How I would have responded to the "Bush is a deserter" question

[dolstein]

If I were Clark, this is what I would have said to Peter Jennings:

I don’t consider George Bush to be a deserter, and I think it was wrong of Michael Moore to call him one. To me, a deserter is a soldier who flees in the face of enemy fire. And the fact is, George Bush can’t be a deserter for the simple reason that his mettle has never been tested on the field of battle.

Does it bother me that George Bush, like so many other sons of privilege, was back at home while John Kerry and I were putting our lives on the line for God and country in the jungles of Vietnam? Sure. And am I troubled by reports that George Bush failed to fulfill his duties as a member of the Texas National Guard? Of course. But will I use this against him in the general election? No, I won’t. Because I’m far more concerned about the damage George Bush is doing to this country now than I am about the things he did over thirty years ago.

[sangh0]

1. Excellent, Dolstein!

I suggest sending to ALL of the cnadidates.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. Clark should hire you.

That would have been a much better response, although I still don't think he handled it poorly. Let the media talk about it. They brought it up. Clark defended the bill of rights. I think that was smart.

[Uzybone]

3. Very well put

Im gonna say this to anyone who challenges me on the Bush=deserter issue.

[papau]

4. Boston Globe on Bush "constancy as a National Guard airman"

I posted the Boston Globe on Bush "constancy as a National Guard airman" in Editorials -

but I like the wording for AWOL/desertion -

when did AWOL become "constancy as a National Guard airman" ?????

:-)

And what is Globe thought as to why he was punished with a 6 month extention to his Guard required time as per contract?

punished for what? - and why 6 months - and why no paper trail as to the change?

[Stuckinthebush]

5. Send that to the Clark campaign

That is great.

[Hoosier Democrat]

6. You are the new Poet Laureate of this board,

:thumbsup:


Also, check out this site:


www.AWOLBush.com

[NewYorkerfromMass]

7. Damn. Clark didn't say this?

That was great.

[TP1776]

8. The General vs. The Deserter

On last night's televised debate, General Clark was asked by why he didn't publicly refute Michael Moore's characterization of Bush as a "Deserter."

Clark handled the question marvelously. General Clark had the manners and courtesy not to blast the President on national television, knowing that the facts will take care of themselves.

In my view, President Bush is, in fact, a Deserter. Here are the facts:

1. Bush avoided Vietnam by securing a spot in the Texas National Guard. (It is unclear whether his father's extensive political and business connections in Texas played any role in this. You be the judge.)

2. Bush was trained, at a cost of millions of taxpayer dollars, to fly USAF fighter aircraft. Bush's performance ratings were sketchy at best.

3. Bush then failed to show up for an entire year, and was adminstratively discharged.

These are the facts, and they are undisputed. What exactly was Clark supposed to refute?

I don't know what else to call it, except that Bush was a "Deserter."

Here's my own personal take on all of this.

As a former military officer and former member of the national guard, I can state with certainty that if any ordinary person had done what George W. Bush did, they would, as Moore suggests, be serving time. You don't just simply claim you were in another state and call it good. (As Bush did, claiming he was in Alabama.)

As a veteran of two military conflicts, here's how I look back on things: I would do it all over again, but I want to know it is worth it.

I simply don't trust Bush to commit soldiers and this nation's wealth only as a last resort, and, furthermore, I don't trust him to tell us when it is indeed worth it.

I trust General Clark to do make that decision, because he has been there, at every level, and he is a good man. He stood against going into Iraq. He didn't vote for the Patriot Act.

I know that alot of other veterans feel the same way. We'll be voting for the General this year, thank you very much.

I hope the dems pick him.

The point is this: Moore is right. It would indeed be great to see The General vs. The Deserter (or whatever name you choose to call it), coming to an election near you this next November.

Let's make it happen, and put General Clark's 34 years of service up against Bush's military record (or lack thereof) this next November.

Following is Michael Moore's reponse to the debate:

....................
In last night's Democratic Presidential debate in New Hampshire, broadcast on the Fox News (Nusciance?) Channel and ABC's Nightline, Peter Jennings went after Wesley Clark -- and me -- because I said I want to see Clark debate Bush... "The General vs. The Deserter."

Jennings, referring to me as "the controversial filmmaker," asked if Clark wanted to distance himself from me and my "reckless" remark. Clark would not back down, stating how "delighted" he was with my support, and that I was entitled to say what I wanted to say -- AND that I was not the only one who had made these charges against Bush.

The pundits immediately went berserk after the debate. As well they should. Because they know that they -- and much of the mainstream media -- ignored this Bush AWOL story when it was first revealed by an investigation in the Boston Globe (in 2000). The Globe said it appeared George W. Bush skipped out in the middle of his Texas Air National Guard service -- and no charges were ever brought against him. It was a damning story, and Bush has never provided any documents or evidence to refute the Globe's charges.

George W. Bush was missing for at least a 12 month period. That is an undisputed fact. If you or I did that, we would serve time.

Senator Daniel Inouye, Democrat of Hawaii and a World War II veteran, joined with Vietnam vets Sen. Max Cleland and Sen. Bob Kerrey to challenge Bush on the gaps in his military record. "The question is, where were you, Governor Bush? What would you do as commander-in-chief if someone in the National Guard did the same thing? At the least, I would have been court-martialed. At the least, I would have been placed in prison," Inouye said.

The Washington Post, the New Republic, and others also presented the evidence that Bush had fled from duty.

The most comprehensive piece I've seen was on Tom Paine.com with all the relevant links and documents.

There are far more important issues to deal with in this election year. Poor Peter Jennings. What was he doing on Fox? All that seems left of his Canadianess is the way he pronounced my name ("Michael Moooore"). The question he posed to Clark was typical of a lazy media looking for a way to distract the viewers from the real issues: the war, the economy, and the failures of the Bush administration. But if they want to really get into the issue of Bush and his "service record," then I say, bring it on! The facts are all there, including the empty flyboy suit.

Yours,

Michael Moore

<http://www.michaelmoore.com>/

[bicentennial_baby]

10. Welcome to DU TP1776!!

Glad to have you on board!! :hi:

[punpirate]

9. Technically...

... the definition of desertion is incorrect, and certainly Clark would know the correct one.

On active duty, AWOL is considered a temporary condition, and is absent without leave for up to 30 days. After 30 days of unauthorized absence, the crime is automatically desertion. After 30 days' absence, military law makes the presumption that the absentee has no intention to return to service.

For National Guard duty, the question is a bit more iffy, since absenteeism from drills at the time of Bush's enlistment was commonplace. Eventually, the Guards and Reserves had to threaten many in the ranks with conversion to active duty.

Nevertheless, the issue should not go away, as the White House and the press wishes. There's at least one person in the Texas ANG who asserts that Bush's records were pruned of most damaging information. It's well-documented that Bush was taken off flight status for failing to appear for two consecutive annual flight physicals, around the time when he purportedly made a deal to quash a cocaine possession charge. And, regardless of the charges and counter-charges, there is still, according to the records, an enormous hole in his meeting attendance listings.

One could chalk most of this up to simply "rich kid games the system and gets away with it," except that this same person is now posturing as a great military commander. That's what makes the issue valid today, and what makes his play-acting so irksome.

Cheers.

[DoYouEverWonder]

11. I think the easy way to solve this whole issue

is for Bu$h to release his military records, which to date he has refused to do. Until then I will assume that the allegations that he went AWOL are true.

[bicentennial_baby]

12. I agree

Clark should put that out there...

[WiseMen]

13. Excellent. Even seems spell-checked. I assume you are with Kerry, Right.

[dolstein]

17. Nope. I like Edwards. Clark too.

Although I found both of their debate performances to be somewhat disappointing.

Actually, I'm probably the closest, ideologically speaking, to Lieberman. And every time I write him off, he comes back and gives a terrific debate performance and reminds me of why I liked him in the first place. But I think at this point it's simply too late for him to bounce back in New Hampshire. So I'm sticking with Edwards. Or Clark.

As for Kerry, I almost feel guilty saying this, but I just don't like the guy. He's always struck me as pompous and programmed. I suppose that if I were tall, had great hair, had an Ivy League education, grew up knowing the Kennedy family, lived in a Georgetown mansion and married a woman with a net worth in the hundreds of millions, I might like the guy. But I'm not any of those things.

[prodigal_green]

14. Any current news

about National Guard folks playing the same game Bush did? I wonder how they are being handled? Considering how many NG soldiers are serving and dying in Iraq, I'm sure at least a couple have decided it may be better to "be out of state" than head off to Mess-0'Potamia (credits The Daily Show). How would one find out about this?

[genius]

15. Clark handled it the right way by not taking the bait.

Also he pointed out that Moore wasn't the only one who believed that about Bush. It certainly isn't relevant until someone gets the nomination and then only someone who is credible can bring it up.

[xray s]

16. Maybe the response was just fine

I think the General may have been laying some landmines.

Tweety said Clark's response reminded him of something Nixon would say; "While many others think my opponent is a Communist, I don't know if there has been any definate proof confirming that"

Hmmm... lets see how this one plays out.

[The Magistrate]

18. That Is An Excellent LIne Of Attack, Mr. Dolstein

This question will come up again....

[HFishbine]

19. That's it...

I'm writing in dolstein.

[grisvador]

20. Spontaneous

I believe Clark handled a difficult question on the spur of the moment really well - turning the question into a talking point about Freedom of Speech and staying above the fray. Now the question is still being banded about and remains in play for many reporters (including Jennings) to report the facts.

Your response was eloquent and well thought out - I will use it.

[cthrumatrix]

21. totally agree....next time we'll be ready for this question

[On the Road]

22. I Think Clark Needed to Avoid Giving a Clear Answer

for the simple reason that he can't support it. The facts aren't public. Bush isn't talking and others aren't telling what they know.

But why should Wes be grilled for this? His answer should be something along the lines of:

"Why are you asking me, Peter? I wasn't his commanding officer. I wasn't there. George Bush hasn't released his records and others in a position to know haven't come forward. All we have is incomplete and conflicting information, and I for one am going to give the president the benefit of the doubt unless I know otherwise.

But if this such an important question, why isn't the media asking George Bush to release all his records? If this is such a bombshell, why aren't you challenging them rather than asking the Democratic candidates who are not in a position to know?"