McAuliffe: Dems Will Focus on Bush AWOL Charge

NewsMax ^ | 2/1/04 | Limbacher

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe insisted on Sunday that President Bush "never served in the military," and said that Democrats would make reports that the president went "AWOL" from the Alabama National Guard in the early 1970s a central focus of the presidential campaign.

"George Bush never served in our military in our country," McAuliffe told ABC's "This Week," apparently discounting Bush's stint in the National Guard from 1968 through 1973. "He didn't show up when he should have showed up."

McAuliffe then echoed the charge by discredited filmmaker Michael Moore, who said three weeks ago that he wanted to see a debate between Gen. Wesley Clark and "the deserter."

Said McAuliffe:

"I look forward to that debate with John Kerry, a war hero with a chest full of medals, standing next to George Bush - a man who was AWOL in the Alabama National Guard."

During the Democratic debate in New Hampshire two weeks ago, ABC News anchorman Peter Jennings said Moore's Bush desertion charge "is not supported by the facts."

After the Boston Globe claimed during the 2000 presidential race that Bush had not appeared for Guard service for 17 months, its sister paper, the New York Times, admitted that report was wildly inaccurate.

Referring to the May 2000 Globe report, the Times said in Nov., "A review of records by The New York Times indicated that some of those concerns [about Bush's Guard service] may be unfounded. Documents reviewed by The Times showed that Mr. Bush served in at least 9 of the 17 months in question."

One document, the paper said, showed that "Mr. Bush served at various times from May 29, 1973, through July 30, 1973, a period of time questioned by The Globe."

The Times said that other records showed that Bush received permission from his superiors to make up the drills he missed during the nine month period still in question.

Still, despite the fact that the Bush AWOL charge has been completely discredited, McAuliffe insisted that the president's guard service would be a major campaign issue.

"The facts are what they are," he told "This Week" host George Stephanopoulos. "[Bush] used his father's contacts to get a spot in the Texas Guard. He then wanted to go work on an Alabama Senate race. He went to Alabama for one year. He didn't show up. Call it whatever you want, AWOL - it doesn't matter."

[cyncooper]

I didn't dispute the number of stories.

Did you bother to read any of them?

This has been thoroughly vetted, and as I pointed out, your comment about President Bush's service record being withheld somehow is completely and utterly false.

I wouldn't be flinging out namecalling if I were you.

[sinkspur]

Look's like "Dick" arete got booted.

It's about damned time!

[sinkspur]

Didn't you read the article? The New York Times investigated it, and said the charge was bogus?

You really think Gore's people wouldn't have used this in 2000 if they could have?

Get a grip.

[sinkspur]

I agree the charge is bogus, my point is that if Bush does not release his service record this charge is not going to go away.

What service record? There have been at least six Air Guard FReepers who said record keeping was pathetic in the 70s. Bush also was GIVEN PERSMISSION to suspend his Air Guard service to work on a political campaign, then served out the remainder.

This is grasping at straws; nobody cares about it. Nobody. It didn't work in 2000, either.

[usedtolurk]

Um, his service record has been released. His discharge papers have been posted here many times.

[arasina]

psssst, Terry! Are you forgetting something?

For your further edification, please compare and contrast. (Who is loved by whom?)

[woodyinscc]

"This is grasping at straws; nobody cares about it. Nobody. It didn't work in 2000, either."

This is one of the reasons it did not. From George magazines comprehensive investigation of the matter.

http://web.archive.org/web/20001202233300/http://www2.georgemag.com/bush.html

[Polybius]

Boston Globe, 6/16/2003: .........Along with Kerry's unquestionable and repeated bravery, he also took an action that has received far less notice: He requested and was granted a transfer out of Vietnam six months before his combat tour was slated to end on the grounds that he had earned three Purple Hearts. None of his wounds was disabling; he said one cost him two days of service and the other two did not lead to any absence.

[Kevin Curry]

This tactic will only succeed in making the Dems look even more petulant and petty than they are--and they already lead the world in petulance and pettiness.

Bush couldn't have a more favorable (to him) group of dipwads for opponents if he hired the best writers in Hollywood to invent them.

[sinkspur]

Thanks for that link. That about says it all.

[windchime]

"Well there is another charge, just like President Bush Jr being AWOL I havent heard before! I can't imagine Bush Sr. being a business partner with McAullif."

I'm reading this late, but in case no one has posted the correct information, here is the real story. President George H.W.Bush was NOT a business partner of T. MacAuliffe. President Bush #41 received stock in Global Crossing in lieu of cash payment for a speech he gave. The stock went up in value and resulted in a tidy sum.

In contrast MacAuliffe's profit from Global Crossing was obtained from alleged insider trading.

[onyx]

Your #147 --- that's a heck of a good post, arasina. Speaks volumes.

[windchime]

"And, if so why are we wasting time complaining about President Bush instead of working within the party to develop a conservative candidate for 2008?"

Bravo!

[nopardons]

BTT

[arasina]

Thanks. I tend to communicate with pictures, don't I? I guess that comes from working in a television newsroom for so long. LOL

[Sci Fi Guy]

I think that the story is a plant to please all the deaniacs to get them behind the party establishment's choice for ticket.

[Godfollow]

Boy, it's a real toss-up huh? But I'd bet on the, "thy're really just that stupid"...

[windchime]

"Arte fails to dislose all the facts. The circumstances surrounding the ownership of stock are quite different."

Excellent and thorough explanation, hobson! I posted a very abreviated response of explanation (before I saw yours) that pales in comparison.

[Dianna]

This is grasping at straws; nobody cares about it. Nobody. It didn't work in 2000, either.

Exactly. If they can't say that he's screwed up while President, the sheeple will yawn at anything which came before.

This is SUCH a losing strategy that the puzzle is figuring out why the dems want to lose.