Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Bush to Release Military Pay Records

Feb 10, 2004 2:58AM PST

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Trying the url again.
Feb 10, 2004 3:00AM PST
- Collapse -
Re:Bush to Release Military Pay Records/ I found this link:)
Feb 10, 2004 3:06AM PST
- Collapse -
Oh come on, Glenda
Feb 10, 2004 3:10AM PST

I plan to vote against Bush and I'd like to know the truth, assuming these pay records contain it.

Bush saying "they can't prove I didn't show up" isn't as convincing as solid evidence that he did, which so far has not been forthcoming.

- Collapse -
And John Kerry.......
Feb 10, 2004 5:39AM PST

is entiltled to the medal?? Josh I wasn't talking about you but other Bush bashers in general! Do I need to name names?? hehehe
But like KP said if your not there ypu don't get paid!
My DIL is in the Navy Reserves and if she doesn't go or reschedule to make it up there is no pay! So that is one proof for Bush right there.

Glenda

- Collapse -
Re:And John Kerry.......
Feb 10, 2004 5:48AM PST

From what I've heard about Kerry's military service, yes, he was entitled to the medals he received. Even his Republican opponents concede that.

- Collapse -
Sounds suspiciously like...
Feb 10, 2004 5:42AM PST

you are insisting on guilty until innocense is proven Josh.

The accuser has the obligation of proof and Bush and the records have shown the accusation false.

- Collapse -
Actually....
Feb 10, 2004 5:52AM PST

....I don't think the records are sufficient to prove guilt or innocence.

- Collapse -
Sure they are IF you have a very basic understanding of Reserve/Guard...
Feb 10, 2004 6:02AM PST

responsibilities.

He had to attend meetings and be recorded as present to receive service credit. He received enough credits to ask for and receive an early release to attend an educational institution.

In the Active Services one is "on duty" 24/7 and if one "misses" a formation of failst to show up for duty one is AWOL or has Missed Movement. The Guard/Reserves doesn't work that way.

In the Guard/Reserves one has to attend a certain number of meetings to receive service credit and pay. One can skip meetings (it is nice to let others know you won't be there but not mandatory except for certain summer camps) as long as they later make them up. The only time missed meetings becomes a factor is when the term of service expires if one doesn't have enough credits.

Bush had more than enough service credits to obtain the early release and honorable discharge and ALL available records clearly support that plain and simple fact.

- Collapse -
Oh really...if records are not sufficient, you are left with nothing.
Feb 10, 2004 12:05PM PST

One person says, 'I didn't see him', another says 'I did'. On what basis do you choose? On what basis do you throw out records? On the basis of your own bias which, apparently, is not shaken by the evidence.

- Collapse -
Re:Sounds suspiciously like...
Feb 10, 2004 6:03AM PST

Well, even if is opposite our policy regarding criminal convictions, even civil cases, you and I both know it's pretty standard in the court of public opinion that a politician accused is guilty till proven innocent.

In fact, most of any fame accused are generally regarded as guilty by a lot of the public until proven otherwise, and even then many figure they just got off.

Shrug, not ideal, but normal, and even more so in national elections.

roger

- Collapse -
Re: Sounds suspiciously like...
Feb 10, 2004 12:13PM PST

Hi, Ed.

First of all, there's a 7-month gap between meetings even in the pay records. And there are notations on some of them that his superiors couldn't rate his performance because they were unable to observe him. Is it possible a friend signed in for him?

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
Guess what, Dave....
Feb 10, 2004 12:44PM PST

Guess what, Dave, I've got one of those notations in my records. To rate someone on an OER, the rating official must have directly observed that indvidual for a minimum time. One of my pilots got transfered a couple of months after I hit that crew, and he didn't observe me long enough to rate me.

- Collapse -
Thanks for your service J. (NT)
Feb 10, 2004 10:49PM PST

.

- Collapse -
(NT) You're welcome
Feb 11, 2004 3:34AM PST

.

- Collapse -
No, of course not. If a freind signed in for him,
Feb 10, 2004 10:47PM PST

he would have been paid. Right? If there is a 7 month period of no meetings, then they were approved absences and were made up. Why? He was credited with enough attendance points, are there are no AWOL reports in the system.

Where are you seeing anything about notations? I haven't seen that in news reports.

- Collapse -
Re:Re: Sounds suspiciously like...
Feb 11, 2004 2:28AM PST

While anything is possible it is highly unlikely as signatures are checked against the ID card.

Regarding the unrated periods, that is nothing to get alarmed about as it is pretty common. In order to rate someone or to be rated by someone the two have to have been in a close working relationship for a certain period of time (varies by service). Like J, I have several unrated periods in my service record ranging from one month to one that is an 8 month unrated period due to a clerical error in assigning me a rater. This was when I was initially assigned in charge of the Ft. Knox Marksmanship Detachment because at the same time I was assigned responsibility for the unit passed from BMAC to G3 and the G3 "assumed" I would be rated by the CG. In reality the G3 CSM was the actual responsible rater and although I interfaced with him on a weekly basis he could not rate me until he had been assigned as a rater which did not happen until shortly before my annual rating was due. It certainly doesn't indicate in any way that one is AWOL simply because of non-rated time.

I am surprised you don't understand this or have a better concept of it because my understanding is that it works much the same in Academia.

The concept to grasp is that he did have enough credits to request the early release for further studies AND his rapid build up of credits towards the latter part of his service indicates that someone in the MILPO reviewed his record to let him know how many meetings he had to make up. (MILPO being the Military Personnel Office.)

- Collapse -
Records released but key question still unanswered
Feb 10, 2004 3:24AM PST
White House releases Bush's military payroll records

"These documents make it very clear that the president of the United States fulfilled his duties," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said. "When you serve, you are paid for that service, and these documents outline the day he was paid."

But under questioning from reporters, McClellan said the records do not specifically show that Bush reported for Guard duty in Alabama, where he spent much of 1972 working on a Senate campaign. And he said the White House has been unable to locate anyone who remembers serving with Bush during that period.
- Collapse -
That's funny, I thought this pretty much covered it.
Feb 10, 2004 4:22AM PST

'The records show Bush received 56 points for service, six more than required, in each of the two years in question -- May 1972 through May 1974, and that he was paid for service on specific dates. There were no pay records for the third quarter of 1972, and he earned no service points for that period.'

He was there on specific dates, and there were sufficient dates to meet his service requirement. If the records don't show Alabama, that doesn't mean he was remiss in his duty. It could just mean that the records are not complete. It was already stated that they didn't know these records existed. Why? As I recall, there was a fire in a records storage location in St. Louis which destroyed many of these. In addition, later in the 70s, as I recall, my records were sent to me and I was told that I should retain them. I have no clue where those records are, and something similar may have happened to Bush.

- Collapse -
Re:That's funny, I thought this pretty much covered it.
Feb 10, 2004 4:37AM PST

It's certainly possible, and in that case we may never have concrete proof that he was there. Guess you'll just have to take his word for it.

- Collapse -
Also....
Feb 10, 2004 4:47AM PST

...don't you find it just an eensy bit odd that NOBODY who served in Alabama during the period he was assigned there can recall ever seeing him there? Surely he must have spoken to SOMEONE who would remember him. He is the President of the United States after all.

- Collapse -
See Bo's link. It says people DID see him there. (NT)
Feb 10, 2004 4:53AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Re:See Bo's link. It says people DID see him there. (NT)
Feb 10, 2004 5:10AM PST

It does indeed say two people claim to remember him. Perhaps those two people ought to come forward since nobody seems to know about them.

I got a chuckle out of this paragraph (emphasis mine):

Despite their anger at Sen. Kerry for his actions as an ally of Jane Fonda after the war, some Vietnam veterans agree. One, a Marine who received the Navy Cross for heroism in Vietnam but who opposed the war in Iraq put it this way in an e-mail to me. "The real question is who is more dangerous for the well-being of the country, Kerry or the people around Bush ? none of whom, as you will recall, came out from under the bed while we were getting shot at.... I think you're going to see a lot of people who would never have supported Kerry under other circumstances deciding to do so in the coming months."

What was it Cheney said? Oh yeah, that he had "other priorities."

However I will give Bush credit where it is due:

The implication that President Bush lacked courage because he joined the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War misses an important point. Although he did not see combat, piloting a high-performance aircraft is an inherently dangerous undertaking, from start to finish. Flying a jet fighter when someone is not shooting at you is only marginally less dangerous than when someone is shooting at you. It is not for the faint of heart.

That it ain't. You couldn't get me into one of those planes for anything, even as a passenger, never mind flying one.

- Collapse -
Gee Josh, I don't think the Associated Press wants to be called 'nobody', but
Feb 10, 2004 12:14PM PST

then who does.

'the Associated Press quoted two friends who worked with Bush in the Blount campaign as saying they recall him attending Air National Guard drills in Alabama

- Collapse -
What a revolutionary idea! That would be nice, but
Feb 10, 2004 4:52AM PST

it sounds like you aren't convinced by pay records, or the testimony of two people who knew Bush in Alabama. I might almost think that you don't want to believe Bush no matter what the facts are.

- Collapse -
I saw the news conference, Josh.
Feb 10, 2004 4:28AM PST

The reporters were trying desparately to keep the issue alive.

Bottom line (and I have said this since 2000)
George W. Bush got an honorable discharge. That is good enough for me. (I have 2 of them)

If he got an honorable discharge, then he fulfilled his complete obligation and had no disciplinary items in his record.

I have no doubt that he missed some meetings in 72. However, he completed enough duty time that he had no problem getting his early release. If there had been time to make up, it would have had to have been made up before the separation was processed.

For more:
http://nationalreview.com/owens/owens200402090833.asp

George Magazine reported in October of 2000: 'It's time to set the record straight.... Bush may have received favorable treatment to get into the Guard, served irregularly after the spring of 1972 and got an expedited discharge, but he did accumulate the days of service required of him for his ultimate honorable discharge.'

Bo

- Collapse -
I didn't see it....
Feb 10, 2004 4:33AM PST

....so I can only go by what I read for now.

The long-standing allegation is that he got that honorable discharge because he had connections (his father), not on the merits.

From what I can see, the release of the pay records doesn't put this to bed.

- Collapse -
Even with little evidence, guilty until proven innocent.
Feb 10, 2004 4:56AM PST

Does age make an allegation more credible?

- Collapse -
I hadn't heard that allegation, but
Feb 10, 2004 7:03AM PST

It could only come from someone who has no knowledge of the military and a large political axe to grind.

By and large, this entire kerfluffle is based on propounding to the public incidents with the worst possible connotation laid on them and hoping that those who have no military knowledge will beleive the worst.

Yes, getting a guard slot in a hurry could be done with political connections. And they were probably exercised for young George. But no amount of political pull can circumvent the discharge regulations. The requirements for an honorable discharge are firm. The recipient must meet all of them or the best that can be done is a General Discharge. There are several levels of General Discharge: Under honorable conditions, For the good of the service, Medical, etc. Below that are Bad Conduct Discharge and Dishonorable Discharges.

It is possible that extreme political pressure can change the level of a General, but the Honorable requirements must always be met.

The release of pay records was what was requested, so the President complied. They do show EXACTLY the amount of time he put in and in general the times of that service. Also released were the point records showing how the points required for the honorable discharge were computed.

The reason this will not die is as I said before. Partisan political games based on innuendo.

Bo

- Collapse -
Re: Bush Pay Records -- What the Dems should do...
Feb 10, 2004 3:50AM PST

is have a commercial featuring on the one hand President Bush explaining how he was released from the National Guard nine months early "because I was going to attend Harvard Business School." On the other hand they should have the woman who was originally charged with being AWOL when a Colorado judge threatened to take her child away if she returned to Iraq after a brief R&R visit (Woman initially declared AWOL won't have to return to Iraq; the army eventually did the right thing, but only because of the adverse publicity from their initial threat to try her for desertion). The caption: "Guess which one had a Congressman for a Daddy?"

-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
Right, and what the Republican's should do
Feb 10, 2004 4:29AM PST

is have a commercial showing Kerry cavorting with Jane Fonda and throwing away his 'medals'. Maybe, they could add some scenes of trooper bodies being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu under the watch of 'I changed my mind and went to Oxford' Clinton.