So when do we go on the offensive about Bush's military record?

[WI_DEM]

Well the month of August has been wasted by a pack of lies which don't seem to be dying regarding Kerry's military record. So fair is fair when are we going to go on the offensive about Bush's record? Perhaps Kerry or more likely Edwards or a strong surrogate such as Max Cleland should deliver a high profile speech and preface it by saying, "John Kerry didn't want to run a campaign based on what his opponent did thirty years ago, but since the Republicans decided to make John Kerry's military record a major issue in this campaign and the media is giving these allegations intense prominence; we have no choice but to do the same regarding Mr. Bush's own military record."

Then he should go on and ask a series of questions (for instance):
1) Isn't it true, Mr. Bush, that you used family connections to get into the National guard?

2) Mr. Bush why did you specifically request not to be sent to Vietnam?

3) Mr. Bush why did you miss your yearly physical which led to disciplinary action against you?

4) Mr. Bush can you produce evidence that you showed up for the final year of your National Guard service to refute the claims that you deserted?

5) Mr. Bush can you produce witnesses to support that you actually showed up in your final year of service? The people who served with John Kerry have come forward in his defense--why is it that not one person can come forward to prove your claims that you did not go AWOL?

If a strong surrogate would do this during the GOP convention it would get media play and throw a wrench into their message.

[sandnsea]

1. Bush = MIA

Somebody put it in another thread and I think that's perfect. Not AWOl or any of the rest of it, just MIA. And then add all the other times in his Presidency that he was MIA. It reminds people of Alabama, avoiding Vietnam, and all his failures in his Presidency. With just three little words. Missing in Action.

[Nancy Waterman]

2. From an article I wrote in February when AWOL was in the news

Assuming that the AWOL allegation is true, and there has been nothing yet that comes close to refuting it, what are we to make of it? What does it tell us about George W. Bush? Running away from one’s sworn duty, whether to avoid the drug test in a physical exam or to simply go off and do something more interesting, certainly suggests some significant character flaws. Bush here demonstrated an inability to complete something to which he had made a commitment, perhaps because that commitment had lost its original luster and excitement. He also showed a lack of the inner discipline necessary to delay gratification, preferring instead to do the pleasing thing in the moment, while minimizing or ignoring the consequences. Unfortunately, this tendency to pay scant attention to consequences has been reinforced throughout Bush’s life by the numerous bailouts afforded him by his family and its circle of wealthy and influential friends. Without this golden parachute, Bush would most likely have ended up in Vietnam in 1973 for his egregious dereliction of duty. It seems, instead, that there were no consequences forthcoming, contrary to all military procedure.

The AWOL events of 32 years ago are significant today because they present a pattern of behavior that has been endemic in Bush’s presidency: a tendency to focus on short-term gratification, with little concern for or understanding of long-term serious repercussions. In Afghanistan, Bush went in with guns blazing and great promises, but removed the bulk of US forces prematurely when the initial excitement was past, seeking instead ever-new fields to conquer. He left behind a mess that continues to fester: warlords empowered and fighting, opium abundant, Taliban resurfacing, and Karzai impotent.

In Iraq, the instant gratification came again with the initial military conquest, but the long-term consequences of potential destabilization, civil war, and increased terrorism were ignored. The ongoing fiasco there is well known, and all of the sorry details were widely predicted before Bush heedlessly marched us over a cliff and into a devastating sinkhole of exploding turbulence.

Economic policy is another area where Bush has been essentially AWOL. The deficit is ballooning beyond anyone’s imagination, and our leader blithely spends more money and cuts more taxes. Again, there is no sense of responsibility for what he is creating, no awareness of or concern for the potentially ruinous consequences of his policies. It is all about instant gratification: making the base happy and creating a windfall for corporate donors, in other words, political short-term gain at the expense of intelligent policy for the long-term good of the country.

The environment is yet another area where the delay of gratification is sorely needed if we are to fend off a future disaster. Instead, indulgence is actually encouraged in such areas as tax credits for SUV’s, while no attempt has been made to educate the public of the imminent and potentially catastrophic decline in world oil production. Moreover, in Bushworld, peer-reviewed studies on global warming are considered science fiction, while self-serving and bogus statistics are considered fact. Even worse, the regulation of industrial pollution has been drastically cut, signaling the administration’s focus on campaign contributions over sane environmental and health policy.

[DoYouEverWonder]

4. The pattern of behavior that we are seeing

is because Bu$h Doesn't Care, about anybody except himself.

All the RWers like W because they think he's a straight shooter, who has accepted Jesus into his life, and that W knows and understands them. They think W cares for them and is acting in their best interest. What they don't realize is that W doesn't give a damn about any of them. He hates everyone.

[Nancy Waterman]

3. Greg Palast's recent work is important and should be spread

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=365&row=0

In 1994, George W. Bush was elected governor of Texas by a whisker. By that time, Barnes had left office to become a big time corporate lobbyist. To an influence peddler like Barnes, having damning information on a sitting governor is worth its weight in gold – or, more precisely, there’s a value in keeping the info secret.

Barnes appears to have made lucrative use of his knowledge of our President’s slithering out of the draft as a lever to protect a multi-billion dollar contract for a client. That's the information in a confidential letter buried deep in the files of the US Justice Department that fell into my hands at BBC television.

Here's what happened. Just after Bush's election, Barnes' client GTech Corp., due to allegations of corruption, was about to lose its license to print money: its contract to run the Texas state lottery. Barnes, says the Justice Department document, made a call to the newly elected governor's office and saved GTech's state contract.


The letter said, "Governor Bush ... made a deal with Ben Barnes not to rebid because Barnes could confirm that Bush had lied during the '94 campaign."

In that close race, Bush denied the fix was in to keep him out of 'Nam, and the US media stopped asking questions. What did the victorious Governor Bush's office do for Barnes? According to the tipster, "Barnes agreed never to confirm the story and the governor talked to the chair of the lottery two days later and she then agreed to support letting GTech keep the contract without a bid."

And so it came to pass that the governor's commission reversed itself and gave GTech the billion dollar deal without a bid.

The happy client paid Barnes, the keeper of Governor Bush’s secret, a fee of over $23 million. Barnes, not surprisingly, denies that Bush took care of his client in return for Barnes’ silence. However, confronted with the evidence, the former Lt. Governor now admits to helping the young George stay out of Vietnam.