Why doesn't Mr.W. Bush simply tell the American public?

[jokerswild]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

The above article states that the military is looking for his service records. Why doesn't Bush just tell the American people where and when he attended? It sholdn't be that difficult, unless he has alzheimers like Ronald Reagan.
Of course it is possible that he doesn't remember because he was in a blacked out stupor for 12 months.

Really, it should be quite easy for him to say, "oh I reported twice a month to a post in such and such a city for x amount of hours each time."

I bet that the military will find these records at the same time they find the purported WMD in Iraq. That is to say: never.

[MattHatter]

You Say Deserter, I Say More Dessert - (Jan, 27th, 2004) Michael Moore

He covers the topic nicely. (He has to after that Wesley Clark introduction fiasco)

Some of the talking heads initially came down pretty hard on Mr Moore but now it seems that John Kerry has mentioned it as well so it might just be ok for this info to move into the public conciousness.

(al gore dragged it out about a week before the election I think, pretty lame)

Fighting wars is for the poor and middle classes.




Matt


For those of you that dislike mr moore, I suggest you look for the 1st episode of his show "the awful truth" and see what he does for the fellow who needs a pancreas transplant from Humana. Mr Moore is a true hero for his time. (maybe 2nd episode?)

[bigpooch]

Entertainingly written article, I might add! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[jokerswild]

If I were the White House, I'm not sure that I would release those records. It indicates that he wasn't paid for 7 months, and made up the time at the end. If he did that in Vietnam, he would have been labled a deserter.

The records validate that he didn't show up. The White House says that those 7 months of records don't exist.

Just as I said, they will never be found.
These guys lie and spin more than Bill CLinton ever did.

I guess it depends on what the definition of "exist" is.

[MMMMMM]

"The records validate that he didn't show up. The White House says that those 7 months of records don't exist.

Just as I said, they will never be found."

So when Bush's records can't be found, it means they exist. When Saddam's WMD's can't be found, it means they don't exist.
OK, got it.

[MattHatter]

as a matter of fact.. I think I read on CNN that they just found them!

White House releases Bush's military payroll records


But just cause he got paid... does that necessarily mean he was there?

"But under questioning from reporters, McClellan said the records do not specifically show that Bush reported for Guard duty in Alabama, where he spent much of 1972 working on a Senate campaign. And he said the White House has been unable to locate anyone who remembers serving with Bush during that period."


Bush Bush Bush..... I wonder if it makes it better or worse that he might have gotten paid for not being there?


Matt

[MattHatter]

"So when Bush's records can't be found, it means they exist. When Saddam's WMD's can't be found, it means they don't exist.
OK, got it."


So, when the presidents actions may be inexcusable, in his defence, we undermine the credibility of he who dares question mr bush? Based on this persons opinon on another matter entirely?

Ok, got it.


Matt


PS: Don't take my sarcasm too seriously [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img] I would hate for this to cause this to devolvve into the sort of thing that usually results from sarcasm. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[MattHatter]

"the sort of thing that usually results from sarcasm"

Laughter? [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]


Matt

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]


But just cause he got paid... does that necessarily mean he was there?


Matt

[/ QUOTE ]

You are really reaching this time Matt. Do you require a written affidavit that he was truly born since just because he exists doesn't mean he was really born without a copy of his birth record, right?

Wake

[George Rice]

While we're on the subject, I can't believe Russert didn't follow up on his questions better, especially on the AWOL issue. After Bush said that he had served and was honorably discharged, Russert should have pressed him on whether he missed any scheduled duty, etc., and if so how much. Now we're left with the press asking one set of questions and the administration responding to another set of questions.

A few of thoughts.

Why would a commanding officer make a note about not seeing one of his subordinates for a year? Seems to me a normal person would find out what a subordinate did before making a report, or delegate the task to someone who knew. Unless, of course, he had compelling reason to write that (To avoid something else being written and at the same time not writing a lie?).

Why haven't others Bush served with come forward to defend him? Certainly everyone knew who he was (a congressman's son, and in retrospect, a CIA chief's son, a Vice President's son and a President's son). Papa Bush's men remembered Papa Bush, and that was a much longer period of time.

Those serving in the National Guard today have every right to be proud and respected by our citizens. They give up much to train and be prepared for conflicts. Back in the 1960's many who wanted to avoid serving in Viet Nam tried to enlist in the Guard to avoid being drafted. Although some Guard units were activated, it was a much safer place than the regular Army. What's more, it was hard to get into the Guard, but many did so because of "connections".

All of this wouldn't be as big a deal if it wasn't for Bush landing on that carrier like a great warrior. A pretty creepy thing to do, in retrospect.