Why is the media bashing Kerry for alluding to George aWol Bush as a deserter?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

digitalsm

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2003
5,253
0
0
Originally posted by: SuperTool
From Drudge.
FLASHBACK: Kerry in 2000 claimed it is a matter of character that Bush avoided duty overseas by joining the Texas Air National Guard. No documents have been found to show he reported for duty as ordered in Alabama in 1972... 'Those of us who were in the military wonder how it is that someone who is supposedly serving on active duty, having taken that oath, can miss a whole year of service without even explaining where it went,' said Kerry... Developing...
FLASHBACK: KERRY ALLUDED TO BUSH AS DESERTER

Apparently saying the truth is not in vogue any more.

Because it goes against what he said defending Clinton in 1992, and 1996.
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,862
84
91
Originally posted by: Zipp
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Lucky
Maybe because he denigrated those who served in the National Guard by comparing them to dodgers who went to Canada?

?If people went to Canada, if people opposed the war, if people chose to be in the Guard, that?s their choice, and I?ve never raised that in an issue,? he said.? (Noelle Straub, ?Kerry Presents Himself As GOP?s Worst Nightmare,? Boston Herald, 2/3/04)"

"I?ve never made any judgments about any choice somebody made about avoiding the draft, about going to Canada, going to jail, being a conscientious objector, going into the National Guard,? Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran, told Fox News Channel. ?Those are choices people make.?? (Nick Anderson, ?Buoyant Kerry Embraces Role Of Frontrunner,? Los Angeles Times, 2/4/04)


DNC is in on it too:

DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe : ?George Bush never served in our military and our country.? (ABC?s ?This Week,? 2/1/04)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



the fact is the guard then is not the same as the guard now. back then, the guard was for defending us soil and europe, basically no chance of them being sent to vietnam. which is precisely the reason his powerful daddy pulled strings to jump his son to the front of the waiting list to get into it. the fact is the waiting lists for getting into the reserve at the time were huge, it was a very real option for those who wanted to avoid going to vietnam.



That's BS...There were many Nation Guard Units sent to Nam back then.


no, there were reserve units sent, not national guard.

But there was no chance Bush's unit would be ordered overseas. Bush says that toward the end of his training in 1970, he tried to volunteer for overseas duty, asking a commander to put his name on the list for a "Palace Alert" program, which dispatched qualified F-102 pilots in the Guard to the Europe and the Far East, occasionally to Vietnam, on three- to six-month assignments.

He was turned down on the spot. "I did [ask] ? and I was told, 'You're not going,' " Bush said.

Only pilots with extensive flying time ? at the outset, 1,000 hours were required ? were sent overseas under the voluntary program. The Air Force, moreover, was retiring the aging F-102s and had ordered all overseas F-102 units closed down as of June 30, 1970.


It was May 27, 1968, at the height of the Vietnam War. Bush was 12 days away from losing his student deferment from the draft at a time when Americans were dying in combat at the rate of 350 a week. The unit Bush wanted to join offered him the chance to fulfill his military commitment at a base in Texas. It was seen as an escape route from Vietnam by many men his age, and usually had a long waiting list.

http://www.awolbush.com/
http://uggabugga.blogspot.com/2003_01_12_uggabugga_archive.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush072899.htm
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
Originally posted by: nutxo
Originally posted by: Gaard
Because you just can't call the president a deserter. You don't do that. /end sarcasm

The truth is that that's just the attitude that floated around when Moore said it. IMO, it's not correct to say that Kerry's past remarks are the reason, becuase I don't think Moore made any past remarks. ;) I think McCllelean and others tried/are trying to make any criticism of Bush's military record seem ridiculous...and there's times when it seems like they want to paint it as unpatriotic. The truth of the matter is that there are legitimate questions regarding his service record that haven't been answered.

It goes to integrity.


Give me a break. Not a single dem questioned Clintons actions during the Viet Nam when he went against Dole or Bush sr. Now these are considered legitamate questions.

Mind if I ask why you don't consider them legitimate questions? Do the actions of the Ds dictate what a legitimate question is?

 

heartsurgeon

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2001
4,260
0
0
Apparently saying the truth is not in vogue any more
How would you know what the truth is? The accuser has the burden of proof...so PROVE that Bush was a
deserter"...you can't..

the pay records PROVE Bush reported for duty in the National Guard.because in he Guard, they only pay you when you show up!....you also accrue "points" that are used to determine benefits later...this is serious stuff.

So now your going to say Bush lied, and the people who keep track of paying him lied....he lied on his tax returns...all 30 yeasa ago knowing he would "need" to lie because he was going to be president, and someone was going to look it up....Do you really believe that is the way the world works?..maybe instead you believe the payroll documents were "fabricated " recently!! get a life.
Even the journalist who claimed he interviewed Bush's commanding office in Alabama, (?Col. Turnipseed?) and claimed he said he never saw Bush, has recanted his story, and Col. Turnipseed actually has said he doesn't remember whether he saw him or not.

This is crap being spewed by Terry McCauliffe, at the direction of Bill Clinton, to distract the press from evaluating Kerry;s record.
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
Originally posted by: nutxo
Originally posted by: Gaard
Because you just can't call the president a deserter. You don't do that. /end sarcasm

The truth is that that's just the attitude that floated around when Moore said it. IMO, it's not correct to say that Kerry's past remarks are the reason, becuase I don't think Moore made any past remarks. ;) I think McCllelean and others tried/are trying to make any criticism of Bush's military record seem ridiculous...and there's times when it seems like they want to paint it as unpatriotic. The truth of the matter is that there are legitimate questions regarding his service record that haven't been answered.

It goes to integrity.


Give me a break. Not a single dem questioned Clintons actions during the Viet Nam when he went against Dole or Bush sr. Now these are considered legitamate questions.

But Republicans did...

Press Briefing
Q Scott, you used some pretty tough language this morning about those who are saying that the President has not answered all of the questions about the National Guard. You accused them of gutter politics and trolling for trash. As you know, back in the '92 campaign, then Governor Clinton's Vietnam-era history came up. And near the end of the campaign, then President Bush, this President's father, in a speech used the words "Slick Willie," talking about Governor Clinton then, and talked about the controversy, that the Governor had promised to release all his draft records, but had not. And he said, "He ought to level with the American people on the draft." He referred again to the records controversy, and he said, "He ought to level on these kinds of things." Is that trolling for trash?

MR. McCLELLAN: John, we released documents showing that the President fulfilled his duties. Some people are calling on us to release documents. The documents spell out that the President fulfilled his duties. I think that you expect the garbage can to be thrown at you in the 11th hour of a campaign, but not nine months before election day. And I certainly hope that this level of discourse is not a reflection of what the American people can expect from the Democratic Party over the duration of the campaign.

Q You also mentioned this morning that the Pentagon had requested the full personnel file, and that you expected it to be shared by the White House --

MR. McCLELLAN: By the way, on that time period, there are -- a lot of people said things that are one way and certainly saying other things these days.

Q I understand that to be the case, and I assume that will all come up in the campaign, as well. When you get the President's full file, what will be the standard for deciding whether additional information will be released?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, we would have to see if there is any new information in that. Like I said yesterday, we thought we had all the information that was relevant to this issue. So we haven't even seen that information at this point.

Q Again, when this controversy came up 10 years ago, the then Bush-Quayle campaign, on October 15, 1992, put out a press release saying that because of the controversy and the questions, that Governor Clinton should release all documents relating to his draft status, and went on to list letters to the Selective Service system, to the Reserve Officer Training Corps, the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marines, the Coast Guard, the Departments of State and Justice, any foreign embassy or consulate. Was that a fair standard?

MR. McCLELLAN: This is 2004, I would remind you. But let me point out to you that the issue that was before us was whether or not the President had served. There had been some who made an outrageous accusation that the President was AWOL, or that he was a deserter. Just outrageous and baseless accusations. And there was a call for more documents to be released, specifically payroll records. We didn't know that they previously existed still. But we found out that they did, and we provided that documentation. That documentation clearly shows that the President fulfilled his duties.

I think what you're seeing now is that some are not interested in the facts. Some are more interested in trolling for trash for political gain. And that's just unfortunate that we're seeing that this early in an election year. This is nothing but gutter politics. The American people deserve better. We are facing great challenges in this nation, and the President is focused on acting decisively to meet those challenges.

Instead of talking about the choices we face in addressing our highest priorities, some are simply trolling for trash for political gain. The American people deserve better. The American people deserve an honest debate about the choices we face. The American people deserve an honest discussion about the type of leadership their Commander-in-Chief is providing in a time of war, at a time when we are confronting dangerous new threats.

I began this briefing by talking about the importance of confronting the spread of weapons of mass destruction, about the importance of stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction. This President, from very early on in his administration, has made it a high priority to confront the dangerous new threats we face in this day and age. These are threats that did not come to us overnight. But September 11th taught us that we must confront these threats. Let's have an honest discussion about the type of leadership people are providing to confront those threats. That's what the American people deserve.


 

heartsurgeon

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2001
4,260
0
0
read this article...it is not from a "conservative" news source...try to actually uinderstand what the article says....

It was DOCUMENTED that Bush attended National Guard meetings as he has stated. END OF DISCUSSION. Any statements he was "AWOL" are SLANDER.....

Alabama commander regrets Bush comments

The ACCUSATION originates from Clinton Hack..Terry McCauliffe: Standard Clinton Tactis..attack the integrity of the opponent..
"The current controversy was ignited by comments from Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe, who charged Bush was absent without leave or AWOL from the Alabama Air National Guard during those 2 months in 1972.

The FACTS:
"When asked about Bush?s pay record, Turnipseed said the paymaster in Alabama would note Bush attended a meeting and send the information onto Texas on what he described as an "IBM 105" card where it would be recorded and sent onto payroll in Colorado.
Bush was accused by Democrats of skipping meetings because there was no written record of him attending those meetings in October and November in Alabama.
On Tuesday, the White House released payroll records that showed the president received credit for attending meetings in October and November 1972.
The records don't indicate where he attended those meetings but he was living in Alabama at the time." "Turnipseed has said all along there would be no mention of the president in the Alabama unit since Bush was paid out of Texas"

What part of this is to complex for the elite advanced Liberal mind to comprehend.

Move along......
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
At issue is a 12-month period, commencing in May 1972, when Bush moved to Alabama to work on a senatorial campaign.
 

nutxo

Diamond Member
May 20, 2001
6,749
422
126
Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"Give me a break. Not a single dem questioned Clintons actions during the Viet Nam when he went against Dole or Bush sr. Now these are considered legitamate questions."

Sure they did. Even Clinton himself expressed some disappointment about his choices.

But turn it around, are Republicans willing to actually look at their candidate's possible flaws ? Is it a crime to admit them in public ?

It doesn't mean you have to reject him, just don't be a lemming.

Im not a lemming pal. I think this is a non issue and people think if they keep yelling the same things over and over they will somehow become true, merely because its what they want to hear.


 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: nutxo
Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"Give me a break. Not a single dem questioned Clintons actions during the Viet Nam when he went against Dole or Bush sr. Now these are considered legitamate questions."

Sure they did. Even Clinton himself expressed some disappointment about his choices.

But turn it around, are Republicans willing to actually look at their candidate's possible flaws ? Is it a crime to admit them in public ?

It doesn't mean you have to reject him, just don't be a lemming.
Im not a lemming pal. I think this is a non issue and people think if they keep yelling the same things over and over they will somehow become true, merely because its what they want to hear.
Since you aren't a lemming, what things about Bush will you concede are flaws?

 

nutxo

Diamond Member
May 20, 2001
6,749
422
126
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: nutxo
Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"Give me a break. Not a single dem questioned Clintons actions during the Viet Nam when he went against Dole or Bush sr. Now these are considered legitamate questions."

Sure they did. Even Clinton himself expressed some disappointment about his choices.

But turn it around, are Republicans willing to actually look at their candidate's possible flaws ? Is it a crime to admit them in public ?

It doesn't mean you have to reject him, just don't be a lemming.
Im not a lemming pal. I think this is a non issue and people think if they keep yelling the same things over and over they will somehow become true, merely because its what they want to hear.
Since you aren't a lemming, what things about Bush will you concede are flaws?

He's to liberal.

 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
Originally posted by: nutxo
Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"Give me a break. Not a single dem questioned Clintons actions during the Viet Nam when he went against Dole or Bush sr. Now these are considered legitamate questions."

Sure they did. Even Clinton himself expressed some disappointment about his choices.

But turn it around, are Republicans willing to actually look at their candidate's possible flaws ? Is it a crime to admit them in public ?

It doesn't mean you have to reject him, just don't be a lemming.

Im not a lemming pal. I think this is a non issue and people think if they keep yelling the same things over and over they will somehow become true, merely because its what they want to hear.

sorry, I didn't mean you in particular, just a generic Republican like the generic Democrat from the post I quoted; and not that they are lemmings, just that they shouldn't be.

I think that's different than saying they(or you) are lemmings ?


 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: nutxo
Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Since you aren't a lemming, what things about Bush will you concede are flaws?

He's to liberal.
LOL. While I can't agree Bush is at all liberal, he is not really conservative either. He has one of the most muddled ideologies I've seen. I don't know what you'd call it, exactly. Maybe "Train Wreck".


 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,862
84
91
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
read this article...it is not from a "conservative" news source...try to actually uinderstand what the article says....

It was DOCUMENTED that Bush attended National Guard meetings as he has stated. END OF DISCUSSION. Any statements he was "AWOL" are SLANDER.....

Alabama commander regrets Bush comments

The ACCUSATION originates from Clinton Hack..Terry McCauliffe: Standard Clinton Tactis..attack the integrity of the opponent..
"The current controversy was ignited by comments from Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe, who charged Bush was absent without leave or AWOL from the Alabama Air National Guard during those 2 months in 1972.

The FACTS:
"When asked about Bush?s pay record, Turnipseed said the paymaster in Alabama would note Bush attended a meeting and send the information onto Texas on what he described as an "IBM 105" card where it would be recorded and sent onto payroll in Colorado.
Bush was accused by Democrats of skipping meetings because there was no written record of him attending those meetings in October and November in Alabama.
On Tuesday, the White House released payroll records that showed the president received credit for attending meetings in October and November 1972.
The records don't indicate where he attended those meetings but he was living in Alabama at the time." "Turnipseed has said all along there would be no mention of the president in the Alabama unit since Bush was paid out of Texas"

What part of this is to complex for the elite advanced Liberal mind to comprehend.

Move along......

you a parrot for the bush administration? there are cases where people did get paid and did not attend meetings.

thats right, move long

bush's lack of character is undeniable anyways.