Replies

If the 1973 document was available, why not the 1972 one? Or maybe it was, and those with an agenda just don't include it in their "case".

That doesn't make sense - if the Bush campaign had that document, they could put an end to this debate immediately, right?

There is no debate (amonst Bush supporters...)

It is the democrat operators who are claiming he was (as quoted above!) that he was "AWOL" and that he skipped out of duty.

Neither is true: It is YOUR side that must prove he skipped duty, or stop making false claims.

It is obvious Bush NEVER was AWOL, never was misassigned, and there is NO evidence he ever missed ANY duty days: he was credited for training days during that period in the 1973 papers, so he obviously served those days.

I see plenty of evidence in those those papers that he went a long way OUT OF HIS WAY to impose on his CO and his duty officer to get permission to go serve in Alabama, and lost flight time (MONEY!) and "observed training days" (PROMOTIONS!) by serving in Alabama.

That doesn't make sense - if the Bush campaign had that document, they could put an end to this debate immediately, right?

If they have it, it will come out in due time, menaing somewhat closer to the election. They haven't really talked much about the issue in quite some time. It's also possible ARPC lost it, they are good at that sort of thing. Even if he didn't gain a single point in 1972, the document for '72 should still exist. If they are saved at ARPC that is. I don't know why they should save them at all, once someone is separated....oh well there is one reason, they might rejoin I suppose, but they would only need to maintain the totals and a few milestone dates (i.e. date first joined, date commisioned, date of last promotion, etc), not the entire points record. If they are not saved at ARPC, where did the '73 copy come from? Some records are maintained "locally" as well, and this may be a record from the Texas Guard, rather than from Air Reserve Pesonnel Center.