Bush and Military Service
Find a Conversation
| Tue, 02-10-2004 - 12:53pm |
Tuesday, February 10, 2004; Page A23
During the Vietnam War, I was what filmmaker Michael Moore would call a "deserter." Along with President Bush and countless other young men, I joined the National Guard, did my six months of active duty (basic training, etc.) and then returned to my home unit, where I eventually dropped from sight. In the end, just like President Bush, I got an honorable discharge. But unlike President Bush, I have just told the truth about my service. He hasn't.
At least I don't think so. Nothing about Bush during that period -- not his drinking, not his partying -- suggests that he was a consistently conscientious member of the Texas or Alabama Air National Guard. As it happens, there are no records to show that Bush reported for duty during the summer and fall of 1972. Nonetheless, Bush insists he was where he was supposed to be -- "Otherwise I wouldn't have been honorably discharged," Bush told Tim Russert. Please, sir, don't make me laugh.
It is sort of amazing that every four or eight years, Vietnam -- that long-ago war -- rears up from seemingly nowhere and comes to figure in the national political debate. In 1988 Dan Quayle had to answer for his National Guard service. In 1992 Bill Clinton had to grapple with the question of how he avoided the Vietnam-era draft. Now George Bush, who faced this question the last time out, has to face it again. The reason is that this time he is likely to compete against a genuine war hero. John Kerry did not duck the war.
But George Bush did. He did so by joining the National Guard. Bush now wants to drape the Vietnam-era Guard with the bloodied flag of today's Iraq-serving Guard -- "I wouldn't denigrate service to the Guard," Bush warned during his interview with Russert -- but the fact remained that back then the Guard was where you went if you did not want to fight. That was the case with me. I opposed the war in Vietnam and had no desire to fight it. Bush, on the other hand, says he supported the war -- as long, it seems, as someone else fought it.
It hardly matters what Bush did or did not do back in 1972. He is not the man now he was then -- that by his own admission. In the same way, it did not matter that Clinton ducked the draft, because, really, just about everyone I knew at the time was doing something similar. All that really matters is how one accounts for what one did. Do you tell the truth (which Clinton did not)? Or do you do what I think Bush has been doing, which is making his National Guard service into something it was not? In his case, it was a rich kid's way around the draft.
In my case, it was something similar -- although (darn!) I was not rich. I was, though, lucky enough to get into a National Guard unit in the nick of time, about a day before I was drafted. I did my basic and advanced training (combat engineer) and returned to my unit. I was supposed to attend weekly drills and summer camp, but I found them inconvenient. I "moved" to California and then "moved" back to New York, establishing a confusing paper trail that led, really, nowhere. For two years or so, I played a perfectly legal form of hooky. To show you what a mess the Guard was at the time, I even got paid for all the meetings I missed.
In the end, I wound up in the Army Reserve. I was assigned to units for which I had no training -- tank repairman, for instance. In some units, we sat around with nothing to do and in one we took turns delivering antiwar lectures. The National Guard and the Reserves were something of a joke. Everyone knew it. Books have been written about it. Maybe things changed dramatically by 1972, two years after I got my discharge, but I kind of doubt it.
I have no shame about my service, but I know it for what it was -- hardly the Charge of the Light Brigade. When Bush attempts to drape the flag of today's Guard over the one he was in so long ago, when he warns his critics to remember that "there are a lot of really fine people who have served in the National Guard and who are serving in the National Guard today in Iraq," then he is doing now what he was doing then: hiding behind the ones who were really doing the fighting. It's about time he grew up.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27178-2004Feb9.html

Pages
http://slate.msn.com/id/2083923/
This week, Slate begins a series of short features explaining who the 2004 presidential candidates are, what they've said and done, and where they propose to take the country. The first installment summarizes each candidate's personal and professional background. Today's subject is John Kerry.
John Forbes Kerry
Web site: www.johnkerry.com.
Age: 59 (born Dec. 11, 1943).
Highest grade completed: Law school (1976).
Political experience: U.S. senator, Massachusetts (1985-present); lieutenant governor, Massachusetts (1983-1985).
Asserted achievements: Started Senate probe that led to revelation of Iran-Contra scandal; chaired investigation of POW claims that led to normalization of relations with Vietnam; authored 2002 budget amendment that increased money for renewable energy.
Previous jobs: Lawyer in private practice (1980-1982); assistant district attorney (1976-1979); spokesman for Vietnam Veterans Against the War (1971); co-founder of Vietnam Veterans of America (1971).
Spouse: Teresa Heinz Kerry.
Children from current marriage: None.
Previous marriages: One (1970-1988).
Children from previous marriage: Two adult daughters.
Military history: U.S. Navy (1966-1970). Commanded a river gunboat in Vietnam. Won Silver Star, Bronze Star, and three Purple Hearts.
Medical history: Surgery for prostate cancer in February 2003.
Parents' jobs: Father was a Foreign Service officer; mother was from elite Forbes family.
Net worth: $165.4 million-$626.3 million, including spouse's assets.
Religion: Catholic.
Campaign songs: "I Won't Back Down" (Tom Petty), "No Surrender" (Bruce Springsteen).
I know he served aboard a destroyer for about a year.
Thanks for the link and the information. I thought he had served about a total of roughly 18 months before doing any research....
www.newsmax.com
www.weeklystandard.com
http://online.wsj.com/public/us
www.drudgereport.com (I think sometimes there are some funny things on here)
I must admit, that I do read, and like the village voice however.
Look at the supposed adultry accusation with Kerry. The story leaked, the press ran with it, only to later find out that it probably isnt true anyway.
Typical of the media today. (part of the reason why I got out of it when I did....it conflicted with my morals to run a story without making sure what I was printing had some substance to it.)
A British detective told me once "believe nothing you hear & only half of what you see".
I'm not that much of a pessimist but in election years maybe
Win big if you can prove Shrub didn't go AWOL!
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/features/2418316
Pages