1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Kerry Campaign takes the high road, refuses to question Bush's service

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by basso, Aug 24, 2004.

  1. basso

    basso Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    33,400
    Likes Received:
    9,319
    or not...

    a transcript from Hannity last night:

    http://www.celluloid-wisdom.com/pw/index.php/weblog/entry/you_decide_2004_cont1/

    Democratic strategist Mary Anne Marsh, speaking last night on “Hannity and Colmes”:

    “George Bush betrayed his country by sending us to war on false pretenses, and George Bush betrayed his country by not fighting in Vietnam.”

    I suppose Bill Clinton and John edwards betrayed their country as well?

    and from kerry's own website:

    http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0427b.html

    imagine the uproar if a similar page showed up on the Bush/Cheney website. oh, and it's from April, well before the swiftvet ads started running!
    --
    John Kerry for President

    April 27, 2004
    Key Unanswered Questions: Bush’s Record In The National Guard
    For Immediate Release

    “If George Bush wants to ask me questions about that through his surrogates, he owes America an explanation about whether or not he showed up for duty in the National Guard. Prove it. That's what we ought to have. I'm not going to stand around and let them play games.” -- John Kerry, NBC News, 4/26/04

    *

    Bush Has Said He Used No Special Treatment To Get Into The Guard. How Does He Explain The Fact That He Jumped Ahead Of 150 Applicants Despite Low Pilot Aptitude Scores?
    *

    Col. Albert Lloyd Said A Report From Alabama To Ellington Should Have Been Filed. Where Is That Report?
    *

    Why Did Bush Miss His Medical Exam In 1972?
    *

    Where Are The Complete Results Of The Required Investigation Into Bush’s Absence From The Exam?
    *

    Why Did Bush Specifically Request To NOT Be Sent Overseas For Duty?
    *

    Why Does The White House Say Bush Was On Base When Bush’s Superiors Had Filed A Report Saying He Was Gone For A Whole Year?
    *

    Why Is The Pentagon Under Orders To Not Discuss Bush’s Record With Reporters?
    *

    Where Are Bush’s Flight Logs?
    *

    Why Hasn’t Bush Himself Demonstrated That He Showed Up For Service in Alabama?

    Bush Has Said He Used No Special Treatment To Get Into The Guard. How Does He Explain The Fact That He Jumped Ahead Of 150 Applicants Despite Low Pilot Aptitude Scores?

    “There was no special treatment.”

    --Then-Gov. George W. Bush [Dallas Morning News, 7/4/99]

    FACT: With Family Connection, Bush Got Coveted Slot in Texas Guard Shortly After Graduating from College.

    A family friend of Bush’s father pulled strings to secure Bush’s spot; Bush joined the Texas Air National Guard after his student deferment ran out when he graduated from Yale in 1968. Before he graduated, Bush personally visited Col. Walter “Buck” Staudt -- the commander of the Texas Air National Guard -- to talk about the Guard. After Bush met with Staudt, he applied and was quickly accepted -- despite a waiting list of over 150 applicants. Staudt recommended Bush for a direct appointment, which allowed Bush to become a second lieutenant right out of basic training without having to go though officer candidate school. The direct appointment also cleared the way for a position in pilot training school. [New York Times, 9/27/99; Houston Chronicle, 10/10/92; Los Angeles Times, 7/4/99]

    FACT: Bush Scored in 25th Percentile on Pilot Aptitude Test. When Bush applied for the Guard, his score on the Air Force pilot aptitude section, one of five on the test, was in the 25th percentile, the lowest allowed for would-be fliers. [Dallas Morning News, 7/4/99]

    FACT: No Shortage of Pilots in Texas Guard. Although a Bush spokesman claimed Bush was fast-tracked because the Guard needed pilots, Charles C. Shoemake, a chief of personnel in the Texas Guard from 1972 to 1980 remembered no such shortage. “We had so many people coming in who were super-qualified,” Shoemake said. Texas Guard Historian Tom Hail said there was no apparent need to fast-track applicants. “I’ve never heard of that,” he said. “Generally they did that for doctors only, mostly because we needed extra flight surgeons.” [Los Angeles Times, 7/4/99] Col. Albert Lloyd Said A Report From Alabama To Ellington Should Have Been Filed. Where Is That Report?

    FACT: Col. Lloyd: Guard Records Should Include Evidence Of Alabama Service. Lloyd also said he did not know whether Bush performed duty in Alabama. “If he did, his drill attendance should have been certified and sent to Ellington, and there would have been a record.” [Boston Globe, 5/23/00; AP, 6/24/00]

    FACT: White House’s Own Expert Said Bush Should Have Done More. According to the Globe, “the White House included with the documents a memorandum from a Texas Air National Guard personnel specialist stating that the documents prove that Bush had a ‘satisfactory year’ for ‘retirement/retention’ purposes between May 27, 1972, and May 26, 1973. But that specialist, retired Lieutenant Colonel Albert C. Lloyd Jr., acknowledged in an interview last night that he evaluated Bush using the lower of two measures for rating Guard service. Guardsmen, he said, needed to serve more days to meet minimum-training requirements than to meet the lower threshold to receive retirement credit for the year. ‘Should he have done more? Yes, he should have,’ Lloyd said of Bush, who was a fighter-interceptor pilot. ‘Did he have to? No.’” [Boston Globe, 2/11/04] Why Did Bush Miss His Medical Exam In 1972?

    FACT: Bush Was Suspended From Flight Duty For Failing To Take Mandated Medical Exam.

    On September 29, 1972, Bush was officially suspended from flying for missing his annual medical examination. The orders note that Bush’s suspension is authorized under the guidelines presented in Air Force Manual 35-12 Para 2-29m, which reads that Bush’s local commander “will direct an investigation as to why the individual failed to accomplish the medical examination.” [Aeronautical Orders, Number 87, 29 Sept 72; AFM 35-13, Para 2-29m] Where Are The Complete Results Of The Required Investigation Into Bush’s Absence From The Exam?

    FACT: The order suspending Bush from flight duty stated: “Verbal orders of the Comdr on 1 Aug 72 suspending 1STLT George W. Bush…from flying status are confirmed…Reason for Suspension: Failure to accomplish annual medical examination. Off will comply with para 2-10, AFM 35-13. Authority: Para 2-29m, AFM 35-13. [Aeronautical Orders, Number 87, 29 September 1972, emphasis added]

    Para 2-29m, AFM 35-13: “When a Rated Officer Fails To Accomplish a Medical Examination Prescribed by AFM 160-1…(1)The local commander who has authority to convene a Flying Evaluation Board will direct an investigation as to why the individual failed to accomplish the medical examination. After reviewing the findings of the investigation, the local commander may convene a Flying Evaluation Board or forward through command channels a detailed report of the circumstances which resulted in the officer’s failure to accomplish a medical examination, along with a recommendation that the suspension be removed. (2) The individual’s major command will forward the report along with the command recommendation to USAFMPC/DPMAJD, Randolph AFB TX 78148 for final determination.” [Para 2-29m, AFM 35-13, emphasis added] Why Did Bush Specifically Request NOT To Be Sent Overseas For Duty?

    FACT: Bush’s Application Indicated Bush Did Not Volunteer for Overseas Duty. On Bush’s application to the 147th Fighter Group at Ellington Air Force Base in Texas, Bush was asked what his “Area Assignment Preferences” were. Bush checked the box beside “Do Not Volunteer” for overseas duty. [Application for Extended Duty With The United States Air Force, 5/27/68] Why Does The White House Say Bush Was On Base When Bush’s Superiors Had Filed A Report Saying He Was Gone For A Whole Year?

    FACT: Bush’s Superiors Were Unable to Evaluate Him for a Full Year, Saying he “Has Not Been Observed at This Unit…”
    May 2, 1973: Bush’s superior officers William D. Harris Jr. and Jerry B. Killian, wrote on his yearly evaluation form, “Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report,” and that a “civilian occupation made it necessary for him to move to Montgomery, Alabama. He cleared this base on 15 May 1972 and has been performing equivalent training in a non flying status with the 187 Tac Recon Gp, Dannelly ANG Base, Alabama.” [AF-77, 2 May 73, emphasis added]

    …But the White House Claims Bush was on Base the Same Day Superiors Filed Report.
    White House release says Bush was paid on May 2, 1973, the very day his superiors reported that “Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report.” [2nd Q 1973 pay record]

    FACT: Bush’s Superior Officer Says He Would Have Known If Bush Had Reported for Duty.
    November 12, 1973: Rufus G. Martin signed a report on Bush’s evaluation, saying Bush was “Not rated for the period 1 May 72 through 30 April 73.” [AF-77a, 12 Nov 73, emphasis added]

    Boston Globe: “But retired colonel Martin, the unit's former administrative officer, said he too thought Bush had been in Alabama for that entire year. Harris and Killian, he said, would have known if Bush returned to duty at Ellington.” [Boston Globe, 5/23/00, emphasis added]
    Why Is The Pentagon Under Orders Not To Discuss Bush’s Record With Reporters?

    FACT: Freedom of Information Officers Under Orders From Senior Pentagon Officials To Ignore Requests on Bush Files. According to the Spokane Spokesman-Review, “at the National Guard Bureau, now headed by a Bush appointee from Texas, officials last week said they were under orders not to answer questions. The bureau's chief historian said he couldn't discuss questions about Bush's military service on orders from the Pentagon. ‘If it has to do with George W. Bush, the Texas Air National Guard or the Vietnam War, I can't talk with you,’ said Charles Gross, chief historian for the National Guard Bureau in Washington, D.C. Rose Bird, Freedom of Information Act officer for the bureau, said her office stopped taking records requests on Bush's military service in mid-February and is directing all inquiries to the Pentagon. She would not provide a reason. Air Force and Texas Air National Guard officials did not respond to written questions about the issue. James Hogan, a records coordinator at the Pentagon, said senior Defense Department officials had directed the National Guard Bureau not to respond to questions about Bush's military records.” [Spokane Spokesman-Review, 3/14/04, emphasis added]



    Paid for and authorized by Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc.
     
  2. No Worries

    No Worries Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1999
    Messages:
    32,895
    Likes Received:
    20,676
    You should pay Sam Fisher to be your fact checker.
     
  3. IROC it

    IROC it Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 1999
    Messages:
    12,629
    Likes Received:
    89
    Talk about your all time back-fires. :rolleyes: :p
     
  4. Faos

    Faos Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2003
    Messages:
    15,370
    Likes Received:
    53

    “If George Bush wants to ask me questions about that through his surrogates, he owes America an explanation about whether or not he showed up for duty in the National Guard. Prove it. That's what we ought to have. I'm not going to stand around and let them play games.” -- John Kerry, 4/26/04


    Yeah, can you imagine if Bush would have came out yesterday and asked Kerry to prove the Swift boat ads were not true? Talk about playing games. :rolleyes:
     
  5. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,810
    Likes Received:
    20,466
    Kerry didn't ask for the Swift boat vets for bitterness ads to be run. But Kerry is saying is that if it's fair for them to try and rewrite history and comb over every insignificant statement, then it is only fair to do the same for Bush.

    Kerry is going to fight back. Bush and his minions won't get away with treating Kerry like they did John MacCain. Kerry didn't ask for this fight, but it's great to see that he's fighting back on it.

    It's funny that Kerry has been attacked for weeks on this non-issue, and at first even denounced an ad attacking Bush for his lack of service and poor record in the ntl. guard. After giving Bush every opportunity to blast the swifties ad, and put an end to it, Kerry has had enough and decides to fight back. Then a person who never once denounced the swfties ad, despite being shown inconsistency, and inaccuracy, and in some cases not even being there, decides to criticize Kerry when he fights back? I can't imagine that tactic will work to well, or Kerry's fighting back will upset too many folks.
     
    #5 FranchiseBlade, Aug 24, 2004
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2004
  6. SamFisher

    SamFisher Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    61,864
    Likes Received:
    41,391
  7. Faos

    Faos Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2003
    Messages:
    15,370
    Likes Received:
    53

    Uh, huh, huh...you said "tit".
     
  8. GreenVegan76

    GreenVegan76 Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    Messages:
    3,336
    Likes Received:
    1
    Kerry served in Vietnam, honorable or not. Bush did not serve in Vietnam, honorable or not. Take from that what you want.

    It's amazing we've been so manipulated into focusing on a war that ended 30 years ago, and not on the one being fought right now.
     
  9. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    Somewhere Rove is laughing…
     
  10. Uprising

    Uprising Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2000
    Messages:
    43,079
    Likes Received:
    6,611
    It was obvious this kind of thing would happen after Kerry's campaign began questioning Bush's record in the NG. If you question one man's history, yours is going to come opened and examined too.
     
  11. SamFisher

    SamFisher Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    61,864
    Likes Received:
    41,391
    As I posted earlier, what basso posted in was in response to the swift boat crap when it first started. Follow the links, note the dates.

     
  12. bnb

    bnb Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    316
    exactly.

    kerry should let go of the bait.
     
  13. SamFisher

    SamFisher Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    61,864
    Likes Received:
    41,391
    It's a conundrum. Do you fight fire with fire and risk prolonging it? or do you not respond and get labeled as a wuss? Not an easy choice.
     
  14. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    Agreed

    But most of the young people around here have no concept of the divisive nature that was Vietnam. Have no concept of the devastation of a true war. And I truly think that what we are seeing with the swiftboat bull**** is a reopening of those times and wounds. Our troops were vilified when they came home from nam; spit on and called babykillers. And for one of them to come home and protest what he saw; many vets didn't like it and were, are very resentful.

    Hence what we see now
     
  15. basso

    basso Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    33,400
    Likes Received:
    9,319
    but whose Tit? where, exactly did it start sam? did it start w/ MM's obscene pas-de-deux w/ Wes Clark in an airplane hanger in NH, as Martin Sheen, aka Kurtz, looked on, laughing and clapping, or did it start here:

    The issue here, as I have heard it raised, is was he present and active on duty in Alabama at the times he was supposed to be. . . . Just because you get an honorable discharge does not in fact answer that question.
    --John Kerry, questioning President Bush's
    military-service record, February 8, 2004.


    last i checked, February is still a coupla months before april...
     
  16. bnb

    bnb Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    316
    rope-a-dope.

    There's not a person in america who's not aware of Kerry's service. That card's been played. I think most people respect him for it -- however, the more mud that's flung...the more likely some of it will stick. George's service is a non-issue as that was played out in 2000. His supporters have accepted it -- so he has no downside. As long as the perception is that the foundation of Kerry's character is his stint in Vietnam, Kerry can only stand to lose by the Rove and Co. assault.

    And as long as we're debating the '60's, 2001 to 2004 stays off the radar. Kerry spends his energy fighting a battle that no longer matters.
     
  17. basso

    basso Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    33,400
    Likes Received:
    9,319
    if i were kerry, i'd just say, "as the president has noted on many occasions, i served honorably. i will not join in any attacks on GWB's record, and i call on the president to return the favor. with that said, here's my plan for iraq, the economy, etc...this is a forward looking campaign..."

    of course, had he done that in boston, we wouldn't be here now...
     
  18. bnb

    bnb Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    316
    well...he certainly doesn't have to appease to THAT extent ;). But i agree it's time to move on.
     
  19. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    From Kerry's acceptance speech...

    not good enough for you basso?
     
  20. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,810
    Likes Received:
    20,466
    I agree that as long as the battle is being faught about Kerry's service we are off topic. That's good for Bush especially while Kerry is on the defensive about his record, and we are only talking about that.

    But I think that's why Kerry needed to fight back. If he can but Bush on the defensive, even about something that Bush did 33 years ago, it is at least pushing the spotlight back on Bush. The spotlight should be on the incumbent, and it hasn't because of the swifties charge.

    It's a series of small steps. If Kerry can fight back, and make Bush play defense as well as offense, while at the same time pointing out that he is only fighting back after he was attacked by Bush's negativity, that helps swing the attention back to Bush's failure as a uniter and not a divider. That then sets the stage for Kerry to come forward with his plans.

    The whole thing was set up fairly nicely by the DNC. Kerrry remained fairly positive, and everyone pointed out at Bush's tendency to be negative, and a divider, contrary to his previous promises. Kerry can then show that he has plans for the future that he's willing to talk about.

    The RNC will probably shift focus at least somewhat from the swift thing back, and bring the focus back into the 21st century.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now