Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Take that!
1 posted on 02/10/2004 4:49:27 AM PST by The G Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last
To: The G Man; Howlin; nopardons
Bump for the research folder.
2 posted on 02/10/2004 4:52:57 AM PST by ClintonBeGone (<a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/~clintonbegone/">Hero</font></a>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
Wonder if Mccullif(sp) will appoligize?
3 posted on 02/10/2004 4:54:36 AM PST by DeaconRed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
George Mag, indepth look at GW's NG stint With documentation.
4 posted on 02/10/2004 4:56:21 AM PST by GailA (Millington Rally for America after action http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/872519/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man; Hon
The commander of the Alabama unit has said Bush did not appear for duty at his assigned unit there.

BS!!! When are the other media whores going to out the Boston Globe for their shoddy and false reporting on this story?

Debunking The Bush AWOL Story - From The Horse's Mouth

The Real Military Record of George W. Bush: Not Heroic, but Not AWOL, Either

5 posted on 02/10/2004 4:57:18 AM PST by optimistically_conservative (The BBC killed Kelly!! Those b@stards!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man; All
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1073076/posts
Debunking The Bush AWOL Story - From The Horse's Mouth
Brig. Gen. Turnipseed | February 6, 2004 | Hon

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1074224/posts
Reporter Who Made Up AWOL Story Has History Of Libeling GOP Candidates
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ^ | March 10, 1987 | N/A
6 posted on 02/10/2004 4:57:52 AM PST by backhoe (--30--)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
Chris Matthews is going be very disappointed with this article...grins.

sw

7 posted on 02/10/2004 5:03:10 AM PST by spectre (Spectre's wife)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
Bookmark BUMP!
8 posted on 02/10/2004 5:03:32 AM PST by WorkingClassFilth (DEFUND PBS & NPR - THE AMERICAN PRAVDA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
Retired Lieutenant Colonel Albert. C. Lloyd Jr., a former personnel director for the Texas Air Guard, said in an interview last night that the minimum number of points required for any year was 50, although most Guardsmen logged substantially more.

"The document shows he satisfactorily completed his military obligation for that year," Lloyd said.

Case closed

9 posted on 02/10/2004 5:03:50 AM PST by The G Man (John Kerry continues to be AWOL in the War on Terror!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
This article is trying so hard to spin this into a negative that it makes the English language dizzy. I feel like the writer must have drunk too much soda pop at the fair then went on the tilt-a-whirl. His rhetoric is the result.
10 posted on 02/10/2004 5:10:48 AM PST by Puddleglum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
I don't have the source, but I just read something the other day where the source (former military individual) said his explanation has been misquoted by the Boston Globe, the originator of this whole criticism of Pres. Bush's military record.

In any event, he has spent the most recent 3+ years in the military as Commander in Chief.
11 posted on 02/10/2004 5:13:55 AM PST by Loyal Buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
Notice though --that while the records show Bush had the required amount of points and service days the GLOBE still has to resort to inuendo's and subtle wording to make this as much of a hit piece as possible.

Had to serve a "Flurry of Days" to make his requirements
Commander says "Flurry of activity in May-July shows that he might not have had enough days before that"
Commander says "I don't remember him being there"

"why did they show a "torn Copy" in 2000
Why show records that were incomplete in 2000 when these records show a different story
etc etc etc etc

13 posted on 02/10/2004 5:14:44 AM PST by commish (Freedom Tastes Sweetest to Those Who Have Fought to Preserve It)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
This is great news. This morning I was listening to this raging liberal Chris Matthew on the pin head Imus show and he was making President Bush service in National Guard as a major theme in the campaign and that Bush must answer these questions about his service. At the same time, he was making Kerry as this great war hero and he disregard his treason to his fellow soldiers when he came from Vietnam as simply “anti-war” stands. I am sure that this Boston Globe article is very sad news to Matthew, to all the liberals, and to John Kerry the traitor of Vietnam.
14 posted on 02/10/2004 5:15:24 AM PST by jveritas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
"The activist, Bob Fertig, is a cofounder of Democrats.com, a website that has no formal affiliation with the Democratic Party."

Anything seem strange about this?
15 posted on 02/10/2004 5:16:01 AM PST by Loyal Buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
I am very surprised that Walter Robinson actually allowed his named to be included with this report, which directly contradicts his earlier report that has been cited by the demoCREEPs since 2000.
16 posted on 02/10/2004 5:16:14 AM PST by mattdono (Big Arnie: "Crush the democrats, drive them before you, and hear the lamentations of the scumbags.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
NOT good enough..../sarcasm
22 posted on 02/10/2004 5:25:43 AM PST by lysie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
And the sad thing is that the DemonRATs expected the AWOL charge to fly the second time after McCain had the wings shot out from it. If there wasn't so much vote fraud that there's a distinct possibility of them getting power again, their attempts at smears would be pathetically funny instead of simply pathetic.
23 posted on 02/10/2004 5:27:18 AM PST by steveegg (You don't clean up 8 years of messes in 4, only to turn it over to Pigpen - W'04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
Now that there appear to be actual days listed for GWB being at NG meetings in AL, it would be nice to have other NG members who were also present on those days come forward and verify attendance. Let's put this issue to bed - once and for all. Corroborating testimony is always good when driving home a point.
25 posted on 02/10/2004 5:28:08 AM PST by familyofman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
But its commander has said Bush never appeared.

This is untrue.

The man has said he doesn't "remember." He was a BrigGen at the time. Why would a brig gen note a lietenant showing up or not?

That's like saying that a deputy division commander should know if a lieutenant in the G-3 shop was there every day or not.

It's not the BG's job to know that.

28 posted on 02/10/2004 5:29:49 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man

30 posted on 02/10/2004 5:34:44 AM PST by Jaxter ("Vivit Post Funera Virtus")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: The G Man
As you all know, the difficulty with this issue is that the left will play it as long and as hard as they can. In fact, they will continue to "question" and "wonder" until the actual facts are disseminated so far and wide that they'll actually look stupid for continuing to beat a dead horse.

It is also obvious, from their position, that the tactic is to smear Bush through this campaign of "questions" and innuendo until enough people (measurably significant) are aware of the true facts and then they'll drop it like it never existed and give it no more ink. In that way, an equal measure of setting the record straight can be omitted and the tactic of "questioning" the motives of Bush's political enemies for raising the issue cannot come home to roost.

If you'll recall, most minor clinton scandals were handled through a variation of this tactic (the disappearing ink trick) and only the biggies were half-heartedly reported because of existant public knowledge obtained through alternative sources. Principally because of the outrageous bias demonstrated by the press and the flagrant abuse of their charged duties (remember clinton's press finale and the lavish party where they all gave each other tongue baths?), their vaunted credibility took massive hits that they haven't recovered from to this day.

However, since the Mullahs at the NYT and the Globe have spoken, it seems that this smear may have outlived it's usefulness as far as the elite media circles are concerned. In other words, the biggest wave has crested on the sand. Of course, minor-league dolts at the Gopher Gulch Gazette may still write barn-burning articles about it, but hey, we already know the nature of the beast and their aversion to the truth, eh?
34 posted on 02/10/2004 5:38:23 AM PST by WorkingClassFilth (DEFUND PBS & NPR - THE AMERICAN PRAVDA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson