Bush Outserves Kerry
 

In a follow up to Paul's post last night, there was an update linking to an article in The Hill that scrutinized President Bush's National Guard Service. Contrary to Terry McAuliffe's AWOL charge or Michael Moore's charge of desertion, it turns out that not only did President Bush serve honorably, but he surpassed his requirements.

Key points:


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.


So President Bush spent nearly 2 years in intensive fighter pilot training to master his interceptor. Now, to whether he fulfilled his commitments:


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...
From May 1972 to May 1973, he earned just 56 points � not much, but enough to meet his requirement...
In June and July of 1973, he accumulated 56 points, enough to meet the minimum requirement for the 1973-1974 year.



So President Bush earned 954 points in just over 5 years, which would have fulfilled a 19-year obligation. Even if points could not be carried over from year to year, President Bush earned more than the 50 point requirement in each of his 6 years of service.

Not only did he fully serve out his obligation, but he did so with distinction:


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 to the question of whether President Bush was the recipient of special treatment:


Bush asked for permission to go to Alabama to work on a Senate campaign. His superior officers said OK. Requests like that weren't 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."


Perhaps, most importantly, is how he left the service:


Bush received an honorable discharge

What is critical for voters, though, is that while President Bush is staking his campaign on both his record and his future plans for security and the economy, Senator Kerry made the centerpiece of his campaign the 4 months he spent in Vietnam. President Bush did not re-enact scenes with a home movie camera for political use because he does not share Kerry's vanity-driven references to military service.

It is clearer than ever that Kerry wants to run on anything but his Senate record, and that his team is pursuing just such a strategy. We'll see how much time the debates spend on issues versus the back-and-forth mudslinging.

I believe Kerry has lost the battle on his military service.

He kept trying to throw up 4 months of service instead of talking about his 20 years of Senate records.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Kerry has backed off this tactic because he lost and isn't talking about military service as much anymore.

-Rudey

Now he's using the word "Wrong" a lot.

Some alphabet soup crap where "W is for Wrong"..

I think that Kerry's campaign has lacked any kind of consistancy. His recent change in campaign advisors came with a whole new round of flip flops including his 8th position on Iraq.

He's a non-candidate.

Interesting because I have picked up on some other tidbits:

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/sto...17&floc=NW_1-T

1- George W. Bush was suspended from flying for the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam war because he failed to meet Guard standards and failed to take his annual flight physical as required.

2- Using only last names, one of the newly disclosed documents points to sharp disagreement among Bush's superiors in Texas over how to evaluate his performance for the period from mid-1972 through mid-1973.

``Stuart has obviously pressured Hedges more about Bush,'' Killian wrote on Aug. 18, 1973. ``I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job - Harris gave me a message today from Grip (a headquarters unit) regarding Bush's OETR (officer efficiency training report) and Stuart is pushing to sugar coat it. Bush wasn't here during rating period and I don't have any comments from 187th in Alabama. I will not rate.''

I don't understand how Kerry can lose the battle on his military service in combat to a man who didn't? I don't get it... on served one didn't - whats to debate?

Well I guess contrary to what they said, this discusses the amount of time he's served.

-Rudey

He lost. Hence his strategy to stop talking about his 4 months of service in Vietnam.

You don't have any rights to make demands about debates involing American presidential candidates. Sorry.

-Rudey

Which has been the entire basis for attack with the people attacking his military record unless I'm mistaken.

I thought it had been decided that Kerry kept talking about his military service b/c the Republicans kept bringing it up.

Well yeah... but if your suspended I don't believe your serving. After-all if you are a pilot who doesn't fly or parade then your technically not serving are you?

Who showed his Vietnam "films" at his convention?

Well, I don't know, seeing I wasn't at any conventions. But I would have to assume you're talking about Kerry. ;)

I did a search, but I can't find it. I could have sworn that someone said something around here somewhere (or maybe I'm dreaming it) about Kerry wasn't using it as a tactic - he was talking about his military service because he was having to defend himself against people attacking his service and his medals.

Doesn't matter either way, my mind's made up on who to vote for come November.

Flying high
 

Bush was a pilot of a specific plane, the F-something. The F-something was an aging plane, and no longer used by the Air Force regular forces.

The Air Force did not want to, or need to, keep training F-something pilots, and there was no need for Bush to take a flight physical since he was leaving the TX ANG.

this effort to save the Air Force money shouldn't be bent into anti-Bush propaganda.

Well Kerry has moved away from the attacks on Cheney and Bush but I believe other groups will continue them.

I would like the whole damn thing to concentrate on the 20 years of service and Kerry's actions after the military, but we'll see if the Democrats can do that.

-Rudey

Isn't Kerry the one who said many years ago that he would never use his war experience for political gain? Defending yourself is one thing but he has gone way beyond that. I honestly could care less what he did in Vietnam vs. what Bush did or didn't do in the National Guard. Bush has served this country for the last 4 years and dealt with the war of today. Kerry can't decide what he thinks about the war of today. I fear for the future of our country if the power is shifted into the hands of a man who doesn't have a clue what he believes.

Right on

Apparenly he changed his mind.

--- He does that I'm told.

It's obvious both candidates are getting quite good at changing their minds. What's your point? I'm sure half the people on this board swore at least once in their life that they'd never go Greek...

What? Kerry straddles an issue. There is a difference between no wanting to answer something and not wanting to give your opinion and changing your opinion based on different environments and actions, etc. Everyone has to be flexible to deal with change, the difference is that Kerry doesn't change, he flip-flops and straddles. See the thread on Kerry flip-flopping and straddling Iraq.

-Rudey

The difference between me changing my mind about joining a fraternity and Kerry changing his mind about a war is exponential.

Personal decisions and the decisions that impact the entire world are two very different things. In the former, whether you waiver in your support for one issue or the other matters to you only. In the later, it could change the course of history.

I don't feel like Kerry is solid enough to do what's right. I'm not sure he's even capable of making strong decisions. When in his life has he chosen something and stuck with it? The leader of the free world has to be able to do that. He's proventhat in his campaign completely changing his message every time it seems like he might be able to one-up someone.

I'm just sad that Kerry has dropped talking about his service and is now using his cronies to attack Bush's national guard service. I can't imagine how many men and women are insulted by these people. Disgusting.

-Rudey

And I can't imagine how many people were insulted by Bush and Cheney's cronies attack the service of Kerry in Vietnam. Both sides are equally guilty of this disgusting mud-slinging - neither can hold the high ground on this issue anymore.

1) They weren't his cronies.
2) Bush condemned it and talked about how Kerry served with honor.
3) Kerry acts like it's bad but does it himself? So he knows something is bad and does it...OK.
4) You are not an American citizen with the right to vote in our American election so it's funny how you keep trying to get that "voice" and interfere.

-Rudey

I wholeheartedly agree - there is a difference b/w a decision about joining a GLO and a decision about war. I was trying to make a light-hearted point, and was actually referring to his decision about using his military service in his campaign, which, again, I agree, is not near the level of the decision about war, but I'll respond anyways.

Personally, I don't like Kerry as a candidate for President. When we had a trillion and one Democrats announce their candidacy, he was not anywhere near the top of my list. But at this point, he's my only choice now, isn't he? How you feel about Kerry is how I feel about Bush. I don't think he's a solid leader. I think he makes bad decisions. I think he's a flip-flopper. But I'm not going to run around and use that as my only argument. It's petty, and it gets really repetitive (I know, I know, if he didn't flip-flop so much we wouldn't have so many opportunities to comment, right? :rolleyes: ). Why is past military service such a big issue? It's just one big pissing contest over who's military service was longer/better and it has no bearing on who will be better at leading our country.

Okay I guess that Cordier and Ginsberg's connections to both the Bush campaign and the Swiftboat people are fabrications of the evil Liberal left?

Again dismissing me as a Canadian is starting to get tired... because last time I checked I still have the right to freedom of speech (both up here and down there). Whether my opinions influence you or others isn't up to me... are you scared of opinions that may oppose yours?

I wish all parties involved would stop focusing on a war from forty years ago, and have discussion about the war going on now.

I'm so sick of this debate that I'm not going to read the whole thing.

There is one thing that I'll point out though after skimming the first couple of posts.

Everyone in the military service in those days was in for six years. Depending on what branch, it could be two years of active duty and four year of ready or inactive reserves (if drafted by the Army), three years active and three years reserves (joined the Army) or four years active and two years reserves (joined any of the other services). Only the Army drafted.

I have tried to figure out how President Bush became an officer. I haven't seen anywhere that he was in ROTC or OCS. Same with Kerry. I just don't know.

However, you can't concentrate on Kerry's four months actually in combat and assume that that was his entire military career. Both would have had to complete some kind of boot camp and additional schooling for their specialties.

For special circumstances, one could get out of active duty early (something like going to college), but generally by only a few months.

Bottom line is this: Assuming there were no really sneaky strings pulled (nothing would surprize me, though), Kerry signed up for a mininum of four years of active duty and Bush for six months. I'm sure that to get into pilot training, the President had to commit to some additional time -- but probably not four years.

Ummm they're not connected?

And I couldn't care what freedom is guaranteed in Canada. In the USA, we have freedom of speech.

Nobody is scared of your opinion. You can never back anything up and always spew lies and I manage to make you look pretty bad. And it's obvious you wish you were an American and wish you could vote, but in actuality you're just trying to interfere.

-Rudey

So Bush served longer than Kerry?

-Rudey

No.

Providing there were no "early outs" granted, they both had a six year obligation.

Kerry was in the regular Navy, which was a four year active duty committment.

Bush was in the National Guard which was a six month active duty committment.

It is very likely that Bush had to agree to an additional couple of years in order to get into pilot school. Probably not four years, though.

I think in a post just prior to mine, Hoosier said something about the F-102 (Delta Dart) becomming obsolete. That's true, however when that happens, a guard unit is upgraded to newer aircraft and the pilots in the unit upgrade as well. When an aircraft is retired, its pilots aren't retired with it.

So what's going on with the calculations above for hours?

-Rudey

I guess that's some part of a formula the National Guard uses to rate its members.

When you are on active duty, you work whenever the officer or noncom above you tells you to work. For all intents and purposes you are on duty 24/7 -- although you really aren't except in a combat zone.