Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Questions about Bush's record STILL unanswered: USAtoday

Questions about Bush's record STILL unanswered: USAtoday
Thread Tools
Lerkfish
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 02:17 PM
 
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...-service_x.htm

Bush has not said what he did in the Guard during that period. Aside from a statement by a former Alabama Air Guard officer who said he saw Bush report for duty there in the fall of 1972, the only evidence he was at Dannelly Air National Guard Base in Alabama was a record of a dental exam on Jan. 6, 1973, at the base.


Bush said in a TV interview in February that he would make all his military records available. That month, the White House released more than 400 pages of Bush military records, including some duplicates, and said the documents were a complete catalog of his personnel files.


But some documents still have not been made public. The White House did not release Bush's medical records from his Guard files but allowed a group of reporters who cover the White House to review them for 20 minutes. They found nothing unusual. Kerry released some of his military records earlier this year. He has also declined to release his complete medical records but showed them to reporters as Bush did.


Since February, the White House has banned all Guard and military commanders outside the Pentagon from commenting on Bush's records or service. Requests for information must go to the Pentagon's Freedom of Information Act office.


The Pentagon last week responded to a 4-month-old request from USA TODAY for additional records from Bush's files by sending another copy of documents that were released by the White House in February. The documents do not address the unexplained year in Bush's Guard service or his decision to stop flying.


The Associated Press filed a lawsuit this summer requesting copies of Bush's military records stored in a Texas archive on microfilm. It sought information that might explain why Bush did not take his flight physical and whether he showed up for duty in Alabama in the fall of 1972, AP spokesman John Stokes said.
     
spacefreak
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 02:53 PM
 
So desperate, just like the rest of Democrats...

Bush signed form 180 that authorized release of his records. Kerry hasn't. Bush has never made his service even a small part of his platform. Kerry on the other hand has revolved his entire campaign around his Vietnam service, traveling around with his "Band of Brothers".

I don't see any Guardmates of Bush stating that he is "Unfit for Command", unlike the 250 or so Swifties who have opposed Kerry's election.

As for the article, these 2 co-authors need to do a little research of their own.
Why did Bush, described by some of his fellow officers as a talented and enthusiastic pilot, stop flying fighter jets in the spring of 1972 and fail to take an annual physical exam required of all pilots?
For one, his plane was being phased out. It was quite late in his tenure to begin training on a new aircraft. Furthermore, in the late spring of 1972, Bush joined another political campaign. This time he helped longtime family friend Jimmy Allison work in Alabama on the U.S. Senate campaign of Republican Winton M. "Red" Blount against longtime Democratic incumbent John J. Sparkman. Bush moved to Alabama and worked until November as political director for Blount, who lost by a wide margin. Source
What explains the apparent gap in the president's Guard service in 1972-73, a period when commanders in Texas and Alabama say they never saw him report for duty and records show no pay to Bush when he was supposed to be on duty in Alabama?
The records indicate Bush received points toward service in October and November 1972 and in January, April and May 1973, and that he drilled extensively in June and July of that year. Source

Did Bush receive preferential treatment in getting into the Guard and securing a coveted pilot slot despite poor qualifying scores and arrests, but no convictions, for stealing a Christmas wreath and rowdiness at a football game during his college years?
Yes, his dad, a Texas congressman, pulled some strings. What father wouldn't, even with a son who, while in college, once stole a wreath and once got rowdy at a football game?

Next.
     
Lerkfish  (op)
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 02:58 PM
 
Originally posted by spacefreak:
I don't see any Guardmates of Bush stating that he is "Unfit for Command", unlike the 250 or so Swifties who have opposed Kerry's election.
Yes, you're right. we don't see ANY guardmates of Bush. Period.

now why is that........hmmmm?

where is james baath?
     
spacefreak
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 03:09 PM
 
Originally posted by Lerkfish:
Yes, you're right. we don't see ANY guardmates of Bush. Period.

now why is that........hmmmm?
Because Bush isn't basing his campaign on what he did 30+ years ago (unlike Cambodia Kerry).

Regardless, here are a few words from some of his mates:
Retired Col. Bill Campenni was one of President Bush's squadron mates. The Texas ANG had the F-102, and probably wished it didn't. According to Campenni, "The F-102 was underpowered and, unlike modern fighters, had a split front view through the canopy. It literally had a bar down the center, so you'd have one eye on each side of the bar. It also had a built in altimeter error of up to 500 feet, which made it interesting when you were at 500 feet out over the ocean at night." Flying and training in the '102 was a dangerous job that required a lot of smarts and flying skill.

Bob Harmon is another of Bush's former squadron mates. At the time, Harmon was an instructor pilot. He remembers Bush as a "young, affable guy" and an above-average pilot, very good for his level of experience. "We flew together two or three times a month." It was dangerous duty. Harmon said that a couple of pilots were killed in F-102 accidents while Bush was there.

The first American jet fighters to be deployed to Vietnam were F-102s of the 509th Fighter Interceptor Squadron. When Lt. Bush signed up for fighters and joined the 111th FIS, he stood ready to deploy to Vietnam, as did every other Air National Guard pilot. In fact, he tried to volunteer for Vietnam.

Of the four pilots I spoke to who flew with Bush in the Texas days, Fred Bradley knew him best. They had met before going off to the year-long ordeal of pilot school, and entered the 111th at about the same time. Both were junior lieutenants without a lot of flying experience. But the inexperience didn't prevent Bush � along with Bradley � from going to their squadron leaders to see if they could get into a program called "Palace Alert." "There were four of us lieutenants at the time, and we were all fairly close. Two of them had more flight time than the president and me, said Bradley." All four volunteered for Vietnam (Bradley doesn't remember whether he and Bush actually signed paperwork, but he specifically remembers both Bush and himself trying to get into the Palace Alert Vietnam program.) Bush and Bradley were turned away, and the two more senior pilots went to Vietnam.

Joe Glavin, another member of Dubya's squadron said, "There were always a core of the guys who were the "in guys" and [Bush] was in the middle of it...George's difference was that we all knew that his daddy was rich and that he was smarter than the rest of us." Smarter? "I don't understand where [people saying Dubya is a dummy] comes from." Glavin explained that because their squadron was an active duty squadron, they always had two aircraft � armed and fueled � standing on the taxiway on what is called "plus five" alert. From the time the horn blows, until the time the aircraft was wheels-up on takeoff had to be five minutes or less.

Glavin said, "When we had to sit alerts, there were two pilots, and two crew chiefs that sat out in the alert barn. George was like everybody else, except while George was over in a corner reading somebody's autobiography, the rest of us were watching Hee Haw."

Glavin remembers Bush as a pilot who had learned good judgment, not a Hollywood hot dog. He told me of one night when the two were on alert and were scrambled to run a practice intercept over the Gulf of Mexico. Bush went out long and high, and turned back at supersonic speed. Glavin also went supersonic and then his radio failed. At that point, the two F-102s were approaching each other at a combined speed of about 1,800 miles an hour. At 20 miles � about 45 seconds before the paths would cross � Bush broke off the intercept. "We went to debrief with the controller and the controller said to George, why'd you break off the intercept? George said something to the effect of '[here] we're coming at each other at 1,800 miles an hour and he doesn't have a radio and you expect me to just sit there?' He said, 'we're not doin' that.'"

When you fly fighters with any squadron, you're literally betting your life on your pals' flying skills, just as they are betting it all on yours. Bush's old squadron-mates have the same confidence in him now they had when they flew with him. Bradley said, "I've always thought he was an intelligent, likeable, level-headed person." According to Glavin, "George was a smart man, an excellent pilot, and I'd fly with him again tomorrow, and I will vote for him in November." Which is about as high as praise gets among the jet jocks.
     
Lerkfish  (op)
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 03:33 PM
 
Originally posted by spacefreak:
Because Bush isn't basing his campaign on what he did 30+ years ago (unlike Cambodia Kerry).
No, Bush is basing his campaign on what KERRY did 30+ years ago.


(I think that qualifies as a SMACKDOWN)

none of the mates you provide can account for the missing time he was AWOL from Alabama, can they?
     
Dr.HermanG.
Senior User
Join Date: May 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 03:50 PM
 
Why is Kerry keeping some of his records secret too?
     
spacefreak
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 03:52 PM
 
Originally posted by Lerkfish:
No, Bush is basing his campaign on what KERRY did 30+ years ago.
Any Bush campaign quotes to link?
     
Millennium
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 03:59 PM
 
Originally posted by Lerkfish:
No, Bush is basing his campaign on what KERRY did 30+ years ago.
And Kerry is basing his campaign on not being Bush. Your point?

Political campaigns nowadays are stupid anyway. While the last few elections (and their associated campaigns) certainly haven't been dull, we haven't really had a good one in decades. The same goes for the candidates in all of those elections.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
BRussell
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Rockies
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 04:12 PM
 
Originally posted by spacefreak:
Bush signed form 180 that authorized release of his records.
You keep on saying this over and over, and I'm going to challenge you on it every time I see it. As far as I know, Kerry has all of his military records on his website. As far as I know, Bush has released all of his too (although apparently some were accidentally destroyed by the Pentagon). Neither of them have allowed direct access by reporters I don't think - they've simply gotten them and then made them all available. Or at least that's what they've said; I suppose it's possible that one or both of them have hidden some things. But the reason they don't make everything directly available to reporters is so they can black out any personal information, which seems fair I suppose.

People are talking about Kerry's diaries which have not been released. That's true, but 1) they're his personal diaries, not military documents, and 2) he signed a contract with Douglas Brinkley that he would have exclusive access to those diaries to write that book.
     
Lerkfish  (op)
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 04:48 PM
 
Originally posted by BRussell:
You keep on saying this over and over, and I'm going to challenge you on it every time I see it. As far as I know, Kerry has all of his military records on his website. As far as I know, Bush has released all of his too (although apparently some were accidentally destroyed by the Pentagon). Neither of them have allowed direct access by reporters I don't think - they've simply gotten them and then made them all available. Or at least that's what they've said; I suppose it's possible that one or both of them have hidden some things. But the reason they don't make everything directly available to reporters is so they can black out any personal information, which seems fair I suppose.

People are talking about Kerry's diaries which have not been released. That's true, but 1) they're his personal diaries, not military documents, and 2) he signed a contract with Douglas Brinkley that he would have exclusive access to those diaries to write that book.
As far as I know, here is the nuts and bolts:
according to the article, the only things Kerry has not released, but allowed reporters to view, are the exact same documents Bush has not released, but allowed reporters to view.
IN ADDITION, there are many documents that Bush would or should produce to account for his whereabout when he is asserted to have been AWOL. Those documents are inexplicably missing, destroyed, or unavailable. Not only the originals, but the three copies as well. Further, Everyone at the Pentagon has been banned (the article's terminology, which I find interesting) from discussing those documents or what they contain.

I"m unaware of documents in Kerry's possession that he had not revealed. I know space has mentioned not signing a release, but is not specific about the documents. The questions for Bush are very specific, and the FOIA requests are seeking particular documents that have been clearly identified, yet, after many months the FOIA has not been granted. Think about that....a FOIA request is stonewalled..why?

Has Kerry been FOIA'd?
     
KaBlooey
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kluhfernya
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 05:03 PM
 
Originally posted by Millennium:
And Kerry is basing his campaign on not being Bush.[...]
Under the present circumstances, that's enough for me.

If you aren't completely appalled, then you haven't been paying attention.
     
Lerkfish  (op)
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 05:08 PM
 
Originally posted by KaBlooey:
Under the present circumstances, that's enough for me.
works for me.
However, I also attended a Kerry rally and was greatly impressed with the man..

besides, the possibility of a president who can actually string sentences together....is a good one.
     
pman68
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Western MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 05:38 PM
 
Originally posted by Lerkfish:
works for me.
However, I also attended a Kerry rally and was greatly impressed with the man..

besides, the possibility of a president who can actually string sentences together....is a good one.


Do neocons disagree with Bush on anything? Can he do no wrong? Iraq, stem cell research, the environment, etc....

anyone?
     
Lerkfish  (op)
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2004, 07:31 PM
 
Originally posted by pman68:


Do neocons disagree with Bush on anything? Can he do no wrong? Iraq, stem cell research, the environment, etc....

anyone?
I've never seen this crowd do anything but agree with him, no matter how preposterous.
But, by the same token, I've never agreed with him...but for me, at least its based on what he actually does, what his policies actually are. If he proposed a policy I agreed with, I would say so.


I'm still waiting to say so.
     
pman68
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Western MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2004, 07:29 AM
 
I did agree with him when he STARTED to go after Al Queda in Afghanistan (you know the ones actually responsible). But then he diverted resources and man power to go to Iraq and hasn't mentioned Bin Laden since.

That's the rub. How conservatives justify that is beyond me.
     
macvillage.net
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2004, 09:29 AM
 
Originally posted by spacefreak:
So desperate, just like the rest of Democrats...

Bush signed form 180 that authorized release of his records. Kerry hasn't. Bush has never made his service even a small part of his platform. Kerry on the other hand has revolved his entire campaign around his Vietnam service, traveling around with his "Band of Brothers".
So if that's really all of the docs... why is there nothing in his... yet everyone else has rather complete documentation of their service? Where is the *rest*?

I don't see any Guardmates of Bush stating that he is "Unfit for Command", unlike the 250 or so Swifties who have opposed Kerry's election.
Because nobody ever met him, so nobody can comment about him.

As for the article, these 2 co-authors need to do a little research of their own.
For one, his plane was being phased out. It was quite late in his tenure to begin training on a new aircraft. Furthermore, in the late spring of 1972, Bush joined another political campaign. This time he helped longtime family friend Jimmy Allison work in Alabama on the U.S. Senate campaign of Republican Winton M. "Red" Blount against longtime Democratic incumbent John J. Sparkman. Bush moved to Alabama and worked until November as political director for Blount, who lost by a wide margin. Source
The records indicate Bush received points toward service in October and November 1972 and in January, April and May 1973, and that he drilled extensively in June and July of that year. Source

Yes, his dad, a Texas congressman, pulled some strings. What father wouldn't, even with a son who, while in college, once stole a wreath and once got rowdy at a football game?
Dad pulled string... he didn't have to take them.

If my father steals a car, can I keep it? Or is it possession of stolen goods? What father doesn't want his son to have a car?


His father does something unethical says something about his father.

When *HE* at his own free will, takes advantage... that makes him unethical.

Is it wrong to steal the walet off a corpse? Why? The dead guy isn't going to need the cash?
     
el chupacabra
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2004, 06:38 PM
 
Originally posted by pman68:


Do neocons disagree with Bush on anything? Can he do no wrong? Iraq, stem cell research, the environment, etc....

anyone?


Nope
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:32 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,