Guard commander's memos criticize Bush

[BuddyLee]

Doesn't look like Vietnam should be an issue anymore. Both candidates have had 'urban legend' faults.

WASHINGTON — President Bush's commander in the Texas Air National Guard concluded that Bush was failing to meet standards for fighter pilots, but the commander felt pressure from superiors to "sugar coat" his judgments, according to newly disclosed documents.

The military service histories of Bush and Democratic challenger John Kerry have become a central issue in the 2004 presidential race. An anti-Bush group, Texans for Truth, is to begin airing an ad on Monday in which a former lieutenant colonel in the Alabama Air National Guard says neither he nor his friends saw Bush in 1972, when the future president was supposed to be training with their unit. (Related story: Ad challenges Bush)

Ben Barnes, a former speaker of the Texas House and former lieutenant governor, told CBS that he was responsible for getting Bush into the Guard ahead of several hundred men on a waiting list. He said he now regrets the favors done for Bush and others from powerful families. Joining the National Guard was a way to avoid the draft, the primary source of troops for the Vietnam War.

Bush, who quit drinking in 1986, the year he turned 40, has said that he sometimes behaved irresponsibly when he was young. At a campaign news conference in 1999 he said, "I made mistakes 20 or 30 years ago, but I've learned from my mistakes."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politi...bush-guard-memos_x.htm?csp=24&RM_Exclude=Juno

God help us, these are our choices.

 

[SmallTown]

Yea, kind of funny you can't do a search on the 1992 election and NOT find a slam against clinton for being a draft dodger.

But now, suddenly, the Bush camp is saying vietnam stuff isn't important.

Interesting how (less) important things become when they are personal.

 

[SamSpade]

But now, suddenly, the Bush camp is saying vietnam stuff isn't important.

"Suddenly"? What have you been smoking? He's never said it was important. He's always been against bringing it up. The person who KEEPS -- BRINGING -- IT -- UP -- is Kerry.

At this point, I wouldn't care if Kerry won the whole damned war all by himself 30 years ago. What has he done in the last 30 years? I hardly think that four months in Vietnam should define whether or not a man is fit to be commander-in-chief.

That's a job Bush has had four years of showing that he's *quite* capable of handling, and very well. THAT is his best qualification for the position, that he's been DOING it for four years. It doesn't matter if he flew fighter jets or flew into outer space 30 years ago.

 

[SmallTown]

"Suddenly"? What have you been smoking? He's never said it was important. He's always been against bringing it up. The person who KEEPS -- BRINGING -- IT -- UP -- is Kerry.

Suddenly in terms of the fact he is now being questioned about it. Up until the 2000 election, all we heard from the right was how unpatriotic clinton was for dodging the draft. Even on this board, mention clinton and someone brings up avoiding the war. Maybe had republicans said back in 1992 "This isn't important", people wouldn't look at the republican's today as being such hipocrites.

I don't really care if Bush faked a heart attack to avoid war, or if kerry wiped his ass with his medals. But I am tired of this political bullshit when people try to completely trash another candidate's integrity, then when the tables are turned come back with "It doesn't matter". Yet ANOTHER example of the first phrase in the republican dictionary "That's Different"

 

[Kyle]

... Interesting how (less) important things become when they are personal.

No less than the same folks who defended Clintons "Dodging" the draft by running to England, getting all worked up about someone serving in the Guard.

 

[Kyle]

... But I am tired of this political bullshit when people try to completely trash another candidate's integrity, then when the tables are turned come back with "It doesn't matter"...

Then tell the Democrats you dont' like it. They use it the most, are best at it... Hell they wrote the book.

 

[SamSpade]

Suddenly in terms of the fact he is now being questioned about it. Up until the 2000 election, all we heard from the right was how unpatriotic clinton was for dodging the draft. Even on this board, mention clinton and someone brings up avoiding the war. Maybe had republicans said back in 1992 "This isn't important", people wouldn't look at the republican's today as being such hipocrites.

I thought "hypocritical" was when you b!tched and moaned and complained and got hysterical over someone doing something - and then subsequently do it yourself.

You know, like lose a cow over Kerry's Vietnam record being challenged, and IMMEDIATELY go to press and trash Bush's record. Where's the friggin' moral high ground there?

You're saying it's hypocritical to say "that's different". You're mistaken - it's denial. Hypocrisy is declaring something as **WRONG**, and then *immediately* doing it yourself.

So who's the hypocrite?

 

[SmallTown]

You're saying it's hypocritical to say "that's different". You're mistaken - it's denial. Hypocrisy is declaring something as **WRONG**, and then *immediately* doing it yourself.

So who's the hypocrite?

With that definition, and looking at the 1992 campaign and the 2004 campaign, The republican's are the hypocrites for blasting clinton in 1992, when today's republican candidate did the same thing and we should look the other way. The dems are hypocrites for defending clinton like crazy in 1992, and then attacking bush in 2004.

However, if you are concerning with the "immediate" nature of hypocrisy, one could point to the many republicans blasting Kerry for his "war record", and ignoring Bush's "war record"

 

[SmallTown]

Then tell the Democrats you dont' like it. They use it the most, are best at it... Hell they wrote the book.

Example #2

 

[Kyle]

Example #2

#2

 

[sleuth]

Did President Bush Sr. actually criticize Clinton's draft dodging? I didn't pay close attention as a freshman in high school. I just don't see Bush Sr. as doing that.

Now maybe the rest of the party did...

Regardless, I think dodging service is a whole nuther ball-o-wax compared to choosing to serve in the Guard instead of the U.S. military.

And... like everyone else said. The only person in this campaign bringing up Kerry's Vietnam record is himself. Bush has said many times that he respects Kerry's service.

 

[SamSpade]

With that definition, and looking at the 1992 campaign and the 2004 campaign, The republican's are the hypocrites for blasting clinton in 1992, when today's republican candidate did the same thing and we should look the other way. The dems are hypocrites for defending clinton like crazy in 1992, and then attacking bush in 2004.

I'm trying to follow your logic here; the Republicans are hypocrites for supporting George Bush in 2004 who went into the National Guard, and then going backward in time blasting Clinton for being a draft dodger? Or, having blasted Clinton for being a draft dodger in '92, they were quiet about a candidate in 2000 who joined the National Guard (which, no matter how you disparage it, is NOT the same as avoiding the draft AND protesting the war in a foreign country). So their hypocrisy is - they said nothing? You have a weird interpretation of 'hypocrisy'.

(Incidentally, while Bush has never criticized Kerry's service, Kerry has not refrained from criticizing Bush's. That includes this past week.)

However, if you are concerning with the "immediate" nature of hypocrisy, one could point to the many republicans blasting Kerry for his "war record", and ignoring Bush's "war record"

Do you mean, his record as commander in chief, or his record in the Guard? I think he served honorably. So far, the ONLY complaint is that very few people saw him in the first half of his FOURTH YEAR in the National Guard. Maybe you should read what we know he DID do during the other five and a half years.

http://www.hillnews.com/york/090904.aspx


BTW, it's the Swift Vets who are crowing the loudest about his war record. Bush has asked them to stop, but he can only ask (instead of threaten them with lawsuits) because of the law. It's personal to them.

You want to claim that "That's different" is the first phrase in the Republican dictionary? Why is it that hundreds of Swift Vets are lying, but Ben Barnes is telling the truth, even though he swore under OATH otherwise?

 

[Voter2002]

With that definition, and looking at the 1992 campaign and the 2004 campaign, The republican's are the hypocrites for blasting clinton in 1992, when today's republican candidate did the same thing and we should look the other way.

Bush DID NOT do the same thing as Clinton...Bush may not have gone to Viet Nam, but at least he served in the military..... unlike Clinton who never served a day in the military and ran to England on a scholarship instead of doing ANY service.

So you're sucking wind when you try to compare the 1992/2004.

 

[itsbob]

Regardless, I think dodging service is a whole nuther ball-o-wax compared to choosing to serve in the Guard instead of the U.S. military.

And... like everyone else said. The only person in this campaign bringing up Kerry's Vietnam record is himself. Bush has said many times that he respects Kerry's service.

Careful of the wording.. Some would take offense over the insinuation "guard instead of the military"
One thing that mostly gets failed to be mentioned, and is unfair to the Veterans, is that the Guard and Reserve were NOT a way to dodge the draft or Vietnam, many guardsman and reservists served honorably (and many died)in Vietnam, just as they are doing now in Iraq.

I have a father-in-law in the AIr Guard, JUST like Bush was, FIL was in the Air Guard I was Acitve DUty Army.. he's been deployed to EVERY conflict and hotspot in the world in the last 15 years... were I didn't get deployed to any of them..

 

[vraiblonde]

Bush has said many times that he respects Kerry's service.

But do you notice that the media doesn't give that a whole lot of play? What they keep harping on is the SBVs, trying to pretend that they are an extension of the Bush Administration. That's why ST thinks Bush is making Vietnam service an issue.

The only connection between Bush and the SBVs is Bush's doctor's cousin's college roommate was in line at McDonalds once with one of the SBV guys' sister's boyfriend's uncle. Or something like that. Yet everything they say is being attributed to the "Bush campaign" or the "Republicans".

The fact is that Kerry built his whole campaign around being a "war hero" and now it's backfiring on him. And in one breath, both Kerry AND Edwards will say we should be focusing on the issues, not Vietnam, then they'll start busting on Bush AND Cheney's service record (or lack thereof).

 

[SmallTown]

Bush DID NOT do the same thing as Clinton...Bush may not have gone to Viet Nam, but at least he served in the military..... unlike Clinton who never served a day in the military and ran to England on a scholarship instead of doing ANY service.

So you're sucking wind when you try to compare the 1992/2004.

No doubt, at face value it looks like Bush's way was "better" to avoid the war.

But why use political/monetary ties to get into the guard then? In front of others?
"Ben Barnes, a former speaker of the Texas House and former lieutenant governor, told CBS that he was responsible for getting Bush into the Guard ahead of several hundred men on a waiting list. He said he now regrets the favors done for Bush and others from powerful families. Joining the National Guard was a way to avoid the draft, the primary source of troops for the Vietnam War. "

 

[SmallTown]

That's why ST thinks Bush is making Vietnam service an issue.

But now, suddenly, the Bush camp is saying vietnam stuff isn't important.

Interesting how (less) important things become when they are personal.

You got it 180 degrees backwards. I'm wondering why Bush and the republicans don't think vietnam is an issue, when it was an issue in 1992

 

[sleuth]

Careful of the wording.. Some would take offense over the insinuation "guard instead of the military"
One thing that mostly gets failed to be mentioned, and is unfair to the Veterans, is that the Guard and Reserve were NOT a way to dodge the draft or Vietnam, many guardsman and reservists served honorably (and many died)in Vietnam, just as they are doing now in Iraq.

I have a father-in-law in the AIr Guard, JUST like Bush was, FIL was in the Air Guard I was Acitve DUty Army.. he's been deployed to EVERY conflict and hotspot in the world in the last 15 years... were I didn't get deployed to any of them..

I was trying to think of better wording but that's the best I could do. Is the National Guard considered part of the U.S. Armed Forces? Does military service refer to guard service and vice versa?

 

[SamSpade]

You got it 180 degrees backwards. I'm wondering why Bush and the republicans don't think vietnam is an issue, when it was an issue in 1992

I'm not sure it was that VIETNAM was the issue.

The biggest thing was probably, this was the *first* campaign where anyone was likely to have been in Vietnam. Prior to that, anyone running for President would have been too young.

Secondly, it was the first time that I know of that a man was running for President who had not only avoided the draft but had not served in the military (at least, of the candidates in the latter half of this century). Back in '92, the thing that p!ssed me off so much was not that he dodged the draft, but that he kept lying about it. He lied about the pot, he lied about the dodge, he was even caught on tape telling Gennifer Flowers to lie.

Bear in mind also - the whole Whitewater thing was bubbling then, too. Everyone said it didn't matter what happened ten years earlier.

NOW, we're talking better than 30 years, over a few month's time - Kerry, with his time in country, and Bush, with the LACK of evidence that he spent most of his time in the Alabama National Guard reading manuals quietly in an office. He'd racked up the minimum flight time. In fact, his first three years, he racked up a HELL of lot of flight time.

Question: why is four month's as a Lt. jg in Vietnam 35 years ago relevant to the kind of job Kerry will do for four YEARS, especially when he himself repudiated that time in Vietnam after he came back (and was STILL active duty)?

 

[vraiblonde]

You got it 180 degrees backwards.

No I don't. Bush has repeatedly said that he respects Kerry's service to his country. Kerry, on the other hand, has blasted Bush's service and touted his own in every single speech he's made.

Is Bush now supposed to be responsible for every syllable that comes out of everyone's mouth? When Kerry isn't even held responsible for the things that come out of his OWN mouth?