Bush missing in action

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-07-2004
Bush missing in action
10
Wed, 09-08-2004 - 7:41am
It's not just a few people on these boards that believe Kerry served with honor & courage while Bush weaseled out of his commitment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/08/opinion/08kristof.html?hp

September 8, 2004

OP-ED COLUMNIST

Missing in Action

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF



resident Bush claims that in the fall of 1972, he fulfilled his Air National Guard duties at a base in Alabama. But Bob Mintz was there - and he is sure Mr. Bush wasn't.

Plenty of other officers have said they also don't recall that Mr. Bush ever showed up for drills at the base. What's different about Mr. Mintz is that he remembers actively looking for Mr. Bush and never finding him.

Mr. Mintz says he had heard that Mr. Bush - described as a young Texas pilot with political influence - had transferred to the base. He heard that Mr. Bush was also a bachelor, so he was looking forward to partying together. He's confident that he'd remember if Mr. Bush had shown up.

"I'm sure I would have seen him," Mr. Mintz said yesterday. "It's a small unit, and you couldn't go in or out without being seen. It was too close a space." There were only 25 to 30 pilots there, and Mr. Bush - a U.N. ambassador's son who had dated Tricia Nixon - would have been particularly memorable.

I've steered clear until now of how Mr. Bush evaded service in Vietnam because I thought other issues were more important. But if Bush supporters attack John Kerry for his conduct after he volunteered for dangerous duty in Vietnam, it's only fair to scrutinize Mr. Bush's behavior.

It's not a pretty sight. Mr. Bush was saved from active duty, and perhaps Vietnam, only after the speaker of the Texas House intervened for him because of his family's influence.

Mr. Bush signed up in May 1968 for a six-year commitment, justifying the $1 million investment in training him as a pilot. But after less than two years, Mr. Bush abruptly stopped flying, didn't show up for his physical and asked to transfer to Alabama. He never again flew a military plane.

Mr. Bush insists that after moving to Alabama in 1972, he served out his obligation at Dannelly Air National Guard Base in Montgomery (although he says he doesn't remember what he did there). The only officer there who recalls Mr. Bush was produced by the White House - he remembers Mr. Bush vividly, but at times when even Mr. Bush acknowledges he wasn't there.

In contrast, Mr. Mintz is a compelling witness. Describing himself as "a very strong military man," he served in the military from 1959 to 1984. A commercial pilot, he is now a Democrat but was a Republican for most of his life, and he is not a Bush-hater. When I asked him whether the National Guard controversy raises questions about Mr. Bush's credibility, Mr. Mintz said only, "That's up to the American people to decide."

In his first interview with a national news organization, Mr. Mintz recalled why he remembered Mr. Bush as a no-show: "Young bachelors were kind of sparse. For that reason, I was looking for someone to haul around with." Why speak out now? He said, "After a lot of soul-searching, I just feel it's my duty to stand up and do the right thing."

Another particularly credible witness is Leonard Walls, a retired Air Force colonel who was then a full-time pilot instructor at the base. "I was there pretty much every day," he said, adding: "I never saw him, and I was there continually from July 1972 to July 1974." Mr. Walls, who describes himself as nonpolitical, added, "If he had been there more than once, I would have seen him."

The sheer volume of missing documents, and missing recollections, strongly suggests to me that Mr. Bush blew off his Guard obligations. It's not fair to say Mr. Bush deserted. My sense is that he (like some others at the time) neglected his National Guard obligations, did the bare minimum to avoid serious trouble and was finally let off by commanders who considered him a headache but felt it wasn't worth the hassle to punish him.

"The record clearly and convincingly proves he did not fulfill the obligations he incurred when he enlisted in the Air National Guard," writes Gerald Lechliter, a retired Army colonel who has made the most meticulous examination I've seen of Mr. Bush's records (I've posted the full 32-page analysis here.

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/opinion/lechliter.pdf

Mr. Lechliter adds that Mr. Bush received unauthorized or fraudulent payments that breached National Guard rules, according to the documents that the White House itself released.

Does this disqualify Mr. Bush from being commander in chief? No. But it should disqualify the Bush campaign from sliming the military service of a rival who still carries shrapnel from Vietnam in his thigh.







Edited 9/8/2004 7:43 am ET ET by allianor

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-13-2003
Wed, 09-08-2004 - 8:14am
As usual, defending Kerry against all charges of lying, desertion and treason consists solely of attacking Bush. Wouldn't it be great if people on trial had a chance to attack the prosecutor? Oh, wait, we did that to Ken Starr. Good job, but Clinton was still impeached. No one wanted Gore as president upon impeachment OR in 2000.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-28-2004
Wed, 09-08-2004 - 9:41am


Wait a sec., you think it's okay to comb through every inch of Kerry's military records but when it turns out that Bush (our President at this very moment) deserted the National Guard -then lied about it - we should turn a blind eye? Stinkin' thinkin', doncha think?

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-05-2003
Wed, 09-08-2004 - 9:43am
Your analogy is absurd.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-13-2003
Wed, 09-08-2004 - 9:45am
Thanks for proving my point!

Those are some pretty stiff unsubstantiated allegations of yours.

I proved mine against Kerry using his own "offical Naval records" and his own statements.

Somehow your claiming "Yah but Bush" turns it into a nyah nyah conversation.

Keep 'em coming!


Edited 9/8/2004 9:54 am ET ET by janeigh

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-16-2004
Wed, 09-08-2004 - 9:56am
It was the Democrats who first used the tactic of attacking the military records; they started this when Bush first ran for Governor of TX and they tried it again in the 2000 election. They were the ones who spoke first about Bush's supposed AWOL Guard service. They've been crying about it since the beginning of 2003, so who's responding to who?
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-06-2004
Wed, 09-08-2004 - 9:59am
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2003
Wed, 09-08-2004 - 10:08am
So Bush didn’t fulfill National Guard commitments in Massachusetts either.






>> In February, when the White House made public hundreds of pages of President Bush's military records, White House officials repeatedly insisted that the records prove that Bush fulfilled his military commitment in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.

But Bush fell well short of meeting his military obligation, a Globe reexamination of the records shows: Twice during his Guard service -- first when he joined in May 1968, and again before he transferred out of his unit in mid-1973 to attend Harvard Business School -- Bush signed documents pledging to meet training commitments or face a punitive call-up to active duty.

He didn't meet the commitments, or face the punishment, the records show.

Even retired Lieutenant Colonel Albert C. Lloyd Jr., a former Texas Air National Guard personnel chief who vouched for Bush at the White House's request in February, agreed that Bush walked away from his obligation to join a reserve unit in the Boston area when he moved to Cambridge in September 1973. By not joining a unit in Massachusetts, Lloyd said in an interview last month, Bush ''took a chance that he could be called up for active duty. But the war was winding down, and he probably knew that the Air Force was not enforcing the penalty. <<

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Thu, 09-09-2004 - 2:51pm
McAulliffe started all of this earlier this spring, and now that Kerry is trailing in the polls, and seems to be flopping like a fish out of water, McAulliffe has started it all back up again.
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-16-2004
Thu, 09-09-2004 - 2:57pm
What else can they do? They've attacked him on Iraq, the economy, health care, medicare, tax cuts, his youth, his intelligence, his national guard service, and they've even stooped to attacking him on how he handled 9/11. None of it has worked, so they're desperate for anything they can dredge up. I guess they think that if they keep bringing it up and pretending that it's brand new, they'll get something (anything!) out of it.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Fri, 09-10-2004 - 12:46pm
I love how the new Kitty Kelly book is already getting slammed by Neil Bush's ex-wife who Kitty Kelly cites as a source.

The former Mrs. Bush (cant remember her first name) said that she never said what Kelly is claiming in the book.