Bush’s War Record Does Matter

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4114162/

Patriot Games

Bush strategists may feel tempted to attack John Kerry’s opposition to Vietnam. Why it’s a battle they can’t win

The voters don't want to refight the Vietnam war, but with John Kerry looking like the likely nominee, Vietnam returns to the front pages. Kerry is accompanied on the campaign trail by the men he served with in the Mekong Delta. "I know a little something about aircraft carriers for real," he says, in an allusion to President George W. Bush's premature "Mission Accomplished" landing last spring on the USS Abraham Lincoln.

There is another chapter to Kerry's war history that Republicans are examining, and that is his leadership in 1971 of Vietnam Veterans Against the War. Some GOP strategists envision television ads linking Kerry with Jane Fonda in order to undermine his credentials as a decorated war veteran. snip

Highlighting Kerry's antiwar activism is a risky strategy for the Republicans. To quote Kerry, who quotes the president: "Bring it on." If the election turns into a debate over war records, Bush can't win.

Boston Globe reporter Walter Robinson did an exhaustive study of Bush's military service, which was published in May 2000. Robinson concluded that during Bush's final 18 months in the Texas Air National Guard in 1972 and 1973, he did not fly at all and was "all but unaccounted for," with no records to indicate that he attended any of the required drills. Bush was working for a Senate campaign in Alabama for part of the time, and was supposed to appear for duty there, but never did. After the November '72 election, Bush returned to Houston, but he was a no-show there, as well.

more

[skullsplitter]

1. Keep it Simple

In my opinion it would be a mistake for any democratic nominee to raise the subject of Bush's national guard service just as it would be a mistake for republicans to challenge Kerry's service or patriotism. Democrats won't succeed in November by rolling in the mud with republicans.

If Kerry is nominated and his service in Vietnam and later opposition to the war are issues raised by Bush (or Bush operatives), Kerry should simply note that Bush had an opportunity to serve his country in Vietnam and chose not to. Would Bush welcome the opportunity to openly discuss his choice?

[ex_jew]

2. Sounds good, but

did you notice that rolling in the mud has brought Reptilicans control of the White House and Congress (not to mention much of the judiciary).
In any case, simply to describe George Bush's failure to meet his obligations is not (or need not be) rolling in the mud.

But welcome to DU !

[skullsplitter]

4. Election tactics

I doubt this will be read, but I disagree with some of the response to my post. Specifically, I don't think democratic "rolling in the mud" was the reason for GOP wins in 2000 and 2002. In the case of the presidential election, pre-election opinion polls showed that a majority of voters identified Bush as the candidate most likely to "lock in" the economic gains of the 90s.

Aside from the last minute Bush DUI revelation, Bush seemed to get a nearly free ride from the press and remarkably generous treatment from democrats. The public cared little, apparently, about questions relating to Bush's past drug and alcohol use, his poor educational record, his failures as a businessman or his poor performance as governor of Texas. For whatever reason, those who voted for Bush decided he was a straight talker, would be a great guy to have over to the house for beer, pretzels and a football game, and wouldn't screw up the good times he inherited from Clinton.

By now I hope every voter realizes that Bush is incompetent. In light of Bush's eagerness to pick fights, I think it is important to highlight the human cost of war and, if Kerry is the nominee, to emphasize Kerry's first hand experience. In this context, I hope Bush is asked to explain his choice not to serve his country in Vietnam. However, as a practical matter, given what we know today (and what we are likely to know in the future) about Bush's national guard duty, I think it will be counterproductive to question Bush's service. If new information emerges, perhaps the issue could be effectively pursued.

Frankly, the nature of Bush's service doesn't matter to me at all (although I admit curiousity). I suspect it matters very little to most Americans, at least until there is something approaching a definitive account that shows dishonorable conduct.

[newyawker99]

3. Hi skullsplitter!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast: