Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Google News: Bush Fell Short of Military Obligation

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
rndmprsn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-08-04 11:10 AM
Original message
Google News: Bush Fell Short of Military Obligation
Edited on Wed Sep-08-04 11:12 AM by rndmprsn
just saw a thread containing 517 related stories on the "more top stories" section...it started off with the rueters story:

Report: Bush Fell Short of Military Obligation
Reuters - 13 minutes ago
President Bush fell short of meeting his military obligations during the Vietnam War and was not disciplined despite irregular attendance at required training drills, The Boston Globe said on Wednesday.


good to see this starting to get legs...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BeatleBoot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-08-04 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
1. Link?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madmax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-08-04 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. google
Report: Bush Fell Short of Military Obligation
Reuters - 23 minutes ago
BOSTON (Reuters) - President Bush fell short of meeting his military obligations during the Vietnam War and was not disciplined despite irregular attendance at ...
Bush fell short on duty at Guard Boston Globe
Records show Bush fell short on Guard pledge Pioneer Press (subscription)
AP Gets New Bush Military Records as Major 'Globe' Report Appears Editor & Publisher (subscription)
Seattle Post Intelligencer - all 517 related »
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rndmprsn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-08-04 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Link, and on CNN now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David__77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-08-04 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
2. Here's a link...
I looked it up:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/08/bush_fell_short_on_duty_at_guard/

On July 30, 1973, shortly before he moved from Houston to Cambridge, Bush signed a document that declared, ''It is my responsibility to locate and be assigned to another Reserve forces unit or mobilization augmentation position. If I fail to do so, I am subject to involuntary order to active duty for up to 24 months. . . " Under Guard regulations, Bush had 60 days to locate a new unit.

But Bush never signed up with a Boston-area unit. In 1999, Bush spokesman Dan Bartlett told the Washington Post that Bush finished his six-year commitment at a Boston area Air Force Reserve unit after he left Houston. Not so, Bartlett now concedes. ''I must have misspoke," Bartlett, who is now the White House communications director, said in a recent interview.

...

Lechliter said the records push him to conclude that Bush had little interest in fulfilling his obligation, and his superiors preferred to look the other way. Others agree. ''It appears that no one wanted to hold him accountable," said retired Major General Paul A. Weaver Jr., who retired in 2002 as the Pentagon's director of the Air National Guard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az_lefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-08-04 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. I say we put him on active duty in Iraq for 24 months!
Fu*k that little frat boy!
:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 02:14 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC