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

Were Bush's medical records scrubbed? And a typical red herring

Feb 11, 2004 9:15PM PST
White House Releases '73 Bush Dental Exam.
First, the dental exam isn't in the period when no one remembers seeing Bush at the Alabama Guard -- or during the long gap in the pay records.

Meanwhile, a report surfaced yesterday that the pay records had been "scrubbed" when Bush was Texas Governor (this is further along in the same story):
>> In a new development Wednesday, a retired Texas National Guard officer said he overheard a conversation in 1997 between then-Gov. Bush's chief of staff, Joe Allbaugh, and then-Adjutant Gen. Daniel James of the Texas Air National Guard in which he contends those two men spoke about getting rid of any military records that would "embarrass the governor."

Former Lt. Col. Bill Burkett told the AP that he saw documents from Bush's file discarded in a trash can a few days later at Camp Mabry in Austin, Texas. Burkett described them as performance and pay documents. He said the documents bore the header: "Bush, George W. 1lt." - meaning first lieutenant.<<

-- 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!

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Any "destroying' of pay records would have had to have been done in St Louis...
Feb 12, 2004 11:08AM PST

as that is where they have been located since his discharge.

Quit humiliating yourself Dave--it is embarassing!..

- Collapse -
The difference Dave
Feb 12, 2004 11:32AM PST

is that the charges against Clinton were provable, and he lost his law license as a result. He also wound up impeached.

That's what REALLY sticks in your craw isn't it. The charges against Clinton were provable, and the charges against Bush are little more than wishful thinking from the left.

The real question is how well Kerry will do when the full weight of inuendo and speculation hit him. The Dems are leading the way and showing how it is done.

- Collapse -
Technically
Feb 13, 2004 1:03AM PST

Clinton was subjected to Impeachment hearings but wasn't Impeached.

- Collapse -
Actually, technically he was Impeached
Feb 13, 2004 1:24AM PST

that is the term for the vote in the House. He was not convicted and removed from office by the Senate.

Evie Happy

- Collapse -
Thanks
Feb 13, 2004 1:37AM PST

I stand corrected Evie. I was under the impression it would only be Impeachment had they found him guilty. Happy

- Collapse -
NT If they were destroyed, how could they be seen? No paper shredders back then?
Feb 13, 2004 7:02AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Re:Enough is enough, Dave
Feb 12, 2004 5:39AM PST

I agree, Bo. I hope you're just as outraged at the laughable attempt by Newsmax to suggest that John Kerry and Jane Fonda were working closely together in the early 70s.

- Collapse -
What's so laughable about it? They were on the same side
Feb 12, 2004 11:46AM PST

weren't they, and they did collaberate didn't they? Do you think Jane suddenly decided later to side with the North Vietnamese? If you do, I've got a bridge I'ld like to sell to you. It's named after Brooklyn.

- Collapse -
Re:What's so laughable about it? They were on the same side
Feb 12, 2004 9:58PM PST

Wishful thinking all, Kiddpeat. They were "on the same side" only in the sense that they both opposed the war. So did I. That doesn't make me a collaborator with Jane Fonda.

I assume from your third question that you think Kerry was somehow involved in Jane Fonda's movement to the far left and her trip to Hanoi? Care to back that accusation up with a fact or two? And do try to avoid links to Newsmax. Might as well be linking to the Weekly World News.

- Collapse -
I read that Bat Boy led us to Saddam's hole! -nt
Feb 12, 2004 10:04PM PST

.

- Collapse -
Who?? (NT)
Feb 12, 2004 11:40PM PST

.

- Collapse -
Frequently on the WWN front page. -nt
Feb 12, 2004 11:43PM PST

.

- Collapse -
Since they were 'allies', spoke at the same events, and were photographed
Feb 12, 2004 11:39PM PST

together, they were a lot closer to each other than you were to them. They are also friends although the current cover story is that their friendship started later. Do you think they published details of their organization and strategy? Do you think they documented these things to reporters? The press wouldn't have cared to expose such things anyway.

- Collapse -
Well put, Josh.
Feb 12, 2004 9:00PM PST

The only inference I draw is that they were at some of the same meetings and had at the time similar views. Later, Jane's views became more virulent.

I do respect the fact that Kerry publicly espoused the anti war views AFTER putting in his service rather than running to Canada.

Bo

- Collapse -
Well Dave, knowing the military dental system...
Feb 12, 2004 2:01AM PST

if he had a dental exam appointment on January 6 of '73 it is a pretty good indicator that he was there to make the appointment in November of '72 at least.

The gap in the attendance and pay records has been adequately explained if you would simply listen or better yet contact your local Guard unit and see what they say about attendance and absences and meeting credits and any other questions you have because you can't believe there is no insidious story here.

Those promoting the AWOL story count on total ignorance to make it believable to their sheep like followers.

- Collapse -
ARF - Discipline???
Feb 12, 2004 4:32AM PST
ARF!....

"As it turns out, though, we have traded one mystery for another. It's now clear that the document is genuine, but what exactly does it tell us? In particular:

The first listed date is October 29, not November 29 as we had theorized before. But George Bush was still in Alabama in October. What exactly was he getting attendance credit for?

This is neither a Texas Air National Guard document nor an Alabama document. What is it?

The answer, as you can see from the top line, is that it is an ARF document, as is this record from 1973-74. So what is ARF? I asked Bob Rogers, a retired Air National Guard pilot who's been following this for some time, and what follows is his interpretation of what happened.

ARF is the reserves, and among other things it's where members of the guard are sent for disciplinary reasons. As we all know, Bush failed to show up for his annual physical in July 1972, he was suspended in August, and the suspension was recorded on September 29. He was apparently transferred to ARF at that time and began accumulating ARF points in October.

ARF is a "paper unit" based in Denver that requires no drills and no attendance. For active guard members it is disciplinary because ARF members can theoretically be called up for active duty in the regular military, although this obviously never happened to George Bush."

Much More...
- Collapse -
And you actually bought that load?
Feb 12, 2004 12:22PM PST

I thought you claimed to have served in the Air Force.

The National Guard as you should be aware is a State force that falls under the auspices of the Army Reserve Forces. The proponent of the National Guard Bureau happens to be NGB-ARF http://www.ngbpdc.ngb.army.mil/pubfiles/10/101.pdf

The ARF is NOT "a paper unit based in Denver" nor are ARF Statement of Points Earned indicative of "disciplinary action". The unit code on the page will tell where the points were earned and others codes indicate whether the points earned are ADT points or IADT points and like most he had both.

The worst it shows is that he missed meetings for 6 months and 11 days BUT it also shows that the missed meetings were made up. With more than the minimum 9 points in the quarter prior to the 6 months there was no concern.

Rather than relying on someone who is guessing and making things up as he goes why not simply verify info with the local Air Guard? They can readily explain that they are an element of the ARF and that all their pilots get ARF points and there is no "paper unit in Denver".

- Collapse -
Hey Folks !
Feb 12, 2004 4:39AM PST

Dave K is, as usual, trolling for trash and laughing when you "refute". Don't play his game...it'll drive him nuts.

Pay no attention to the irrelevant.

We have only seen the pre-game warm up of the democrats and the republicans have yet to come out of the clubhouse. I certainly hope the republicans stay with their game plan, and don't waste time and resources 'refuting', which the democrats are hoping will become a 24/7 enterprise.

- Collapse -
The Bush Legacy - One Term Presidency...
Feb 12, 2004 4:46AM PST
I certainly hope the republicans stay with their game plan, and don't waste time and resources 'refuting', which the democrats are hoping will become a 24/7 enterprise. - Del McMullen

I hope most of the Republicans do as you say. GW's credibility is now in question and Americans and the media are beginning to wake up and ask the really important questions. FINALLY! Feel free to ignore the mounting evidence against GW and his administration. Those who do as you say will be the only ones surprised when GW loses in November and becomes the second Bush to be kicked out of the White House after only one term...
- Collapse -
The people don't care about 30 years ago since it doesn't apply to now...
Feb 12, 2004 5:41AM PST

...only a bunch of knee jerk media hounds and lesser democrats, many who managed to slink back from Canada during the amnesty period of the Carter years, some that didn't serve so admirably and then joined the antiwar protestor groups, cozying up to Hanoi Jane, and thereby giving comfort to the enemy.

- Collapse -
Bush's credibility is not in question but...
Feb 12, 2004 12:25PM PST

that of those who lapped up that fiction you linked to definitely is.

- Collapse -
Re:Bush's credibility is not in question -- dream on, Ed.
Feb 12, 2004 9:41PM PST
- Collapse -
(NT) You and your biased polls are humorous--should I call on Uncle Remus?
Feb 13, 2004 2:04AM PST
- Collapse -
Re:(NT) You and your biased polls -- New definition of 'biased,' according to Ed.
Feb 13, 2004 3:40AM PST

biased (adj.) Having a view or result not favorable to conservatives or conservatism.

-- 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 -
Nice try but shows your struggle...
Feb 13, 2004 5:14AM PST

as I have stated here several times that the polls are biased and have further pointed out that the bias is regardless of who takes them.

When you posted a poll about bush slipping and kerry overtaking him I posted a response to a list of polls and pointed out that the results depended on who took the poll because all the left leaners showed results similar to what you posted while the right leaners showed the opposite.

Your definition of biased is well known Dave but like your own personal bigotry you can't see the bias in the sources you refer to and avoid others sources because they don't present the results you want. Pretty much like the polls themselves and who funds them--they want to get what they paid for.

- Collapse -
PS, link to other thread about same story
Feb 13, 2004 2:31PM PST
- Collapse -
As I pointed out to Blake
Feb 13, 2004 2:21PM PST

Nothing wrong with being skeptical but O'Reilly

"O'Reilly places the blame on intelligence officials for their pre-war assessments. "

Did Bush have desires to remove Saddam, possibly. Did he lie about the intelligence to do it? don't see when same intelligence had been held by many from before him taking office.

Did he phrase things to convince in a political speech? who doesn't?

- Collapse -
Medical Exam
Feb 12, 2004 11:01PM PST

Would the exam he refused to take have included a drug test?

Dan