Posted on 09/13/2004 12:48:53 PM PDT by cwiz24
That's all there is....something will be forthcoming soon.
Oh, I saw that. They made Reich and Allan look like spinning fools.
I dig Hannity, and his accent might help us speak to some undecideds in the Northeast.
Shouldn't this be in breaking news?
From the Kerry Spot:
Drudge has a PDF of a May 27, 1968 "statement of understanding" signed by George W. Bush, pledging to enter on active duty for 120 days. It also has the signature of Willie J. Hooper Jr., captain and assistant administrative officer.
(The document, at first glance, looks like something typed in 1968.)
I think Drudge is citing this document to refute the charge in a new Democratic National Committee press release that Bush claimed to have served in the U.S. Air Force.
The counter-argument would be that Bush was serving, actively, in the U.S. Air Force, during this 120 day period.
Either way, when thousands of men and women in the National Guard are serving the country in far-off and dangerous places like Iraq and Afghanistan, is it a good strategy for the DNC to be insisting that National Guard doesn't really count as a part of the Armed Forces?
I mean, are they trying to make sure no one in the National Guard votes for Kerry?
FWIW, me thinkst it's stonefaced, sarcastic, irony designed to bait Rather into appearing on the Factor. If Rather were to believe he could appear, and get softball questions from a friendly interviewer, then O'Rielly could get a high ratings scoop exclusive.
How on earth does he reconcile that statement with the fact that Dan Rather DID use forged documents in his reports?
Never mind. O'Reilly is an idiot thinking that all partisans are created equal. He refuses to see what the left has devolved to.
The Democrats have recently put out information saying that Bush lied on his 1978 campaign literature when he wrote that he served in the Air Force. Apparently, the Dems have already released information to the public about this "lying". Drudge's link shows that Bush was not lying. And as someone else already pointed out above, if the Dems consider 120 days "not serving" in the Air Force, then what can they say about Kerry serving in the Navy for four months?
holycrap dead!! I'm ROFLMAO here! Crunge Politics is BACK, Baby!
It's somebody else's turn to hit those dummies over the head with facts.
I'd help but it's kinda like trying to teach a pig to sing.
It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Another arrow pulled from the Democrat quiver of despair.
Active duty is active duty.
There are ZERO active duty NG training units for the most part. They are ALL active duty, organizational units.
The unit to which Pres. Bush was assigned would have been active duty.
There are a few exceptions where a national guard training unit will activate for a summer to conduct enlisted basic training....I think the 100th division from Kentucky area is one of these.
About 99.9% of the time, whether active, reserve, or national guard, you get assigned to an active duty training unit.
You wear THEIR patches/awards/ribbons, etc.
(Disclosure: I swiped this image from FReeper onyx's page.)
Here's what I posted yesterday:
To: areafiftyone
I believe G.W. was in the Air Force when he was on active duty with the Air National Guard. Activated ANG personnel are assigned to the Air Force. It's not like some state Air National Guard unit goes off on its own to some foreign country to fight a war.
5 posted on 09/12/2004 10:40:55 AM PDT by Hank All-American (Free Men, Free Minds, Free Markets baby!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
And I wasn't in my pajamas. I was in my underwear.
We are now watching the opening salvos of Operation: Fortunate Son miss their target by a mile... Now, they will launch the Tit Offensive - run by a bunch of boobs.
Drudge was pretty much singing Dan's praises last night on his radio show as well.
BTTT
I love the smell of strategery in the afternoon!
This is another piece of the out of control and ill concieved attack machine which plays 100% into the current Blathergate scandal, upping the ante again.
So why do it this way? Why so over the top?
1) to completely destroy and discredit the Kerry/Kennedy wing of the Democrat party
2) to push out Terry McAwful - he's thrown over the Clintons and backed Kerry big time, plus he has too much baggage for '08
3) Finally, and possibly most important, CBS Evening News hasn't had ratings this high in 15 years. The more the controversy brews the more ratings Mad Man Dan gets.
Ever see the movie Network? Everyone remembers the "I'm Mad as Hell" line, but very few remember the plot about a failing network news show and how its ratings went through the roof when it's anchor went completely over the edge and turned into a mad profit.
I wonder how Dan looks in a hairshirt?
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.