Mary Mapes has seized on Dan Rather’s Quixotic attack on CBS at a bloody shirt (enough metaphors yet?) to wave in defense of the truthiness of their journalism about President Bush.
Go read the whole thing, but move the drinks away from the keyboard when you do.
It has been three years since we aired our much-maligned story on President Bush’s National Guard service and reaped a whirlwind of right-wing outrage and talk radio retaliation. That part of the assault on our story was not unexpected. In September 2004, anyone who had the audacity to even ask impertinent questions about the president was certain to be figuratively kicked in the head by the usual suspects.
What was different in our case was the brand new and bruising power of the conservative blogosphere, particularly the extremists among them. They formed a tightly knit community of keyboard assault artists who saw themselves as avenging angels of the right, determined to root out and decimate anything they believed to be disruptive to their worldview.
To them, the fact that the president wimped out on his National Guard duty during the Vietnam War — and then covered it up — was no big deal. Our having the temerity to say it on national TV was unforgivable and we had to be destroyed. They organized, with the help of longtime well-connected Republican activists, and began their assault.
Actually, we had done a straightforward, well-substantiated story. We presented former Texas Lt. Governor Ben Barnes in his first ever interview saying that he had pulled strings to get the future president into the National Guard after a Bush family friend requested help in keeping the kid out of Vietnam.
And we showed for the first time a cache of documents allegedly written by Bush’s former commander. The documents supported a mountain of other evidence that young Bush had dodged his duty and not been punished. They did not in any way diverge from the information in the sketchy pieces of the president’s official record made available by the White House or the National Guard. In fact, to the few people who had gone to the trouble of examining the Bush record, these papers filled in some of the blanks.
We reported that since these documents were copies, not originals, they could not be fully authenticated, at least not in the legal sense. They could not be subjected to tests to determine the age of the paper or the ink. We did get corroboration on the content and support from a couple of longtime document analysts saying they saw nothing indicating that the memos were not real.
Instantly, the far right blogosphere bully boys pronounced themselves experts on document analysis, and began attacking the form and font in the memos. They screamed objections that ultimately proved to have no basis in fact. But they captured the argument. They dominated the discussion by churning out gigabytes of mind-numbing internet dissertations about the typeface in the memos, focusing on the curl at the end of the “a,” the dip on the top of the “t,” the spacing, the superscript, which typewriters were used in the military in 1972.
It was a deceptive approach, and it worked.
These critics blathered on about everything but the content. They knew they would lose that argument, so they didn’t raise it. They focused on the most obscure, most difficult to decipher element of the story and dove in, attacking CBS, Dan Rather, me, the story and the horse we rode in on — without respite, relentlessly, for days.
Oh my Freaking God.
Look, Mary, let me try and explain it to you. I’ll make it simple, I don’t have a lot of time.
I don’t for a second doubt that Bush pulled strings to get beneficial treatment. Similarly, I don’t doubt that Kerry gamed the system to leave Vietnam before his tour was up. People game systems all the time – and in both cases, it’s a legitimate issue to raise when someone is running for office.
But the fact that Bush may have used pull doesn’t justify lying – or careless assertion of facts that can be easily disproved – to do a hit piece just in time for an election. Let me put it another way:
Captain Dudley Smith: Would you be willing to plant corroborative evidence on a suspect you knew to be guilty, in order to ensure an indictment?
Ed Exley: Dudley, we’ve been over this.
Captain Dudley Smith: Yes or no, Edmund?
Ed Exley: No!
There’s a reason why we let guilty suspects go free when cops plant evidence.
Mapes and Rather got a hard-on for Bush, and were blinded by the glee that they’d be able to lay a hard hit on him just in time for the election. Sadly for them, they stopped paying attention to the details.
Mapes, delusionally, claims that the typographic facts about the documents they hung their case on are themselves ‘deceptive’ and that the documents are ‘fake, but accurate’. If Mapes and Rather had been honest journalists, they would have run with the provable facts about Bush’s military history – they would have has a much less sexy story, but a real one.
And Mapes is just off her freaking rocker when she claims that the fact that attacks on Bush were met with brickbats while ignoring that attacks on Clinton were equally met with personal vendetta.
But then zombies were never very smart.
Dan Rather: So then what?
Bigfoot: I say, George, you have to take … that … physical!
I wish you’d chosen a different example of rectitude than Ed Exley.
Like Rob Roy refusing to smear the Duke of Argyll as a Jacobite just because the Marquis of Montrose hated him.
As for Mary Mapes, she ought to save her outrage for the creeps who supplied her with forged documents. The fact that she doesn’t would seem to indicate that she was complicit in the forgery. But a more likely explanation is that Mary is just monumentally stupid.
Ugh. I was hoping Mary Mapes had abandoned the idea of “the documents were never proven to be forgeries”, and embraced “we were wrong to not prove these were authentic.” Falling on the the idea that they were a victim for pushing a poor job is just sad.
Though if this ever works it way out, I wouldn’t be surprised at a mega-media corporation sacrificing him to gain regulatory favor – I don’t think anyone would, really. Even if his willful ignorance (at best) would be reason enough.
_And Mapes is just off her freaking rocker when she claims that the fact that attacks on Bush were met with brickbats while ignoring that attacks on Clinton were equally met with personal vendetta.”
I’m sorry, but you cannot equate the response given to something like this to the “response” someone like Scaife got, Falwell’s Foster conspiracy buy in, or any of the other things that went on. We’ve seen any number of digital catcalls of people who oppose Bush’s policies of being traitors and un-American over the past few years – along with the occasional “and you know what happens to traitors in wartime, right?”, which you could find in plenty just 2 years ago.
Long held grudges and vendetta maybe – intensity and near threats, no.
AL-
When you go to the HuffinGlue Toast for your news what do you expect besides hyperbole and breathless screeching about the EEEEEEEEVILE!!! Bushhilterhalliburtonblackwater and Rethuglicans. We are truly the ubermenschen – truly evil geniuses (genii?) and slack jawed hicks – all at once!
Sheesh, what a brazen liar she is.
Translation: These forged documents supported the story we wanted to tell and so you should just ignore that they were crudely forged by incompetents.
Still, there’s every reason to believe that document was fake but accurate. Whoever faked it didn’t put in anything that was known to be false. Very likely it was all true. But the particular document was probably faked, though it’s still completely unproven that it was faked.
There’s every reason to believe that Bush was AWOL part of his time in the military, and that he suffered no penalty whatsoever for it.
Which in some ways was just as well, since there was no particular reason for him to continue that make-work program and every time he flew he risked an expensive plane.
I felt at the time that both parties let us down. The GOP was wrong to run Bush in 2000, and they should have admitted their mistake and run somebody else in 2004. The main reason I had to vote for Kerry was that it seemed real unlikely he’d be as bad as Bush. But he might have been. Bush in 2000 looked bad but not nearly the disaster he turned out to be.
I want IRV or some near-equivalent for presidential votes. Give third parties a fair chance. It’s a travesty when we vote for president and have just two bad choices.
No, J Thomas, you want it to be true, but that’s all you have. That’s all that Mary Mapes had too and you are suffering from the same willing self-delusions on the matter. Meanwhile, claiming that “it’s still completely unproven that it was faked” is completely ridiculous. The document literally could not have been created by its purported author in the early ’70’s.
“Still, there’s every reason to believe that document was fake but accurate.”
You have to love that.
“Which in some ways was just as well, since there was no particular reason for him to continue that make-work program and every time he flew he risked an expensive plane.”
IowaHawk, is that you?
I truly hope this goes to trial. Perhaps we will find out who Lucy Ramirez really is.
Mary’s screed reminds me of the quote from William Blake: “The eye altering, alters all.”
(BTW, you’d think even a TV reporter/producer would know the correct meaning of the word “decimate,” but I guess not.)
I disagree with A.L. in one respect. I don’t think how young men in the Vietnam era gamed the system is a legitimate issue to raise. Frankly, I’m sick of it.
Putting aside the Baby Boomer nostalgia for the defining moral conflict of all time, conscription has always been unfair and before conscription there was the militia and it was unfair. And by unfair, I mean it was not universal — subject to exemptions and excuses and influence.
How boomers (or their relatives) gamed the system seems to be as useful to their Presidential qualifications as Dukakis driving around in a tank.
But I keep getting drawn back in . . .
This comment at Salon seems to make Rather’s point without seeming to appreciate the irony:
bq. _I’m on Rather’s side in this. It was obvious that his job was mostly reading what was placed before him. No one expected that he would be responsible to personally investigate stories put before him on the teleprompter._
Yes, Rather is going to save his reputation by demonstrating that his career simply involved reading the teleprompter.
For a real hoot, try reading the comments over at the H-BOMB when the utterly discredited fool Mary Mapes decided to post about “the courage” of Dan Rather.
Is it just me, or has a whole class of people suddenly become utterly deranged in the span of a few years because of their unbridled hatred for President Bush?
It takes an amazing level of cognitive dissonance to continue to push these documents as legitimate. I’d go further to state that anyone who thinks they are not crude forgeries should be classified as mentally retarded.
Meanwhile, claiming that “it’s still completely unproven that it was faked” is completely ridiculous. The document literally could not have been created by its purported author in the early ’70’s.
Do you have any proof for that?
“link”:http://www.glcq.com/set_up.htm
Here’s a link to a claim that some of the Bush documents released by the DoD were similar, with proportionate typespace etc. I haven’t checked those claims myself.
The obvious conclusion if this is so would be that the document could have been created when it was claimed to be, after all.
That wouldn’t prove it was unforged, but it would destroy the evidence that it was forged.
Besides that, there is so far no evidence whatsoever that anything in the possibly-forged document was incorrect. All of the claims that can be tested independently have been true. There is so far no evidence whatsoever that Bush ever showed up at Alabama National Guard. There is a sizeable reward still available for someone who can provide that evidence, and the prize is still unclaimed.
J Thomas, that was hilarious. Your link cites to Dr. Hailey who has been thoroughly debunked. You are trying to revisit history here, as all the pathetic attempts to defend the forgeries was shredded three years ago. Just one example at Wizbang.
But your last paragraph is equally hilarious, because you seem to believe that the contents of a forged memo are true unless explicitly proven false. That’s a line of illogic that is just mind-boggling.
Robin; Not sure what you’re getting at here. There should be records of Bush’s service if he fulfilled it. In this case the absence of evidence is evidence of absence, I’d say. Adding other corroborative info from the time and I think the preponderance of evidence suggests Bush 1) dodged combat zone service by getting a coveted spot in the TANG (I don’t blame him, Viet Nam was ridiculous. As is Iraq. No wonder the current enlistment rates are bottoming out. Anyone who wants to serve on principle, rather than for economic or social reasons, won’t go near this war). And 2) his service record, while at TANG, was dishonorable, even though he received an honorable discharge.
Kerry, OTOH, did serve in a combat zone voluntarily. Comments by Armed Liberal to the effect that he “also gamed the system” by somehow getting out earlier than normal (not aware of this charge or the evidence supporting it, so any help here would be appreciated) raise a false equivalence with Bush’s service with the intent of sweeping the issue under the rug, and are unfounded.
Alan, you are introducing a completely different issue. Rather’s story attempted to bolster claims about Bush’s national guard time with explicit memorandum that were forged. That’s the issue in this thread.
With respect to the question of the completeness of Bush’s national guard records, he did complete his service obligation and was discharged. The adequacy of the supporting records for the details of his service were extensively discussed in 2004 and were not inconsistent with the quality of record keeping at the time.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence in this case. Kerry is also not the topic of this thread.
Here’s a blast from the past on the subject – The Comic Book Guy Interviews Mary Mapes:
http://wuzzadem.typepad.com/wuz/2005/11/cbg.html
Heh, heh.
Don’t know what website originally led me there. Might have been this one, for all I know.
Your link cites to Dr. Hailey who has been thoroughly debunked.
Your link does not appear to address this claim. It does claim to debunk various other claims it attributes to him, and it appears to debunk him personally — for example by claiming he contributed $250 to the Kerry campaign.
Did I miss the debunking? I haven’t seen this particular claim debunked. Were there Bush documents from the early 1970’s released by the DoD that had comparable typefaces? Entirely apart from Hailey, that would be quite significant if true, right?
_But your last paragraph is equally hilarious, because you seem to believe that the contents of a forged memo are true unless explicitly proven false. That’s a line of illogic that is just mind-boggling._
Do you have any evidence against them? The biggest part of those claims had been independently verified, which is a part of why they were accepted so readily.
I don’t say the part that hasn’t been verified is true. I say that I have seen no evidence against any of it. Nothing to say it’s false.
When there is no evidence, isn’t the proper attitude “I don’t know” and not “I know it’s the way I want it to be”? There is no evidence of any sort that Bush ever showed up at Alabama Air National Guard. No records. Nobody who says he flew with him. Nothing. If Bush was not AWOL he left no trace of his passage through the system. That doesn’t prove he wasn’t there. But there is absolutely no evidence of any sort that he was there, unless perhaps he personally claims it. I’m not sure whether he has made that claim or not. I suppose if he says it’s true we should believe him on the grounds that he isn’t a politician and so we should assume he wouldn’t lie.
It’s a dead issue now. Bush has had ample time to show his character to the public, and the public has decided, rather too late. When he decided that he’d “spend his political capital” (the attitude he took when he was running private businesses) and asked americans to trust him with the social security money, they decided they didn’t trust him at all. In another 16 months he’ll have done pretty much all the damage he can.
JThomas,
Forget the fonts, type and everything related. The acronyms, abbreviations and jargon are inconsistent with anything that would be produced by a member of the military.
Obviously your lack of experience makes you incapable of recognizing documents that were obviously produced by someone wothout a military background.
Some people will never be satisfied, no matter how much evidence to the contrary exists. It’s best to ignore them, and let them fester in their feverswamp.
J Thomas –
You seem to be unfamiliar with the extensive examination of the forged documents that took place three years ago; this “wiki”:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rathergate provides a good summary.
The documents were typed on MS Word using the default settings. Nothing else. Not on an IBM Selectric, or any other kind of typewriter. Barring the use of Donnie Darko time warps or such, that proves them to be forgeries with absolute utter certainty.
You know what kind of person forges a document from the 1970s using MS Word? A person who is too stupid to rob parking meters for a living. You know what kind of person believes such forgeries? A CBS news editor.
Some years ago somebody forged a government briefing paper (“Majestic-12”) claiming that the Eisenhower administration was covering up a UFO crash at Roswell. That forgery was VASTLY more competent than this one.
Doesn’t Ed Exley come to the eventual realization that sometimes you have to break the rules to get the bad guy? Shooting Captain Smith in the back, then agreeing to take part in a cover-up of Smith’s nefarious dealings to protect the LAPD, isn’t exactly according to the rule book.
Oki says to JThomas, “Obviously your lack of experience makes you incapable of recognizing documents that were obviously produced by someone wothout a military background.”
Bullshit. Obviously your own lack of experience renders you incapable of understanding J Thomas’ larger point; which is that if Bush had served in the Alabama National Gaurd there would be documentation.
J Thomas’ larger point stands as an undeniable reality from the standpoint of anyone who has actually served and is not a politically motivated liar for hire.
But, let’s have you, Oki, demonstrate this body of experience based knowledge you pretend to possess. What form (s) would state Bush’s billets; forms that are common to anyone who has served? Come on now. This is fairly easy.
And, finally, where are Bush’s copies of these forms showing evidence of Alabama?
avedis, have you ever looked at/for thirty-year old government documents? Again, I’m not making an affirmative claim that Bush did everything right. But the lack of evidence isn’t the evidence of absence, as is oft said.
The claims that Bush scrubbed his files aren’t impossible. But Occam suggests that we look at more likely explanations 1st. Among other things, someone would have to do the scrubbing – probably several someones. And once that happens, you have the question of why none of them have come forward, or why non of their wives or kids have come forward.
Possible? Certainly. It’s also possible that my dad shot JFK. is it enough of a hook to base the kinds of accusations you make on? Well, I’ll leave that to others. For me, no. We’re arguing over random speculation, and that seems like a fun thing to do over beers, but a waste of time to do in this environment.
A.L.
“avedis, have you ever looked at/for thirty-year old government documents?”
Yeah, my own. Mostly squared away. Hell, my old man’s are from the 1940’s (I assisted him with some VA stuff). Not too bad. US Marine Corps…billets….combat record….purple heart….all there.
“The claims that Bush scrubbed his files aren’t impossible.”
No they’re not given his connections and all. However, I don’t think that the claim is that the files were scrubbed. I think the claim is that pertinent files never existed because he never fulfilled his service requirements. And this later claim makes sense to me.
Correction…sorry..mine are 20 years old ( + or -). Don’t think it makes too much difference.
The claims that Bush did not fulfill his obligations all are based on inferences derived from an absence of records. What Mapes and Rather tried to do was provide positive evidence of the claims with forged documents. For that they were rightfully pilloried and frankly are lucky they were not prosecuted.
The claims that Santa Claus does not exist all are based on inferences derived from an absence of records…..
Avedis, trying to rehash the accusations against Bush does not improve their lack of evidence. But more to the topic, such does not excuse Mapes / Rather’s forged news story.
“But more to the topic, such does not excuse Mapes / Rather’s forged news story.”
Agreed. More scurilous journalism. No good for our republic. I am not affiliated with either party (nor third party). I vote for the person I think is best. I would very much prefer to see improved journalistic standards regardless of who is the target of journalism’s below board tactics.
I did not commence the rehash of Bush’s service record (or lack thereof). I am merely adding to the discussion that had already begun. If Bush fulfilled his committment honorably then I would not like to see him derided, though I do feel that he was a weasel for his NoGo status when so many were fighting and paying the price in Vietnam. I wonder who had to do the hump in his place?
Still, fulfilled commitment is fulfilled commitment. I just don’t see any evidence of such and I cannot understand why there wouldn’t be.
_Forget the fonts, type and everything related. The acronyms, abbreviations and jargon are inconsistent with anything that would be produced by a member of the military._
That garbage got debunked with the Beauchamp mess.
But consider the alternative theories here.
Theory 1: TANG said it was OK for Bush to go to alabama and serve out part of his term with Alabama Air National Guard. Bush went to alabama and never contacted them. After some time he went back to texas and TANG went after him, where was he? He showed up but stopped flying, and after awhile TANG gave him an honorable discharge.
Theory 2: TANG said it was OK for Bush to go to alabama and serve out part of his term with Alabama Air National Guard. Bush went to alabama and linked up with Alabama Air National Guard. He got his physicals, flew his missions, and there’s no piece of paper surviving in alabama with his name on it. No one there remembers him. He kept a very low profile. The alabama guys sent documents back to TANG saying what a good job he did but all copies of those documents were lost, both by alabama and TANG and anybody else they got sent to.
Now, I don’t see that either theory is *proven*. Maybe you know somebody else who was in a national guard unit where all his records got permanently lost. And just because anybody who knew him there could collect a couple hundred thousand dollars by vouching for him and nobody has, doesn’t prove he wasn’t there. Msybe they all hated him and prefer to pass up the money than give him the satisfaction. Maybe he was just the kind of guy that nobody remembers.
But — if it wasn’t Bush, if it was just some _other_ ne’er-do-well with family connections, how much belief would you give to Theory 2?
Whats more interesting:
A) That GW Bush may have fudged his Vietnam era military service somewhat (nobody seriously claims he _didnt_ fly first generation all weather jet fighters for the national guard to some extant or another)
or
B) Perhaps the biggest, most trusted media outlet in America used _remarkably_ slipshod procedures to such an extent that they put forwards documents as proof that they by their own admission cant validate as true, and indeed are almost certainly fake. Not only that, they cant so much as prove the existance of the individual in the chain of custody. Whatsmore the way they stonewalled and attacked the people who brought force the counterevidence which continues to this day without apology.
Which is the bigger story here JT? Do you really care about Bush’s NG experience more than the way our major media handles itself?
Isnt this something like a guy accused of shoplifting 30 years ago presenting compelling evidence that the FBI framed him? Is the shoplifting even relevant at that point?
At least Rather is still sticking up for what he believes are his professional principles. Contrast him with Peter Arnett, after the Tailwind smear was debunked, coming on all like “Hey! I was just up there reading the teleprompter!”
J Thomas, those are not the only alternatives, you’ve created a false dichotomy deliberately.
What “professional principles” would those be, lies, deciet, and forgeries are all ok as long as the ends justify the means? Rather is an affront to journalism. His insistence on “fake but accurate” destroys any credibility he might have had. At this point, I consider him nearly senile.
avedis – Interesting. I went looking for 40 – year old (about the same era) high school records and they couldn’t be found. Wonder what that says about me…
Seriously, avedis, do you really believe that Rather/Mapes’ documents represent anything except a recent forgery? if so, can you give some explanation of why?
Note that I’m not making any case one way or another about Bush’s service. I’ve said my piece on that (and on Kerry’s). Let’s talk about the CBS story instead.
Because it’s perfectly possible for someone to do a horrible story on OJ Simpson, and they deserve to be busted for it – despite the fact that we’re mostly pretty sure he’s a murderer and reprehensible guy. Does that give the reporter a pass to lie?
A.L.
Robin:
I think CBS made a serious mistake in not pursuing charges against the source(s) of the Killian documents. It was an act of criminal fraud, after all.
I guess they were afraid that might discourage people from coming forth with forged documents in the future.
Forget the fonts, type and everything related. The acronyms, abbreviations and jargon are inconsistent with anything that would be produced by a member of the military.
#32 from J Thomas: “That garbage got debunked with the Beauchamp mess.”
–
Which itself was twaddle, a mess of malicious accusations hanging in the air, neither supported by facts nor retracted.
And let’s not forget that J Thomas’ “I think it’s plausible that some administration figures had a part in 9/11, but how do you collect convincing evidence?” And the dream of America as the world Nazis, forcing everyone else to unite against it and bringing about kumbayah.
Mary Mapes’ insane story – a farrago of smears neither supported by facts nor withdrawn – is buttressed by more smears directed at the bloggers who found the media out on this.
Plan B is to repeat Plan A.
And unfortunately, this is normal enough that there is profit to be had in providing media services to a large audience with similar prejudices and habits of mind.
Given that people come out of school receptive to this stuff, and consequently highly resistant to facts, I don’t think there’s a lot that can be done about it.
“avedis – Interesting. I went looking for 40 – year old (about the same era) high school records and they couldn’t be found. Wonder what that says about me…”
Well, I think that we cannot compare the DoD (or State of Texas) with a High School.
I mean think about it……if what you’re insinuating about 30 – 40 year old record keeping is ubiquitous and valid, purchasing realestate would be prohibitively expense because title insurance would be so incredibly risky. To the contrary, most county level governments keep fairly thorough records of real estate transaction, births, deaths, etc going back a hundred years or more. There are many other examples of public record keeping that you can explore the efficacy of on your own. The court system and legal records comes immediately to mind.
Sorry AL, that dog won’t hunt.
“Seriously, avedis, do you really believe that Rather/Mapes’ documents represent anything except a recent forgery? if so, can you give some explanation of why?”
I think it was most likely a forgery. I have already offered my perspective on the sorry state of journalism in this country (see upthread and elsewhere).
“…cause it’s perfectly possible for someone to do a horrible story on OJ Simpson, and they deserve to be busted for it – despite the fact that we’re mostly pretty sure he’s a murderer and reprehensible guy.”
Good analogy.
“Does that give the reporter a pass to lie?”
Again, absolutely not! Screw Rather. Though I do think that CBS scapegoated him and that there are other staff more culpable than he that should be publicly excoriated for their actions and then fired from CBS.
Meanwhile Rather is off demonstrating his lack of ethics, fact checking, and knowledge of structural engineering in his latest attempt at kicking up a product liability storm involving Boeing’s latest plane…
“Dreamliner Safety Concerns Specious”:http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/20/1352208
I think AL is right, he’s attempting to get back into the spotlight, any way he can…
Do the reports that Syria recently received “nuclear components” from North Korea have better sourcing & proof than Dan Rather’s story?
Is the Syria story any less political?
Boy alphie you get around. Trolling Patterico, and now here?
Treefrog, don’t get me started on the latest Rather “reporting” on the Dreamliner. My father has worked for Boeing for 37 years in the Engineering department on the 747 primarily, and now the dreamliner. The “whistleblower” has a reputation that well precedes him.
I wouldn’t call it “trolling” exactly, Gabriel.
I read through the documents the DoD provided on Bush’s military career and looked at the CBS docs. They’re probably fake, or at least transcribed using Word.
Just odd that CBS only using “unidentified sources” with obvious partisan propaganda to push on a story(Syrian-nukes) doesn’t raise any questions at all from bloggers.
Dan’s crime in this case seems to have to have actually named his sources.
Naming a source, that names a source that no one can find. How Sy Hersh of him.
BTW alphie: keep deluding yourself
Haha, Gabriel,
A Rupert Murdoch owned paper passing along propaganda from “informed sources in Washington and Jerusalem” kind proves my (O.T.) point, doesn’t it?
It’s almost an Onion parody about the neocon press, and yet…some take it at face value.
Why?
Nobody answer this. Coming from alphie it’s a rhetorical question; he already knows the answer and he’s not about to let our Zionist propaganda distract him.
Geez, Glen,
At least Dan Rather produced some documents.
If by “produced” as in he typed them up himself, then that statement’s pretty close to being accurate.
Robin in #17
bq. Kerry is also not the topic of this thread.
Armed Liberal in the thread heading:
bq. I don’t for a second doubt that Bush pulled strings to get beneficial treatment. Similarly, I don’t doubt that Kerry gamed the system to leave Vietnam before his tour was up. People game systems all the time – and in both cases, it’s a legitimate issue to raise when someone is running for office.
Me in #16:
bq. Kerry, OTOH, did serve in a combat zone voluntarily. Comments by Armed Liberal to the effect that he “also gamed the system” by somehow getting out earlier than normal (not aware of this charge or the evidence supporting it, so any help here would be appreciated) raise a false equivalence with Bush’s service with the intent of sweeping the issue under the rug, and are unfounded.
Armed Liberal’s response to support his assertion:
bq. /nt
Alan:
I should track down a link, but my recollection is that Kerry volunteered for a position that was out of the combat zone. It was only after he volunteered that the Swift Boats were put in harm’s way. In other words, he (much like Bush) volunteered for a position that would keep him out of combat, he just had the bad luck to be reassigned (and the same thing could have happened to Bush).
But since I haven’t provided any proof, feel free to disregard me. My recollection could easily be mistaken. But if you do, let me know and I’ll try to dig up a reference.
The claim that Kerry “gamed” the system was based on his leaving Vietnam after, as I recall, four months in Swift boats based on the three purple heart awards cutting short his tour in Vietnam. Kerry subsequently requested his next assignment be as an admiral’s aide in the US and was so assigned. This is one of the things that upset the Swift Boats Vets group.
Alan, it’s been discussed ad nauseum. I talked about it a while ago, “here”:http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/004620.php
That may clear things up for you.
A.L.
Ah, Marc, I had forgotten about his request to leave active duty early as well.
I still find it impossible to see the validity in comparing Bush, who didn’t face enemy fire even for a second, to Kerry, who did, as two equivalent examples of “gaming the system” (in your words).
It’s completely ridiculous to use the combat situation of Kerry as an excuse to forgive the spotty at best stateside TANG service of GWB, and it does a grave disservice to all those in uniform who are brave enough to take up arms against enemy combatants vs. those who are all too happy to send others to do it but reserve the right to bow out themselves.
If it hasn’t occurred to you yet, it’s the perfect illustration of the behavior of the so-called “elite” that you decried in a previous thread for failing to participate in the armed services to the same proportion as the rest of the population. It’s strange to see one person taking two different sides of the same argument within the space of a week or so. Although I guess it’s a good illustration of what makes politicians so distrusted.
The efforts into proving this unsubstantiated allegation were fairly
extensive. They went back to 1999; around the time, that James Hatfield,
another dubious source; a recently paroled attempted double murderer was presenting his biographical hatchetjob
“Favorite Son”; with drug allegations,
intercession by a unnamed judge, etc.
Interestingly, you can still find that book, despite its fraudulence, along with “Arming America” in most libraries.
He first referenced Ben Barnes and the G-tech contract; but left out a salient detail.
I find it hilarious that Ben Barnes, is considered a reliable source foranything.
Almost the entire Texas Democratic party went down to defeat when he was Lt. Governor in the Sharpsville Bank scandal in 1971. A generation later, G-tech hired him as a lobbyist on the lotto contract
Alan, you’ve set up a strawman rather than A.L.’s comment to address. But at that, you still add in rhetoric that is dubious at best. While Bush in TANG did not see combat, he nonetheless took on a challenging and dangerous role. There is nothing inherently ignoble about national guard service despite your sneering. Certainly it adds nothing to the discussion.
Alan:
The first man to do grave disservice to Kerry’s record was Kerry himself, when he returned from Vietnam to slander its veterans as killers and drug addicts.
That portion of Kerry’s military “career” was pointedly ignored by the same people who have tried to impugn Bush’s record in the National Guard – impugning the entire Vietnam-era National Guard as well, because they don’t give a f–k about anything except scoring points for the Democratic Party and its obnoxious camp followers. (Or owners, if you prefer.)
The same people pointedly ignored Bill Clinton’s conduct during the Vietnam War, and even ennobled it.
This is what happens when a political party is your country, your religion, and your only sense of honor.
As I said, it’s an apples to oranges comparison that is as meaningless (but in the same vein) as AL’s comparison of his High School’s record keeping to the official document trail generated by the government for those in the Armed Services (in #37).
That’s two arguments made by raising a false equivalence in one thread in an effort to defend George Bush.
And I bet Bush risked his life more in his car driving to and from the airbase every day then he did in the handful of times he was actually in the cockpit of an airplane.
It’s a strawman, Robin, to suggest I’m impugning the honor or integrity of those who took an earnest interest in their National Guard Service or do so today. But Bush was and still is a wise-ass rich boy poseur who takes nothing seriously; I’m questioning no one’s integrity but his, and the very relevant point that Armed Liberal raised in comparing his Vietnam service to Kerry’s in an effort to dismiss the questions as irrelevant on the basis of their equivalence (thus, supposedly, canceling each other out as issues).
Once again I’ll reprint Armed Liberal’s comment in reply to your contention that I am not trying to address his comments.This time, perhaps you’d like to make note of the word “Similarly”
bq. I don’t for a second doubt that Bush pulled strings to get beneficial treatment. Similarly, I don’t doubt that Kerry gamed the system to leave Vietnam before his tour was up. People game systems all the time – and in both cases, it’s a legitimate issue to raise when someone is running for office.
Alan, adding new terms to your sneering does little to add to its credibility.
_The first man to do grave disservice to Kerry’s record was Kerry himself, when he returned from Vietnam to slander its veterans as killers and drug addicts._
I was around then. My draft number was high enough that I didn’t go, and went to college. In summer school I was assigned a roommate who was back from vietnam (he’d spent a term in germany after vietnam, he got tularemia and they pulled him out). He put a hundred pounds of opiated hash in the recessed ceiling of our room. He brought in a bunch of friends to smoke it, and they got wasted. I guess. They sat there for a couple of hours not moving much, and every now and then one of them said “Wasted. Wasted, man.”. About the time they left he got paranoid. He came up very close to me and his eyes were bright red, and he told me if I told anybody about it then as soon as he got out of jail he’d track me down and kill me slowly. I tried my very best to reassure him that I would never do such a thing.
The second night they were doing it all over when our RA knocked on the door and then came in. He was wearing a bathrobe and smoking a pipe. He said, “You guys have got to keep it quiet. Nobody wants to spoil your fun but we need you to be _discreet_. I could smell you all the way down the hall. Try to be careful.” He looked at me. “I’m surprised at you, J. I’d have thought you’d have more sense. Try to watch out for your friends.”.
If he went to jail, I’d go to jail. I asked for a room transfer and moved out. My roommate threatened me some more but the next time I saw him he was carrying a shovel and a bag over his shoulder, so I hoped he’d thought things out some. I came out of it with nothing worse than a ferocious case of athlete’s foot.
I never saw him kill anybody but he was in the army in vietnam — if they weren’t killing anybody what were they there for?
It’s only slander when it isn’t true.
_And I bet Bush risked his life more in his car driving to and from the airbase every day then he did in the handful of times he was actually in the cockpit of an airplane._
I don’t know how much Bush actually flew, but those planes had a reputation for being dangerous. If he actually learned how to be effective in one, he did a lot of things that could kill him if done wrong.
While I’ve heard of no evidence that he did that, still he _could_ have learned how to fly the plane and done a lot of dangerous things. There are probably records that show how many times he was in the air at TANG, and it’s even possible that he flew at alabama though there’s no reason to think so. Did he ever solo? If he flew solo then nobody else was doing it for him.
J. Thomas –
Wow, that’s quite a story. I don’t know what a hundred pounds of opiated hash looks like, but I would think it enough to insulate Woody Harrelson’s house.
That’s all I got out of the anecdote, I’m afraid. Because that’s all there was in it.
Glen, I didn’t weigh it. It was just what he told me. I was concerned about putting that much weight on a drop ceiling. It smelled different from regular hash and the second-hand smoke effects were different, I had some dropping-elevator feeling.
“Glen, I didn’t weigh it.”
LMAO!
This thread has officially jumped the shark. Topic, people, topic. Less cowbell. OK? Thanks.
You’re right, Nort. This new topic is much funnier, but it’s giving me a dropping-elevator feeling. It’s not like the pleasant euphoria you get from a medicinal marijuana thread, but at least it doesn’t leave a rotten-compost taste in your mouth.
Actually I’d sworn off the Rathergate stuff, too. Trouble is, there’s always somebody who has a bunch of it. And there’s always somebody who’s never tried it before, so one thing leads to another.