Mr. Bush - Missing in Action?
- Thread starter Klaus
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Scarletwine said:
This whole issue if benefiting the President. If Democrats want to fall on their own sword, so be it. Although I have many disagreements with Bill Clinton, he is an incredible politician, and he told Kerry to simply off of Vietnam. Everything about these issues is hurting Kerry, not Bush.
Gallup poll showed Bush with a 1 point lead after the Democratic convention. The Gallup poll after the Republican convention showed Bush with a 7 point lead in a year that was supposed to not have convention poll bounces.
Bottom line, the general public went through the whole attempt to slime Bush's guard service in 2000. Now that Bush has been president for four years, this issue which was rejected four years ago by the public, is of little interest to them now.
Bush 52%
Kerry 45%
Its time for team Kerry to change course if they want to remain competitive in November.
It ultimately doesn't matter. I have plenty of other reasons to dislike Bush. It's still interesting reading though.
Interesting point that I just read on a blog and will use now.
The White House released copies of the documents the night the CBS story ran. According to Scott McClellan in this White House press gaggle, they had every reason to believe the documents were true at the time.
If Bush hadn't disobeyed a direct order, then the White House would have known they were forgeries and said so at the time. Bush would have vehemently denied the allegations in the memo, saying that he never disobeyed a direct order. Yet he didn't. Why?
The White House released copies of the documents the night the CBS story ran. According to Scott McClellan in this White House press gaggle, they had every reason to believe the documents were true at the time.
If Bush hadn't disobeyed a direct order, then the White House would have known they were forgeries and said so at the time. Bush would have vehemently denied the allegations in the memo, saying that he never disobeyed a direct order. Yet he didn't. Why?
ThatGuy said:No answer to the question I asked, though?
I think there are a lot of things that happened over 30 years ago, that Bush and everyone around do not remember or have a record of. Hell, one can dig up records on Colin Powell's experience in the military that were unfavorable to him. It would be prudent of the White House to examine the issue first before totally confirming or denying something of this nature.
When its all said and done, Bush was honorably discharged. Something some liberals seem to be ignorant of.
ThatGuy said:
Depends on the circumstances of the situation especially in the Guard and Reserve in which there are many ways in which one can finish and complete their service. If there were something serious that happened, Bush would not have been honorably discharged.
Scarletwine
New Yorker
The secretary of Bush's commander was just on TV. She stated that she didn't type them, but the contents were completely accurate. So he did disobey a direct order and should have been dishonorable discharged.
Just as his Daddy got him in, Daddy got him out.
Just as his Daddy got him in, Daddy got him out.
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
The claims are far flimsier that those be the SBVT - at least they didn't make up the documents.....
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
Scarletwine said:
Now how in the world can she state that she didn't type the memos, but knows that the contents are accurate???
More bull
from the Kerry campaign....nbcrusader said:
Now how in the world can she state that she didn't type the memos, but knows that the contents are accurate???
More bull
So the Kerry campaign is masterminding the forged CBS documents but the Bush campaign had nothing to do with the Swift Boat Vets?
Anyhow, she stated that she didn't type those memos, but that she had written similar ones, and that the CBS memos accurately reflected Killian's feelings and Bush's actions at the time.
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
ThatGuy said:
I guess she was in on all the personnel review meetings..... right
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
ThatGuy said:So the Kerry campaign is masterminding the forged CBS documents but the Bush campaign had nothing to do with the Swift Boat Vets?
At least you can put names to the SBVT group.
And, the DNC was so quick to run ads based on the fraudulent memo.
Keep going Kerry, you are showing real leadership here
Flying FuManchu
New Yorker
Kerry and campaign should drop the campaign attacks on Bush's Vietnam record in the National Guard. I know it hurts them emotionally (Kerry & co.) to not get back at the conservatives/ repugs for being attacked by the Swift Boat Vets but the whole issue is counter-productive to their campaign, especially with the election coming in real soon and Kerry's campaign being run as poorly as it is. The idea that they will find proof/ or a smoking gun that will hurt Bush is very small and wasting time. Barnes was always a questionable source and those memos are dragging their campaign down rather than hurting Bush. The Kerry campaign is lucky as hell that they have hurricane weather b/c IMO news orgs would probably focus even more on those shady documents and the potential image of a Citizne Kane like image of CBS news.
Kerry needs to focus on the economy, post-war Iraq (not the war itself), health care....
Bush is relatively weak in those areas. Also change up his line of attack in terms of the economy. IMO the whole economy is getting better argument by the Bush campaign is relatively strong so Kerry would need to attack at another angle.
Kerry and co are fishing in the wrong pond.
So what. Bush has already been elected President even with all the innuendo and rumors. Its also been known that Bush was a drunk and hellraiser who shaped up in terms of that aspect of his life. People will accept Bush's mistakes and put them together with whatever
Kerry needs to focus on the economy, post-war Iraq (not the war itself), health care....
Bush is relatively weak in those areas. Also change up his line of attack in terms of the economy. IMO the whole economy is getting better argument by the Bush campaign is relatively strong so Kerry would need to attack at another angle.
Kerry and co are fishing in the wrong pond.
So what. Bush has already been elected President even with all the innuendo and rumors. Its also been known that Bush was a drunk and hellraiser who shaped up in terms of that aspect of his life. People will accept Bush's mistakes and put them together with whatever
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
ThatGuy said:
Hmmm. Bush hasn't protested or even asked Kerry to pull the smear campaign ads.
I guess the words "honorable discharge" say enough.
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
nbcrusader said:
If I were Bush I wouldn't wait until someone else discredited the CBS documents. I'd tell anyone who would listen that I never disobeyed a direct order, and that anyone who said that was a flat out liar. The White House Press Secretary said that the White House had every reason to believe that the documents were authentic, and that Laura Bush said the documents were "probably" fake. If the charges made in those documents were untrue it would be pretty easy for the Bush team to immediately refute tnem on a factual basis, wouldn't it? Why didn't they?
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
Talking about the memos gives them a level of dignity. I guess these memos fall below that level.
They did talk about the memos. They released copies to the press. Scott McClellan said, "We received those documents from a major news organization. We had every reason to believe that they were authentic at that time." If the charges contained in the documents were false the White House should have said so right away, but they didn't. Why would the White House beleive that the documents were "authentic" if the things they said weren't true?
Flying FuManchu
New Yorker
Maybe b/c they actually thought there were no more documents to be found. Maybe they trusted CBS and had no answer.
ThatGuy said:
It was over 30 years ago and the Bush campaign and Bush himself do not remember, have all the documents about everything that happened that long ago. This is all pointless speculation, about things which are, today, essentially irrelevant.
Whether Bush should be re-elected as President or not is based on what he has done the past four years, not on some fantasy BS from 30 years ago.
The Democrats have spent the past 6 years attacking Bush's National Guard record and they have failed to prove any of their chief claims. If they want to, they can bring up Bush's Guard service in the 2008 election. As silly as that would be, they are currently on track to do just that.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
STING2 said:
Bush barely got into the Whitehouse 4 years ago. He has dodge his past and not come clean. In 72 and 73 I was 17 and 18. There are a dozen people or so that I worked with and went to school with that could recall spending time with me.
It seems everybody has an opinion where Kerry was and will say so. We even know where Cheney was then.
Where are the missing six months or so
of W's life experience?
"It does not matter" does not wash.
If the truth was known,
Would the 2000 election have been different?
The argument he deserves a second term based on the last fours years is like saying "Let a college professor who lied about his degrees on his resume keep the job because he is doing ok."
Last edited:
