:
Interestingly, the Dallas Morning News (which by the way endorsed Bush last time around) reports that:
"A Bush spokesman did not deny the authenticity of the documents, but dismissed the new information as 'dirty politics'."

There wasn't a memo. In fact, there was a series of communications to Lt. Bush, comments about political pressure, and other papers. You've been snockered again. Better go read up on it for yourself. Why do you think the Bush campaign refuses to comment on the substance of the records?

(speculation that the military records are a hoax)

Evidence would be a good thing at this point, along with an explanation of why Bush didn't deny that he got those messages ordering him to appear. And since other records, such as the one removing him from flying status for failing to appear as ordered are consistent with the new information, it's going to be an uphill climb.

This one is just starting to cook.

The only problem with that story (aside from the fact that there's no evidence for the claim) is that Barnes made that admission years ago, privately, in testimony in a lawsuit. Bush wasn't even president then.

Barbarian on belated attempts to deny military records:
Sounds like more desperation from the sleaze machine.

The convention bounce is evaporating (Rasmussen has Bush's lead down to less than one point) and there's more bad news on the horizon.

In typical llib style, you simply denied the facts. Bush had a five-point bounce on Rasmussen, and it is now about a point. Rather steep decline in less than a week.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/09/04/MNGS78JRT41.DTL

Barbarian observes:
Bush's own GAO reports that he has virtually no chance of cutting the deficit until he raises taxes or cuts spending.

[qoute]If the Clinton presidency proved anything it is that an expanding economy is what solves the federal deficit.[/quote]

So how did Clinton do it? Raised taxes, and cut spending. Bush did just the opposite. So why are you amazed that the economy did just the oppostite?

It's a matter of public record that it did.

Would you like to see the data from the applicable years?

 

How to solve this "problem".

1) Find the original memo in question ala Bush.

2) Have Kerry sign the necessary forms and have all his military records released.

3) Get all the dirt flushed down the toilet.

4) Then have each of them tell us in detail how they plan to protect us, our kids and grandkids from a Beslan type terror attack!

HankD

 

Clinton evaded the draft in the same sense that Rumsfield and Cheney did, through deferments. So if you had a problem with Clinton's actions I assume you have a problem with Rumsfield and Cheney.

 

That goes without saying. Unlike Bush, and like Cheney and Rumsfeld, what Clinton did was morally questionable, but perfectly legal.

What Bush did was both morally indefensible and illegal.

TCMJ: Texas Code 432.131. ABSENCE WITHOUT LEAVE
"A person subject to this chapter shall be punished as a court-martial directs if the
person without authority:

(1) fails to go to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed;

(2) goes from that place;

or
(3) absents himself or remains absent from his unit, organization, or place of duty at which he is required to be at the time prescribed."


Bush's absence for an ordered physical was documented in a TANG order removing him from flying status for that offense.

His absence thereafter for an entire year was also documented by Bush's supervisor on his OER.

 

We have to choose between two sinners. No third party at this point in time has the proverbial snowball's chance.

BTW, AWOL is not necessarily a courts-martial offense. It can be an article 14 offence or dismissed as an offense under mitigating circumstances. I was officially AWOL in 1961 because my aircraft was force landed in a blizzard for several days. The charge was later dismissed.

HankD

 

Hank, that would be Article 15, not 14.

The question goes beyond all this silliness. I don't know how much time any on this thread have spent either in the Guard or Reserves in the 1970s, or in the active military dealing with them. I dealt with reserves and guard troops for over 20 years. As I said on another thread, I was a young sergeant in the early to mid '70s, and I worked many Reserve weekends at our joint active-reserve base. After that, I was an aircraft maintenance officer for many years on bases with a lot of Air Reserve and ANG activities.

First, AWOL is not AWOL unless someone is charged with it. Bush was not charged, so he was not AWOL. Had they considered him AWOL, they would have charged him. They did not. He was not.
Had he been AWOL for real, he would have been charged. Forget daddy's influence--Texas state government in those days was Democratic, not GOP!

I have no doubt but that he had verbal permission to not show up--in those days, the guard and reserve were that loose--it was easily taken care of by a phone call. It is kind of like calling off work. You don't get your drill pay, you don't get your points, ho hum. When he was in AL, he did not have a real job anyway, since his kind of aircraft were not there. He was also ahead on points. He had enough active duty points (because he flew a lot of intercepts, etc. in his earlier service) to get out six months early--he had the points, that is what counted for guard time. Finally, and most importantly, he was honorably discharged. That means that he completed his service. Forget speculation, forget the ridiculous spectacle of people examining flight logs with a fine tooth comb who wouldn't know a flap from a spoiler. He has a properly executed DD 214 saying he was honorably discharged.

 

I did post some of that evidence for you. A picture of John Kerry that hangs in the Communist North Vietnamese War Museaum honoring John Kerry for "helping the communist party defeat the United states in the War".

John Kerry and his camp have also admitted that he did meet with communist leaders without authorization during the Vietnam war and discussed matters regarding the role the VVAW could play to end the War in Vietnam. He is on record in senate meetings having stated he did indeed meet with the communist leaders during the war. That's called treason boys and girls.

Also... Bush was never AWOL. In his first two years of service he put in enough time to fulfill the minimum requirements for his entire 6 year term. He put in enough time in each of the first 5 years of his 6 year obligation to fulfill the minimum requirements for all six years three times over. In the last year, he STILL fulfilled all his requirements for points earned. He recieved permission to leave to work on politics and was granted that permission (seeing as how he had already MORE THAN FULFILLED ALL HIS REQUIREMENTS). With permission, he was HONORABLY discharged.

Contrast that with the communist John Kerry. He made self applications for purple hearts on insignificant wounds that were self inflicted in order to get out of his service. He lied over and over again. He put his men in danger repeatedly because of his negligence and dishonesty. He even was responsible for killing children and covering it up. He was a war criminal - he commanded his men to burn the grass huts in small villages and kill the village people's pigs and chickens when all the members of the village fled when he came on shore.

The man is the worst kind of scum. He is a traitor, and truely evil. Moreover he is corrupt of mind and spirit.

But Galatian would vote for any democrat no matter who or what that democrat did. So I am not surprised he is supporting Kerry in this race. It's not surprising that The Galatian stands for a party who's platform is anti-morality, anti-family, and anti-God. His posts in the other threads on evolution and his belief that the Bible is a fairy tale is more than enough evidence of that.

 

Oops, right (it was over 40 years ago ). Also you are also correct about the AWOL charge. When I called in to confirm my status (Griffiss AFB, Rome NY) due to the blizzard, I wasn't charged nor was the time missed taken from my leave accrual.

HankD

 

Nope. Check the Texas Code of Military Justice. It merely says that if one does not appear as ordered, one is AWOL. It does not say that if one is not charged, one is not AWOL.

Wrong again. The TCMJ provides for non-judicial punishment. He was, as the order documents, removed from flying status for his failure to report as ordered.

Wrong again. Daddy had powerful democrats on his side, too. Speaker of the House Ben Barnes has admitted pulling strings to get Daddy's boy into the guard.

If so, he wouldn't have been punished, would he?

As you must know, if you were really in the service, many people were given non-judicial punishment for being AWOL, and still recieved honorable discharges.

C'mon, Major. You know better than this.

And Gup... I'm not voting for a democrat. I'm voting for Peroutka. I've said so here a good number of times.

I'm not like Larry, or Gershom, so I won't accuse you of dishonesty. I'll just assume you made a mistake. That is the Christian thing to do. No apology necessary.

The part about killing children is something I've never been able to confirm though. Where did you get your evidence? I'd like to know.

If you hated Kerry less, you might be able to admit that he's not the devil incarnate.

 

I can agree with Galatian about one thing.
We need a clean sweep of the beltway.

In my younger days (pre-Rowe vs Wade) I was a democrat.

Disillusioned in 1973, I became an independent voting as a republican.

Disillusioned again, I have no where to go.

Personally, I see President bush as the better of two not-so-good choices.

Being a realist, I don’t see a third party yet which has the impetus to replace either one of our demopublican parties.

HankD

 

Barbarian observes:
Nope. Check the Texas Code of Military Justice. It merely says that if one does not appear as ordered, one is AWOL. It does not say that if one is not charged, one is not AWOL.

In the TCMJ, Article 15 describes the procedure for keeping and receiving prisioners.

Including disciplinary ones. And nonjudicial punishments can be a suspension of priviledges or pay (such as flight pay) with no "article 15."

Indeed, but the TCMJ does not have such an Article 15. And there is no question that Bush was treated with special consideration. That's how he got in.

I don't know about his daughter, but he admitted that he exerted political pressure for Bush in a private lawsuit, long before this came up. And he didn't make an issue of it, until someone found out about it. Which makes it seem kinda unlikely this is a liberal conspiracy.

I've heard the "daughter says he's lying" thing, but no one seems to have a checkable source, or how exactly she knew.

I mean, it seems kinda odd for a guy to go home and say, "Well Honey, I didn't pull a few strings to get George H.W.'s kid into the guard."

Can you explain how that worked, with some checkable sources?

 

Ah, here we are:

"A woman purporting to be Amy Barnes, daughter of former Texas Lt. Gov. Ben Barnes, said Thursday that her father had fabricated claims that he used his influence to get President Bush into the Texas Air National Guard 36 years ago."

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/9/9/202100.shtml (isn't that a surprise?)

A woman called a talk show host and claimed to be Barnes' daughter. Hmmm... does that sound a bit fishy to you?

Does to me. Major, I'd very much appreciate it, if you'd tell me where you got your information.

 

I did post some of that evidence for you. A picture of John Kerry that hangs in the Communist North Vietnamese War Museaum honoring John Kerry for "helping the communist party defeat the United states in the War".</font>[/QUOTE]When was that picture taken? Something like 1984, wasn't it?

Do you have a source for this other than that Book of Lies?

Gup, that's just not very factual.

Well, at least he never blew up frogs, live, with firecrackers.

Really, Gup, exagerate much?

The Galatian is not a Democrat, silly. He's not even a Liberal - don't know why, because otherwise he seems a sensible fellow.

 

Forget the Bush Air National Guard debaco, my hope (perhaps slim) is that if President Bush is re-elected to a second term with nothing more to lose, he will pull out the stops and actually do something about abortion, our exposed borders, illegal immigration, etc.

A vote for Senator Kerry is at best a huge question mark.

What's better? Four more years of President Bush or four new years of the most liberal Senator in our lifetimes who has publicly acknowledged VC atrocities, which acknowledgment was used by charlie to demoralize and hurt out POWs?

Forget the Texas Air National Guard mess, even if were true, we have no other real choices.

HankD