Bush's "missing year,"

2/5/04:
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...ational_guard/


Democrats have seized on the story of Bush's "missing year," which was
first raised in a 2000 Boston Globe article.

This week Democratic front-runner Sen. John Kerry called on Bush to
give a fuller explanation of his service record.

That brought an outraged response from Bush-Cheney '04 chairman Marc
Racicot, who denounced Kerry's request as a "slanderous attack" and
"character assassination."

White House spokesman Scott McClellan also tried to slam the door on
the subject, declaiming that Democratic questions about Bush's
military service "have no place in politics and everyone should
condemn them."

In a sign that the Bush team is taking the issue seriously, on
Wednesday Bush's campaign spokesman questioned the integrity of the
retired Guard commander who claims Bush failed to show for duty in
1972, citing the commander's recent donation to a Democratic candidate
for president.

Republicans clearly want to quarantine the issue of Bush's service and
have it labeled as outside the bounds of acceptable public discourse.
With good reason:

If the story takes root it could do real damage to Bush's reelection
run, which is anchored on his image as a trusted leader in America's
war on terrorism.

Trying to make the subject go away could prove difficult, though.

"It's a booby trap that's out there ticking for Bush," warns retired
U.S. Army Col. David Hackworth.

"His opponents are going to keep turning this screw until something
gives."

Right now, the network news is covering the political jousting.

It remains unclear, however, whether mainstream journalists will take
the time to examine Bush's military record and ask the president why,
after receiving pilot training that cost 1970s taxpayers nearly $1
million, he took it upon himself to decide he was finished with his
military requirements nearly two years before his six-year obligation
was up.

Bush's infrequent responses to questions on the issue have been by
turns false, misleading and contradictory.

His memory has also proved to be highly unreliable:

During 2000, Bush variously could not remember which weekends he
served during the year in question, where he served, under whose
command, or what his duties were.

The story emerged in 2000 when the Boston Globe's Walter Robinson,
after combing through 160 pages of military documents and interviewing
Bush's former commanders, reported that Bush's flying career came to
an abrupt and unexplained end in the spring of 1972 when he asked for,
and was inexplicably granted, a transfer to a paper-pushing Guard unit
in Alabama.

During this time Bush worked on the Senate campaign of a friend of his
father's.

With his six-year Guard commitment, Bush was obligated to serve
through 1973.

But according to his own discharge papers, there is no record that he
did any training after May 1972.

Indeed, there is no record that Bush performed any Guard service in
Alabama at all.

In 2000, a group of veterans offered a $3,500 reward for anyone who
could confirm Bush's Alabama Guard service.

Of the estimated 600 to 700 Guardsmen who were in Bush's unit, not a
single person came forward.

On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 22:54:29 +0100 (CET), Tarapia Tapioco
wrote:

posted by Tapioca's missing brain, directly from the desks of the DNC
- by a paid employee.
Regards,


snipped...

On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 22:54:29 +0100 (CET), Tarapia Tapioco
wrote:

> 2/5/04:
>http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...ational_guard/
>
>
>Democrats have seized on the story of Bush's "missing year," which was
>first raised in a 2000 Boston Globe article.
>
And after the neo-soc losers got their ass kicked the last time, you
would have thought they would have learned by now.
Guess not....
And that's why they are still stupid now.