Replies

A question of service - Unsigned editorial in the Commercial Appeal, Memphis, from their new editorial page editor.

February 10, 2004

THE QUESTION of George Bush's National Guard service did not really come up in the 2000 presidential race, perhaps because both candidates were sons of privilege and it was in the interest of neither to raise it.

With John Kerry, a decorated war hero, likely to be the Democratic nominee, it will be an issue in this campaign. Indeed, Democratic surrogates have already made it an issue with party chairman Terry McAuliffe accusing Bush of being "AWOL in the Alabama National Guard: He didn't show up when he should have."

It is an ugly charge that should be squarely rebutted. Partisanship aside, when the President is asking extraordinary sacrifice of members of the military, including the Guard, it is fair to ask how well he himself served the nation.

Bush joined the Texas Air National Guard in 1968, jumping a waiting list to do so, according to published accounts, and qualified as a pilot. In 1972, he transferred to the Alabama Air National Guard so he could work on a Senate campaign. But there is no record that he ever reported for duty as required during the eight months he was in Alabama. During that time he lost his pilot's status for missing a physical exam.

Bush had an opportunity to address this gap in his military resume during his hour-long interview with NBC's Tim Russert, and his sketchy response must have surely dismayed his supporters.

After briefly making the point that he had been honorably discharged, the President told Russert: "I would be careful not to denigrate the Guard." It was a crude way of trying to change the subject since no one had.

He went on to say that the phantom criticism of the Guard was off-base because there are "a lot of really fine people who served in the National Guard ..." Surely, Bush could have remembered some of them from Alabama, or at least a few anecdotes about his service there.

Bush insisted he did "show up in Alabama," but the question was not whether he was in the state but whether he did any Guard service while there.

Russert asked if Bush would authorize the release of "pay stubs, tax records, anything to show that you were serving during that period?"

Bush's response was again not terribly reassuring: "Yeah, if we still have them ..."

Surely with all the resources at George Bush's disposal the question of whether he did or did not show up for Guard service in Alabama can be settled quickly and definitively.

My letter in response:

To the Commercial Appeal, Memphis

I had hoped that the change in the heading of your editorial page would signal an improvement in the quality of the content below, but this has not been the case at all. The Tuesday editorial about the President's service record is a striking example of the laziness and intellectual laxity that have become your new and shameful hallmarks.

You have published unsupported rumors and allegations as fact, and ignored the researched and documented findings of other organizations that have already done what you failed to do, such as research or fact finding, that is the proper responsibility of the news organization you claim to be. Instead, you hide behind your deliberate ignorance in order to propagate three false charges against a President you dislike.

First, he received his guard appointment because he agreed to pilot training, which required both qualification and commitment to over a year of active duty training, which others ahead of him on the waiting list did not do.

Second, his early discharge to attend college was a common occurrence, not some kind of special favor to the son of a congressman. Also, by that time the F102's he flew were being phased out, and he would have needed retraining and requalification to continue flying for the few months of service he had left.

Third, and the heart of the matter, concerns his reporting for assigned duty in Alabama. Some - like you, lacking the courage to make the accusation - have passed along anonymous accusations of the President shirking his service in Alabama. National Guard service is a SECOND job, except during activation, and accomodation to civilian activity is normal and unexceptional. Guardsmen are paid for days present at either the regular drills or makeup drills, which are also common. Points are awarded for attendance, and credit for service is based on accumulating sufficient points. The President's honorable discharge is sufficient evidence of completion of his obligation, but more recent evidence is even more compelling.

For that, you might have perused the Associated Press story published on your own web site on the same day, indicating, "The pay information (released) documented the dates when Bush showed up for Guard duty", and "You are paid for the (specific) dates you served."

An apology from you - and from others who have chosen to engage in this innuendo - would be welcome and refreshing, although totally unexpected. You established a pettern in your equally dishonest editorial about Judge Pickering, and I suppose we can expect no better from you in the future.

That is too bad - for Memphis, and for you.