Posted on 09/07/2004 6:12:59 PM PDT by alydar
President Bush fell well short of meeting his military obligation in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War, the BOSTON GLOBE is planning to front on Wednesday, newsroom sources tell DRUDGE.
(Excerpt) Read more at drudgereport.com ...
yeah, every time Oliphant shows up to defend Kerry, Kerry drops 3 points in the Zell Miller - Reagan Democrats.
Oliphant trys to believe everything that isn't written by him or one of his friends is "tabloid" and therefore not "worth of comment".
That was his argument about the Swift Boats is that it was birthed in the "tabloids".
That would just blow it up. As it stands now, only the Globe will report this story. Bush commenting on it would get it the lead on all the evening news programs.
It seems that the Globe is playing games with words here.
Look at how they word it. Which commanding officer are they talking about. If they are talking about the Commanding officer in Texas....that is simple....BUSH WAS IN ALABAMA. (And last night..Lt.Col John Calhoun came forward and said that he remembers seeing Bush at the base in Alabama. Bush signed in on the sheet that was on Calhoun's desk.)
from Drudge:
"In fact, Bush's unit certified in late 1973 that his service had been "satisfactory" - just four months after Bush's commanding officer wrote that Bush had not been seen at his unit for the previous 12 months."
The pay record does show him at Alabama. It seems that the press wants to use the Texas Guard write ups...and misrepresent what they mean...for the time period when Bush was in Alabama. When Bama Guard records probably show he was there. They are selectively showing certain records..while not showing the others.
If a record shows that I am not in one location..but shows I am at another location on temp duty at that same time...then it is not too hard to see that I was on duty at the second location.
The press is hoping to confuse people who don't understand the military. They keep saying that Bush's records bring up more questions...when they don't.
It is time for Bush to call BS on this crap..point out that his records show he served...Challenged the media on what questions they have..then, in the press conference hand them the sheet...show where it indicates what he is talking about...and then end the press conference by challenging Kerry to release ALL of his military and medical records...and CHALLENGE THE MEDIA TO FILE AN FOI ON KERRY LIKE THEY DID HIM.
The drudge piece says that networks are going to bring it up as well.
Kerry committed war atrocities? Are you saying that freedom-defending American soldiers in Vietnam were guilty of war crimes? Some freepers would disagree.
You're probably right. I get so angry about all this bs. I might have to turn my TV off for awhile because I'm getting fed up and we still have two months to go.
I agree
Actually, I don't see any of this as bad news. The more the MSM continues to drag up old dirt and show how disingenuous they really are, the more the voters will turn them off and move away from those that the MSM wants them support. Well, that's my theory and I am sticking to it.
"There they go again!"
Does any not think that if only question should be asked about either Bush or Kerry about Viet Nam it should be to Kerry and it should be : Did you really commit war crimes and if not were you lying in 1971 when you said you had?
Sorry, Bush might have been in Alabama and not Texas at one point and some of his records may be missing BUT he did not disgrace his fellow vets while engaged in the war, did not extend the pain and suffering of our POWs under the VC and is not a self-professed war criminal.
Honestly, I think the media is jumping the shark with this because they don't want to ask the REAL questions.
Not sure if this was sarcasm, but in case it wasn't, Kerry is the one who made the claim about war crimes while in Vietnam. It is this context that is necessary to understand the above post.
"His commander could not have have seen or rated Bush, for Bush was TDY to the Alabama ANG. "
EXACTLY.
From looking at Drudge..it seems the press will try...with out evidence...to claim that Bush should have faced punitive action.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT HE MISSED DUTY. So there would be no punitive action needed.
They keep trying to claim that BUSH WAS NOT IN TEXAS in october of 72. DUH....his Records indicate that he WAS IN ALABAMA!
Even the AP admits that Bush had permission to train with the Alabama unit in September, October and November 1972.
Seems that the press is is manipulating the presentations of the records.
It's good to hope for all of that, but I doubt that's how things will go. But I'll pray for that to happen.
Don't miss this.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1209600/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.