posted on February 10, 2004 12:32:10 PM new
WASHINGTON -- The White House, facing election-year questions about President Bush's military service, released pay records and other information today that it said supports Bush's assertion that he fulfilled his duty as a member of the Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.
The material included annual retirement point summaries and pay records that the White House said show that Bush served.
"When you serve, you are paid for that service. These documents outline the days on which he was paid. That means he served. And these documents also show he met his requirements," press secretary Scott McClellan told reporters. "And it's just really a shame that people are continuing to bring this up."
"These documents clearly show that the president fulfilled his duties," McClellan said.
The documents indicate Bush received pay for six days of duty between May and December of 1972 when he was supposed to be on temporary duty in Alabama. There is a five-month stretch in 1972 when he was not paid for service. The records do not indicate what duty Bush performed or where he was.
The White House also has not been able to produce fellow guardsmen who could testify that Bush attended guard meetings and drills. "Obviously we would have made people available" if they had been found, McClellan said.
Sen. John Kerry, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, is regularly accompanied by a "band of brothers" of military veterans who served with him in Vietnam.
Kerry said today he has said all he is going to say about Bush's record.
"I just don't have any comment on it," Kerry told reporters between campaign stops in Tennessee and Virginia. "It's not an issue that I chose to create. It's not my record that's at issue and I don't have any questions about it."
A memo written by retired Lt. Col. Albert Lloyd Jr, at the request of the White House, said a review of Bush's records showed that he had "satisfactory years" for the period of 1972-73 and 1973-74 "which proves that he completed his military obligation in a satisfactory manner."
Lloyd was personnel director for the Texas Air National Guard from 1969 to 1995 and also had reviewed Bush's military records at the request of his campaign four years ago.
Asked why the White House had not publicly brought forward any comrades who had served during the period with Bush, McClellan said, "Obviously we would have made people available," then pointed to Lloyd's statement.
The point summaries were released during the 2000 presidential campaign but the pay records were not obtained by the White House until late Monday from the Air Reserve Personnel Center in Denver, Colo., McClellan said. He said the center, apparently acting on its own, reviewed Bush's records and came up with the pay information.
"It was our impression from the Texas Air National Guard -- they stated they didn't have them," he said. "It was also our impression those records didn't exist." Bush on Sunday authorized the release of his Guard records. McClellan said the latest material apparently is all of Bush's records.
The pay information documented the dates when Bush showed up for Guard duty, the spokesman said. "You are paid for the dates you served," McClellan added.
Bush's military record was raised as an issue in the 2000 campaign and was revived this year by Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe, who called Bush "AWOL" -- absent without leave -- during a period of his service when he was in Alabama.
Asked if the records should end the controversy about Bush's service, McClellan said, "You have to ask those who made these outrageous accusations if they stand by them in the face of this documentation that demonstrates he served and fulfilled his duties."
Bush enlisted in the Texas Air National Guard in 1968 shortly before graduating from Yale University.
Questions have been raised about whether family connections helped him get into the Guard when there were waiting lists for what was seen as an easy billet. Bush says no one in his family pulled strings and that he got in because others didn't want to commit to the almost two years of active duty required for fighter pilot training.
A central issue is whether he showed up for duty while assigned to Guard units in Alabama, where he worked on a political campaign in 1972. "There may be no evidence, but I did report," Bush told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday. "Otherwise, I wouldn't have been honorably discharged."
Another question is why he was allowed to end Guard duty about six months early to attend Harvard Business School. Bush said on NBC that he had "worked it out with the military. And I'm just telling you, I did my duty."
Lloyd has said that Bush's early discharge was not uncommon for pilots or other crewmen who were to leave soon and had been trained on now-obsolete jets, as was Bush's case.
posted on February 10, 2004 02:02:48 PM new
"Lloyd has said that Bush's early discharge was not uncommon for pilots or other crewmen who were to leave soon and had been trained on now-obsolete jets, as was Bush's case."
It was also Bush's case that he'd lost his certification as a pilot by then, rendering the expensive flight training he'd been given utterly worthless.
posted on February 10, 2004 03:13:31 PM new
Calling the President a deserter only makes you look foolish.
-------------
And from your own url: [i]While critical of President Bush (news - web sites), O'Reilly said he did not think the president intentionally lied. Rather, O'Reilly blamed CIA (news - web sites) Director George Tenet, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton (news - web sites).
As I've stated before....both presidents were given the same information.
There's a LOT of selective reading going on here lately. LOL
posted on February 10, 2004 03:17:31 PM new
Yes, bear....interesting that when Dean had promised to open up his records, and DIDN'T no one here was screaming. But now that Bush HAS opened up his records they STILL don't buy it. LOL But hey......they supported a draft dodger and now want to make a case against a president who was honorably discharged. Foolishness if I've ever seen it.
posted on February 10, 2004 03:21:52 PM new
Linda, since George W. Bush has looked "foolish" since he first appeared on national television, I can't imagine how you've managed to 'dumb-down' the number who concur in that assessment to the few posters at Vendio -- unless, of course, you're using the same skewed statistical analysis techniques promulgated by Bear on an equally ill-informed thread he posted here earlier today...
posted on February 10, 2004 03:34:33 PM new
pat - I'm not the LEAST bit worried about this President not being re-elected. All the democratic candidates, from the beginning, are a joke. Nothing's changed. But I understand each little non issue that can be brought up and rehashed sends chills down the spines of those who are so very hopeful JUST ANYONE will come along and save their party. LOL
posted on February 10, 2004 03:37:40 PM new
Sadly, Linda, I've no doubt that Bush will have another term, either, no matter how many of his character flaws and political shortcomings are brought to light...
posted on February 11, 2004 04:02:36 PM newColin Powell Explodes over AWOL Questions
WASHINGTON (AP) -
Under questioning by House Democrats, Secretary of State Colin Powell said Wednesday he was surprised U.N. and American inspectors did not find storehouses of hidden weapons in Iraq.
But when Brown (Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio) contrasted Powell's military experience to Bush's record with the National Guard, saying the president "may have been AWOL" from duty, Powell exploded.
"First of all, Mr. Brown, I won't dignify your comments about the president because you don't know what you are talking about," Powell snapped.
"I'm sorry I don't know what you mean, Mr. Secretary," Brown replied.
"You made reference to the president," Powell shot back.
Brown then repeated his understanding that Bush may have been AWOL from guard duty.
"Mr. Brown, let's not go there," Powell retorted. "Let's not go there in this hearing. If you want to have a political fight on this matter, that is very controversial, and I think it is being dealt with by the White House, fine, but let's not go there."
Powell then went on to defend the Bush administration's assertions on Iraq's pre-war weaponry. "We didn't make it up," Powell said. "It was information that reflected the views of analysts in all the various agencies."
Unfortunately, it doesn't look like the committee members thought to ask Powell which "agencies" specifically. Too bad, because then it'd have to come out that the administration used a Pentagon think tank as its primary source of misinformation...
posted on February 11, 2004 04:23:49 PM new
I saw that exchange today. It appears that the Bush administration is losing it's cool. In other words, they are overwhelmed with surfacing corruption that they would prefer not to explain.
posted on February 11, 2004 04:29:41 PM new
Really Bush might very well think that he fulfilled his commitment in a normal fashion.
When you are raised like the rich are it is nothing like we experience as middle class people.
If there are problems everything stops and waits on them - they have never had to wait in lines or punch a time clock or have a supervisor get crappy about a personal call.
Their dad can take a vacation to the 'cottage' or Europe and as long as he keeps in touch he is still 'working'.
They don't go out shopping or go to the bank or drive their own car unless it is for pleasure.
They have their meals prepared and if they want to see a movie they stay in and have a showing.
If daddy called and arranged for him to be let go early well - that would just be like had always happene. What would be unusual or wrong about that? What is the fuss? Isn't that just how things are done?
To these sort of people living in a little wood house and having the drudgery of going to a job everyday probably looks about like sleeping on a steam grate and living out of a dumpster looks to us.
They may as well not even be ion the same planet.
And he has a lot more in common with people like Fox from Mexico than a hourly worker in his own country.
posted on February 11, 2004 04:54:15 PM new
So, we should check his attendance at Yale. Maybe those C's which by the way are considered failure at Yale, may be explained by the fact that he chose to spend his days at the skull and bones facility.
Poor guy had so much money it corrupted his character?
posted on February 11, 2004 10:34:23 PM new
Linda, you know what I find funny? Just because Bush has an 'honorable' discharge doesn't mean he spent his days in the military honorably. It has more to do with what you did or accomplished while you were in there, than if you got discharged out okay. It's like knowing somebody is the biggest crook, and saying, "well, they don't have a felony record" so thats that. But that only proves that is has never been documented in a legal forum; and in no way disproves they are not a criminal. And you wanted to see Clinton impeached for having consensual oral sex and lieing about it?? (Whatt's wrong with this picture?)
posted on February 12, 2004 05:03:06 AM new
It is funny Linda, how when they start losing ground on one smear tactic, they try to switch to another...
President Bush will enjoy another 4 years because people are too smart to fall for any Demo rehtoric
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
heh, who really cares in a world were queers can be married...
posted on February 12, 2004 07:04:03 AM new
Tweleve, you are silly if you dont think both parties employ the same smear tactics.
But yes, I know, to you, republicans are above lieing and doing anything 'unholy'.
(how naive is that?) I am sure they are grateful for your undieing support, but its people like you that get snickered at behind closed doors.
How by the way do you justify bashing Kennedy for drinking when Bush had a problem of his own? The main difference with you republican supporters is you are quite selective about what vice and by whom you are willing to brush it off and overlook.
[ edited by neroter12 on Feb 12, 2004 07:11 AM ]
posted on February 12, 2004 08:00:25 AM new
The Dems are going to give it out just like the cheap shot Reps.
If the Bush camp opens its mouth in any smear campaign, the Dems are rightly going to give them both barrels by bringing up Bush's substance abuse problems and his military desertion. The next step is to get Bush's comrades from the guard on the record stating they never saw him, this includes his superior officers.
As far as getting an honorable discharge-- does anyone really believe that Bush Jr. would have been disciplined with his old man a big shot in the Federal government ? Does any rational human being believe that the Bush Jr's and the Dan Qualye's got into National Guard units by luck of the draw when those inits were over staffed to begin with ? Their poor counter-parts were denied a spot in the National Guard and were shipped off to fight and perhaps die in Vietnam.
The same influence that got Bush into the guard during Vietnam is the same influence that got him the "honorable" discharge. Can you imagine any officer nailing Bush Jr ? It would end his career.
Run on his record and Bush is done. Record deficit, record jobs loss, and lied about Iraq.
posted on February 12, 2004 08:28:08 AM new
Seems a buddy does remeber Bush from the ANG - or deoes he ??
"I got in contact with Bill Campenni, known as the witness (possibly) to George W Bush's missing year. I asked him why he chose just now to finally come forth with his story and his reply was that "The stupidity reached a critical mass". He also says that he doesn't know why it's been so difficult for the national media to get in contact with him to verify his story (honestly, it was pretty easy to track him down), though he believes that stupidity has something to do with it.
When I asked him about being stationed in Pittsburgh, not Alabama and the fact that his story leads one to believe he was in grad school from '71-72 (the same years as the hole in Bush's record) and thus incapable of vouching for where the president was, his reply? An evasive "Nice Try".
And more
Loss of Flight Status Should've Spurred Probe
Now they're getting to the important bits:
President Bush's August 1972 suspension from flight status in the Texas Air National Guard -- triggered by his failure to take a required annual flight physical -- should have prompted an investigation by his commander, a written acknowledgement by Bush, and perhaps a written report to senior Air Force officials, according to Air Force regulations in effect at the time.
Bush, who was a fighter-interceptor pilot assigned to the Texas Air National Guard, last flew in April 1972 -- just before the missed physical and 30 months before his flight commitment ended. He also did not attend National Guard training for several months that year and was permitted to cut short his military commitment a year later in 1973.
Two retired National Guard generals, in interviews yesterday, said they were surprised that Bush -- or any military pilot -- would forgo a required annual flight physical and take no apparent steps to rectify the problem and return to flying. "There is no excuse for that. Aviators just don't miss their flight physicals," said Major General Paul A. Weaver Jr., who retired in 2002 as the Pentagon's director of the Air National Guard, in an interview.
posted on February 12, 2004 08:29:18 AM newIn Secretary of State Colin Powell's autobiography, My American Journey, he says, "I am angry that so many of the sons of the powerful and well-placed managed to wangle slots in the Army Reserve and National Guard units... Of the many tragedies of Vietnam, this raw class discrimination strikes me as the most damaging to the ideal that all Americans are created equal and owe equal allegiance to their country."
posted on February 12, 2004 09:08:13 AM new
I look at it this way. If President Bush has nothing to hide about his service records why isn't he digging to get all the documentation available and show it to everyone and end all the questions?
The way it stands now, everything looks a bit murky and muddy and it just begs for answers.
posted on February 12, 2004 09:46:52 AM new
Powell was a guy who used to care about the troops. Back in the 90's he asked Congress to never squander the troops needlessly.
In Secretary of State Colin Powell's previous autobiography, Sacred Honor, he says, "The essence of what we are supposed to be doing -- that's serving...That's the ultimate statement of selfless service: Send me".
The self serving Bush administration corrupts everything and everybody with which it is associated.
posted on February 12, 2004 10:23:48 AM new
Yeah...
Of all the highly-placed officials in the Bush Aministration, Colin Powell is the only one I can believe even some of the time. I really thought he'd resign (or be fired) over the initial Iraq intelligence flap, when he was taking most of the heat.
I'd like to think he stayed on as the one reasonable voice in that otherwise unprincipled war-mongering pack; I just wish they'd listen to him once in a while...
posted on February 12, 2004 10:24:08 AM new
Powell was indeed a person who cared about the troops, so much so that he helped try to cover up the Mai Lai massacre.
Powell's job in the Iraq affair, since he was considered such a man of principle, was to sit on the fence and then fall off pulling people who were undecided with him.
The whole of Bush's policy is to look and talk honor and act with total dishonor. This cannot be emphasized enough.
[ edited by getalife on Feb 12, 2004 10:29 AM ]
[ edited by getalife on Feb 12, 2004 10:30 AM ]
1) He got into the Guard by pulling strings, avoiding the year and a half waiting list;
2) He took a 2-month vacation in Florida after just 8 weeks, (1 of 3 leaves), to work on a political campaign;
3) Bush skipped Officer Candidate School and got a special commission as a 2nd Lieutenant, without qualifications;
4) He was assigned to a safe plane (being phased out of active service), the F-102 ;
5) During flight school, he was flown on a government jet to Washington for a date with President Nixon's daughter Tricia ;
6) Bush got an illegal transfer (later overruled) to a base with no work;
7) He simply didn't show up for a YEAR, with no penalty;
8) George W. skipped all his medical exams after they started drug tests, and was removed from flight status;
9) He ended his service 10 months early to go to Harvard Business School;
RE: #8)
"It was May, 1972 -- one month after the drug testing was announced -- that Bush stopped attending Guard duty. In August 1972, he was suspended from flight duty for failing to take his physical. "
(see link for document)http://www.realchange.org/bushgrnd.gif
[ edited by austbounty on Feb 12, 2004 04:06 PM ]
posted on February 12, 2004 04:42:36 PM new
Ah! but today they did release records showing he did show up for dental work. I suppose if they dig they can come up with documentation he used the PX. What that has to do with anything is a mystery......
Unless that was his 'alternative' service.
I suspect his alternative service was working at politics and staying out of their hair.
[ edited by gravid on Feb 12, 2004 04:43 PM ]
posted on February 12, 2004 05:29:56 PM new
But President Bush never posed in front of a VC (Viet Cong) flag, like you loser Kerry.
Massachusetts is about to become the first state to allow gays and lesbians to marry. Now here's the part I don't understand -- why would a gay guy want to marry a lesbian? ....Jay Leno
posted on February 12, 2004 06:37:34 PM new
Probably, Gravid, showing up for dental work was one of his priorities in the military. I tell ya, that nitrous oxide is good stuff!
