Informative article about Bush's National Guard history (not Bush-bashing)

[Bowfinger]

(This got buried in another thread, so I thought I'd post it separately.)

Here is an informative article from the Boston Globe with extensive detail about Bush's National Guard history:

One-year gap in Bush's National Guard duty

Don't let the title deter you. Some of the article is favorable to Bush; other parts are critical. Yes, it appears Bush Sr. pulled strings to get his son out of the draft and into the Guard, and yes it appears Bush was (in effect) AWOL for part of his term. It also says Bush was a good pilot, in the top 5% according to one of his superiors, and that he may have attempted to make up much of the time he missed. The Globe could not gather the information needed to fill in some gaps since, "Texas military officials have put many of his records off-limits [...]."

We've all thrown around so many claims and counter-claims about Bush's history, I thought it might help to get real information on the table. It is an interesting read regardless of which side of the fence you call home.

 

[Martin]

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/030411.html

Another similar article.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/030411.html

Another similar article.

First linked article from the boston paper has far more detail.

 

[Tripleshot]

When this was brought up during the 2000 campaign, the right wingnuts that slammed Clinton as there only claim to knowledge of any candidate, swore up and down this was a fabrication,or it didn't matter. Less than 600 contested votes made him president, and you just saw him as your commander in chief, leading men to war and give up there lives for the cause of ridding the world of WMD's in IRAQ. OK, so maybe that was just a small fib, and it really was just a way to get oil and Haliburton a good ol' boy contract to rake in a few extra million dollars cleaning up IRAQ. Or a small fib that it was just to get Saddam for trying to kill Bush Sr. years ago.

How many US lives lost for that leadership cause? Do you really want him for 4 more years? Check your wallet lately, or your retirement fund?

Oh well, I really don't think people care about who they vote for, or if they vote at all. No wonder. The trust you can have in politicians in this day and age is less than ever, and its because of exposure of this stuff.

Reality Bites!

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Originally posted by: Tripleshot
When this was brought up during the 2000 campaign, the right wingnuts that only slammed Clinton as there only claim to knowledge of any candidate, swore up and down this was a fabrication,or it didn't matter. Less than 600 contested votes made him president, and you just saw him as your commander in chief, leading men to war and give up there lives for the cvause of ridding the world of WMD's in IRAQ. OK, so maybe that was just a small fib, and it really was just a way to get oil and Haliburton a good ol' boy contract to rake in a few extra million dollars cleaning up IRAQ. Or a small fib that it was just to get Saddam for trying to kill Bush Sr. years ago.

How many US lives lost for that leadership cause? Do you really want him for 4 more years? Check your wallet lately, or your retirement fund?

Oh well, I really don't think people care about who they vote for, or if they vote at all. No wonder. The trust you can have in politicians uin this day and age is less than ever, and its because of exposure of this stuff.

Reality Bites!

Well said.

 

[Bowfinger]

Bump for those who didn't see the article yet.

 

[cpumaster]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Bump for those who didn't see the article yet.

well, rich kids got all the preferential treatment everywhere, what else is new? but bump anyway

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: cpumaster
well, rich kids got all the preferential treatment everywhere, what else is new? but bump anyway

I'm trying not to spin it one way or another. If anything, I came out of it with a more positive impression of Bush, or maybe "less negative" is more accurate.

It's just nice to see a well-researched article for a change. So much reporting these days is so shallow.

 

[sMiLeYz]

We know Bush skipped service and paid no consequences and only with daddy's help did he get in Yale. It's nothing new.

 

[Ylen13]

Originally posted by: Tripleshot
When this was brought up during the 2000 campaign, the right wingnuts that slammed Clinton as there only claim to knowledge of any candidate, swore up and down this was a fabrication,or it didn't matter. Less than 600 contested votes made him president, and you just saw him as your commander in chief, leading men to war and give up there lives for the cause of ridding the world of WMD's in IRAQ. OK, so maybe that was just a small fib, and it really was just a way to get oil and Haliburton a good ol' boy contract to rake in a few extra million dollars cleaning up IRAQ. Or a small fib that it was just to get Saddam for trying to kill Bush Sr. years ago.

How many US lives lost for that leadership cause? Do you really want him for 4 more years? Check your wallet lately, or your retirement fund?

Oh well, I really don't think people care about who they vote for, or if they vote at all. No wonder. The trust you can have in politicians in this day and age is less than ever, and its because of exposure of this stuff.

Reality Bites!

Yes I would love him to be the president of United States for the next 4 years only if he is able to have the tax cut passes

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
We know Bush skipped service and paid no consequences and only with daddy's help did he get in Yale. It's nothing new.

For me, the new parts were that he was a very good pilot and that he apparently attempted to make up some of the time he missed.