Akira 0 Posted February 13, 2004 Actually someone here in the Texas Nat'l Guard just accused Bush and/or Bush's Chief Of Staff, of having "scrubbed" his records when he was governor so that "it wouldn't hinder his re-election or election if he went for President." They of course deny... EDIT: This was reported on CBS...and local channels here... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Balschoiw 0 Posted February 13, 2004 [b said: Quote[/b] ]Actually someone here in the Texas Nat'l Guard just accused Bush and/or Bush's Chief Of Staff, of having "scrubbed" his records when he was governor so that "it wouldn't hinder his re-election or election if he went for President." [b said: Quote[/b] ]I doubt it will as all papers concerning G.W Bush jr , his father´s "business" and the papers about Jr´s governor time are locked up, protected by Patriot act and presidential decret. G.W. Bush maybe expected that when he locked the papers up... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Schoeler 0 Posted February 13, 2004 Bush is crumbling before our very eyes. Denoir, this story has now appeared on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews and now CBS. Two very mainstream media outlets. Another story appearing in the Washington Post: [b said: Quote[/b] ] Poll: Public’s trust in Bush at low ebb. Many think he lied or exaggerated on WMD. President Bush closes his notebook after he finishes speaking about the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, at the Fort Lesley J. McNair National Defense University in Washington, on Wednesday. By Richard Morin and Dana Milbank Updated: 7:59 a.m. ET Feb. 13, 2004 WASHINGTON - A majority of Americans believe President Bush either lied or deliberately exaggerated evidence that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction in order to justify war, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. The survey results, which also show declining support for the war in Iraq and for Bush's leadership in general, indicate the public is increasingly questioning the president's truthfulness -- a concern for Bush's political advisers as his reelection bid gets underway. Barely half -- 52 percent -- now believe Bush is "honest and trustworthy," down 7 percentage points since late October and his worst showing since the question was first asked, in March 1999. At his best, in the summer of 2002, Bush was viewed as honest by 71 percent. The survey found that nearly seven in 10 think Bush "honestly believed" Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Even so, 54 percent thought Bush exaggerated or lied about prewar intelligence. Honesty and credibility have been central to Bush's appeal since the 2000 campaign, when he benefited from disgust over President Bill Clinton's lies about the Monica S. Lewinsky affair and when Bush's campaign accused then-Vice President Al Gore of "saying one thing and doing another." But a number of factors, including the failure to find unconventional weapons in Iraq and the administration's underestimating of its Medicare prescription drug plan's costs, appear to have undermined perceptions of his credibility. • More politics news Bush's possible Democratic opponent, Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), has begun to talk about a "credibility gap." Even some Bush allies say they have been misled about Iraq's weapons, and the current Time magazine cover story asks: "Believe him or not -- does Bush have a credibility gap?" Questions about Bush's use of prewar intelligence, in addition to feeding doubts about his honesty, have sent his performance rating plummeting. Fifty percent of Americans approve of the job he is doing, the lowest level of his presidency in Post-ABC polling and down 8 percentage points from January. The survey found that, for the first time since the war ended, fewer than half of Americans -- 48 percent -- believe the war was worth fighting, down 8 points from last month. Fifty percent said the war was not worth it. Nine-point advantage for Kerry These doubts have affected Bush's reelection prospects. In a head-to-head matchup, Kerry beat Bush by 52 percent to 43 percent among registered voters. Bush had more passionate support -- 83 percent of his backers said their support was strong, while 59 percent of Kerry supporters said so -- and retains an advantage over Kerry in dealing with Iraq and the war on terrorism. But the Democrat was seen as better able to handle the economy and jobs, education, and health care -- all top issues with voters this year. The survey found a steep drop in public perceptions of Bush as a president and as an individual. In a sign that Bush has been set back by recent controversies over Iraqi weapons, his National Guard record and the federal budget, the number of Americans viewing him as a "strong leader" has slipped to 61 percent, down 6 points from December and the lowest level since the 2001 terrorist attacks. Bush's rating on handling the economy stood at 44 percent, down 7 percentage points, with nearly half of the public saying they are worse off now than they were when Bush became president three years ago. Six in 10 disapprove of the job Bush is doing creating jobs. On education, 47 percent said they approve of the job Bush is doing, down 8 points from January. And his rating on health care has also fallen. But the president's declining ratings related to Iraq were most striking. Approval of his handling of the situation there has fallen to 47 percent, down 8 percentage points in the past three weeks. About half of Americans -- 51 percent -- said they would prefer a report evaluating the accuracy and use of prewar intelligence before the election, while 35 percent favor what Bush has ordered: a broader study of the overall accuracy of U.S. intelligence-gathering operations that reports its findings after the election. While 21 percent believe that Bush lied about the threat posed by Iraq, a larger number -- 31 percent -- thought he exaggerated but did not lie. Indeed, six in 10 Americans believed, as Bush did, that Iraq had such weapons. Three in four Democrats said Bush either lied or exaggerated about what was known about Iraq's weapons, while an equally large majority of Republicans said the president did neither. Slightly more than half of all independents believed Bush had misled the public about Iraq's weapons cache. 'He's manipulatable' "I think he was believing what he wanted to believe," said one respondent, Ron Perholtz, an accountant from Jupiter, Fla. "I can't say he's dishonest. He heard what he wanted to hear. He's manipulatable by [Vice President] Cheney and others." Many respondents expressed regrets about the Iraq war. For example, Mike Richcreek, 52, of Warner Robbins, Ga., believes Bush neither exaggerated nor lied. "He went by what the intelligence given to him showed," Richcreek said. But, at the same time, Richcreek said he has begun to doubt the merits of the war. "I'm not sure now we should have gone to war in the first place," he said. "You think of all of our young kids getting killed. That's a problem. I'm glad I didn't have to make the decision." A total of 1,003 randomly selected adults were interviewed Feb. 10 to 11. The margin of sampling error for the overall results is plus or minus 3 percentage points. Assistant polling director Claudia Deane contributed to this report. © 2004 The Washington Post Company Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralphwiggum 6 Posted February 13, 2004 It had hard time digging up his service records from 70's, but had no problem digging out photos of Kerry with Fonda from the 70's. -David Letterman. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
walker 0 Posted February 13, 2004 (denoir @ Feb. 10 2004,23:33) said: Although I dislike Bush just as much as the next man, I really think this is a non-issue. Being a veteran does not in any way mean that you are automatically more qualified to be president. Hi Denoir It is not about his millitary status it is about his hiding what it was he did. When somebody hides things it usualy because they know they have done something wrong. The fact of engaging in acts to obscure what you did is wrong in itself. And at the very least makes people more suspicious of you. If you were to make fake official doccuments for your gain that is fraud. A felony. If several people are involved that becomes conspiracy to defraud. A very serious felony. These are the questions that the cover up has raised and seem to be multiplying by the day. Kind Regards Walker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Schoeler 0 Posted February 13, 2004 Breaking news: President Bush has ordered the release of his entire military record to the media. I have to give him credit for that. It will be interesting to see if all of his records really are released, and what exactly they will tell us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
denoir 0 Posted February 13, 2004 I more than ever suspect this is a TBA stunt to make people forget the WMD claims. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ex-RoNiN 0 Posted February 13, 2004 (denoir @ Feb. 14 2004,00:50) said: I more than ever suspect this is a TBA stunt to make people forget the WMD claims. Either way, Bush is going down. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Badgerboy 0 Posted February 14, 2004 The election is a long way off, and your average voter has a very short memory span. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Balschoiw 0 Posted February 14, 2004 That´s true. You don´t hear much from media when it comes to Iraq war these day. And even less when you look at the reasons that led to war. And the lies, and the ... ah you all know about it. Maybe Bush´s advisors have switched tacs for election campaign. "Let them do the military shit, while we can duck away from the betrayal about Iraq war". To be continued... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Balschoiw 0 Posted February 14, 2004 [b said: Quote[/b] ]The records showed that Mr Bush was suspended from flying in 1972 because he did not take a physical. His last flight exam was in May 1971. White House communications director Dan Bartlett said the president did not take the physical because he was going to be doing duties that did not involve flying. Holiday ? Bush's military records released Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Schoeler 0 Posted February 14, 2004 (Balschoiw @ Feb. 13 2004,16:34) said: That´s true. You don´t hear much from media when it comes to Iraq war these day. And even less when you look at the reasons that led to war. And the lies, and the ... ah you all know about it.Maybe Bush´s advisors have switched tacs for election campaign. "Let them do the military shit, while we can duck away from the betrayal about Iraq war". To be continued... Actually MSNBC is all over the President about the Iraq War right now. They reported tonight on Countdown with Keith Olberman that the intelligence Powell gave and the President used to justify the war looks like it was completely fabricated. It looks as if the intel community was shooting straight and the White House was crooked. The Washinton Post conducted a poll today that shows only 52% of Americans believe the President is honest, down from 71% just a few months ago. 21% of Americans now believe the President outright lied about the war. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gen.Carnage 0 Posted February 14, 2004 read my signature........ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Balschoiw 0 Posted February 14, 2004 Is it THE Douglas Adams who wrote the "Hitchhyker´s Guide through the galaxy" ? I enjoyed those books a lot. Ever wanted to test the pangalactic thunderdrink Zaphod used to have. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
walker 0 Posted February 14, 2004 Hi all Not everything has been released. The Doccuments everyone wants to see are still held back: [b said: Quote[/b] ]And the records show officials from Bush's home base in Texas declining to provide details of his activities between May 1972 to April 1973, even though such documentation was requested by National Guard headquarters. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40964-2004Feb13.htmlThese are the crucial doccuments that were sent from Alabama to Texas and record what if anything he did in Alabama. The Alabama period; what are they hiding? Kind Regards Walker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Albert Schweitzer 10 Posted February 16, 2004 Eat this movie 4MB downloadable Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drewb99 0 Posted February 16, 2004 The daily show's great Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Albert Schweitzer 10 Posted February 16, 2004 one thing someone just has to explain to me from an american perspective. What is wrong for someone, who fought bravely in Vietnam to afterwards sympathise with Anti-Vietnam-war activists. Why this trouble about him and Jane Fonda? Why is this more of an issue than a president who can barely provide a proof for having served the country? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
red oct 2 Posted February 17, 2004 nothing imo. and as far as i know it nobody seems to care too much about Kerry's war history, nor his views on Vietnam, after all there were quite a few Nam Vets that did start to protest after the war. and i hear very very little about this deal w/ Jane Fonda. what ever the realation was it doesn't seem to be important enough for the media to bring it up. i think what happened was that Bush tried to do some mud slinging by bringing that up in hopes that it would hurt Kerrys growing popularity but it seems to have backed fired when the dems brought up Bushes little and "brief" history in the National Guard. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
walker 0 Posted February 17, 2004 Hi Albert Schweizer It is in indeed odd Let us compare. Before "serving" Bush supported the war on Vietnam but he did not want to be one of those who fought. He left that to those who did not have his dady's connections so he jumped everyone in the list with better qualifications to get himself a place in a National Guard Unit that was not going to go to Vietnam [b said: Quote[/b] ]"I was not prepared to shoot my eardrum out with a shotgun in order to get a deferment. Nor was I willing to go to Canada," Bush explained to The Dallas Morning News back in 1990. "So I chose to better myself by learning how to fly airplanes." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4271520/ Bold as brass he admits he is a Vietnam War Dodger. He did not even do it to serve his nation he did it to [b said: Quote[/b] ]"... better myself by learning how to fly airplanes." If he had been one of the peaceniks and burnt his draft card and gone to jail he would have had more courage. After the war he supported all the anti Vietnam rhetoric despite never having served there. Now he sometimes gives an excuse that he never supported the war It would be intresting to know if the Republican he worked for when he was suposed to be in Alabama supported the war in Vietnam just to verify George Bush Jnr.'s Viewpoint at the time. Before serving Kerry Suported his nation but criticized the intervention in Vietnam. [b said: Quote[/b] ]In his class-day oration in June 1966, Kerry criticized American intervention in Vietnam. But, Kerry emphasized, "we have not really lost the desire to serve," and no one recalls that the speech caused much of a stir. Good prophetic call.We all Know Kerry is an honnest to god decorated War Hero. Who unlike Bush Did not ask to get off his duty 6 months early. When he came back Kerry who had fought in the war [b said: Quote[/b] ]...testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" I wonder which young man or woman returning from Iraq will be the first to echo that question. The choice then is: Hipocritical, Conniving, Vietnam War Dodger George Bush Jnr. who could not see where the Vietnam war was going. Who spent a lot of time drinking and never bothered about those in Vietnam. OR Contientious, Courageous Vietnam War Hero John F. Kerry who could see the war was bad from the start but still served his nation with honor and then once again resumed his objections to the waste of his nations young men in an honnest democratic way. Guess that sums it up Kind Regards Walker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IceFire 0 Posted February 17, 2004 Walker, you are only looking at one aspect of both candidates, their military record. Â Â You can call bush a vietnam war dodger all you want. Â He still completed his necessary time. We do not even know the full story on this. Â Sure, John Kerry may be a war hero too. Â Noone is debating that. There is more to these candidates than their military past. Bush is still a better man to lead the country. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
denoir 0 Posted February 17, 2004 One thing that is easy to forget is that Kerry's military history has always been related to his political ambitions. Basically he's always been an ambitious populist. 1) He joined the military because he thought it would be good for a political career. 2) He turned against the vietnam war and started organizing protests when the tides turned and being against the war scored political points. 3) He voted for the Iraq war although it at the time was perfectly obvious that the claims were pure BS. Check the first Iraq thread at the time that congress voted. 4) He is now suddenly opposed to the war as attacking Bush is his ticket to the white house. While relative to Bush, he is certainly the better choice, but that's no big achievement. A randomly selected person on the street would probably be better than Bush. On an absolute scale, Kerry is a typical politician of the system - his interests are only self-serving. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
walker 0 Posted February 17, 2004 Hi Denoir (denoir @ Feb. 17 2004,03:10) said: 2) He turned against the vietnam war and started organizing protests when the tides turned and being against the war scored political points. Sorry Denoir your statement is factualy incorrect please re read my source and previous post. (denoir @ Feb. 17 2004,03:10) said: 3) He voted for the Iraq war although it at the time was perfectly obvious that the claims were pure BS. Check the first Iraq thread at the time that congress voted.As did I and I have made my case for why I changed my view. The prospectus for war in Iraq has since been proven to my satifaction to have been a false one. Not only that but if you look in my posts it is clear I highlight how TBA and TBA2 designed the authoring of that false prospectus to fool their respective nations. (denoir @ Feb. 17 2004,03:10) said: 4) He is now suddenly opposed to the war as attacking Bush is his ticket to the white house. If you were to follow this realy silly line of reasoning the whole concept of this forum would be null as inherent in your thesis is the negation of discussion, persuasion and free will.So Sentences 3 and 4 are semanticly NULL. They mean nothing, Nada, not even as much as one of Avon's Spam posts (I am sure Avon will be along to make one soon) Sentence 1 is a valid criticism though I would dispute it after all he served in destroyers but volunteered to serve in the far more dangerous coastal river and mekong delta fast patrol boats. Kind Regards Walker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IceFire 0 Posted February 17, 2004 (denoir @ Feb. 17 2004,03:10) said: One thing that is easy to forget is that Kerry's military history has always been related to his political ambitions.Basically he's always been an ambitious populist. 1) He joined the military because he thought it would be good for a political career. 2) He turned against the vietnam war and started organizing protests when the tides turned and being against the war scored political points. 3) He voted for the Iraq war although it at the time was perfectly obvious that the claims were pure BS. Check the first Iraq thread at the time that congress voted. 4) He is now suddenly opposed to the war as attacking Bush is his ticket to the white house. While relative to Bush, he is certainly the better choice, but that's no big achievement. A randomly selected person on the street would probably be better than Bush. On an absolute scale, Kerry is a typical politician of the system - his interests are only self-serving. Bush beats Kerry by a long shot. Some men are destined for leadership. Bush is one of them. Again, Kerry may be a war hero, but he's not the man to lead the country. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Albert Schweitzer 10 Posted February 17, 2004 Still denoir, he served, and he served not somewhere hidden in the backyard of the national guard, he served in Vietnam. Whether or not he had polticial ambitions do so doesnt count. To go to Vietnam to get a reference for your political CV, that sounds very odd to me. As far as Bush is concerned I have nothing to criticse. Of course his parents, priviledged as they were, didnt want him to go into battle. I suppose it was their decision rather than his. The problem only occurs once Mr. Bush called himself " a military man" and a "president of war" (see video posted). THAT, doesnt make no sense and after a silly occasion like the impeachment of Mr. Clinton he should have known that journalists would dig in his past. It cant be that presidents are so unaware of future campaign-threats Share this post Link to post Share on other sites