CBS Breaking News!!
- Thread starter DawnCt1
- Start date
When my dad spoke of qualifications I think he was referring to the slots and the competetion. The Guard could be very picky then since it was a popular "escape" from the actual war. Plus they normally gave the slots to returning vets since they were "pretrained" and they wanted to hang on to that experience.
Of course my Dad did get somewhere close to Vietnam before his unit was recalled and I know the unit has served in Iraq this time.
Of course my Dad did get somewhere close to Vietnam before his unit was recalled and I know the unit has served in Iraq this time.
LIDisneyFan
<font color=red>Older, yet for some reason not muc
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2000
- Messages
- 1,122
Am I the only fool who wishes there would be a discussion about issues? People are so blindly supportive of any candidate or party are merely blind. They all have faults. They all have virtues. Mostly, they all have their own agendas.
So, I would prefer to listen to their opinions on substantial matters and decide based upon that.
So, I would prefer to listen to their opinions on substantial matters and decide based upon that.
Now stop that!!!!
Who wants intelligent, thoughtful discourse about the issues?
Geesh, whats next, polite debate?
Admiting shortcommings?
Tony
(Idiot by decree and now fool by choice!) <======Hola! Tag Farie!
This is a column by Byron York, from the National Review. I know that just that name discredits the analysis in the minds of the Left Wing - the very same folks who insist that we consider as authoritative the propoganda spewed by Michael Moore.
Read this if you DARE:
Bushs National Guard years -
Before you fall for Dems spin, here are the facts:
What do you really know about George W. Bushs time in the Air National Guard? That he didnt show up for duty in Alabama? That he missed a physical? That his daddy got him in?
News coverage of the presidents years in the Guard has tended to focus on one brief portion of that time to the exclusion of virtually everything else. So just for the record, here, in full, is what Bush did:
The future president joined the Guard in May 1968. Almost immediately, he began an extended period of training. Six weeks of basic training. Fifty-three weeks of flight training. Twenty-one weeks of fighter-interceptor training.
That was 80 weeks to begin with, and there were other training periods thrown in as well. It was full-time work. By the time it was over, Bush had served nearly two years. Not two years of weekends. Two years.
After training, Bush kept flying, racking up hundreds of hours in F-102 jets. As he did, he accumulated points toward his National Guard service requirements. At the time, guardsmen were required to accumulate a minimum of 50 points to meet their yearly obligation.
According to records released earlier this year, Bush earned 253 points in his first year, May 1968 to May 1969 (since he joined in May 1968, his service thereafter was measured on a May-to-May basis).
Bush earned 340 points in 1969-1970. He earned 137 points in 1970-1971. And he earned 112 points in 1971-1972. The numbers indicate that in his first four years, Bush not only showed up, he showed up a lot. Did you know that?
That brings the story to May 1972 the time that has been the focus of so many news reports when Bush deserted (according to anti-Bush filmmaker Michael Moore) or went AWOL (according to Terry McAuliffe, chairman of the Democratic National Committee).
Bush asked for permission to go to Alabama to work on a Senate campaign. His superior officers said OK. Requests like that werent unusual, says retired Col. William Campenni, who flew with Bush in 1970 and 1971.
In 1972, there was an enormous glut of pilots, Campenni says. The Vietnam War was winding down, and the Air Force was putting pilots in desk jobs. In 72 or 73, if you were a pilot, active or Guard, and you had an obligation and wanted to get out, no problem. In fact, you were helping them solve their problem.
So Bush stopped flying. From May 1972 to May 1973, he earned just 56 points not much, but enough to meet his requirement.
Then, in 1973, as Bush made plans to leave the Guard and go to Harvard Business School, he again started showing up frequently.
In June and July of 1973, he accumulated 56 points, enough to meet the minimum requirement for the 1973-1974 year.
Then, at his request, he was given permission to go. Bush received an honorable discharge after serving five years, four months and five days of his original six-year commitment. By that time, however, he had accumulated enough points in each year to cover six years of service.
During his service, Bush received high marks as a pilot.
A 1970 evaluation said Bush clearly stands out as a top notch fighter interceptor pilot and was a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership.
A 1971 evaluation called Bush an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot who continually flies intercept missions with the unit to increase his proficiency even further. And a 1972 evaluation called Bush an exceptional fighter interceptor pilot and officer.
Now, it is only natural that news reports questioning Bushs service in The Boston Globe and The New York Times, on CBS and in other outlets would come out now. Democrats are spitting mad over attacks on John Kerrys record by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
And, as it is with Kerry, its reasonable to look at a candidates entire record, including his military service or lack of it. Voters are perfectly able to decide whether its important or not in November.
The Kerry camp blames Bush for the Swift boat veterans attack, but anyone who has spent much time talking to the Swifties gets the sense that they are doing it entirely for their own reasons.
And it should be noted in passing that Kerry has personally questioned Bush s service, while Bush has not personally questioned Kerrys.
In April before the Swift boat veterans had said a word Kerry said Bush has yet to explain to America whether or not, and tell the truth, about whether he showed up for duty. Earlier, Kerry said, Just because you get an honorable discharge does not, in fact, answer that question.
Now, after the Swift boat episode, the spotlight has returned to Bush.
Thats fine. We should know as much as we can.
And perhaps someday Kerry will release more of his military records as well.
*** end of copy
I believe that Bush served honorably in the ANG. I believe that the focus on those couple of months in Alabama - after he had fulfulled his complete obligation - is just a ridiculous (and all too common) ploy by the Democrats to focus on some inanity.
CONSIDER THIS = Kerry did not receive his discharge until late in the 70's = He was in the Reserve all that time since returning from VN early in 70. This is essentially the same as National Guard service - he had commitments to attend meetings - he had commitments to get physicals - he had commitments for some minimal drills - He got paid for that (of course he didnt need the pay - neither did Bush)
QUESTION = How many people who hate Bush are DEMANDING to see if KERRY showed up for all these "commitments"?
BET - I would bet anyone a steak dinner that Kerry never showed up for a TENTH of those commitments.
Any takers ??????????????????????????
I will bet NOT - I suspect that the Left Wingers in here are completely disinterested in the actual TRUTH of any issue - Their ONLY concern is whether or not they can USE information to harm Bush. They don't care if the information is true - or suspicious - or demonstrably false - or an obvious forgery. If they can use it to smear Bush then it is perfectly fine with them
Likewise - I suspect that any information or logic or common knowledge that supports Bush is just IGNORED by them as irrelevant.
When I hear allegations harmful to Bush - I wnat to KNOW if they are true or not - With remarkably few exceptions (Michael Moore is one) - I do not just ignore it out of hand - I examine it to see if it makes any kind of sense - I ponder the reasoning behind the assertion - I follow up the sources cited - I look at other sources and I come to an opinion about the truth of the matter. I must say however that I don't invest that sort of time in an "issue" that I find totally irrelevant - such as this "desertion" allegation against Bush - it just ain't worth the effort. I DO laugh a lot at the silliness of the Democrat campaign when that happens.
I sincerely believe that the Left Wing Democrats have abandoned all sense of fairness - all respect for truth - all appeal to decency. I sincerely believe that they are approaching this election as a WAR - where anything that advances their cause is valid because they think that the ends justify the means.
How I wish they took this same attitude towards terrorism.
later
Read this if you DARE:
Bushs National Guard years -
Before you fall for Dems spin, here are the facts:
What do you really know about George W. Bushs time in the Air National Guard? That he didnt show up for duty in Alabama? That he missed a physical? That his daddy got him in?
News coverage of the presidents years in the Guard has tended to focus on one brief portion of that time to the exclusion of virtually everything else. So just for the record, here, in full, is what Bush did:
The future president joined the Guard in May 1968. Almost immediately, he began an extended period of training. Six weeks of basic training. Fifty-three weeks of flight training. Twenty-one weeks of fighter-interceptor training.
That was 80 weeks to begin with, and there were other training periods thrown in as well. It was full-time work. By the time it was over, Bush had served nearly two years. Not two years of weekends. Two years.
After training, Bush kept flying, racking up hundreds of hours in F-102 jets. As he did, he accumulated points toward his National Guard service requirements. At the time, guardsmen were required to accumulate a minimum of 50 points to meet their yearly obligation.
According to records released earlier this year, Bush earned 253 points in his first year, May 1968 to May 1969 (since he joined in May 1968, his service thereafter was measured on a May-to-May basis).
Bush earned 340 points in 1969-1970. He earned 137 points in 1970-1971. And he earned 112 points in 1971-1972. The numbers indicate that in his first four years, Bush not only showed up, he showed up a lot. Did you know that?
That brings the story to May 1972 the time that has been the focus of so many news reports when Bush deserted (according to anti-Bush filmmaker Michael Moore) or went AWOL (according to Terry McAuliffe, chairman of the Democratic National Committee).
Bush asked for permission to go to Alabama to work on a Senate campaign. His superior officers said OK. Requests like that werent unusual, says retired Col. William Campenni, who flew with Bush in 1970 and 1971.
In 1972, there was an enormous glut of pilots, Campenni says. The Vietnam War was winding down, and the Air Force was putting pilots in desk jobs. In 72 or 73, if you were a pilot, active or Guard, and you had an obligation and wanted to get out, no problem. In fact, you were helping them solve their problem.
So Bush stopped flying. From May 1972 to May 1973, he earned just 56 points not much, but enough to meet his requirement.
Then, in 1973, as Bush made plans to leave the Guard and go to Harvard Business School, he again started showing up frequently.
In June and July of 1973, he accumulated 56 points, enough to meet the minimum requirement for the 1973-1974 year.
Then, at his request, he was given permission to go. Bush received an honorable discharge after serving five years, four months and five days of his original six-year commitment. By that time, however, he had accumulated enough points in each year to cover six years of service.
During his service, Bush received high marks as a pilot.
A 1970 evaluation said Bush clearly stands out as a top notch fighter interceptor pilot and was a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership.
A 1971 evaluation called Bush an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot who continually flies intercept missions with the unit to increase his proficiency even further. And a 1972 evaluation called Bush an exceptional fighter interceptor pilot and officer.
Now, it is only natural that news reports questioning Bushs service in The Boston Globe and The New York Times, on CBS and in other outlets would come out now. Democrats are spitting mad over attacks on John Kerrys record by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
And, as it is with Kerry, its reasonable to look at a candidates entire record, including his military service or lack of it. Voters are perfectly able to decide whether its important or not in November.
The Kerry camp blames Bush for the Swift boat veterans attack, but anyone who has spent much time talking to the Swifties gets the sense that they are doing it entirely for their own reasons.
And it should be noted in passing that Kerry has personally questioned Bush s service, while Bush has not personally questioned Kerrys.
In April before the Swift boat veterans had said a word Kerry said Bush has yet to explain to America whether or not, and tell the truth, about whether he showed up for duty. Earlier, Kerry said, Just because you get an honorable discharge does not, in fact, answer that question.
Now, after the Swift boat episode, the spotlight has returned to Bush.
Thats fine. We should know as much as we can.
And perhaps someday Kerry will release more of his military records as well.
*** end of copy
I believe that Bush served honorably in the ANG. I believe that the focus on those couple of months in Alabama - after he had fulfulled his complete obligation - is just a ridiculous (and all too common) ploy by the Democrats to focus on some inanity.
CONSIDER THIS = Kerry did not receive his discharge until late in the 70's = He was in the Reserve all that time since returning from VN early in 70. This is essentially the same as National Guard service - he had commitments to attend meetings - he had commitments to get physicals - he had commitments for some minimal drills - He got paid for that (of course he didnt need the pay - neither did Bush)
QUESTION = How many people who hate Bush are DEMANDING to see if KERRY showed up for all these "commitments"?
BET - I would bet anyone a steak dinner that Kerry never showed up for a TENTH of those commitments.
Any takers ??????????????????????????
I will bet NOT - I suspect that the Left Wingers in here are completely disinterested in the actual TRUTH of any issue - Their ONLY concern is whether or not they can USE information to harm Bush. They don't care if the information is true - or suspicious - or demonstrably false - or an obvious forgery. If they can use it to smear Bush then it is perfectly fine with them
Likewise - I suspect that any information or logic or common knowledge that supports Bush is just IGNORED by them as irrelevant.
When I hear allegations harmful to Bush - I wnat to KNOW if they are true or not - With remarkably few exceptions (Michael Moore is one) - I do not just ignore it out of hand - I examine it to see if it makes any kind of sense - I ponder the reasoning behind the assertion - I follow up the sources cited - I look at other sources and I come to an opinion about the truth of the matter. I must say however that I don't invest that sort of time in an "issue" that I find totally irrelevant - such as this "desertion" allegation against Bush - it just ain't worth the effort. I DO laugh a lot at the silliness of the Democrat campaign when that happens.
I sincerely believe that the Left Wing Democrats have abandoned all sense of fairness - all respect for truth - all appeal to decency. I sincerely believe that they are approaching this election as a WAR - where anything that advances their cause is valid because they think that the ends justify the means.
How I wish they took this same attitude towards terrorism.
later
following is excerpt is an e-mail from a good friend of mine:
****
Subject: The spin on Bush's National Guard Service
Most friends know I managed Naval Air Reserve
programs for 10 years. I was the active-duty
Naval Officer in charge of two squadrons and
then worked in the Reserve Personnel office at
the Pentagon just before retirement in 1981.
I retired as a Commander in 1981.
Each reservist was an individual and we adjusted
as much as possible to keep highly qualified and
trained personnel in the Naval Reserve.
One instance was a young reservist who was
on the Olympic equestrian team. He did not want
to quit the reserves but no one wanted him to
miss the Olympics being held in Europe.
I arranged for him to remain in the reserves
by checking in with a U.S. counselor office
twice a month. He was not paid for attendance
but he legally satisfied his reserve requirement.
We kept a good man and he did a good job
representing the U.S. at the Olympics.
That is the way the real world works and should
work.
Taking time off to work on an election was
not unusual. If you look at Kerry's record you
will see he did just that and avoided ANY reserve
service.
Hearing all the liberal media hype about Bush is
a laugh.
*****
The above is just another rational response to the tempest in a teapot that the Democrats and their media sychophants want the public to see as something important. Why is there nobody in the media who can see the obvious silliness in their pursuit ??
It is amazing to me to see adults act this way - especially if they want to be taken seriously.
unbelievable
****
Subject: The spin on Bush's National Guard Service
Most friends know I managed Naval Air Reserve
programs for 10 years. I was the active-duty
Naval Officer in charge of two squadrons and
then worked in the Reserve Personnel office at
the Pentagon just before retirement in 1981.
I retired as a Commander in 1981.
Each reservist was an individual and we adjusted
as much as possible to keep highly qualified and
trained personnel in the Naval Reserve.
One instance was a young reservist who was
on the Olympic equestrian team. He did not want
to quit the reserves but no one wanted him to
miss the Olympics being held in Europe.
I arranged for him to remain in the reserves
by checking in with a U.S. counselor office
twice a month. He was not paid for attendance
but he legally satisfied his reserve requirement.
We kept a good man and he did a good job
representing the U.S. at the Olympics.
That is the way the real world works and should
work.
Taking time off to work on an election was
not unusual. If you look at Kerry's record you
will see he did just that and avoided ANY reserve
service.
Hearing all the liberal media hype about Bush is
a laugh.
*****
The above is just another rational response to the tempest in a teapot that the Democrats and their media sychophants want the public to see as something important. Why is there nobody in the media who can see the obvious silliness in their pursuit ??
It is amazing to me to see adults act this way - especially if they want to be taken seriously.
unbelievable
I understand that there are NO RECORDS of Kerry attending Ready Reserve meetings, which as you indicate, are a requirement. He did however, visit N. Viet Nam during his Ready Reserve committment. I wonder if that also concerns anyone. Kerry is the one who wanted to make his Viet Nam activities front and center of the campaign. A decision, I am sure that the DNC now regrets.
Grog
Semper Gumby
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2000
- Messages
- 5,033
The above posts really make me realize that most on the left just don't know, or don't care, how the Guard works.
I had a friend who was in a NG unit here in Houston from 1987 to 1991. He was going to school, and working as a waiter at the time. He loved being in the Guard but it was hard on him financially because he could make more in a night waiting tables than he could make at his monthly drill. He used to miss drills on a regular basis and didn't get in trouble. Why?...
In his first year (after Basic, AIT, and Jump School) he spent six months on active duty working with the Border Patrol. In his second year he spent two weeks (beyond his two week AT commitment) training in England. The third year he did an extra two weeks in Australia. He didn't go to many of his regular drills, but he more than met the attendance requirments. He was happy, the NG was happy, end of story.
I had a friend who was in a NG unit here in Houston from 1987 to 1991. He was going to school, and working as a waiter at the time. He loved being in the Guard but it was hard on him financially because he could make more in a night waiting tables than he could make at his monthly drill. He used to miss drills on a regular basis and didn't get in trouble. Why?...
In his first year (after Basic, AIT, and Jump School) he spent six months on active duty working with the Border Patrol. In his second year he spent two weeks (beyond his two week AT commitment) training in England. The third year he did an extra two weeks in Australia. He didn't go to many of his regular drills, but he more than met the attendance requirments. He was happy, the NG was happy, end of story.
yes - everyone knows that is how life works
BUT - the Democrat party has been getting away with taking some slice of ordinary life and finding a way to make it sound sinister. Then they take it to their sychophants in the media who produce an "investigative report" about it and put it on the air for the ignorant masses.
The GOP has always just shaken their heads and said to themselves - "nobody will believe that crap." But sadly, many do, and they have lost many elections based on such silliness.
Like the Democrat in Florida who campaigned against his GOP opponent as being an "avowed ****-sapiens" - and he won.
It is not pretty to watch, but I am glad to see that the Democrats are at least having to cope with SOME of the same sort of attacks. It is about time.
The cure for all of this would be a "truth in advertising" law for politics - but that would never pass.
BUT - the Democrat party has been getting away with taking some slice of ordinary life and finding a way to make it sound sinister. Then they take it to their sychophants in the media who produce an "investigative report" about it and put it on the air for the ignorant masses.
The GOP has always just shaken their heads and said to themselves - "nobody will believe that crap." But sadly, many do, and they have lost many elections based on such silliness.
Like the Democrat in Florida who campaigned against his GOP opponent as being an "avowed ****-sapiens" - and he won.
It is not pretty to watch, but I am glad to see that the Democrats are at least having to cope with SOME of the same sort of attacks. It is about time.
The cure for all of this would be a "truth in advertising" law for politics - but that would never pass.
I have noticed a paucity of LW commentary on the latest attempted smear of Bush's ANG service, since CBS has become a laughing stock, and the DNC ad has shown to be totally false.
This is so sad - to see a once-proud national party, and a once-revered national news broadcast channel, completely sacrifice their credibility in their blind partisanship.
More than anything else, I am hoping for a crushing defeat of Kerry and anyone who is in a leadership position in the DNC. I feel that if the public just once rises up and says "ENOUGH" of this kind of political sabatoge, that the Democrat party can once again rise from the ashes and be a moral force in the country.
I am a true conservative, but I do not want the GOP to completely dominate the political scene forever. Absolute power corrupts. That is what happened to the Democrat party from the 50s up thru 1994. They had a strangle-hold on congress for so long, that they became inbred with the notion that they could do anything with impunity. Even now, the margin the GOP enjoys in the congress is tenuous - not enough for them to run rough-shod over the Dems like the Dems ran over the GOP for 40 years.
However, a decade of really solid GOP control would cause the Democrats to have to get back in touch with the American people, the middle class who make America work. They may have to lessen their priority of catering to all the radical fringe groups with their single-issue mentalities.
Hoping for better times ahead - counting the days until Dan Rather is totally humiliated and perhaps required to resign.
America is a wonderful place, if we can keep the radicals from destroying it.
This is so sad - to see a once-proud national party, and a once-revered national news broadcast channel, completely sacrifice their credibility in their blind partisanship.
More than anything else, I am hoping for a crushing defeat of Kerry and anyone who is in a leadership position in the DNC. I feel that if the public just once rises up and says "ENOUGH" of this kind of political sabatoge, that the Democrat party can once again rise from the ashes and be a moral force in the country.
I am a true conservative, but I do not want the GOP to completely dominate the political scene forever. Absolute power corrupts. That is what happened to the Democrat party from the 50s up thru 1994. They had a strangle-hold on congress for so long, that they became inbred with the notion that they could do anything with impunity. Even now, the margin the GOP enjoys in the congress is tenuous - not enough for them to run rough-shod over the Dems like the Dems ran over the GOP for 40 years.
However, a decade of really solid GOP control would cause the Democrats to have to get back in touch with the American people, the middle class who make America work. They may have to lessen their priority of catering to all the radical fringe groups with their single-issue mentalities.
Hoping for better times ahead - counting the days until Dan Rather is totally humiliated and perhaps required to resign.
America is a wonderful place, if we can keep the radicals from destroying it.
Share this page
-
Ten Tips To Feel Good on a Disney Summer Vacation
-
Bluey at Disney's Animal Kingdom Is Going to Be a Disaster
-
New Disney Cruise Line Discounts for Select Sailings
-
Disney x Winnie the Pooh 100th Collabs Are Almost Too Cute to Handle
-
Should You Plan Every Disney Meal in Advance?
-
What Activities Are Available for Tweens and Teens on a Disney Cruise?
-
Spotted: 3 New Sparkly Disney Ear Headbands
Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts.
Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
