Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend.... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (5220)	9/25/2004 11:34:50 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

Another Officer Praises Bush's Service powerlineblog Reader Brenda Sparks sent us this news story from a television station in Knoxville, Tennessee: A retired National Guard officer now living in East Tennessee is weighing into the debate over President Bush's service record. [T]he man who swore then-Lieutenant George Bush into the Air National Guard, is rising to the President's defense from his Blount County home. Retired Colonel Ed Morrisey served in the Air National Guard and is familiar with the President's record since the beginning of his service. "George W. went to pilot training, seated well, being selected to be a fighter pilot, which is at the top of the line in the Air Force selection process. Came back to train in the F-102 at Ellington. He stood alert like anyone else," says Colonel Morrisey. According to Morrisey, then-Lieutenant Bush more than fulfilled his guard requirements. Morrisey says in the six years the President served he never failed to meet participation point requirements. "Bush averaged 176 per year. In no year did he have less that 50," says Morrisey. "He was rated by his commander, Col. Maurice Udell in the top 5 of his pilots." One of the criticisms leveled at the President is that he sought guard service to keep him from serving in Vietnam. Morrisey says, "not so." "The Air Force, in their ultimate wisdom, assembled a group of 102's and took them to Southeast Asia. Bush volunteered to go. But he needed to have 500 [flight] hours, but he only had just over 300 hours so he wasn't eligible to go,” Morrisey recalls. Despite that, Lieutenant Bush stayed busy. "He flew in active air defense missions, training missions. Day, night, regardless of inclement weather," Morrisey says. Colonel Morrisey assured us that to the best of his knowledge Lieutenant Bush was treated like any other officer in the Texas Air National Guard. The facts continue to pile up, and they paint an attractive figure of a dedicated, patriotic pilot. Does this mean that the mainstream media will stop reporting as a fact that President Bush became a Guard pilot through favoritism, joined the Guard to dodge Vietnam, and failed to fulfill his Guard requirements? No. They will continue to report those things, never citing any evidence, because they care nothing about the truth, and everything about electing John Kerry. Rest assured, they know better. Because they read Power Line. But they won't correct their false stories until they absolutely have to. Posted by Hindrocket powerlineblog.com

To: Sully- who wrote (5220)	9/25/2004 11:38:09 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

Home made bumber sticker........ powerlineblog.com Courtesy of Powerline powerlineblog.com

To: Sully- who wrote (5220)	9/26/2004 10:10:06 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

POWERLINE - Another Officer Praises Bush's Service Reader Brenda Sparks sent us this news story from a television station in Knoxville, Tennessee: A retired National Guard officer now living in East Tennessee is weighing into the debate over President Bush's service record. [T]he man who swore then-Lieutenant George Bush into the Air National Guard, is rising to the President's defense from his Blount County home. Retired Colonel Ed Morrisey served in the Air National Guard and is familiar with the President's record since the beginning of his service. "George W. went to pilot training, seated well, being selected to be a fighter pilot, which is at the top of the line in the Air Force selection process. Came back to train in the F-102 at Ellington. He stood alert like anyone else," says Colonel Morrisey. According to Morrisey, then-Lieutenant Bush more than fulfilled his guard requirements. Morrisey says in the six years the President served he never failed to meet participation point requirements. "Bush averaged 176 per year. In no year did he have less that 50," says Morrisey. "He was rated by his commander, Col. Maurice Udell in the top 5 of his pilots." One of the criticisms leveled at the President is that he sought guard service to keep him from serving in Vietnam. Morrisey says, "not so." "The Air Force, in their ultimate wisdom, assembled a group of 102's and took them to Southeast Asia. Bush volunteered to go. But he needed to have 500 [flight] hours, but he only had just over 300 hours so he wasn't eligible to go,” Morrisey recalls. Despite that, Lieutenant Bush stayed busy. "He flew in active air defense missions, training missions. Day, night, regardless of inclement weather," Morrisey says. Colonel Morrisey assured us that to the best of his knowledge Lieutenant Bush was treated like any other officer in the Texas Air National Guard. The facts continue to pile up, and they paint an attractive figure of a dedicated, patriotic pilot. Does this mean that the mainstream media will stop reporting as a fact that President Bush became a Guard pilot through favoritism, joined the Guard to dodge Vietnam, and failed to fulfill his Guard requirements? No. They will continue to report those things, never citing any evidence, because they care nothing about the truth, and everything about electing John Kerry. Rest assured, they know better. Because they read Power Line. But they won't correct their false stories until they absolutely have to. Posted by Hindrocket

To: Sully- who wrote (5220)	9/26/2004 10:30:05 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

From the very liberal rag, "The Nation"........ (hat tip to LindyBill) Chairman McAuliffe, Please Shut Up 09/24/2004 @ 2:09pm E-mail this Post Please shut up, Terry McAuliffe--that is, about George W. Bush and his missing-time in the Texas Air National Guard. I keep receiving press releases from flacks at the Democratic Party about Bush's Guard service (or lack thereof). For instance, moments before John Kerry delivered a major speech on September 20 that refocused his campaign with a blast against Bush's war in Iraq, the Democratic National Committee press office emailed me and other reporters an invitation to participate in a conference call with McAuliffe on Bush and the Guard. The call was scheduled to occur in the middle of Kerry's speech. [Correction: After this column was first posted, the DNC contacted me to complain--about its overall thrust and about the depiction of this particular conference call. The DNC says that Kerry's speech was scheduled to start at 10:00 am and the conference call was scheduled for 11:15 am. As it turned out, Kerry began late and was speaking at 11:15. But the DNC did not begin the conference call until after Kerry finished. Still, the main point remains.] Shouldn't the Democratic Party that day have been reinforcing Kerry's message that Bush has screwed the pooch in Iraq and that Kerry has a plan for dealing with the mess Bush created? (Click here to read about Kerry's proposals.) Instead, McAuliffe and his crew at DNC HQ thought it was best to take yet another swipe at Bush for cutting out on the Guard. Despite the success of the Swift Vets' assault on Kerry--as fact-free as much of it was--McAuliffe and the party are wrong to obsess over what Bush or did not do three decades ago. I've written frequently about Bush and the Guard, and I encourage journalists and researchers to pursue the story. But Bush's military service should not be a frontline battle for the Democratic Party. By raising the issue incessantly, McAuliffe and the party will not persuade voters. Voters probably have already reached their conclusions about that 32-year-old episode and its significance. Absent new information--material not based on forgeries--McAuliffe should not be beating this horse further. The matter is a sideshow. Whatever Bush did way back then, his record in the White House is more critical--particularly what he has done since September 11, 2001. Kerry is right to confront Bush directly on the war in Iraq and the misnamed war on terrorism. He has little choice. Bush has deftly and effectively defined the election not only as a referendum on the war in Iraq but a contest to determine which candidate is more decisive and better able to lead a strong and assertive attack on America's enemy. And as president and as head of a party machine that is maniacally disciplined when it comes to message development and promotion, Bush has the power to set the terms of the debate. (Kerry cannot snap his fingers and declare that this election is really about health care and outsourcing.) So the final stretch of this election will focus on who can best be the protector-in-chief. What Kerry did in Vietnam, what Bush did not in Vietnam (and Alabama) is largely irrelevant in this discussion.