� �A spokesman for the Alabama National Guard estimates there were 600 to 700 members in the unit Bush was supposed to have served with in 1972. But none of these men has ever come forward to say he remembers Bush, and Bush has not named a single one of them.�-- The New Republic, 10/16/00
� �[Headquarters Air Reserve Personnel Center in Denver Colorado] then designated Bush as AWOL and a �non-locatee� (i.e. a deserter) who had failed to satisfactorily participate in TXANG, and certified him for immediate induction through his local draft board. Once the Houston draft board got wind of the situation, strings were pulled... �(... and once again George got a pass). The AWOL Project, see link below.
� �Rather than only asking how a young George W. got out of the National Guard, we ought to ask how he got in when 350 American men were dying each week in Vietnam and 100,000 were on National Guard waiting lists across the country.�-- LA Weekly, 2/13/04
So come on, you Swift Boat Veterans for Truth! If you�re really looking for a Presidential candidate that shirked his military obligation, you need look no further than your Commander in Chief, George. W. �Bring �em on� Bush.
For the sad truth about Bush the Deserter, go to The AWOL Project.
Probably- I saw just a "regular guy" being interviewed at the Vietnam Wall in D.C. on the news last night. He might have said it best- he said he too was in Vietnam- but he doesn't wear it on his back- I think THERE is part of the problem Kerry has-- The phony salute and the "reporting for duty" at the convention was a bit over the top. Funny how he trots out his "band of brothers" when it helps HIM- and kicked them in the pants when he perceived it would help him.- Kerry has a LOT to say about those four months- He has gotten years worth of material from them.
By the way, what happened to John Edwards?? He gave a radio address yesterday, I was beginning to think he disappeared entirely.. Another one trick ( and one speech) pony?
I never said he lied, although I am sure he "stretched the truth a bit, any political in front of a recorded hearing will. I said it is time to move past this war hero crap and move on to more important issues. He won't, so they won't and the Mexican standoff has begun. What a waste of time, attention and money?
I agree let's not make a 30 year old painful episode in America like Vietnam an issue, but first we need to settle that little AWOL FROM THE ALABAMA NATIONAL GUARD THING! And how this priveleged son obtained such service. And how Cheney stayed out of Nam.
Then we can put it behind us.
I think Kerry's problems stem from his tendency to "get carried away" with his stories- His side still has not explained away the "Christmas in Cambodia" thing- Also, remember a few months ago when Kerry claimed leaders of European nations supposedly told him they want to see Kerry elected. When pressed on who, and under what circumstances Kerry would have had a conversation(s) with "European leaders"- Kerry couldn't come up with an explanation. When "holes" like this keep on reappearing, it is natural to start doubting whatever he says.
1. It is not my slant. I saw and heard the entire testimony on C-span. He was about 27 years old.
2. He had to bring up his service in Vietnam because he was already being attacked about the protests.
3. He can prove what he did there because it is on record. The problem is that his attackers now state that he "wrote" the records which is ridiculous. I heard that the guy who did, has come forward.
4. It is important for many reasons. One of the reasons is if Kerry and his backers let it go, people will believe it and it could have an influence on their vote. It has worked in the past.
40 years ago, we were all different people, with different views on many things. Again, I think this is a waste of time and the deflection from real issue is a disservice to the American voters.
Yeah, he told them 20 years ago, which in itself is enough to make this an irrelevant conversation, but he told them what he heard, or was told, not what he saw, at least according to your slant on the subject.
I think it is all a waste of time and energy.
Kerry is the one that started the convention with his "reporting for duty" phrase and keeps hounding about what a hero he is. If he can't prove what he did, he shouldn't have brought it up at all...in fact it is so meaningless to this election, no one should have brought it up.
He stated "if that is all he has to offer" re Kerry telling Congress what other veterans told him. He goes on to state that a Presidential candidate should not dwell on things that happened 40 years ago.