T Nation

50K Reward for Proof...

… that George W. Bush actually fulfilled his duties in the National Guard. (Note: Gary Trudeau offered a similar reward during the 2000 election, which nobody claimed).

http://www.texansfortruth.com/

Get on this, Bushies!!! Collect your big reward!!! LOL

Read this post on the thread:

Influential Democrat Promises Dirty Tricks Forthcoming

ScottL
09/13/04
03:43 AM
Oh and Roy, an eye witness from Bush’s national Guard days:

"By Col. William Campenni The Washington Times | August 25, 2004

George Bush and I were lieutenants and pilots in the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron (FIS), Texas Air National Guard (ANG) from 1970 to 1971. We had the same flight and squadron commanders (Maj. William Harris and Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, both now deceased). While we were not part of the same social circle outside the base, we were in the same fraternity of fighter pilots, and proudly wore the same squadron patch.

It is quite frustrating to hear the daily cacophony from the left and Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, et al., about Lt. Bush escaping his military responsibilities by hiding in the Texas ANG…

see other post for the rest

http://www.hillnews.com/york/090904.aspx

Perhaps Byron York will take the money…

Of course, this is fixed, because no matter what proof is offered, such as the honorable discharge, the pay records, the calculation of hours served above, they will simply say, “No, we don’t believe it, so it’s not proved.”

Lumpy,

I guess they let you out of the nuthouse(or jail)…

How the hell are we, as political observers sitting behind a keyboard, going to prove what happened to a man that none of us know 30 years ago?

Why dont you prove that Kerry’s injuries weren’t minor and the grounds for his medals grossly exaggerated? You can’t because you base all of your information on a host of sources that are far removed from what happened decades ago and there is plenty of conflicting information.

Although Im a traditional conservative and voting for Bush, I wont deny that Kerry at least went to Vietnam and Bush didnt. I also know Kerry came back and spit on all the guys he left behind…that I saw with my own 2 eyes. Still, that was 30 years ago…

Can’t you wackos get past the Air National Guard nonsense. Lets compare Kerry’s senate record to Bush’s presidency and stop talking about trivial crap.

Has anyone actually seen RSU and Lumpy online at the same time?

Hmmmm…

Official military records support John Kerry’s version events.

There are no official military records that can prove George Bush fulfilled his military commitments. Why not??? Why are the essential military documents AWOL??? Where are they?

Not only did George Bush seek the easy way out of the Viet Nam war, he couldn’t even be bothered to follow through on his cushy assignment.

Gee, I would have thought a cowboy and swaggering tough guy like Dubya would have been chomping at the bit to see some live combat!

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Has anyone actually seen RSU and Lumpy online at the same time?

Hmmmm…[/quote]

lol…I thought this might be coming, as he and I tend to fight seperate battles and I noticed he, like I, tends to disappear for a handful of days at a time

…I think it’s tough for any one man to put up with as much shit as we do for long periods of time, so we take breaks…what do you think Lumpy?

I agree, the breaks are much needed from the lumpa poo that starts to steam in this forum.

Did I just make a funny? :wink:

[quote]Lumpy wrote:
Official military records support John Kerry’s version events.

There are no official military records that can prove George Bush fulfilled his military commitments. Why not??? Why are the essential military documents AWOL??? Where are they?

Not only did George Bush seek the easy way out of the Viet Nam war, he couldn’t even be bothered to follow through on his cushy assignment.

Gee, I would have thought a cowboy and swaggering tough guy like Dubya would have been chomping at the bit to see some live combat![/quote]

Lumpa, Kerry wrote his own damn reports! When are you folks gonna get it?

It’s obvious that you didn’t go the site that BB was so kind to point you to. I’ll post it again (thanks for the great link BB)… http://www.hillnews.com/york/090904.aspx

Oh, not only did Kerry write his own reports, he also re-enacted battle scenes so that he could video tape his heroism as well. What a chump.

[quote]Lumpy wrote:
Official military records support John Kerry’s version events.

[/quote]

The official military records that you talk about are nothing more than daily reports that John Kerry filled out. So basically, it’s his version of what happened. Without reason to doubt him at the time, I’m sure the military accepted his reports as factual. The credibility of these “official military” records depend on how much you believe in Kerry’s integrity and version of events.

Read my post about idiots who keep bringing this crap up. NO ONE CARES WHAT HAPPENED 30 YEARS AGO!!!

Keep doing this and all you’re doing is pushing the independent vote towards Bush. He’s already up by 25 points in independents. Do you want him up by more?

In any case, it’s dumb ass posts like this that make me think there are still people who are worried about crap that happened 30 years ago. Here’s what happened:

Kerry - Went to vietnam, came back and protested the war.

Bush - Joined the Guard and used his dads influence to keep him from going overseas.

Does any of this crap matter now? Fu** no!

Get the hell over this.

[quote]Right Side Up wrote:
I think it’s tough for any one man to put up with as much shit as we do for long periods of time, so we take breaks…what do you think Lumpy?
[/quote]

I’ve been busy. However my workouts are going great lately!

I posted this thread in response to the endless Swift Boat crap, and now all the new threads about how 60 Minutes is lying with forged documents saying Bush went AWOL.

Of course, the people involved with these Bush documents are lying.

How do we know they are lying? Because they’re Democrats. And according to knuckleheads like Chuckmansjoe, the formula is simple to remember:
Democrats = always lie
Republicans = always truthful

Let me give you Bushie knuckleheads a little hint here: IT DOESN’T MATTER IF 60 MINUTES USED FORGED DOCUMENTS OR NOT. The fact is that Bush cannot deny he shirked his duty in the Guard. Notice how the White House cannot and will not deny that the documents are legitimate? And how they cannot deny that essential records that would absolve Bush simply do not exist? For all they know, the documents are not forged… because the facts are still the same: Bush skipped out. They know he skipped out, and they can’t deny it.

Here’s the “triumph” of the Swift Boat vets… As a result of their smear campaign, it doesn’t even matter if people tell the truth anymore. All you have to do is come forward and throw mud. The media will report it without too many questions, and somebody will believe it. The damage will be done. You’ll cost somebody some votes.

That’s why the Swift Boat campaign was launched 2 months before the election, and not during the primaries, or when Kerry first announced, or when he ran for the Senate, or any one of a million other times they could have come forward with their allegations.

Gee, how come both times George Bush campaigned against a Vietnam vet, the other guy is always a liar or a coward or a traitor?

Maybe that’s why Bush ducked Vietnam, he didn’t want to mix with the liars and cowards?

LUMP,

How many intelligence committee meetings did Kerry skip out on? I’m sure he would do better if he could just become Commander-in-Chief.

Don’t you think this is a much more serious problem than Bush taking one month off?

Lumpy:

Welcome back to the forum! I had wondered where the heck you have been. I was almost ready to start a thread: “Lumpy Come Back.”

Okay, as to your post: Isn’t you who wanted to leave Viet Nam in the past when the heat was on Kerry? All of a sudden Bush’s Guard service is important? You liberals are a riot.

I assure you of one thing, anything that the DNC (and Dan Rather) can drum up about Bush’s Guard service will have zero impact on the election. Most people read about it last time around and find nothing new in these allegations. And with the new twist as to possible false documents the entire story has been tainted. You gotta do better pal.

As far as I am concerned the Guard story can stay front and center for another month. Won’t mean a thing, Bush will still win.

Also, shouldn’t you have to prove that he didn’t?

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Also, shouldn’t you have to prove that he didn’t? [/quote]

That is correct, sir. The burden of proof lies upon the accuser. So, lumpers, being the accuser, bears the burden of proof.

[quote]DA MAN wrote:
The burden of proof lies upon the accuser.[/quote]

No, actually, the burden of proof lies upon the proponent of the positive hypothesis. So when we propose that Bush did serve honorably in the Guard, and the other side proposes that he did not, the burden of proof is on us.

This would all fall apart if the anti-Bush camp were to identify what Bush supposedly did. Then they would have to prove it. So they continue claiming Bush didn’t do things, to keep the burden of proof on us.

However, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, so our inability to prove Bush served honorably in the Guard doesn’t mean he didn’t. It just means we can’t make the other side shut up about the possibility that he didn’t, because we can’t prove that he did.

[quote]Mr. Chen wrote:
How many intelligence committee meetings did Kerry skip out on? I’m sure he would do better if he could just become Commander-in-Chief.

Don’t you think this is a much more serious problem than Bush taking one month off?[/quote]

Mr. Chen
You have made some rude and out-of-line comments to me, yet your posts usually lack any substance. I hope you will enjoy these links:

"Bush Spending Little Time at White House
"If you’re looking for President Bush, don’t bother searching the White House.

Bush has not spent a full day in Washington since Aug. 2 – roaming the country rather than staying in the Oval Office as he seeks a second term.

On Wednesday, he’ll break a 44-day, outside-the-Beltway streak to host a concert and reception at the White House in honor of Hispanic Heritage Month. But not for long: He’s back on the road the next day."
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=536&e=2&u=/ap/20040914/ap_on_el_pr/where_is_bush

Bush’s overall vacation history as of 2003:
http://ask.yahoo.com/ask/20031001.html

Here’s an article about how Bush was on vacation for the entire month of August 2001, the longest-ever vacation of any recent president, just a few weeks before we were hit with the 9-11 attacks. (And as you may recall, even after receiving the 11 page memo “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Within United States”, Bush stayed on vacation)
http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/08/15/bush.newmexico/

Hi ZEB
I agree that the Vietnam/AWOL issue is not going to be a major factor in the election, although it will have a small effect. Too bad! It distracts people from the real issues… our lack of a strategy in Iraq while the casualty counts continue to rise, the hunt for Bin Laden (or should I say non-existant hunt) the threat of nukes in Korea, the rising rates of Americans living in poverty (one third of them are children) and so on.

“Twenty-seven percent (27%) of voters believe that the CBS Memos concerning President Bush’s National Guard service are authentic. However a Rasmussen Reports survey also found that 38% believe the memos are forgeries.”

“Thirty-eight percent (38%) of voters believe Rather presents the news in an unbiased manner. An identical 38% say that Rather is using his broadcasts to try and help elect John Kerry.”

Weren’t you one of the folks who said they admired Lee Atwater and his tactics?

Remember a few months ago, when Republicans were circulating a fake photo that appeared to show John Kerry onstage next to Jane Fonda? I don’t recall a big media frenzy or investigation into that, do you?

Dearest Lump,

Please note I have numbered my questions within this post to help you find them more easily. I want you to address them directly. You didn’t answer my last question, but instead just asked another.

The articles you linked to remind us that the president is never really on vacation, as I pointed out in another post. 1) Did you read the articles thoroughly? It seemed you just picked out the parts you liked. The title of one of the articles is even, “Bush stays on the job through his lengthy vacation”. I don’t think adding up the days the president is outside of Washington really has any meaning. I myself often combine travel with work. Some people mistakenly think I’ve got it made, but it’s not like that. Traveling is very tiring, no matter what style you do it in. 2) Don’t you think the president should be out and about as part of his work?

On the other hand, Kerry’s frequent absence from the intelligence committee is not the same thing at all. He should be there. It’s expected of committee work.

Lump my boy, I have usually followed your lead in commenting on your posts. Your posts are full of sarcasm, and I have responded in kind. Which one has been out of line? Speak reasonably, and you’ll get a reasonable answer.

Best Regards,
Mr. Chen

Lumpy-

You’re the Man Bro! Keep dropping the truth!

Mr Chen-

You’re truly a riot… a riot I say!