"Fake but Accurate"?

What part of his speech was fake, and what part of his speech makes you happy he didn't win?

That was a completely reasoned and factual speech - the crux of which was to make certain that media remain a means to deliver freedom of speech to all.

He was arguing that you should maintain the rights abilities to post on this site, for example.

...and that scares you?

Did you even read the speech? Can you be honest enough to read it objectively?

From your response, I sincerely doubt that.

But, then, you believe Rush Limbaugh contrary to direct evidence, and despite the fact that you hadn't even examined the evidence yourself.

Color-me "not surprised".

Partisan.

Perhaps it's the part where he says the White House "forced" Dan Rather out of his job because he "angered" them. I believe it was bloggers who started that particular wheel turning, not the Bush administration. The White House does not have the power to do anything of the sort no matter who the president is. CBS felt pressured, so they made a decision. Chalk it up to them not feeling they could stand behind Dan.

It is a little stretch, but not a large one...

After-all, the white house did pounce on rather pretty hard...

real documents or not, Bush's service and dereliction of duty in the national guard are quite relevantly in question...

Rather carelessly reported on documents that at worst were representative of some truth - and got rightly lambasted for it.

To say the white house did NOT play some role in that lambasting would not be entirely honest, anymore than saying they played the only role would be.

So - Bush never admitted why he was grounded, never admitted why he never showed up for that physical exam - both facts.

But, Rather reported on, at best, very questionable documents - that's a fact.

However, the core story, Bush's failure to fulfill his duty, was completely valid.

I don't see the point of dismissing the entire speech for one stretch which maintains very strong validity.

TJ

Since you seem to be ignorant about the military and flight status let me help.

Gw was not grounded. He was assigned to a unit that did not have aircraft.

There was no reason to take a flight physical as he was soon to be discharged plus see the above.

He fulfilled his military obligation and has the Purple Hearts or I should say the Honerable Discharge to prove it.

You should be tired of parroting these Michael Moore talking points.

For your edification...

------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------

In defense of Lt. Bush

By Charles D. Youree, Jr.
Published October 11, 2004
------------------------------------------------------------------------

President Bush's military service is being unjustly vilified. I feel
a sense of anger and frustration when I hear that instead of
volunteering for Vietnam, Mr. Bush "hid out" flying fighter/interceptor
jets in the Air National Guard (ANG) for four years.
As a former Air Force pilot with 6,000 hours of flying time,
including more than 3,000 hours in jet fighters, I know that whenever
you strapped yourself into a jet fighter and took off, you were in
harm's way. Your life was on the line. As fighter pilots, we did not
feel we were in harm's way. Statistics proved us wrong.
During my first four years of military service as both a student and
an instructor pilot in fighter aircraft, I experienced many close shaves
and witnessed dozens of jet fighter pilots killed in my flying training
wing due to air accidents. The next two years, I was on exchange duty
with a Navy squadron of about 24 pilots. Two other instructor pilots
checked into the squadron the same week as I did -- Navy Lt. Bill
Charles and Marine Lt. Sam Murphy. Within eight months both Lt. Charles
and Lt. Murphy, along with their pilots undergoing checkout, died in air
accidents.
My 1952 West Point class sent approximately 100 graduates to the Air
Force jet pilot training program. We experienced five fatalities (5
percent) in the first 20 months due to air crashes. By 1964 our numbers
fell to 70 due to fatalities and resignations. From then until 1968, the
year Lt. Bush joined the Air National Guard, we lost 10 more Air Force
classmates, a 14 percent fatality rate. One was due to hostile action;
eight were due to accidents. In total, we lost 18 classmates (18
percent) during our flying careers.
In contrast, of our 397 West Point classmates commissioned in the
Army, 11 were killed in action or died in training accidents during
their military careers, which included Korea and Vietnam. This is a
fatality rate of 2.77 percent, versus the 18 percent fatality rate of
the class of 1952 flyers in the Air Force.
Additionally, during the entire Vietnam conflict, Pentagon records
show 3,403,000 military personnel served in Southeast Asia. The United
States suffered 58,205 fatalities, a rate of 1.71 percent. Fatality
rates varied substantially from unit to unit; nevertheless, over 98
percent of those serving in that conflict returned home.
Comparing these data, it is obvious that Lt. Bush, as a jet
fighter/interceptor pilot in the Air National Guard, was more than twice
as exposed to fatal danger than he would have been if he had taken his
chances on an average tour in Vietnam. Most of his first two Air
National Guard years were on active duty for training with the Air
Force, undergoing basic training, flight school, survival training,
combat-crew training, etc. Because the draft was for two years, he was
not avoiding hazardous military duty being an Air National Guard pilot.
During the Vietnam era, guardsmen were required to accumulate 50
points to meet their yearly obligations. After training, Lt. Bush kept
flying, racking up hundreds of hours in F-102 jets performing his
squadron mission. According to his military records released this year,
he earned 253 points in his first year, 340 points the second year, 137
points the third year and 112 points in his fourth year of duty. In
other words, Lt. Bush showed up a lot, earning more than four times the
required duty points in his first four years.
In Lt. Bush's fifth year -- which included parts of 1972 and 1973 --
the Vietnam War was winding down due to President Nixon's Vietnamization
program. Many pilots had difficulty obtaining flying slots. According to
Col. William Campenni (Ret.), a former fighter/interceptor pilot with
Lt. Bush in the ANG, there was then "an enormous glut of pilots." At
that time, I was a B-52 Wing Commander and recall this Air Force-wide
pilot surplus developing. When Lt. Bush requested a transfer to the
Alabama Air National Guard for employment reasons, his superior officers
granted this routine request. "In fact, you were helping them solve
their [glut] problem," said Col. Campenni.
Since Lt. Bush's Alabama Air National Guard unit did not have
F-102s, he stopped flying. From May 1972 to May 1973, he earned 56
points -- more than enough to meet his annual requirement. Since he
would not be flying, there was obviously no need to take an annual
flight physical, which some accuse him of avoiding. Then, from May
through July 1973, Lt. Bush accumulated 56 points, enough to meet his
minimumrequirementsfor 1973?74, before requesting and receiving
permission to attend Harvard Business School. It was not unusual for
such requests to be granted. He received an honorable discharge after
serving five years, four months and five days of his original six-year
commitment -- although he had accumulated enough points to cover six
years of service.
One final thought regarding fatalities in the current war in Iraq.
Although our war casualties are always horrific, they are a product of
war and must be kept in perspective. Do we eliminate our police forces
because a valiant police officer might sacrifice his life? Clearly our
answer is "No." For a war that has lasted about eighteen months, our
fatality rate fortunately is very modest compared to past conflicts. See
the graph above, which is derived from the Encyclopedia Britannica Almanac.

Brig. Gen. Charles D. Youree, Jr., USAF (Ret.) is former Strategic
Air Command chief project officer for the B-1 bomber.

Copyright © 2004 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to the article

Algore calling us Nazis again didn't sit to well with me either, Pam.

I may be ignorant about military and flight status, but I do know these basic facts:

1 - bush did not show up for a required physical
2 - as a result of not showing up for hte physical, he was disallowed from carrying out duties involving flying airplanes.

Any retelling of that story is complete and total deliberate obfuscation.

I have never ever used Michael Moore as a source for any of my contentions.

Unlike many partisans, I drink NO ONE's kool-aid.

Just the kool-aid you fix yourself.

Aaron - you believe Rush Limbaugh.

There is no need of further clarification about your credibility.

So Rush is 100% wrong, 100% of the time? When did I ever say I agree with Rush 100% of the time? I've only posted on things I am in agreement with Rush on...where do you find this blind-faith loyalty?

I never said Rush was "100% wrong, 100% of the time".

I did, however, infer that he's a liar who's word should not be trusted. I imply that in a contest of right and wrong, his word should be trusted second in a question of facts.

I have no idea that you agree with Rush 100% of the time - I merely find it questionable that anyone take his word over anyone else's without a complete examination of the facts.

And in one specific instance, you clearly accepted his word over another without examining the facts - or, at best, you ignored the facts in favor of Rush.

My contention above stands.