Posted on 10/03/2004 1:27:55 PM PDT by wagglebee
OPINION -- What a young man did more than 30 years ago shouldn’t be a primary criteria in determining his qualifications to be President of the United States. George Bush has had almost four years now as Commander and Chief of the World’s largest military force and he should be judged on how well he has done. Yet John Kerry and the Democratic Left won’t give it up.
On almost a daily basis, Kerry says, "I served this country honorably as a young man in Vietnam [4 months/12 days] and I will serve this country honorably as Commander and Chief." Then the Left yells that George Bush got preferential treatment in getting into the National Guard and even failed to complete his Guard obligations. They have even forged documents to prove their point.
The facts are that George Bush served honorably in the National Guard obtaining service points far in excess of the 50 annual service points required to meet his obligation.
Records show that in 1968/69 he accumulated 253 points -- 340 in 1969/70, 137 in 1970/71, 112 in 1971/72, 56 in 1972/73 and 56 in 1973/74 -- points far in excess of the service agreed to and that required to meets his obligation and be Honorably Discharged.
George Bush has never made his National Guard service a qualification to lead this country, nor has he ever questioned the service of John Kerry.
While the Left and the mainstream media have never questioned the Vietnam era service of John Kerry, they seem to feel that the record of George Bush 30 years ago should be of concern to voters in November.
But what about John Kerry’s record?
We are told that he was a decorated veteran. We are also told that he was deeply involved in anti-war activities on his return from Vietnam in violation of his oath as an officer in the US Navy. Kerry has a long and well-documented history of providing "aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of war. By his own account of his actions and protests, he violated the UCMJ, the Geneva Conventions and the U.S. Code while serving as a Navy officer. Further he met, on two occasions, with North Vietnamese negotiators in 1970 and 1971, while a Reserve Officer, willingly placing himself in violation of Article three, Section three of the U.S. Constitution, which defines treason as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of warfare.
From here, the record of John Kerry becomes unclear and the mainstream press won’t demand that John Kerry sign a Department of Defense (DOD) form 180 that would release all of his military records.
Records released by Kerry's campaign are confusing. There are indications that he was Honorably Discharged on Jan. 3, 1970, Feb 16, 1978, July 13, 1978 and even lately Mar. 12, 2001.
Why the confusion on a relatively simple service event? Could it be that John Kerry received a less than honorable discharge in the early 70’s because of his anti-war activities? And then was pardoned for those activities when then President Jimmy Carter on January 21, 1978 (Proclamation 4483) granted a full, complete and unconditional pardon to all persons who may have committed any offense between August 4, 1964 and March 28, 1973 in violation of the Military Selective Service Act or any rule or regulation promulgated there under?
Did John Kerry request that his service be granted an Honorable Discharge and it was finally granted in 1978? Only a complete release of his military records will show what actually happened during this period. And to date, John Kerry has refused to sign the necessary DOD form 180 which would allow for this release.
If the Democratic Party, the mainstream press, and the Bush critics are going to demand -- as they do on almost a daily basis -- that George Bush release all of his records, shouldn’t they do the same for John Kerry?
You notice that Prsident Bush keeps saying that he was honorably discharged from the Texas Air National Guard. I wonder if he knows something. Hehehe. Parley
"What is John Kerry hiding? Why doesn't he sign the Standard Form 180"
I really wonder along the line someplace his discharge was less than honorable?
The only "180" Kerry hasn't done is an SF180.
LOL You got that right!
Carter's Amnesty program.
I've been ticked about the lack of attention paid to Kerry's military record since this started. I even had two DNC drones come to my front door and tell me that they weren't sure whether or not meeting in Paris with the communist reps was "illegal". This man may not be dirty-repeat 'may not be'-but the fact that he has done far less than Bush to release 'all' of his records vis a vi his refusal to sign the SF-180 tells me one thing: he has something to hide. And until the MSM holds his well pedicured feet to the fire he won't be signing any such release.
I personally want to know the answers to the following:
1) Where are your Fitness Reports, Mr Kerry, covering the period from the day you left Vietnam until 1972; and then your status from '72 to '78?
(this would cover the Paris period)
2) Did anyone see you at your weekend drills after you came back from Vietnam?
(the Bush Alabama guard test)
Just one Marine's opinion. If my son is going to serve for someone that, in my gut, committed treason, then by all means, I think he should settle this.
BTTT
I'd like to see us take Fallujah and capture/kill Zarqawi. That would be a great October surprise.
BING!! BING!!
That is the question.
Why was he Honorably Discharged in 1978 during the Carter Administration when his obligated service time would have made him eligible for Honorable Discharge much earlier?
See my Post #19.
I still want answers about the Bronze Star citation that was signed by John Lehman. Either it is a forgery or for some unknown reason the original "disappeared" and had to be reissued during the Reagan administration. Either way, I think there should be some explanation.
http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/Bronze_Star.pdf
Kerry will never sign the 180 and those records will never be released.
Could this be one of he October surprises from Karl Rove
Under normal circumstances, I don't think he should be required to release his records. It is not normally a consideration, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter and Dole never released their records. sKerry's situation is different though, his whole campaign consists of "Bush f*cked up the whole country, and I'm a Vietnam war hero, so vote for me." There are so many inconsistencies in the records that he has released, the only reasonable conclusion is that he is hiding something.
Exactly what Linda Tripp said, about her records.
Thanks, Lady!
By all means, it must pass the "Global Test". *grin*
You're very welcome, woman. My best wishes with fighting with a lib SIL. Been there, quit that!
Kerry was honorably discharged in Feb 1978. He was released from active duty into the inactive reserves on Jan 3, 1970 with no drill obligation and just had the requirement to keep the Navy informed of his whereabouts since he was subject to recall. Kerry was placed into the inactive Standby Reserves on July 1, 1972. We have the official records to document this. This old canard about Kerry not receiving an honorable discharge has been surfacing again and again despite no factual basis.
When an Officer gets a commission through ROTC or OCS, he has to go serve three to four years of active duty unlike enlisted who join the Reserves and can then go to "weekend warrior" status after basic training.
On the other hand, once released from active duty, officers can enter the Individual Ready Reserve where they are subject to call back but are not required to be members of a drilling unit. No drills. No Fitness Reports.
I have a Retirement Certificate but never served a single minute with a drilling Reserve unit.
However, Kerry does need to account for his status until his Honorable Discharge in 1978. His obligated service contract would have made him eligible for Honorable Discharge long before 1978.
I would bet dollars to doughnuts that Kerry is hiding a Less Than Honorable Discharge that was upgraded to Honorable Discharge in 1978 under the Carter Amnesty Program.
Kerry has put out quite a smokescreen over this issue. See my Post 19.
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.