Is Chris Thomas a Real Pilot?

[jls]

http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm

[PAW]

" jls" > wrote in message
...
> http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm
>
>

GW Bush is a waste of human flesh.

[Darrel Toepfer]

PAW wrote:
> " jls" > wrote...
>
>>http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm

> GW Bush is a waste of human flesh.

Website looks to be in its alpha stage, with all the broken links...

Server Used: [ whois.dodora.net ]

glcq.com = [ 209.63.57.142 ] Registration Service Provided By:
BLUEHOST.COM
Contact:
Abuse Desk Email Address:
Domain Name: GLCQ.COM
Registrant:
goddam librul commie queers of the USA
lukasiak paul
2230 st albans st
philadelphia
PA 19146
US
Tel. 000.0000000
Creation Date: 09-Apr-2004
Expiration Date: 09-Apr-2005
Domain servers in listed order:
ns1.bluehost.com
ns2.bluehost.com
Administrative Contact:
goddam librul commie queers of the USA
lukasiak paul
2230 st albans st
philadelphia
PA 19146
US
Tel. 000.0000000
Technical Contact:
BlueHost.Com POWERFUL WEBHOSTING
BlueHost.Com
BlueHost.Com 252 N Orem Blvd
Orem
UT 84057
US
Tel. 000.0000000
Billing Contact:
goddam librul commie queers of the USA
lukasiak paul
2230 st albans st
philadelphia
PA 19146
US
Tel. 000.0000000
Status: ACTIVE

[B2431]

>From: " jls"
>Date: 8/23/2004 7:10 AM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm

I got as far as the ARPC gag. For those who never served during that time frame
let me explain. The site said Bush never finished his 6 year commitment. The
authour has no idea what that means. During that time ALL males 18 and over had
a 6 year obligation unless excused for valid reasons (conscientious objector,
medical etc). This means if one signed up for 3 years active duty in the Army
and completed those 3 years and got out he STILL had 3 years inactive reserves
before being released. If Bush didn't serve his 6 years in either Guard, active
or reserves the remaining time was INACTIVE reserve.

The six year obligation was the same for officers, warrants and enlisteds.

As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon
retirement.

Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling proves
absoultely nothing.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Ray]

On 23-Aug-2004, (B2431) wrote:

>
> I got as far as the ARPC gag. For those who never served during that time
> frame
> let me explain. The site said Bush never finished his 6 year commitment.
> The
> authour has no idea what that means. During that time ALL males 18 and
> over had
> a 6 year obligation unless excused for valid reasons (conscientious
> objector,
> medical etc). This means if one signed up for 3 years active duty in the
> Army
> and completed those 3 years and got out he STILL had 3 years inactive
> reserves
> before being released. If Bush didn't serve his 6 years in either Guard,
> active
> or reserves the remaining time was INACTIVE reserve.
>
> The six year obligation was the same for officers, warrants and enlisteds.
>
> As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon
> retirement.
>

Actually, you don't retire until you have 30 years in. If you transfer to
the
Fleet Reserve at say 22 years, you only have 8 years of inactive service
until you're officially retired.

> Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling
> proves
> absoultely nothing.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Ray U.S. Navy retired

[B2431]

>From: "Ray"
>Date: 8/23/2004 2:16 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: .net>
>
>
>On 23-Aug-2004, (B2431) wrote:
>
>>
>> I got as far as the ARPC gag. For those who never served during that time
>> frame
>> let me explain. The site said Bush never finished his 6 year commitment.
>> The
>> authour has no idea what that means. During that time ALL males 18 and
>> over had
>> a 6 year obligation unless excused for valid reasons (conscientious
>> objector,
>> medical etc). This means if one signed up for 3 years active duty in the
>> Army
>> and completed those 3 years and got out he STILL had 3 years inactive
>> reserves
>> before being released. If Bush didn't serve his 6 years in either Guard,
>> active
>> or reserves the remaining time was INACTIVE reserve.
>>
>> The six year obligation was the same for officers, warrants and enlisteds.
>>
>> As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon
>> retirement.
>>
>
>Actually, you don't retire until you have 30 years in. If you transfer to
>the
>Fleet Reserve at say 22 years, you only have 8 years of inactive service
>until you're officially retired.
>
>> Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling
>> proves
>> absoultely nothing.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
>Ray U.S. Navy retired

I guess I will reread my retirement papers. I retired with about 21 years and I
think I got a 10 year commitment. You are probably right. It's been a long
time.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[RobertR237]

>
>
>>From: " jls"
>>Date: 8/23/2004 7:10 AM Central Daylight Time
>>Message-id: >
>>
>>http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm
>
>I got as far as the ARPC gag. For those who never served during that time
>frame
>let me explain. The site said Bush never finished his 6 year commitment. The
>authour has no idea what that means. During that time ALL males 18 and over
>had
>a 6 year obligation unless excused for valid reasons (conscientious objector,
>medical etc). This means if one signed up for 3 years active duty in the Army
>and completed those 3 years and got out he STILL had 3 years inactive
>reserves
>before being released. If Bush didn't serve his 6 years in either Guard,
>active
>or reserves the remaining time was INACTIVE reserve.
>
>The six year obligation was the same for officers, warrants and enlisteds.
>
>As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon
>retirement.
>
>Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling proves
>absoultely nothing.
>
>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>

On the contrary Dan, I proves a great deal...just not about Bush.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[B2431]

>From: (RobertR237)
>Date: 8/23/2004 8:51 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>
>>
>>>From: " jls"
>>>Date: 8/23/2004 7:10 AM Central Daylight Time
>>>Message-id: >
>>>
>>>http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm
>>
>>I got as far as the ARPC gag. For those who never served during that time
>>frame
>>let me explain. The site said Bush never finished his 6 year commitment. The
>>authour has no idea what that means. During that time ALL males 18 and over
>>had
>>a 6 year obligation unless excused for valid reasons (conscientious
>objector,
>>medical etc). This means if one signed up for 3 years active duty in the
>Army
>>and completed those 3 years and got out he STILL had 3 years inactive
>>reserves
>>before being released. If Bush didn't serve his 6 years in either Guard,
>>active
>>or reserves the remaining time was INACTIVE reserve.
>>
>>The six year obligation was the same for officers, warrants and enlisteds.
>>
>>As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon
>>retirement.
>>
>>Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling proves
>>absoultely nothing.
>>
>>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>>
>
>On the contrary Dan, I proves a great deal...just not about Bush.
>
>
>Bob Reed


I hadn't look at it that way. You are correct.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[PAW]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >From: (RobertR237)
> >Date: 8/23/2004 8:51 PM Central Daylight Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>>From: " jls"
> >>>Date: 8/23/2004 7:10 AM Central Daylight Time
> >>>Message-id: >
> >>>
> >>>http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm
> >>
> >>I got as far as the ARPC gag. For those who never served during that
time
> >>frame
> >>let me explain. The site said Bush never finished his 6 year commitment.
The
> >>authour has no idea what that means. During that time ALL males 18 and
over
> >>had
> >>a 6 year obligation unless excused for valid reasons (conscientious
> >objector,
> >>medical etc). This means if one signed up for 3 years active duty in the
> >Army
> >>and completed those 3 years and got out he STILL had 3 years inactive
> >>reserves
> >>before being released. If Bush didn't serve his 6 years in either Guard,
> >>active
> >>or reserves the remaining time was INACTIVE reserve.
> >>
> >>The six year obligation was the same for officers, warrants and
enlisteds.
> >>
> >>As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon
> >>retirement.
> >>
> >>Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling
proves
> >>absoultely nothing.
> >>
> >>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
> >>
> >
> >On the contrary Dan, I proves a great deal...just not about Bush.
> >
> >
> >Bob Reed
>
>
> I hadn't look at it that way. You are correct.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Any of you guys recall NG's with 4 year active reserve commitments in the
late 60's, early 70's? I don't. Every single NG I knew was on 6 year ACTIVE
reserve status. I'm sure many of them would have enjoyed getting cut loose
early too. :)

Phil

[B2431]

>From: "PAW"
>Date: 8/25/2004 1:22 AM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>
>"B2431" > wrote in message
...
>> >From: (RobertR237)
>> >Date: 8/23/2004 8:51 PM Central Daylight Time
>> >Message-id: >
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>>From: " jls"
>> >>>Date: 8/23/2004 7:10 AM Central Daylight Time
>> >>>Message-id: >
>> >>>
>> >>>http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm
>> >>
>> >>I got as far as the ARPC gag. For those who never served during that
>time
>> >>frame
>> >>let me explain. The site said Bush never finished his 6 year commitment.
>The
>> >>authour has no idea what that means. During that time ALL males 18 and
>over
>> >>had
>> >>a 6 year obligation unless excused for valid reasons (conscientious
>> >objector,
>> >>medical etc). This means if one signed up for 3 years active duty in the
>> >Army
>> >>and completed those 3 years and got out he STILL had 3 years inactive
>> >>reserves
>> >>before being released. If Bush didn't serve his 6 years in either Guard,
>> >>active
>> >>or reserves the remaining time was INACTIVE reserve.
>> >>
>> >>The six year obligation was the same for officers, warrants and
>enlisteds.
>> >>
>> >>As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon
>> >>retirement.
>> >>
>> >>Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling
>proves
>> >>absoultely nothing.
>> >>
>> >>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>> >>
>> >
>> >On the contrary Dan, I proves a great deal...just not about Bush.
>> >
>> >
>> >Bob Reed
>>
>>
>> I hadn't look at it that way. You are correct.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> Any of you guys recall NG's with 4 year active reserve commitments in the
>late 60's, early 70's? I don't. Every single NG I knew was on 6 year ACTIVE
>reserve status. I'm sure many of them would have enjoyed getting cut loose
>early too. :)
>
>Phil

The commitment was a total of 6 years. I know people who did Guard fo 6 years
and and some who did 4 years. Never having done Guard I'm not sure how they did
it.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[PAW]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "PAW"
> >Date: 8/25/2004 1:22 AM Central Daylight Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >
> >"B2431" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> >From: (RobertR237)
> >> >Date: 8/23/2004 8:51 PM Central Daylight Time
> >> >Message-id: >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>>From: " jls"
> >> >>>Date: 8/23/2004 7:10 AM Central Daylight Time
> >> >>>Message-id: >
> >> >>>
> >> >>>http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm
> >> >>
> >> >>I got as far as the ARPC gag. For those who never served during that
> >time
> >> >>frame
> >> >>let me explain. The site said Bush never finished his 6 year
commitment.
> >The
> >> >>authour has no idea what that means. During that time ALL males 18
and
> >over
> >> >>had
> >> >>a 6 year obligation unless excused for valid reasons (conscientious
> >> >objector,
> >> >>medical etc). This means if one signed up for 3 years active duty in
the
> >> >Army
> >> >>and completed those 3 years and got out he STILL had 3 years inactive
> >> >>reserves
> >> >>before being released. If Bush didn't serve his 6 years in either
Guard,
> >> >>active
> >> >>or reserves the remaining time was INACTIVE reserve.
> >> >>
> >> >>The six year obligation was the same for officers, warrants and
> >enlisteds.
> >> >>
> >> >>As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon
> >> >>retirement.
> >> >>
> >> >>Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling
> >proves
> >> >>absoultely nothing.
> >> >>
> >> >>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >On the contrary Dan, I proves a great deal...just not about Bush.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Bob Reed
> >>
> >>
> >> I hadn't look at it that way. You are correct.
> >>
> >> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
> >
> > Any of you guys recall NG's with 4 year active reserve commitments in
the
> >late 60's, early 70's? I don't. Every single NG I knew was on 6 year
ACTIVE
> >reserve status. I'm sure many of them would have enjoyed getting cut
loose
> >early too. :)
> >
> >Phil
>
> The commitment was a total of 6 years. I know people who did Guard fo 6
years
> and and some who did 4 years. Never having done Guard I'm not sure how
they did
> it.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Nobody (other than GW Bush) went through flightschool (during that time
period) with a 4 year NG commitment. :) I served my time, why couldn't Bush
serve his? Why couldn't he maintain flight status? We know he likes to
fly.... at least out to aircraft carriers playing pilot dressup. Gw's
commitment was for 6 years of ACTIVE TANG and he didn't finish it. In the
meantime, men were being drafted and sent to war.

Dan, were you in the service prior to 75?

Phil

[RobertR237]

>> >>
>> >>As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon
>> >>retirement.
>> >>
>> >>Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling
>proves
>> >>absoultely nothing.
>> >>
>> >>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>> >>
>> >
>> >On the contrary Dan, I proves a great deal...just not about Bush.
>> >
>> >
>> >Bob Reed
>>
>>
>> I hadn't look at it that way. You are correct.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> Any of you guys recall NG's with 4 year active reserve commitments in the
>late 60's, early 70's? I don't. Every single NG I knew was on 6 year ACTIVE
>reserve status. I'm sure many of them would have enjoyed getting cut loose
>early too. :)
>
>Phil
>

I seem to remember something along that line but I don't remember the details
of the program. If I recall it was limited to the non-com ranks and was only
for the army NG.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[PAW]

"RobertR237" > wrote in message
...
> >> >>
> >> >>As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon
> >> >>retirement.
> >> >>
> >> >>Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling
> >proves
> >> >>absoultely nothing.
> >> >>
> >> >>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >On the contrary Dan, I proves a great deal...just not about Bush.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Bob Reed
> >>
> >>
> >> I hadn't look at it that way. You are correct.
> >>
> >> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
> >
> > Any of you guys recall NG's with 4 year active reserve commitments in
the
> >late 60's, early 70's? I don't. Every single NG I knew was on 6 year
ACTIVE
> >reserve status. I'm sure many of them would have enjoyed getting cut
loose
> >early too. :)
> >
> >Phil
> >
>
> I seem to remember something along that line but I don't remember the
details
> of the program. If I recall it was limited to the non-com ranks and was
only
> for the army NG.
>
>
> Bob Reed
> www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
> KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....
>
> "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
> pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
> (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)
>

Bob,

Think of the line they would have had if *all* you had to do was a 4 year
active guard hitch to go to *flight school*. Heck, I would have gone in a
heartbeat rather than the SIX years of active duty I got stuck with. :) Not
that I should complain. I managed to stay out of Vietnam too. They sent me
to Okinawa instead. Anyhow, GW was one lucky guy. Anyone else would have
been yanked into active duty or charged with a crime.

And you're correct. They handled enlisted ranks much different. They could
mix it up... 2 active (draft) 4 inactive, 3 and 3, 4 and 2, or all 6. GW had
none of these as options. :)

Phil

[B2431]

>From: "PAW"
>Date: 8/25/2004 6:26 AM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>
>"B2431" > wrote in message
...
>> >From: "PAW"
>> >Date: 8/25/2004 1:22 AM Central Daylight Time
>> >Message-id: >
>> >
>> >
>> >"B2431" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> >From: (RobertR237)
>> >> >Date: 8/23/2004 8:51 PM Central Daylight Time
>> >> >Message-id: >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>From: " jls"
>> >> >>>Date: 8/23/2004 7:10 AM Central Daylight Time
>> >> >>>Message-id: >
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm
>> >> >>
>> >> >>I got as far as the ARPC gag. For those who never served during that
>> >time
>> >> >>frame
>> >> >>let me explain. The site said Bush never finished his 6 year
>commitment.
>> >The
>> >> >>authour has no idea what that means. During that time ALL males 18
>and
>> >over
>> >> >>had
>> >> >>a 6 year obligation unless excused for valid reasons (conscientious
>> >> >objector,
>> >> >>medical etc). This means if one signed up for 3 years active duty in
>the
>> >> >Army
>> >> >>and completed those 3 years and got out he STILL had 3 years inactive
>> >> >>reserves
>> >> >>before being released. If Bush didn't serve his 6 years in either
>Guard,
>> >> >>active
>> >> >>or reserves the remaining time was INACTIVE reserve.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>The six year obligation was the same for officers, warrants and
>> >enlisteds.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>As an aside retirees have a 10 year inactive reserve obligation upon
>> >> >>retirement.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Think what you want about Bush, but wild accusations and name calling
>> >proves
>> >> >>absoultely nothing.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >On the contrary Dan, I proves a great deal...just not about Bush.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Bob Reed
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I hadn't look at it that way. You are correct.
>> >>
>> >> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>> >
>> > Any of you guys recall NG's with 4 year active reserve commitments in
>the
>> >late 60's, early 70's? I don't. Every single NG I knew was on 6 year
>ACTIVE
>> >reserve status. I'm sure many of them would have enjoyed getting cut
>loose
>> >early too. :)
>> >
>> >Phil
>>
>> The commitment was a total of 6 years. I know people who did Guard fo 6
>years
>> and and some who did 4 years. Never having done Guard I'm not sure how
>they did
>> it.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
>Nobody (other than GW Bush) went through flightschool (during that time
>period) with a 4 year NG commitment. :) I served my time, why couldn't Bush
>serve his? Why couldn't he maintain flight status? We know he likes to
>fly.... at least out to aircraft carriers playing pilot dressup. Gw's
>commitment was for 6 years of ACTIVE TANG and he didn't finish it. In the
>meantime, men were being drafted and sent to war.
>
> Dan, were you in the service prior to 75?
>
> Phil

He was qualified on F-102s which were being phased out at the time. I don't
think he had retainability to cross train.

In any event, that was a long time ago and we all suffered in that damn war so
I don't understand why it's such a big part of kerry's campaign. If combat
alone made one qualified to be president the Tim McVeigh was just as qualified.

Yes, I came back from Viet Nam in 1972 and got out of the Army in 1973.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[B2431]

>From: "PAW"
>Date: 8/25/2004 8:52 AM Central


>
> Think of the line they would have had if *all* you had to do was a 4 year
>active guard hitch to go to *flight school*. Heck, I would have gone in a
>heartbeat rather than the SIX years of active duty I got stuck with. :) Not
>that I should complain. I managed to stay out of Vietnam too. They sent me
>to Okinawa instead. Anyhow, GW was one lucky guy. Anyone else would have
>been yanked into active duty or charged with a crime.
>

What crime would that be? Despite all the sputtering by the anti Bush no one
has yet come up with proof he had done anything wrong. The fact remains he
served and was honourably discharged.


> And you're correct. They handled enlisted ranks much different. They could
>mix it up... 2 active (draft) 4 inactive, 3 and 3, 4 and 2, or all 6. GW had
>none of these as options. :)
>
>Phil

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[RobertR237]

>
>Bob,
>
> Think of the line they would have had if *all* you had to do was a 4 year
>active guard hitch to go to *flight school*. Heck, I would have gone in a
>heartbeat rather than the SIX years of active duty I got stuck with. :) Not
>that I should complain. I managed to stay out of Vietnam too. They sent me
>to Okinawa instead. Anyhow, GW was one lucky guy. Anyone else would have
>been yanked into active duty or charged with a crime.
>
> And you're correct. They handled enlisted ranks much different. They could
>mix it up... 2 active (draft) 4 inactive, 3 and 3, 4 and 2, or all 6. GW had
>none of these as options. :)
>
>Phil
>

Phil,

You have been listening to too much hype and not enough facts regarding GW's NG
duty. He did serve his full two years of full time duty and there is only a
question about the last year of weekend duty. Even then, the record keeping
for the weekend NG wasn't all that great and I know of several people who
skipped many of their weekend calls. Rather he did or didn't really doesn't
make one bit of difference now.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[RobertR237]

>
>He was qualified on F-102s which were being phased out at the time. I don't
>think he had retainability to cross train.
>
>In any event, that was a long time ago and we all suffered in that damn war
>so
>I don't understand why it's such a big part of kerry's campaign. If combat
>alone made one qualified to be president the Tim McVeigh was just as
>qualified.
>
>Yes, I came back from Viet Nam in 1972 and got out of the Army in 1973.
>
>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>

It was an issue in Kerry's campaign because he wants to try and use it as some
sort of leverage that he has better qualifications to be commander in chief.
The democrats have been pushing the issue of Bush's National Guard record from
the very beginning. It also takes the heat off of Kerry's voting record which
they really don't want advertised.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Corky Scott]

On 26 Aug 2004 01:37:16 GMT, (RobertR237)
wrote:

>It was an issue in Kerry's campaign because he wants to try and use it as some
>sort of leverage that he has better qualifications to be commander in chief.
>The democrats have been pushing the issue of Bush's National Guard record from
>the very beginning. It also takes the heat off of Kerry's voting record which
>they really don't want advertised.

Fact: Kerry went to Vietnam and fought in combat. Fact: He was a
commander who commanded in combat. Regardless the medals issue and
those swift boat idiots who are funded by close Texan friends of Bush,
and who have direct connections to the Whitehouse whether Bush was
aware of it or not, he went and put himself and his men in harms way,
like all soldiers are supposed to, but sometimes don't. It is said by
many who fought in war that leading soldiers under fire is an all
encompassing leavening process, that it changes you forever and
teaches you to lead.

It's an issue because Bush, for whatever his reasons, chose not to go
to Vietnam, and that's a fact too. Yes he flew an F-102 but as
everyone who knew him and Bush himself admits, he mostly drank and
partied during those years. I would venture to say, there's no doubt
about this either, it's been extensively documented and Bush himself
admits to heavy drinking and partying during those years, as do those
who knew him.

As a young man Kerry - led men in deadly combat during the most
divisive conflict in American history. A conflict that our leaders
who took us there now admit was a HUGE mistake. Some, like Kerry,
figured this out while he was there. He not only had to command his
men, he also had to command his Swift Boat. Loose control of the boat
and you loose control of the situation and put your men in jeopardy.
Most readily admit that Swift Boat duty was tough and dangerous duty.

As a young man Bush - drank and partied while flying stateside for the
National Guard thus avoiding serving in combat. Whether it was his
intent or not, he did not go.

Those were the processes by which these two men learned to lead.
Which process do you think might have the best chance to shape a
decisive leader?

Corky Scott

[Mark Smith]

Corky Scott wrote:
>
> On 26 Aug 2004 01:37:16 GMT, (RobertR237)
> wrote:
>
> >It was an issue in Kerry's campaign because he wants to try and use it as some
> >sort of leverage that he has better qualifications to be commander in chief.
> >The democrats have been pushing the issue of Bush's National Guard record from
> >the very beginning. It also takes the heat off of Kerry's voting record which
> >they really don't want advertised.
>
> Fact: Kerry went to Vietnam and fought in combat. Fact: He was a
> commander who commanded in combat. Regardless the medals issue and
> those swift boat idiots who are funded by close Texan friends of Bush,
> and who have direct connections to the Whitehouse whether Bush was
> aware of it or not, he went and put himself and his men in harms way,
> like all soldiers are supposed to, but sometimes don't. It is said by
> many who fought in war that leading soldiers under fire is an all
> encompassing leavening process, that it changes you forever and
> teaches you to lead.
>
> It's an issue because Bush, for whatever his reasons, chose not to go
> to Vietnam, and that's a fact too. Yes he flew an F-102 but as
> everyone who knew him and Bush himself admits, he mostly drank and
> partied during those years. I would venture to say, there's no doubt
> about this either, it's been extensively documented and Bush himself
> admits to heavy drinking and partying during those years, as do those
> who knew him.
>
> As a young man Kerry - led men in deadly combat during the most
> divisive conflict in American history. A conflict that our leaders
> who took us there now admit was a HUGE mistake. Some, like Kerry,
> figured this out while he was there. He not only had to command his
> men, he also had to command his Swift Boat. Loose control of the boat
> and you loose control of the situation and put your men in jeopardy.
> Most readily admit that Swift Boat duty was tough and dangerous duty.
>
> As a young man Bush - drank and partied while flying stateside for the
> National Guard thus avoiding serving in combat. Whether it was his
> intent or not, he did not go.
>
> Those were the processes by which these two men learned to lead.
> Which process do you think might have the best chance to shape a
> decisive leader?
>
> Corky Scott


with only four months, kerry likely never learned where the lever was
to make the boat go faster,

I've seen bosses who stay 'four months' and the lowlies run the show for
him,,,,,,,,,,
--


Mark Smith
Tri-State Kite Sales http://www.trikite.com
1121 N Locust St
Mt Vernon, IN 47620
1-812-838-6351

[B2431]

>From: Corky Scott
>Date: 8/26/2004 7:53 AM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>On 26 Aug 2004 01:37:16 GMT, (RobertR237)
>wrote:
>
>>It was an issue in Kerry's campaign because he wants to try and use it as
>some
>>sort of leverage that he has better qualifications to be commander in chief.
>
>>The democrats have been pushing the issue of Bush's National Guard record
>from
>>the very beginning. It also takes the heat off of Kerry's voting record
>which
>>they really don't want advertised.
>
>Fact: Kerry went to Vietnam and fought in combat. Fact: He was a
>commander who commanded in combat. Regardless the medals issue and
>those swift boat idiots who are funded by close Texan friends of Bush,
>and who have direct connections to the Whitehouse whether Bush was
>aware of it or not, he went and put himself and his men in harms way,
>like all soldiers are supposed to, but sometimes don't. It is said by
>many who fought in war that leading soldiers under fire is an all
>encompassing leavening process, that it changes you forever and
>teaches you to lead.
>
>It's an issue because Bush, for whatever his reasons, chose not to go
>to Vietnam, and that's a fact too. Yes he flew an F-102 but as
>everyone who knew him and Bush himself admits, he mostly drank and
>partied during those years. I would venture to say, there's no doubt
>about this either, it's been extensively documented and Bush himself
>admits to heavy drinking and partying during those years, as do those
>who knew him.
>
>As a young man Kerry - led men in deadly combat during the most
>divisive conflict in American history. A conflict that our leaders
>who took us there now admit was a HUGE mistake. Some, like Kerry,
>figured this out while he was there. He not only had to command his
>men, he also had to command his Swift Boat. Loose control of the boat
>and you loose control of the situation and put your men in jeopardy.
>Most readily admit that Swift Boat duty was tough and dangerous duty.
>
>As a young man Bush - drank and partied while flying stateside for the
>National Guard thus avoiding serving in combat. Whether it was his
>intent or not, he did not go.
>
>Those were the processes by which these two men learned to lead.
>Which process do you think might have the best chance to shape a
>decisive leader?
>
>Corky Scott

Main Gott, you are comparing anvils to oranges. The leadership a man learns in
combat is how to lead in combat not how to run a corporation. Successful
executives use managment, not leadership. There is a difference.

As for the drinking and partying I can tell you have never been in the
military. I am willing to bet kerry did exactly that between missions. I know I
did when I was in Viet Nam in the Army.

Now then, why does kerry not talk about what he has done in his political life?
Kerry is always alternating between bashing Bush and bring up his Viet Nam
service. I want to hear from kerry what his plans are if by some miracle he
gets elected.

Now the most important question: what has any of this to do with homebuilt
aircraft?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Corky Scott]

On 26 Aug 2004 18:57:27 GMT, (B2431) wrote:

>Now the most important question: what has any of this to do with homebuilt
>aircraft?

Good point. I'd ask Bill Phillips, who originally posted the anti
Kerry story.

Whether Kerry drank in the military isn't the point, I only brought up
that situation regarding Bush because those who knew him in those days
thought he seemed over the top with not just drinking, but bragging
about it. It was basically what he did for evening's entertainment.
And yes, I realise he has turned to god in the most scary of ways and
no longer drinks, that we know of. The point was Kerry chose a
different path. He went to a very unpopular war and led men in combat
in a tough branch of the service. The men he led seem to feel he did
a good job of it.

As to Mr. Bush's education in the corporate world, the information I
keep seeing indicates he was not very sucessful at that.

Corky Scott

[B2431]

>From: Corky Scott
>Date: 8/26/2004 3:19 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>On 26 Aug 2004 18:57:27 GMT, (B2431) wrote:
>
>>Now the most important question: what has any of this to do with homebuilt
>>aircraft?
>
>Good point. I'd ask Bill Phillips, who originally posted the anti
>Kerry story.
>
>Whether Kerry drank in the military isn't the point, I only brought up
>that situation regarding Bush because those who knew him in those days
>thought he seemed over the top with not just drinking, but bragging
>about it. It was basically what he did for evening's entertainment.
>And yes, I realise he has turned to god in the most scary of ways and
>no longer drinks, that we know of. The point was Kerry chose a
>different path. He went to a very unpopular war and led men in combat
>in a tough branch of the service. The men he led seem to feel he did
>a good job of it.
>
>As to Mr. Bush's education in the corporate world, the information I
>keep seeing indicates he was not very sucessful at that.
>
>Corky Scott

Take a look at Lincoln. He failed at almost everything he did before getting
elected president. He did most of his failing after his military service.

My point is what kerry and Bush did during the war has a lot less bearing on
qualifications as an executive than what the have done during the war. Kerry
needs to stop Bush bashing and start telling us what he has done that makes him
qualified for president. Whether you feel Bush is a good president or was a
good governor the fact remains he had experience as an executive, at the very
least his governorship qualifies, before becoming president.

I will say no more about this in this NG since it is not a political group.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Matt Whiting]

Corky Scott wrote:

> On 26 Aug 2004 01:37:16 GMT, (RobertR237)
> wrote:
>
>
>>It was an issue in Kerry's campaign because he wants to try and use it as some
>>sort of leverage that he has better qualifications to be commander in chief.
>>The democrats have been pushing the issue of Bush's National Guard record from
>>the very beginning. It also takes the heat off of Kerry's voting record which
>>they really don't want advertised.
>
>
> Fact: Kerry went to Vietnam and fought in combat. Fact: He was a
> commander who commanded in combat. Regardless the medals issue and
> those swift boat idiots who are funded by close Texan friends of Bush,
> and who have direct connections to the Whitehouse whether Bush was
> aware of it or not, he went and put himself and his men in harms way,
> like all soldiers are supposed to, but sometimes don't. It is said by
> many who fought in war that leading soldiers under fire is an all
> encompassing leavening process, that it changes you forever and
> teaches you to lead.
>
> It's an issue because Bush, for whatever his reasons, chose not to go
> to Vietnam, and that's a fact too. Yes he flew an F-102 but as
> everyone who knew him and Bush himself admits, he mostly drank and
> partied during those years. I would venture to say, there's no doubt
> about this either, it's been extensively documented and Bush himself
> admits to heavy drinking and partying during those years, as do those
> who knew him.
>
> As a young man Kerry - led men in deadly combat during the most
> divisive conflict in American history. A conflict that our leaders
> who took us there now admit was a HUGE mistake. Some, like Kerry,
> figured this out while he was there. He not only had to command his
> men, he also had to command his Swift Boat. Loose control of the boat
> and you loose control of the situation and put your men in jeopardy.
> Most readily admit that Swift Boat duty was tough and dangerous duty.
>
> As a young man Bush - drank and partied while flying stateside for the
> National Guard thus avoiding serving in combat. Whether it was his
> intent or not, he did not go.
>
> Those were the processes by which these two men learned to lead.
> Which process do you think might have the best chance to shape a
> decisive leader?
>
> Corky Scott
>
>


Based on Kerry's voting record in Congress, I'd say Bush.


Matt

[PAW]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >From: Corky Scott
> >Date: 8/26/2004 7:53 AM Central Daylight Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >On 26 Aug 2004 01:37:16 GMT, (RobertR237)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>It was an issue in Kerry's campaign because he wants to try and use it
as
> >some
> >>sort of leverage that he has better qualifications to be commander in
chief.
> >
> >>The democrats have been pushing the issue of Bush's National Guard
record
> >from
> >>the very beginning. It also takes the heat off of Kerry's voting record
> >which
> >>they really don't want advertised.
> >
> >Fact: Kerry went to Vietnam and fought in combat. Fact: He was a
> >commander who commanded in combat. Regardless the medals issue and
> >those swift boat idiots who are funded by close Texan friends of Bush,
> >and who have direct connections to the Whitehouse whether Bush was
> >aware of it or not, he went and put himself and his men in harms way,
> >like all soldiers are supposed to, but sometimes don't. It is said by
> >many who fought in war that leading soldiers under fire is an all
> >encompassing leavening process, that it changes you forever and
> >teaches you to lead.
> >
> >It's an issue because Bush, for whatever his reasons, chose not to go
> >to Vietnam, and that's a fact too. Yes he flew an F-102 but as
> >everyone who knew him and Bush himself admits, he mostly drank and
> >partied during those years. I would venture to say, there's no doubt
> >about this either, it's been extensively documented and Bush himself
> >admits to heavy drinking and partying during those years, as do those
> >who knew him.
> >
> >As a young man Kerry - led men in deadly combat during the most
> >divisive conflict in American history. A conflict that our leaders
> >who took us there now admit was a HUGE mistake. Some, like Kerry,
> >figured this out while he was there. He not only had to command his
> >men, he also had to command his Swift Boat. Loose control of the boat
> >and you loose control of the situation and put your men in jeopardy.
> >Most readily admit that Swift Boat duty was tough and dangerous duty.
> >
> >As a young man Bush - drank and partied while flying stateside for the
> >National Guard thus avoiding serving in combat. Whether it was his
> >intent or not, he did not go.
> >
> >Those were the processes by which these two men learned to lead.
> >Which process do you think might have the best chance to shape a
> >decisive leader?
> >
> >Corky Scott
>
> Main Gott, you are comparing anvils to oranges. The leadership a man
learns in
> combat is how to lead in combat not how to run a corporation. Successful
> executives use managment, not leadership. There is a difference.
>
> As for the drinking and partying I can tell you have never been in the
> military. I am willing to bet kerry did exactly that between missions. I
know I
> did when I was in Viet Nam in the Army.
>
> Now then, why does kerry not talk about what he has done in his political
life?
> Kerry is always alternating between bashing Bush and bring up his Viet Nam
> service. I want to hear from kerry what his plans are if by some miracle
he
> gets elected.
>
> Now the most important question: what has any of this to do with homebuilt
> aircraft?
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>

George Bush has yet to run a successful corportation (or small business for
that matter) without a 'bail-out' from either taxpayers, or foreign
financial intervention (IE the Saudi family).

Also, I have yet to find ANYONE that was allowed to go to flight school with
less than a 6 year ACTIVE duty or reserve commitment. Kerry may be a chump,
but GW Bush is disgusting. How ANY Vet can support this ****-ant is beyond
me. This Vet won't vote for that pile of defecation.

What has this got to do with aircraft? Kerry is an active pilot. GW Bush is
a wanna-be that refused to fulfill his promise to the TANG. Kerry is a
'friend' of aviation. GW Bush is a.... ???

Kerry DOES talk about his political life. You may not be listening. ;)

Phil (U.S. Army 71-77)

[RobertR237]

>wrote:
>
>>It was an issue in Kerry's campaign because he wants to try and use it as
>some
>>sort of leverage that he has better qualifications to be commander in chief.
>
>>The democrats have been pushing the issue of Bush's National Guard record
>from
>>the very beginning. It also takes the heat off of Kerry's voting record
>which
>>they really don't want advertised.
>
>Fact: Kerry went to Vietnam and fought in combat. Fact: He was a
>commander who commanded in combat. Regardless the medals issue and
>those swift boat idiots who are funded by close Texan friends of Bush,
>and who have direct connections to the Whitehouse whether Bush was
>aware of it or not, he went and put himself and his men in harms way,
>like all soldiers are supposed to, but sometimes don't. It is said by
>many who fought in war that leading soldiers under fire is an all
>encompassing leavening process, that it changes you forever and
>teaches you to lead.
>
>It's an issue because Bush, for whatever his reasons, chose not to go
>to Vietnam, and that's a fact too. Yes he flew an F-102 but as
>everyone who knew him and Bush himself admits, he mostly drank and
>partied during those years. I would venture to say, there's no doubt
>about this either, it's been extensively documented and Bush himself
>admits to heavy drinking and partying during those years, as do those
>who knew him.
>
>As a young man Kerry - led men in deadly combat during the most
>divisive conflict in American history. A conflict that our leaders
>who took us there now admit was a HUGE mistake. Some, like Kerry,
>figured this out while he was there. He not only had to command his
>men, he also had to command his Swift Boat. Loose control of the boat
>and you loose control of the situation and put your men in jeopardy.
>Most readily admit that Swift Boat duty was tough and dangerous duty.
>
>As a young man Bush - drank and partied while flying stateside for the
>National Guard thus avoiding serving in combat. Whether it was his
>intent or not, he did not go.
>
>Those were the processes by which these two men learned to lead.
>Which process do you think might have the best chance to shape a
>decisive leader?
>
>Corky Scott

I don't think that any one event will shape a decisive leader. The roads to
any given point are many and varied. Yes, Kerry served in Viet Nam but based
on his testimony and actions after returning from Viet Nam, I have serious
questions about what sort of decisive leader he has become. I even have many
questions about what sort of leader he was in Viet Nam. He testified about
some of the acts our soldiers did in Viet Nam but I wonder if he was speaking
from the personal experience of his own actions.

In any case, both Bush and Kerry have come a long way since then. I much more
concerned with what each is likely to do from here forward than with what they
did 35 years ago. Neither impresses me much in that respect.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Jerry Springer]

Corky Scott wrote:

> As a young man Bush - drank and partied while flying stateside for the
> National Guard thus avoiding serving in combat. Whether it was his
> intent or not, he did not go.
>
> Those were the processes by which these two men learned to lead.
> Which process do you think might have the best chance to shape a
> decisive leader?
>
> Corky Scott
>
>

Corky, Corky, Corky
Are you saying that those that served in the NG should be less proud
of their service in the guard because they did not serve in Vietnam?
I did serve in vietnam and I do not think any less of those that stayed state
side in the NG.

Bush does admit he had a drinking problem and overcame it, I believe that is a
plus for him.

I well not ever forgive Kerry and his cronies for saying I committed atrocities
in Vietnam. I say I because I do take it personally.

Also why is Kerry trying to suppress his own book called "The New Soldier,"
that has a picture of a bunch of hippy types rising the American flag upside down?

Jerry

[Andy Asberry]

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 08:53:59 -0400, Corky Scott
> wrote:

e heat off of Kerry's voting record which
>>they really don't want advertised.
>
>Fact: Kerry went to Vietnam and fought in combat. Fact: He was a
>commander who commanded in combat. Regardless the medals issue and
>those swift boat idiots who are funded by close Texan friends of Bush,

Just who did you expect to finance it? A Democrat? I suspect all of
Kerry's ads are financed by his supporters.

>and who have direct connections to the Whitehouse whether Bush was
>aware of it or not, he went and put himself and his men in harms way,
>like all soldiers are supposed to, but sometimes don't. It is said by
>many who fought in war that leading soldiers under fire is an all
>encompassing leavening process, that it changes you forever and
>teaches you to lead.
>
>It's an issue because Bush, for whatever his reasons, chose not to go
>to Vietnam, and that's a fact too. Yes he flew an F-102 but as
>everyone who knew him and Bush himself admits, he mostly drank and
>partied during those years. I would venture to say, there's no doubt
>about this either, it's been extensively documented and Bush himself
>admits to heavy drinking and partying during those years, as do those
>who knew him.
>
>As a young man Kerry - led men in deadly combat during the most
>divisive conflict in American history. A conflict that our leaders
>who took us there now admit was a HUGE mistake. Some, like Kerry,
>figured this out while he was there. He not only had to command his
>men, he also had to command his Swift Boat. Loose control of the boat
>and you loose control of the situation and put your men in jeopardy.
>Most readily admit that Swift Boat duty was tough and dangerous duty.
>
>As a young man Bush - drank and partied while flying stateside for the
>National Guard thus avoiding serving in combat. Whether it was his
>intent or not, he did not go.
>
>Those were the processes by which these two men learned to lead.
>Which process do you think might have the best chance to shape a
>decisive leader?
>
>Corky Scott
>

[Morgans]

"B2431" > wrote
>
> I will say no more about this in this NG since it is not a political
group.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Amen! If only more felt that way, and all resisted the urge to rebut.

Face it everyone, no opinions will be changed, here,

Yes, I know, I don't have to read it. I do, from force of habit, usually.
--
Jim in NC

[Stan Kap]

Like I said earlier,

B,BB,,BBB,,,,BBBB,,,,BUSH IS AN IDIOT.

Stan K.


"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >From: Corky Scott
> >Date: 8/26/2004 3:19 PM Central Daylight Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >On 26 Aug 2004 18:57:27 GMT, (B2431) wrote:
> >
> >>Now the most important question: what has any of this to do with
homebuilt
> >>aircraft?
> >
> >Good point. I'd ask Bill Phillips, who originally posted the anti
> >Kerry story.
> >
> >Whether Kerry drank in the military isn't the point, I only brought up
> >that situation regarding Bush because those who knew him in those days
> >thought he seemed over the top with not just drinking, but bragging
> >about it. It was basically what he did for evening's entertainment.
> >And yes, I realise he has turned to god in the most scary of ways and
> >no longer drinks, that we know of. The point was Kerry chose a
> >different path. He went to a very unpopular war and led men in combat
> >in a tough branch of the service. The men he led seem to feel he did
> >a good job of it.
> >
> >As to Mr. Bush's education in the corporate world, the information I
> >keep seeing indicates he was not very sucessful at that.
> >
> >Corky Scott
>
> Take a look at Lincoln. He failed at almost everything he did before
getting
> elected president. He did most of his failing after his military service.
>
> My point is what kerry and Bush did during the war has a lot less bearing
on
> qualifications as an executive than what the have done during the war.
Kerry
> needs to stop Bush bashing and start telling us what he has done that
makes him
> qualified for president. Whether you feel Bush is a good president or was
a
> good governor the fact remains he had experience as an executive, at the
very
> least his governorship qualifies, before becoming president.
>
> I will say no more about this in this NG since it is not a political
group.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[RobertR237]

>"B2431" > wrote
>>
>> I will say no more about this in this NG since it is not a political
>group.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>Amen! If only more felt that way, and all resisted the urge to rebut.
>
>Face it everyone, no opinions will be changed, here,
>
>Yes, I know, I don't have to read it. I do, from force of habit, usually.
>--
>Jim in NC

I had to really laugh at your response Jim. You not only read it but could not
resist the urge to rebut as well.

Good Show! <BFG>


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[RobertR237]

>
>Like I said earlier,
>
>B,BB,,BBB,,,,BBBB,,,,BUSH IS AN IDIOT.
>
>Stan K.
>

Well if Bush is an idiot and he is President,

You must be a .... ah hell, never mind we know what you are.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Stan Kap]

Guys,

What makes me feel reeeeaaaal good is that bush is going to loose. It's
funny to see him faltering now and pulling out all the stops to try and get
re-elected. Adios Amigo!!! I just hope the new president can undo what
this idiot has already done. No stand back and watch this drive. Ha, Ha,
HHAA, HHHHAAAA.

Stan K.

"RobertR237" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >Bob,
> >
> > Think of the line they would have had if *all* you had to do was a 4
year
> >active guard hitch to go to *flight school*. Heck, I would have gone in a
> >heartbeat rather than the SIX years of active duty I got stuck with. :)
Not
> >that I should complain. I managed to stay out of Vietnam too. They sent
me
> >to Okinawa instead. Anyhow, GW was one lucky guy. Anyone else would have
> >been yanked into active duty or charged with a crime.
> >
> > And you're correct. They handled enlisted ranks much different. They
could
> >mix it up... 2 active (draft) 4 inactive, 3 and 3, 4 and 2, or all 6. GW
had
> >none of these as options. :)
> >
> >Phil
> >
>
> Phil,
>
> You have been listening to too much hype and not enough facts regarding
GW's NG
> duty. He did serve his full two years of full time duty and there is only
a
> question about the last year of weekend duty. Even then, the record
keeping
> for the weekend NG wasn't all that great and I know of several people who
> skipped many of their weekend calls. Rather he did or didn't really
doesn't
> make one bit of difference now.
>
>
> Bob Reed
> www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
> KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....
>
> "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
> pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
> (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)
>

[Stan Kap]

Hey Bob,

Like I said I didn't insult any of you. But as long as your at it, we all
know what you are, a non thinking, goat loving, BOAB republican who can't
even think for himself.

Stan K.


"RobertR237" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >Like I said earlier,
> >
> >B,BB,,BBB,,,,BBBB,,,,BUSH IS AN IDIOT.
> >
> >Stan K.
> >
>
> Well if Bush is an idiot and he is President,
>
> You must be a .... ah hell, never mind we know what you are.
>
> Bob Reed
> www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
> KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....
>
> "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
> pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
> (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)
>

[RobertR237]

>
>Guys,
>
>What makes me feel reeeeaaaal good is that bush is going to loose. It's
>funny to see him faltering now and pulling out all the stops to try and get
>re-elected. Adios Amigo!!! I just hope the new president can undo what
>this idiot has already done. No stand back and watch this drive. Ha, Ha,
>HHAA, HHHHAAAA.
>
>Stan K.
>

I am glad you feel sooooooo good Stan. I am confused though, if Bush is such
an idiot and you are so smart, why aren't you President and showing us all how
its done. It seems to be that you only know how to call someone, who has
accomplished a lot more than you could ever dream of doing, an idiot. When you
can debate your opinions with something more than "Bush is an idiot, period."
maybe we can see some value to your opinions. Until then, the real idiot is
the one calling another an idiot.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[RobertR237]

>
>Hey Bob,
>
>Like I said I didn't insult any of you. But as long as your at it, we all
>know what you are, a non thinking, goat loving, BOAB republican who can't
>even think for himself.
>
>Stan K.
>

Wrong, you insulted the President of the United States and the Office of the
President, and I take both as a personal insult. You seem totally unwilling or
unable to express any intelligent arguments to support you statements but, just
like you did above, are limited to degrading insults. If that is what you call
thinking for yourself, you are a very non-thinking person.

Oh yes, If my comment below was an insult to you, it was an insult that YOU
filled in yourself and you must know to be true.



>
>"RobertR237" > wrote in message
...
>> >
>> >Like I said earlier,
>> >
>> >B,BB,,BBB,,,,BBBB,,,,BUSH IS AN IDIOT.
>> >
>> >Stan K.
>> >
>>
>> Well if Bush is an idiot and he is President,
>>
>> You must be a .... ah hell, never mind we know what you are.
>>
>> Bob Reed
>
Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Stan Kap]

Bob,

I don't have the skull and bones masonic connections and my daddy didn't
hand me a silver spoon. I also know the I know more than you'll ever know.
That's what I know.

Stan K.


"RobertR237" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >Guys,
> >
> >What makes me feel reeeeaaaal good is that bush is going to loose. It's
> >funny to see him faltering now and pulling out all the stops to try and
get
> >re-elected. Adios Amigo!!! I just hope the new president can undo what
> >this idiot has already done. No stand back and watch this drive. Ha, Ha,
> >HHAA, HHHHAAAA.
> >
> >Stan K.
> >
>
> I am glad you feel sooooooo good Stan. I am confused though, if Bush is
such
> an idiot and you are so smart, why aren't you President and showing us all
how
> its done. It seems to be that you only know how to call someone, who has
> accomplished a lot more than you could ever dream of doing, an idiot.
When you
> can debate your opinions with something more than "Bush is an idiot,
period."
> maybe we can see some value to your opinions. Until then, the real idiot
is
> the one calling another an idiot.
>
>
> Bob Reed
> www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
> KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....
>
> "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
> pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
> (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)
>

[Jerry Springer]

Stan Kap wrote:

> Bob,
>
> I don't have the skull and bones masonic connections and my daddy didn't
> hand me a silver spoon. I also know the I know more than you'll ever know.
> That's what I know.
>
> Stan K.
>

To bad you can't say what you think you know.

[Morgans]

"RobertR237" > wrote > >Amen! If only more felt
that way, and all resisted the urge to rebut.
> >
> >Face it everyone, no opinions will be changed, here,
> >
> >Yes, I know, I don't have to read it. I do, from force of habit,
usually.
> >--
> >Jim in NC
>
> I had to really laugh at your response Jim. You not only read it but
could not
> resist the urge to rebut as well.
>
> Good Show! <BFG>
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ahh, but grasshopper, notice there is no political content!

<even bigger FG>
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"Stan Kap" > wrote in message
...
> Hey Bob,
>
> Like I said I didn't insult any of you. But as long as your at it, we all
> know what you are, a non thinking, goat loving, BOAB republican who can't
> even think for himself.
>
> Stan K.

And you're close to illiterate, to use YOUR in your post, like that.

I would be willing to bet Bush would get that right.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"Morgans" > wrote

> And you're close to illiterate, to use YOUR in your post, like that.
>
> I would be willing to bet Bush would get that right.
> --
> Jim in NC

Oh, and by the way, stan, I'll make an exception for you, and announce that
I put you in my loony bin. PLONK!
--
Jim in NC

[RobertR237]

>
>Bob,
>
>I don't have the skull and bones masonic connections and my daddy didn't
>hand me a silver spoon. I also know the I know more than you'll ever know.
>That's what I know.
>
>Stan K.
>

Yes Sir, you sure make a lot of ass-u-mptions and have totally proven your
point.


>
>"RobertR237" > wrote in message
...
>> >
>> >Guys,
>> >
>> >What makes me feel reeeeaaaal good is that bush is going to loose. It's
>> >funny to see him faltering now and pulling out all the stops to try and
>get
>> >re-elected. Adios Amigo!!! I just hope the new president can undo what
>> >this idiot has already done. No stand back and watch this drive. Ha, Ha,
>> >HHAA, HHHHAAAA.
>> >
>> >Stan K.
>> >
>>
>> I am glad you feel sooooooo good Stan. I am confused though, if Bush is
>such
>> an idiot and you are so smart, why aren't you President and showing us all
>how
>> its done. It seems to be that you only know how to call someone, who has
>> accomplished a lot more than you could ever dream of doing, an idiot.
>When you
>> can debate your opinions with something more than "Bush is an idiot,
>period."
>> maybe we can see some value to your opinions. Until then, the real idiot
>is
>> the one calling another an idiot.
>>
>>



Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[RobertR237]

>
>Well guys,
>
>I've had all the fun I can have with you, I'm leaving this news group for
>greener pastures.
>
>No hard feelings,
>See ya later,
>
>Stan K.
>

TRANSLATION: OOPS, I'm getting my ass kicked and better get the hell out of
here.

BYE!


>Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> "Morgans" > wrote
>>
>> > And you're close to illiterate, to use YOUR in your post, like that.
>> >
>> > I would be willing to bet Bush would get that right.
>> > --
>> > Jim in NC
>>
>> Oh, and by the way, stan, I'll make an exception for you, and announce
>that
>> I put you in my loony bin. PLONK!
>> --
>> Jim in NC
>>
>>

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Stan Kap]

Well guys,

I've had all the fun I can have with you, I'm leaving this news group for
greener pastures.

No hard feelings,
See ya later,

Stan K.

Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Morgans" > wrote
>
> > And you're close to illiterate, to use YOUR in your post, like that.
> >
> > I would be willing to bet Bush would get that right.
> > --
> > Jim in NC
>
> Oh, and by the way, stan, I'll make an exception for you, and announce
that
> I put you in my loony bin. PLONK!
> --
> Jim in NC
>
>

[Stan Kap]

See I can't leave, you guys are asking interesting questions now.

I will be building my own aircraft design, similar to a hummelbird, but not
quite. I'm modifying a geo-metro engine but it won't fit in the hummelbird
fuselage. I have my design modeled and now I'm sizing everything.

I bought Richard Hiscocks book, Light Aircraft Design. It's a very good
text, he works through an all metal high wing design example of his own. He
used to work for Dehaviland, and was one of the designers of the Beaver and
other commercial aircraft, a very intelligent man. Unfortunately, he passed
away a few years ago.

Anyway I have a crude website with pictures of my design and the engine
rebuild in progress. It's at: http://www.metrocraft.bravehost.com/ Have a
look see, and please no more politics, I'm sick of it.

And like I said earlier, no hard feelings, just poking at you guys, Del, Bob
and anyone else I offended.

Stan K.



"Del Rawlins" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:55:10 -0400, "Stan Kap" >
> wrote:
>
> >Bob,
> >
> >I don't have the skull and bones masonic connections and my daddy didn't
> >hand me a silver spoon. I also know the I know more than you'll ever
know.
> >That's what I know.
> >
> >Stan K.
>
> What are you building?
>
>
> ================================================== ==
> Del Rawlins--
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply

[Mark Hickey]

(Del Rawlins) wrote:

>On 27 Aug 2004 02:21:32 GMT, (RobertR237)
>wrote:
>
>>>
>>>Like I said earlier,
>>>
>>>B,BB,,BBB,,,,BBBB,,,,BUSH IS AN IDIOT.
>>>
>>>Stan K.
>>>
>>
>>Well if Bush is an idiot and he is President,
>>
>>You must be a .... ah hell, never mind we know what you are.
>
>Apparently, a stuttering idiot.

With a stuck CapLock key.

I always find it ironic that there are people in the world naive
enough to actually believe that an "idiot" could rise to the most
powerful position on earth. Not to mention that there aren't a lot of
"idiots" with SAT scores above 1200 (unadjusted - that would be higher
numerically today) and who have graduated from both Harvard and Yale.
And how many "idiots" would survive learning to fly F-102s?

By those standards, there wouldn't be many of us who aren't idiots.

Mark Hickey

[Mark Hickey]

"Stan Kap" > wrote:

>Guys,
>
>What makes me feel reeeeaaaal good is that bush is going to loose.

What is he going to "loose"? His tie? His grip on Al Qaeda's gonads?

> It's
>funny to see him faltering now and pulling out all the stops to try and get
>re-elected.

If by "faltering" you mean sitting 3 points ahead of Kerry BEFORE the
convention, dream on. Let's see... last time someone won from that
position was.... errrr... heh.

> Adios Amigo!!! I just hope the new president can undo what
>this idiot has already done. No stand back and watch this drive. Ha, Ha,
>HHAA, HHHHAAAA.

Kerry's past has come back to haunt him. It's only going to get
worse.

Mark Hickey

[Stan Kap]

Mark,

Who ever said he could fly an F-102? Do his records show he soloed an
F-102. Do you have his log books? I can't imagine him flying instruments at
400 mph without running into anything.

I have heard so many people say, I have "X" number of hours of flight time.
Then I ask, what did you fly? They respond, I was a chief mechanic in Hueys
in the army, I have over 800 hours flight time. So, I guess anyone who
flies on commercial airlines has a great deal of flight time too, all
sitting in the back seat going wherever the plane takes them. Just my two
cents.

Stan K. CFI

"Mark Hickey" > wrote in message
...
> (Del Rawlins) wrote:
>
> >On 27 Aug 2004 02:21:32 GMT, (RobertR237)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>>Like I said earlier,
> >>>
> >>>B,BB,,BBB,,,,BBBB,,,,BUSH IS AN IDIOT.
> >>>
> >>>Stan K.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Well if Bush is an idiot and he is President,
> >>
> >>You must be a .... ah hell, never mind we know what you are.
> >
> >Apparently, a stuttering idiot.
>
> With a stuck CapLock key.
>
> I always find it ironic that there are people in the world naive
> enough to actually believe that an "idiot" could rise to the most
> powerful position on earth. Not to mention that there aren't a lot of
> "idiots" with SAT scores above 1200 (unadjusted - that would be higher
> numerically today) and who have graduated from both Harvard and Yale.
> And how many "idiots" would survive learning to fly F-102s?
>
> By those standards, there wouldn't be many of us who aren't idiots.
>
> Mark Hickey

[Del Rawlins]

On 27 Aug 2004 02:21:32 GMT, (RobertR237)
wrote:

>>
>>Like I said earlier,
>>
>>B,BB,,BBB,,,,BBBB,,,,BUSH IS AN IDIOT.
>>
>>Stan K.
>>
>
>Well if Bush is an idiot and he is President,
>
>You must be a .... ah hell, never mind we know what you are.

Apparently, a stuttering idiot.

================================================== ==
Del Rawlins--
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply

[Del Rawlins]

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:55:10 -0400, "Stan Kap" >
wrote:

>Bob,
>
>I don't have the skull and bones masonic connections and my daddy didn't
>hand me a silver spoon. I also know the I know more than you'll ever know.
>That's what I know.
>
>Stan K.

What are you building?


================================================== ==
Del Rawlins--
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply

[Mark Hickey]

"Stan Kap" > wrote:

>Mark,
>
>Who ever said he could fly an F-102? Do his records show he soloed an
>F-102. Do you have his log books? I can't imagine him flying instruments at
>400 mph without running into anything.

That would be your limitation, not his (and the F-102 is a heck of a
lot faster than 400mph as well). The info I have seen says he had 600
hours of flight time by the time he left the NG, and was rated in the
top 5% of the pilots by his commander.

Go to:
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/32/2181.html

for a good summary, if you would prefer to know the truth of the
matter rather than remaining in the fantasy land you're living in now.
Your call... perhaps you enjoy remaining (and appearing) so naive.

Mark Hickey

[B2431]

>From: "Stan Kap"
>Date: 8/26/2004 11:12 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Mark,
>
>Who ever said he could fly an F-102? Do his records show he soloed an
>F-102. Do you have his log books?

Hey, Einstein, he was posted to an operational unit. He WAS qualified.

I can't imagine him flying instruments at
>400 mph without running into anything.
>
>I have heard so many people say, I have "X" number of hours of flight time.
>Then I ask, what did you fly? They respond, I was a chief mechanic in Hueys
>in the army, I have over 800 hours flight time. So, I guess anyone who
>flies on commercial airlines has a great deal of flight time too, all
>sitting in the back seat going wherever the plane takes them. Just my two
>cents.
>
>Stan K. CFI
>

The Army doesn't send pilot trainees into operational units either. You would
know this if you really were a helicopter mechanic.

If you had any idea what USAF fighter pilot training consisted of you would
know stupid people couldn't pass it. If you really were a CFI you would have
some idea of this.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Barnyard BOb -]

>> Like I said I didn't insult any of you. But as long as your at it, we all
>> know what you are, a non thinking, goat loving, BOAB republican who can't
>> even think for himself.
>>
>> Stan K.
>
>And you're close to illiterate, to use YOUR in your post, like that.

Oh me.
Oh my.

Using your criteria...
YOU'RE close to being an illiterate school teacher.

As I remember, YOU'RE a shameless school teacher
that doesn't spell for ****, but excuses himself because
he teaches shop... not English.
>
>I would be willing to bet Bush would get that right.
>--
>Jim in NC

Don't bet the ranch.
You could easily become a homeless teacher
without a_ Corvair_ to live in. <g>


Barnyard BOb - pot, kettle, black.

[Barnyard BOb -]

O
>That would be your limitation, not his (and the F-102 is a heck of a
>lot faster than 400mph as well). The info I have seen says he had 600
>hours of flight time by the time he left the NG, and was rated in the
>top 5% of the pilots by his commander.
>
>Go to:
>http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/32/2181.html
>
>for a good summary, if you would prefer to know the truth of the
>matter rather than remaining in the fantasy land you're living in now.
>Your call... perhaps you enjoy remaining (and appearing) so naive.
>
>Mark Hickey
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Bush may have logged 600 hours of flight time by the time
he left the Guard... if he had 400 before he went in.

It would be naive to believe that Bush flew anything
close to 600 legitimate hours as PIC in the Guard...
although a Baptist would never tell a lie or repeat
hearsay. <g>


Barnyard BOb - trust, but verify.

[RobertR237]

>
>Mark,
>
>Who ever said he could fly an F-102? Do his records show he soloed an
>F-102. Do you have his log books? I can't imagine him flying instruments at
>400 mph without running into anything.
>
>I have heard so many people say, I have "X" number of hours of flight time.
>Then I ask, what did you fly? They respond, I was a chief mechanic in Hueys
>in the army, I have over 800 hours flight time. So, I guess anyone who
>flies on commercial airlines has a great deal of flight time too, all
>sitting in the back seat going wherever the plane takes them. Just my two
>cents.
>
>Stan K. CFI
>
>"Mark Hickey" > wrote in message
...
>> (Del Rawlins) wrote:
>>
>> >On 27 Aug 2004 02:21:32 GMT, (RobertR237)
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >>>
>> >>>Like I said earlier,
>> >>>
>> >>>B,BB,,BBB,,,,BBBB,,,,BUSH IS AN IDIOT.
>> >>>
>> >>>Stan K.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>Well if Bush is an idiot and he is President,
>> >>
>> >>You must be a .... ah hell, never mind we know what you are.
>> >
>> >Apparently, a stuttering idiot.
>>
>> With a stuck CapLock key.
>>
>> I always find it ironic that there are people in the world naive
>> enough to actually believe that an "idiot" could rise to the most
>> powerful position on earth. Not to mention that there aren't a lot of
>> "idiots" with SAT scores above 1200 (unadjusted - that would be higher
>> numerically today) and who have graduated from both Harvard and Yale.
>> And how many "idiots" would survive learning to fly F-102s?
>>
>> By those standards, there wouldn't be many of us who aren't idiots.
>>
>> Mark Hickey

Clearly you have not done any homework regarding Bush's military record and
your uninformed statements of the last few days are clear proof of that fact.
It is not enough to listen to a bunch of half backed detractors who will say
anything and everything to see to it that Bush is not re-elected. Do your
homework and you will find that Bush did indeed fly the F-102 and was a very
qualified pilot. Rather he has flown since then is of no material significance
because many pilots for one reason or another have quit flying. Sometimes, its
simply a case of not enjoying it, sometimes we just get busy with other things
and the years pile up.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[PAW]

"Jerry Springer" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Corky Scott wrote:
>
> > As a young man Bush - drank and partied while flying stateside for the
> > National Guard thus avoiding serving in combat. Whether it was his
> > intent or not, he did not go.
> >
> > Those were the processes by which these two men learned to lead.
> > Which process do you think might have the best chance to shape a
> > decisive leader?
> >
> > Corky Scott
> >
> >
>
> Corky, Corky, Corky
> Are you saying that those that served in the NG should be less proud
> of their service in the guard because they did not serve in Vietnam?
> I did serve in vietnam and I do not think any less of those that stayed
state
> side in the NG.
>
> Bush does admit he had a drinking problem and overcame it, I believe that
is a
> plus for him.
>
> I well not ever forgive Kerry and his cronies for saying I committed
atrocities
> in Vietnam. I say I because I do take it personally.
>
> Also why is Kerry trying to suppress his own book called "The New
Soldier,"
> that has a picture of a bunch of hippy types rising the American flag
upside down?
>
> Jerry
>

" I well not ever forgive Kerry and his cronies for saying I committed
atrocities
> in Vietnam. I say I because I do take it personally."

Are you trying to say what Kerry said was not true? No freefire zones, no
villages burned to the ground, nobody from the 101st collecting VC ears, no
TA312's being cranked on the nutsacks of NVA? ;) You may not like what he
said, but it was true.

Phil
>

[Barnyard BOb -]

>>That would be your limitation, not his (and the F-102 is a heck of a
>>lot faster than 400mph as well). The info I have seen says he had 600
>>hours of flight time by the time he left the NG, and was rated in the
>>top 5% of the pilots by his commander.
>>
>>Go to:
>>http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/32/2181.html
>>
>>for a good summary, if you would prefer to know the truth of the
>>matter rather than remaining in the fantasy land you're living in now.
>>Your call... perhaps you enjoy remaining (and appearing) so naive.
>>
>>Mark Hickey
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>Bush may have logged 600 hours of flight time by the time
>he left the Guard... if he had 400 before he went in.
>
>It would be naive to believe that Bush flew anything
>close to 600 legitimate hours as PIC in the Guard...
>although a Baptist would never tell a lie or repeat
>hearsay. <g>
>
>
>Barnyard BOb - trust, but verify.
==================================

GW Bush time line [abbreviated version]
-=-=-=-=-

GW entered the Guard May 28, 1968

Flight School ............. Nov 68 - Nov 69

Last physical [non pilot] ..... May 1971

G W Bush enrolls at Harvard - Oct 1, 1973

Discharged TANG - 8 month before 6 years

Source....
Chasing George W. Bush and the F-102
http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/bush102.htm


Barnyard BOb - trust, but verify

[Ken Finney]

"Barnyard BOb -" > wrote in message
...
>
> >>That would be your limitation, not his (and the F-102 is a heck of a
> >>lot faster than 400mph as well). The info I have seen says he had 600
> >>hours of flight time by the time he left the NG, and was rated in the
> >>top 5% of the pilots by his commander.
> >>
> >>Go to:
> >>http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/32/2181.html
> >>
> >>for a good summary, if you would prefer to know the truth of the
> >>matter rather than remaining in the fantasy land you're living in now.
> >>Your call... perhaps you enjoy remaining (and appearing) so naive.
> >>
> >>Mark Hickey
> >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> >Bush may have logged 600 hours of flight time by the time
> >he left the Guard... if he had 400 before he went in.
> >
> >It would be naive to believe that Bush flew anything
> >close to 600 legitimate hours as PIC in the Guard...
> >although a Baptist would never tell a lie or repeat
> >hearsay. <g>
> >
> >
> >Barnyard BOb - trust, but verify.
> ==================================
>
> GW Bush time line [abbreviated version]
> -=-=-=-=-
>
> GW entered the Guard May 28, 1968
>
> Flight School ............. Nov 68 - Nov 69
>
> Last physical [non pilot] ..... May 1971
>
> G W Bush enrolls at Harvard - Oct 1, 1973
>
> Discharged TANG - 8 month before 6 years
>
> Source....
> Chasing George W. Bush and the F-102
> http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/bush102.htm
>

Another datapoint, and a question.
1. On a www.democrats.com website it says that GWB had 300+ hours in the
F-102, has anyone seen better data than this?

2. Since I'm not a pilot, I'm curious as to how the pilots view the website
Barnyard BOb listed. To me, it sounds like someone who doesn't know about
aviation writing about it. Especially "If he flew the T-41A at Moody,
should have been his Primary Trainer in '68, he should have been able to fly
the Cessna 172 in '76". I have a Jeep CJ, but the first time I got into an
M38A1, I couldn't figure out how to start it.

[Matt Whiting]

PAW wrote:

> "B2431" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>>From: Corky Scott
>>>Date: 8/26/2004 7:53 AM Central Daylight Time
>>>Message-id: >
>>>
>>>On 26 Aug 2004 01:37:16 GMT, (RobertR237)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>It was an issue in Kerry's campaign because he wants to try and use it
>
> as
>
>>>some
>>>
>>>>sort of leverage that he has better qualifications to be commander in
>
> chief.
>
>>>>The democrats have been pushing the issue of Bush's National Guard
>
> record
>
>>>from
>>>
>>>>the very beginning. It also takes the heat off of Kerry's voting record
>>>
>>>which
>>>
>>>>they really don't want advertised.
>>>
>>>Fact: Kerry went to Vietnam and fought in combat. Fact: He was a
>>>commander who commanded in combat. Regardless the medals issue and
>>>those swift boat idiots who are funded by close Texan friends of Bush,
>>>and who have direct connections to the Whitehouse whether Bush was
>>>aware of it or not, he went and put himself and his men in harms way,
>>>like all soldiers are supposed to, but sometimes don't. It is said by
>>>many who fought in war that leading soldiers under fire is an all
>>>encompassing leavening process, that it changes you forever and
>>>teaches you to lead.
>>>
>>>It's an issue because Bush, for whatever his reasons, chose not to go
>>>to Vietnam, and that's a fact too. Yes he flew an F-102 but as
>>>everyone who knew him and Bush himself admits, he mostly drank and
>>>partied during those years. I would venture to say, there's no doubt
>>>about this either, it's been extensively documented and Bush himself
>>>admits to heavy drinking and partying during those years, as do those
>>>who knew him.
>>>
>>>As a young man Kerry - led men in deadly combat during the most
>>>divisive conflict in American history. A conflict that our leaders
>>>who took us there now admit was a HUGE mistake. Some, like Kerry,
>>>figured this out while he was there. He not only had to command his
>>>men, he also had to command his Swift Boat. Loose control of the boat
>>>and you loose control of the situation and put your men in jeopardy.
>>>Most readily admit that Swift Boat duty was tough and dangerous duty.
>>>
>>>As a young man Bush - drank and partied while flying stateside for the
>>>National Guard thus avoiding serving in combat. Whether it was his
>>>intent or not, he did not go.
>>>
>>>Those were the processes by which these two men learned to lead.
>>>Which process do you think might have the best chance to shape a
>>>decisive leader?
>>>
>>>Corky Scott
>>
>>Main Gott, you are comparing anvils to oranges. The leadership a man
>
> learns in
>
>>combat is how to lead in combat not how to run a corporation. Successful
>>executives use managment, not leadership. There is a difference.
>>
>>As for the drinking and partying I can tell you have never been in the
>>military. I am willing to bet kerry did exactly that between missions. I
>
> know I
>
>>did when I was in Viet Nam in the Army.
>>
>>Now then, why does kerry not talk about what he has done in his political
>
> life?
>
>>Kerry is always alternating between bashing Bush and bring up his Viet Nam
>>service. I want to hear from kerry what his plans are if by some miracle
>
> he
>
>>gets elected.
>>
>>Now the most important question: what has any of this to do with homebuilt
>>aircraft?
>>
>>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>>
>
>
> George Bush has yet to run a successful corportation (or small business for
> that matter) without a 'bail-out' from either taxpayers, or foreign
> financial intervention (IE the Saudi family).
>
> Also, I have yet to find ANYONE that was allowed to go to flight school with
> less than a 6 year ACTIVE duty or reserve commitment. Kerry may be a chump,
> but GW Bush is disgusting. How ANY Vet can support this ****-ant is beyond
> me. This Vet won't vote for that pile of defecation.
>
> What has this got to do with aircraft? Kerry is an active pilot. GW Bush is
> a wanna-be that refused to fulfill his promise to the TANG. Kerry is a
> 'friend' of aviation. GW Bush is a.... ???

Bush as a moral compass, Kerry reads the polls, just like Clinton. If
the polls said that 77% of Americans supported legalizing murder, Kerry
would likely support it also.


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Stan Kap wrote:

> Bob,
>
> I don't have the skull and bones masonic connections and my daddy didn't
> hand me a silver spoon. I also know the I know more than you'll ever know.
> That's what I know.

That didn't stop Abe Lincoln and a few others. If you were smart, you'd
easily be able to overcome such trivial things.


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Stan Kap wrote:

> Well guys,
>
> I've had all the fun I can have with you, I'm leaving this news group for
> greener pastures.

We'll miss you. Just kidding!


> No hard feelings,

Likewise.

Matt

[Mark Hickey]

Richard Riley > wrote:

>On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:31:49 -0400, Matt Whiting
> wrote:
>
>:Stan Kap wrote:
>:
>:> Bob,
>:>
>:> I don't have the skull and bones masonic connections and my daddy didn't
>:> hand me a silver spoon. I also know the I know more than you'll ever know.
>:> That's what I know.
>:
>:That didn't stop Abe Lincoln and a few others. If you were smart, you'd
>:easily be able to overcome such trivial things.
>
>Just thinking recently, humble beginnings didn't stop Clinton, Reagan,
>Carter, Nixon, Johnson, Eisenhauer or Truman.

Or George W. Bush...

http://www.midland-texas.com/midland-texas-george-w-bush.htm

Mark Hickey

[Stan Kap]

Hey Barnraised Boob,

You can kiss my Butt. I use forth grade grammar on this group so guys like
you can understand me. I'm not as concerned about grammar when communicating
in a newsgroup full of lackey's. I'm a mechanical engineer with a masters
degree and have worked at that profession for 20 years. I also teach
technical physics part time at a major university. I've never had any
problems communicating anything to anyone except maybe to a bunch of bone
heads on this news group. I probably earn more than most of you so I really
have no problem with your criticism. Keep it coming.

Stan K.


"Barnyard BOb -" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> >> Like I said I didn't insult any of you. But as long as your at it, we
all
> >> know what you are, a non thinking, goat loving, BOAB republican who
can't
> >> even think for himself.
> >>
> >> Stan K.
> >
> >And you're close to illiterate, to use YOUR in your post, like that.
>
> Oh me.
> Oh my.
>
> Using your criteria...
> YOU'RE close to being an illiterate school teacher.
>
> As I remember, YOU'RE a shameless school teacher
> that doesn't spell for ****, but excuses himself because
> he teaches shop... not English.
> >
> >I would be willing to bet Bush would get that right.
> >--
> >Jim in NC
>
> Don't bet the ranch.
> You could easily become a homeless teacher
> without a_ Corvair_ to live in. <g>
>
>
> Barnyard BOb - pot, kettle, black.

[Stan Kap]

Hey Dan,

I am a CFI and not a helicopter pilot. My point was that people claim to
have flight time and it's only time sitting in the back seat, that was the
point, sorry if it went over your head. Oh, and I bet you greased a lot of
jeeps while you were in the airforce.

Stan K.


"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Stan Kap"
> >Date: 8/26/2004 11:12 PM Central Daylight Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >Mark,
> >
> >Who ever said he could fly an F-102? Do his records show he soloed an
> >F-102. Do you have his log books?
>
> Hey, Einstein, he was posted to an operational unit. He WAS qualified.
>
> I can't imagine him flying instruments at
> >400 mph without running into anything.
> >
> >I have heard so many people say, I have "X" number of hours of flight
time.
> >Then I ask, what did you fly? They respond, I was a chief mechanic in
Hueys
> >in the army, I have over 800 hours flight time. So, I guess anyone who
> >flies on commercial airlines has a great deal of flight time too, all
> >sitting in the back seat going wherever the plane takes them. Just my
two
> >cents.
> >
> >Stan K. CFI
> >
>
> The Army doesn't send pilot trainees into operational units either. You
would
> know this if you really were a helicopter mechanic.
>
> If you had any idea what USAF fighter pilot training consisted of you
would
> know stupid people couldn't pass it. If you really were a CFI you would
have
> some idea of this.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Morgans]

DAMN, MATT!

A 5 kb post, for two lines? Learn to snip, please!
--
Jim in NC

[Jerry Springer]

Stan Kap wrote:
> Hey Dan,
>
> I am a CFI and not a helicopter pilot. My point was that people claim to
> have flight time and it's only time sitting in the back seat, that was the
> point, sorry if it went over your head. Oh, and I bet you greased a lot of
> jeeps while you were in the airforce.
>
> Stan K.
>

Jerks like you give all of us CFIs a bad name.

[Barnyard BOb -]

>Hey Barnraised Boob,
>
>You can kiss my Butt. I use forth grade grammar on this group so guys like
>you can understand me. I'm not as concerned about grammar when communicating
>in a newsgroup full of lackey's. I'm a mechanical engineer with a masters
>degree and have worked at that profession for 20 years. I also teach
>technical physics part time at a major university. I've never had any
>problems communicating anything to anyone except maybe to a bunch of bone
>heads on this news group. I probably earn more than most of you so I really
>have no problem with your criticism. Keep it coming.
>
>Stan K.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

**** off, Stan....

If you will look again, you will see I took_Jim_to task...

** NOT YOU **

you name baiting, **** for brains, egotistical moron.


FWIW....
An intolerable asshole that makes lots of money...
is still an intolerable asshole. Adios, Stan.

- Plonk -

Barnyard BOb




>> >> Like I said I didn't insult any of you. But as long as your at it, we
>all
>> >> know what you are, a non thinking, goat loving, BOAB republican who
>can't
>> >> even think for himself.
>> >>
>> >> Stan K.
>> >
>> >And you're close to illiterate, to use YOUR in your post, like that.
>>
>> Oh me.
>> Oh my.
>>
>> Using your criteria...
>> YOU'RE close to being an illiterate school teacher.
>>
>> As I remember, YOU'RE a shameless school teacher
>> that doesn't spell for ****, but excuses himself because
>> he teaches shop... not English.
>> >
>> >I would be willing to bet Bush would get that right.
>> >--
>> >Jim in NC
>>
>> Don't bet the ranch.
>> You could easily become a homeless teacher
>> without a_ Corvair_ to live in. <g>
>>
>>
>> Barnyard BOb - pot, kettle, black.
>
>

[B2431]

>From: Bashir Salamati ?
>Date: 8/27/2004 9:41 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>In article >, Stan Kap says...
>>
>>Hey Dan,
>>
>>I am a CFI and not a helicopter pilot. My point was that people claim to
>>have flight time and it's only time sitting in the back seat, that was the
>>point, sorry if it went over your head. Oh, and I bet you greased a lot of
>>jeeps while you were in the airforce.
>>
>>Stan K.
>
>Wow.
>
>Do you front a major rock band, cure cancer and walk on water too?

Nope, but I bet he passes water rather nicely when frightened.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[B2431]

>From: "Stan Kap"
>
>
>Hey Dan,
>
>I am a CFI and not a helicopter pilot. My point was that people claim to
>have flight time and it's only time sitting in the back seat, that was the
>point, sorry if it went over your head. Oh, and I bet you greased a lot of
>jeeps while you were in the airforce.
>
>Stan K.

Nope, but I greased a bunch of people whan I was in the Army in Viet Nam.

Based on your posts I seriously doubt you were ever in the military of hold a
CFI.

I am not going to have a juvenile argument nor exchange insults with you.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[B2431]

>From: "Stan Kap"
>Date: 8/27/2004 8:59 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Hey Barnraised Boob,
>
>You can kiss my Butt. I use forth grade grammar on this group so guys like
>you can understand me. I'm not as concerned about grammar when communicating
>in a newsgroup full of lackey's. I'm a mechanical engineer with a masters
>degree and have worked at that profession for 20 years. I also teach
>technical physics part time at a major university. I've never had any
>problems communicating anything to anyone except maybe to a bunch of bone
>heads on this news group. I probably earn more than most of you so I really
>have no problem with your criticism. Keep it coming.
>
>Stan K.
>
>
>"Barnyard BOb -" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>
>> >> Like I said I didn't insult any of you. But as long as your at it, we
>all
>> >> know what you are, a non thinking, goat loving, BOAB republican who
>can't
>> >> even think for himself.
>> >>
>> >> Stan K.
>> >

Does this guy sound like tarver or what?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Jerry Springer]

Stan Kap wrote:
> Hey Dan,
>
> I am a CFI and not a helicopter pilot. My point was that people claim to
> have flight time and it's only time sitting in the back seat, that was the
> point, sorry if it went over your head. Oh, and I bet you greased a lot of
> jeeps while you were in the airforce.
>
> Stan K.
>

BTW Stanley Kapushinski did you ever sell that old 1992 Geo Metro you
had for sale there in PA?

Jerry

[Jerry Springer]

Richard Riley wrote:

> On 28 Aug 2004 05:58:08 GMT, (B2431) wrote:
>
> :Does this guy sound like tarver or what?
> :
> He sounds like Brian "Liability Stealth" Gunn. Where's an Uuberhacker
> when you need one?

He is actually for real, he is a flight instructor named Stanley Kapushinski
that live in PA. The fact that he is an actual flight instructor is kind of scary.

[Del Rawlins]

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:49:00 -0400, "Stan Kap" >
wrote:

>See I can't leave, you guys are asking interesting questions now.
>
>I will be building my own aircraft design, similar to a hummelbird, but not
>quite. I'm modifying a geo-metro engine but it won't fit in the hummelbird
>fuselage. I have my design modeled and now I'm sizing everything.

Translation: You are drawing an airplane.

>Anyway I have a crude website with pictures of my design and the engine
>rebuild in progress. It's at: http://www.metrocraft.bravehost.com/ Have a
>look see, and please no more politics, I'm sick of it.

Looks positively suicidal, but variety is the spice of life.


================================================== ==
Del Rawlins--
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply

[Morgans]

"B2431" > wrote
>
> Does this guy sound like tarver or what?
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Or Dennis Fetters.
--
Jim in NC

[Cy Galley]

The questions still remains... Is Chris Thomas a Real Pilot?

"Del Rawlins" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:49:00 -0400, "Stan Kap" >
> wrote:
>
> >See I can't leave, you guys are asking interesting questions now.
> >
> >I will be building my own aircraft design, similar to a hummelbird, but
not
> >quite. I'm modifying a geo-metro engine but it won't fit in the
hummelbird
> >fuselage. I have my design modeled and now I'm sizing everything.
>
> Translation: You are drawing an airplane.
>
> >Anyway I have a crude website with pictures of my design and the engine
> >rebuild in progress. It's at: http://www.metrocraft.bravehost.com/
Have a
> >look see, and please no more politics, I'm sick of it.
>
> Looks positively suicidal, but variety is the spice of life.
>
>
> ================================================== ==
> Del Rawlins--
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply

[Darrel Toepfer]

Cy Galley wrote:

> The questions still remains... Is Chris Thomas a Real Pilot?

As I stated previously (Google this):
Message-ID: >

A Switchboard search shows 100+ listings for a Chris Thomas. To narrow
that down a bit, a FAA registration search shows a Chris Thomas as an
aircraft owner of a Beech 23 in Ohio. There are 4 CHRISTOPHER Thomas's
that own aircraft, they seem to favor 172's 3 to 1...

[RobertR237]

>
>>Hey Barnraised Boob,
>>
>>You can kiss my Butt. I use forth grade grammar on this group so guys like
>>you can understand me. I'm not as concerned about grammar when communicating
>>in a newsgroup full of lackey's. I'm a mechanical engineer with a masters
>>degree and have worked at that profession for 20 years. I also teach
>>technical physics part time at a major university. I've never had any
>>problems communicating anything to anyone except maybe to a bunch of bone
>>heads on this news group. I probably earn more than most of you so I really
>>have no problem with your criticism. Keep it coming.
>>
>>Stan K.
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>**** off, Stan....
>
>If you will look again, you will see I took_Jim_to task...
>
> ** NOT YOU **
>
> you name baiting, **** for brains, egotistical moron.
>
>
>FWIW....
>An intolerable asshole that makes lots of money...
>is still an intolerable asshole. Adios, Stan.
>
> - Plonk -
>
>Barnyard BOb
>
>

Damn BOb, I do wish you would quit holding back, it is bad for your blood
pressure.

<G>


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Matt Whiting]

Stan Kap wrote:

> Hey Barnraised Boob,
>
> You can kiss my Butt. I use forth grade grammar on this group so guys like
> you can understand me. I'm not as concerned about grammar when communicating
> in a newsgroup full of lackey's. I'm a mechanical engineer with a masters
> degree and have worked at that profession for 20 years. I also teach
> technical physics part time at a major university. I've never had any
> problems communicating anything to anyone except maybe to a bunch of bone
> heads on this news group. I probably earn more than most of you so I really
> have no problem with your criticism. Keep it coming.

If this is really true, I may have to turn in my P.E. license in shame...


Matt

[Barnyard BOb -]

>"Stan Kap" wrote:

>>I will be building my own aircraft design, similar to a hummelbird, but not
>>quite. I'm modifying a geo-metro engine but it won't fit in the hummelbird
>>fuselage. I have my design modeled and now I'm sizing everything.
>
>Translation: You are drawing an airplane.
>
>>Anyway I have a crude website with pictures of my design and the engine
>>rebuild in progress. It's at: http://www.metrocraft.bravehost.com/ Have a
>>look see, and please no more politics, I'm sick of it.
>
>Looks positively suicidal, but variety is the spice of life.

>Del Rawlins
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"I probably earn more than most of you so I really
have no problem.....

Stan K."

So, this is the paper dream of a guy with a Masters
in mech engineering, teaches physics and makes
more money than the rest of us?

This hardly adds up, unless one is destined
for a Darwin Award on the super cheap.

FWIW....
Mech engineers are NOT grouped at the top of the pay scale.
That goes double, in general, for very good part time teachers.
Ask a Fortune 500 employer writing paychecks for valued MBA's.


Barnyard BOb - over 50 years of flight

[Barnyard BOb -]

>>
>>**** off, Stan....
>>
>>If you will look again, you will see I took_Jim_to task...
>>
>> ** NOT YOU **
>>
>> you name baiting, **** for brains, egotistical moron.
>>
>>
>>FWIW....
>>An intolerable asshole that makes lots of money...
>>is still an intolerable asshole. Adios, Stan.
>>
>> - Plonk -
>>
>>Barnyard BOb
>>
>>
>
>Damn BOb, I do wish you would quit holding back, it is bad for your blood
>pressure.
>
><G>
>
>
>Bob Reed
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I wuz overdue. <g>


Barnyard BOb - a rose by any other name is still a rose

[Morgans]

"Cy Galley" > wrote in message
news:44%Xc.105929$TI1.64883@attbi_s52...
> The questions still remains... Is Chris Thomas a Real Pilot?
>

Damn it Cy, don't confuse us, by trying to get us on topic! <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Ron Webb]

"Stan Kap" > wrote in message
...
> Hey Barnraised Boob,
<SNIP>. I also teach technical physics part time at a major university.
<SNIP>
> Stan K.
>


AHHH...a college teacher...Much becomes clear.

He only hates Bush because everyone he knows hates Bush. It's part of the
university culture these days.
Talk about people who can't think for themselves!

By the way, how come Kerry gets credit for 4 months in combat? He took
command of his boat on
30 January , and gave it up on 13 March. That's 6 weeks. The rest of the
time was training (although
he did manage a purple heart for a self inflicted wound during this training
period). Even so, he did
volunteer for combat...that has to count for something.

Now, standing next to the traitorous bitch Hanoi Jane makes him a traitor.
He also has to be guilty of either
Lying to Congress (which makes him a perjurer and thus a felon) ...Or did he
tell the truth (which makes him
a war criminal)? Either way, he is not even legally eligible to be
president.

[jls]

"Ron Webb" > blahblahblah in message
...
>

Yeah, like Billy Bee Badd really got an e-mail he posted in RAH along with
his shilling and wondering whether big, tall, short, fat, scum Chris Thomas
is a pilot.

Here's something to consider, while you do another wet layup or rivet that
trailing edge:

Aug. 27 - Karl Rove makes Chuck Colson look like a girly man. Colson
didnt have the audacity to go after John Kerrys military record when
President Nixon was looking for dirt on antiwar leaders. After
researching Kerrys medals, Colson, who now heads a prison ministry
program, backed off. Maybe Chuck knew he was going to find Jesus back
then because he had a degree of shame, says a senior staffer to a
Senate Republican.

The Kerry campaign thinks it has succeeded in discrediting the
scurrilous attack on Kerrys military service, but Rove got what he
wanted. Instead of talking about a failed war in Iraq and a new report
that shows 1.3 million more Americans living in poverty, were debating
what happened in the Mekong Delta in 1968. The strategy came straight
from the West Wing, says the GOP staffer. Nobody should be confused.
Asked to explain, this Republican says Rove is smart enough to keep
technical distance. But all it takes is a well-placed wink to activate
a web of Bush family hit men, confidantes and deep-pocket donors. They
know what to doits like sleeper cells that get activated, he says,
likening the players to political terrorists.

They sprang into action in 2000 when Bush was running in the primaries
against John McCain. After getting beat in New Hampshire by McCain,
Bushs first event was at Bob Jones University in South Carolina.
Standing next to Bush on the stage was a veteran who went right at
McCain, questioning his Vietnam service while Bush remained silent. A
whisper campaign told voters that McCain had a black child. (The
McCains have an adopted daughter from Bangladesh.) McCain lost the
primary; the veteran became a Bush administration appointee.

The charges advanced by the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth
would never hold up in a court of law. These men would have us
believe, contrary to Navy records and countless eye witnesses, that
Kerry did not act heroically and had a grand plan to manipulate medals
from the military.

Too bad Bob Dole got hauled into this mess. Once known principally as
a GOP hatchet man, Dole had rehabbed himself over the years to war
hero and sardonic wit. Then over the weekend he said all Swift Boat
Veterans for Truth cant be Republican liars. Its the old
where-theres-smoke-theres-fire routine. Why would Dole allow himself
to be used like that? He must have forgotten how Bushs father provoked
him during the 1988 GOP primaries with sleazy allegations. When Vice
President Bush approached him on the Senate floor, Dole blurted out,
Quit lying about my record. The remark helped sink Doles chance for
the nomination.

My Republican mole on Capitol Hill says the green light has gone out
to Republicans to do whatever it takes to get Bush elected. This is
the way we hold onto power, he says with disgust. Pollster John Zogbys
survey of battleground states taken last week as the Swift Boat
controversy raged shows no fundamental change in the race. Its running
its course, and it may boomerang, he says of the attack on Kerrys
heroism. The fact that the sleeper network has gone nuclear is
evidence of Bushs weakness, not his strength, says Zogby. If [the Bush
team] werent seeing serious damage,
they wouldnt be hitting so hard so early. The president is on the
ropes; theres no other way of looking at it.

A lot of Vietnam vets will never forgive Kerry for accusing them of
committing atrocities. Kerry has conceded some hyperbole in his 1971
Senate testimony, but didnt the Toledo Blade win a Pulitzer this year
for uncovering Vietnam-era atrocities? Have we forgotten about the My
Lai massacre and Zippo lighters burning down hooches? Maybe a few
masochists want to debate whether Vietnam was a noble cause, but
58,000 of our soldiers died. The war was a waste whether you were on
the right or the left. Kerry leveled most of his criticism at
political leaders who didnt tell the truth, and who sanctioned search
and destroy missions that invited war crimes. By the time Kerry
testified in 1971, 44,000 American soldiers were already dead. The war
had almost no popular support, yet another 14,000 lives would be lost.

The irony is that Kerry does have courage--the very quality this
smarmy campaign seeks to denigrate. The rap on him is that he is slow
to battle, that it takes a near-death experience to get him fully
engaged. By assailing his heroism, the GOP may have done Kerry a
favor. Maybe theyve awakened a sleeping giant.

Eleanor Clift, August 27, 2004

[Ron Webb]

>To me, it sounds like someone who doesn't know about
> aviation writing about it.

That was my reaction as well.

It has a story about Bush going flying in a rented Cessna 172, and
supposedly not being able to fly it properly. That is interesting, since he
took his basic flight training in a T-41 Mescelero (that's a Cessna 172 to
us civilians).

So here we have a story written by a non pilot, recalling an incident 20
years previous, and judging the man's pilot skills. Or maybe he's just a
political enemy who wants to make Bush look bad. That certainy makes more
sense than the story as told.

Then there's the part about him scaring everyone by "stalling the ENGINE".

....Is it Bull**** yet???

[Barnyard BOb -]

>That would be your limitation, not his (and the F-102 is a heck of a
>lot faster than 400mph as well). The info I have seen says he had 600
>hours of flight time by the time he left the NG, and was rated in the
>top 5% of the pilots by his commander.
>
>Go to:
>http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/32/2181.html
>
>for a good summary, if you would prefer to know the truth of the
>matter rather than remaining in the fantasy land you're living in now.
>Your call... perhaps you enjoy remaining (and appearing) so naive.
>
>Mark Hickey
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Is the above, fact or fiction?
Read this and then decide.....

In February, when the White House made public hundreds of pages of
President Bush's military records, White House officials repeatedly
insisted that the records prove that Bush fulfilled his military
commitment in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.

But Bush fell well short of meeting his military obligation, a Globe
reexamination of the records shows: Twice during his Guard service --
first when he joined in May 1968, and again before he transferred out
of his unit in mid-1973 to attend Harvard Business School -- Bush
signed documents pledging to meet training commitments or face a
punitive call-up to active duty.

He didn't meet the commitments, or face the punishment, the records
show. The 1973 document has been overlooked in news media accounts.
The 1968 document has received scant notice.

On July 30, 1973, shortly before he moved from Houston to Cambridge,
Bush signed a document that declared, ''It is my responsibility to
locate and be assigned to another Reserve forces unit or mobilization
augmentation position. If I fail to do so, I am subject to involuntary
order to active duty for up to 24 months. . . " Under Guard
regulations, Bush had 60 days to locate a new unit.

But Bush never signed up with a Boston-area unit. In 1999, Bush
spokesman Dan Bartlett told the Washington Post that Bush finished his
six-year commitment at a Boston area Air Force Reserve unit after he
left Houston. Not so, Bartlett now concedes. ''I must have misspoke,"
Bartlett, who is now the White House communications director, said in
a recent interview.

And early in his Guard service, on May 27, 1968, Bush signed a
''statement of understanding" pledging to achieve ''satisfactory
participation" that included attendance at 24 days of annual weekend
duty -- usually involving two weekend days each month -- and 15 days
of annual active duty. ''I understand that I may be ordered to active
duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory
participation," the statement reads.

Yet Bush, a fighter-interceptor pilot, performed no service for one
six-month period in 1972 and for another period of almost three months
in 1973, the records show.

The reexamination of Bush's records by the Globe, along with
interviews with military specialists who have reviewed regulations
from that era, show that Bush's attendance at required training drills
was so irregular that his superiors could have disciplined him or
ordered him to active duty in 1972, 1973, or 1974. But they did
neither. In fact, Bush's unit certified in late 1973 that his service
had been ''satisfactory" -- just four months after Bush's commanding
officer wrote that Bush had not been seen at his unit for the previous
12 months.

Bartlett, in a statement to the Globe last night, sidestepped
questions about Bush's record. In the statement, Bartlett asserted
again that Bush would not have been honorably discharged if he had not
''met all his requirements." In a follow-up e-mail, Bartlett declared:
''And if he hadn't met his requirements you point to, they would have
called him up for active duty for up to two years."

That assertion by the White House spokesman infuriates retired Army
Colonel Gerald A. Lechliter, one of a number of retired military
officers who have studied Bush's records and old National Guard
regulations, and reached different conclusions.

''He broke his contract with the United States government -- without
any adverse consequences. And the Texas Air National Guard was
complicit in allowing this to happen," Lechliter said in an interview
yesterday. ''He was a pilot. It cost the government a million dollars
to train him to fly. So he should have been held to an even higher
standard."

Even retired Lieutenant Colonel Albert C. Lloyd Jr., a former Texas
Air National Guard personnel chief who vouched for Bush at the White
House's request in February, agreed that Bush walked away from his
obligation to join a reserve unit in the Boston area when he moved to
Cambridge in September 1973. By not joining a unit in Massachusetts,
Lloyd said in an interview last month, Bush ''took a chance that he
could be called up for active duty. But the war was winding down, and
he probably knew that the Air Force was not enforcing the penalty."

But Lloyd said that singling out Bush for criticism is unfair. ''There
were hundreds of guys like him who did the same thing," he said.

Lawrence J. Korb, an assistant secretary of defense for manpower and
reserve affairs in the Reagan administration, said after studying many
of the documents that it is clear to him that Bush ''gamed the
system." And he agreed with Lloyd that Bush was not alone in doing so.
''If I cheat on my income tax and don't get caught, I'm still cheating
on my income tax," Korb said.

After his own review, Korb said Bush could have been ordered to active
duty for missing more than 10 percent of his required drills in any
given year. Bush, according to the records, fell shy of that
obligation in two successive fiscal years.

Korb said Bush also made a commitment to complete his six-year
obligation when he moved to Cambridge, a transfer the Guard often
allowed to accommodate Guardsmen who had to move elsewhere. ''He had a
responsibility to find a unit in Boston and attend drills," said Korb,
who is now affiliated with a liberal Washington think tank. ''I see no
evidence or indication in the documents that he was given permission
to forgo training before the end of his obligation. If he signed that
document, he should have fulfilled his obligation."

The documents Bush signed only add to evidence that the future
president -- then the son of Houston's congressman -- received
favorable treatment when he joined the Guard after graduating from
Yale in 1968. Ben Barnes, who was speaker of the Texas House of
Representatives in 1968, said in a deposition in 2000 that he placed a
call to get young Bush a coveted slot in the Guard at the request of a
Bush family friend.

Bush was given an automatic commission as a second lieutenant, and
dispatched to flight school in Georgia for 13 months. In June 1970,
after five additional months of specialized training in F-102
fighter-interceptor, Bush began what should have been a four-year
assignment with the 111th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron.

In May 1972, Bush was given permission to move to Alabama temporarily
to work on a US Senate campaign, with the provision that he do
equivalent training with a unit in Montgomery. But Bush's service
records do not show him logging any service in Alabama until October
of that year.

And even that service is in doubt. Since the Globe first reported
Bush's spotty attendance record in May 2000, no one has come forward
with any credible recollection of having witnessed Bush performing
guard service in Alabama or after he returned to Houston in 1973.
While Bush was in Alabama, he was removed from flight status for
failing to take his annual flight physical in July 1972. On May 1,
1973, Bush's superior officers wrote that they could not complete his
annual performance review because he had not been observed at the
Houston base during the prior 12 months.

Although the records of Bush's service in 1973 are contradictory, some
of them suggest that he did a flurry of drills in 1973 in Houston -- a
weekend in April and then 38 days of training crammed into May, June,
and July. But Lechliter, the retired colonel, concluded after
reviewing National Guard regulations that Bush should not have
received credit -- or pay -- for many of those days either. The
regulations, Lechliter and others said, required that any scheduled
drills that Bush missed be made up either within 15 days before or 30
days after the date of the drill.

Lechliter said the records push him to conclude that Bush had little
interest in fulfilling his obligation, and his superiors preferred to
look the other way. Others agree. ''It appears that no one wanted to
hold him accountable," said retired Major General Paul A. Weaver Jr.,
who retired in 2002 as the Pentagon's director of the Air National
Guard.


© Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.

[Tammy]

Forget Alabama. The news today is that Bush transfered to
Massachusetts and not even the Bush campaign claims that he fulfilled
his service there. Not only didn't he fulfill his service, he didn't
even show up. How many times can a man go AWOL during wartime and not
get punished. Evidently, at least twice, if you are a Bush.

Ah, the benifit to being connected to a corrupt political family.

Barnyard BOb - > wrote in message >...
> >That would be your limitation, not his (and the F-102 is a heck of a
> >lot faster than 400mph as well). The info I have seen says he had 600
> >hours of flight time by the time he left the NG, and was rated in the
> >top 5% of the pilots by his commander.
> >
> >Go to:
> >http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/32/2181.html
> >
> >for a good summary, if you would prefer to know the truth of the
> >matter rather than remaining in the fantasy land you're living in now.
> >Your call... perhaps you enjoy remaining (and appearing) so naive.
> >
> >Mark Hickey
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
> Is the above, fact or fiction?
> Read this and then decide.....
>
> In February, when the White House made public hundreds of pages of
> President Bush's military records, White House officials repeatedly
> insisted that the records prove that Bush fulfilled his military
> commitment in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.
>
> But Bush fell well short of meeting his military obligation, a Globe
> reexamination of the records shows: Twice during his Guard service --
> first when he joined in May 1968, and again before he transferred out
> of his unit in mid-1973 to attend Harvard Business School -- Bush
> signed documents pledging to meet training commitments or face a
> punitive call-up to active duty.
>
> He didn't meet the commitments, or face the punishment, the records
> show. The 1973 document has been overlooked in news media accounts.
> The 1968 document has received scant notice.
>
> On July 30, 1973, shortly before he moved from Houston to Cambridge,
> Bush signed a document that declared, ''It is my responsibility to
> locate and be assigned to another Reserve forces unit or mobilization
> augmentation position. If I fail to do so, I am subject to involuntary
> order to active duty for up to 24 months. . . " Under Guard
> regulations, Bush had 60 days to locate a new unit.
>
> But Bush never signed up with a Boston-area unit. In 1999, Bush
> spokesman Dan Bartlett told the Washington Post that Bush finished his
> six-year commitment at a Boston area Air Force Reserve unit after he
> left Houston. Not so, Bartlett now concedes. ''I must have misspoke,"
> Bartlett, who is now the White House communications director, said in
> a recent interview.
>
> And early in his Guard service, on May 27, 1968, Bush signed a
> ''statement of understanding" pledging to achieve ''satisfactory
> participation" that included attendance at 24 days of annual weekend
> duty -- usually involving two weekend days each month -- and 15 days
> of annual active duty. ''I understand that I may be ordered to active
> duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory
> participation," the statement reads.
>
> Yet Bush, a fighter-interceptor pilot, performed no service for one
> six-month period in 1972 and for another period of almost three months
> in 1973, the records show.
>
> The reexamination of Bush's records by the Globe, along with
> interviews with military specialists who have reviewed regulations
> from that era, show that Bush's attendance at required training drills
> was so irregular that his superiors could have disciplined him or
> ordered him to active duty in 1972, 1973, or 1974. But they did
> neither. In fact, Bush's unit certified in late 1973 that his service
> had been ''satisfactory" -- just four months after Bush's commanding
> officer wrote that Bush had not been seen at his unit for the previous
> 12 months.
>
> Bartlett, in a statement to the Globe last night, sidestepped
> questions about Bush's record. In the statement, Bartlett asserted
> again that Bush would not have been honorably discharged if he had not
> ''met all his requirements." In a follow-up e-mail, Bartlett declared:
> ''And if he hadn't met his requirements you point to, they would have
> called him up for active duty for up to two years."
>
> That assertion by the White House spokesman infuriates retired Army
> Colonel Gerald A. Lechliter, one of a number of retired military
> officers who have studied Bush's records and old National Guard
> regulations, and reached different conclusions.
>
> ''He broke his contract with the United States government -- without
> any adverse consequences. And the Texas Air National Guard was
> complicit in allowing this to happen," Lechliter said in an interview
> yesterday. ''He was a pilot. It cost the government a million dollars
> to train him to fly. So he should have been held to an even higher
> standard."
>
> Even retired Lieutenant Colonel Albert C. Lloyd Jr., a former Texas
> Air National Guard personnel chief who vouched for Bush at the White
> House's request in February, agreed that Bush walked away from his
> obligation to join a reserve unit in the Boston area when he moved to
> Cambridge in September 1973. By not joining a unit in Massachusetts,
> Lloyd said in an interview last month, Bush ''took a chance that he
> could be called up for active duty. But the war was winding down, and
> he probably knew that the Air Force was not enforcing the penalty."
>
> But Lloyd said that singling out Bush for criticism is unfair. ''There
> were hundreds of guys like him who did the same thing," he said.
>
> Lawrence J. Korb, an assistant secretary of defense for manpower and
> reserve affairs in the Reagan administration, said after studying many
> of the documents that it is clear to him that Bush ''gamed the
> system." And he agreed with Lloyd that Bush was not alone in doing so.
> ''If I cheat on my income tax and don't get caught, I'm still cheating
> on my income tax," Korb said.
>
> After his own review, Korb said Bush could have been ordered to active
> duty for missing more than 10 percent of his required drills in any
> given year. Bush, according to the records, fell shy of that
> obligation in two successive fiscal years.
>
> Korb said Bush also made a commitment to complete his six-year
> obligation when he moved to Cambridge, a transfer the Guard often
> allowed to accommodate Guardsmen who had to move elsewhere. ''He had a
> responsibility to find a unit in Boston and attend drills," said Korb,
> who is now affiliated with a liberal Washington think tank. ''I see no
> evidence or indication in the documents that he was given permission
> to forgo training before the end of his obligation. If he signed that
> document, he should have fulfilled his obligation."
>
> The documents Bush signed only add to evidence that the future
> president -- then the son of Houston's congressman -- received
> favorable treatment when he joined the Guard after graduating from
> Yale in 1968. Ben Barnes, who was speaker of the Texas House of
> Representatives in 1968, said in a deposition in 2000 that he placed a
> call to get young Bush a coveted slot in the Guard at the request of a
> Bush family friend.
>
> Bush was given an automatic commission as a second lieutenant, and
> dispatched to flight school in Georgia for 13 months. In June 1970,
> after five additional months of specialized training in F-102
> fighter-interceptor, Bush began what should have been a four-year
> assignment with the 111th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron.
>
> In May 1972, Bush was given permission to move to Alabama temporarily
> to work on a US Senate campaign, with the provision that he do
> equivalent training with a unit in Montgomery. But Bush's service
> records do not show him logging any service in Alabama until October
> of that year.
>
> And even that service is in doubt. Since the Globe first reported
> Bush's spotty attendance record in May 2000, no one has come forward
> with any credible recollection of having witnessed Bush performing
> guard service in Alabama or after he returned to Houston in 1973.
> While Bush was in Alabama, he was removed from flight status for
> failing to take his annual flight physical in July 1972. On May 1,
> 1973, Bush's superior officers wrote that they could not complete his
> annual performance review because he had not been observed at the
> Houston base during the prior 12 months.
>
> Although the records of Bush's service in 1973 are contradictory, some
> of them suggest that he did a flurry of drills in 1973 in Houston -- a
> weekend in April and then 38 days of training crammed into May, June,
> and July. But Lechliter, the retired colonel, concluded after
> reviewing National Guard regulations that Bush should not have
> received credit -- or pay -- for many of those days either. The
> regulations, Lechliter and others said, required that any scheduled
> drills that Bush missed be made up either within 15 days before or 30
> days after the date of the drill.
>
> Lechliter said the records push him to conclude that Bush had little
> interest in fulfilling his obligation, and his superiors preferred to
> look the other way. Others agree. ''It appears that no one wanted to
> hold him accountable," said retired Major General Paul A. Weaver Jr.,
> who retired in 2002 as the Pentagon's director of the Air National
> Guard.
>
>
> © Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.

[Stan Premo]

My recollection is that Bush went AWOL one other time that people tend to
forget. While the civilians were dealing with the aftermath of 911, bush
left Florida hell-bent for leather...not to his post...but westward for
safety under fighter escort...later to claim a "radar lock" made him do it.
Of course, the VP was still around...or more correctly, underground.
"Tammy" > wrote in message
om...
> Forget Alabama. The news today is that Bush transfered to
> Massachusetts and not even the Bush campaign claims that he fulfilled
> his service there. Not only didn't he fulfill his service, he didn't
> even show up. How many times can a man go AWOL during wartime and not
> get punished. Evidently, at least twice, if you are a Bush.
>
> Ah, the benifit to being connected to a corrupt political family.
>
> Barnyard BOb - > wrote in message
>...
> > >That would be your limitation, not his (and the F-102 is a heck of a
> > >lot faster than 400mph as well). The info I have seen says he had 600
> > >hours of flight time by the time he left the NG, and was rated in the
> > >top 5% of the pilots by his commander.
> > >
> > >Go to:
> > >http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/32/2181.html
> > >
> > >for a good summary, if you would prefer to know the truth of the
> > >matter rather than remaining in the fantasy land you're living in now.
> > >Your call... perhaps you enjoy remaining (and appearing) so naive.
> > >
> > >Mark Hickey
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> >
> > Is the above, fact or fiction?
> > Read this and then decide.....
> >
> > In February, when the White House made public hundreds of pages of
> > President Bush's military records, White House officials repeatedly
> > insisted that the records prove that Bush fulfilled his military
> > commitment in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War.
> >
> > But Bush fell well short of meeting his military obligation, a Globe
> > reexamination of the records shows: Twice during his Guard service --
> > first when he joined in May 1968, and again before he transferred out
> > of his unit in mid-1973 to attend Harvard Business School -- Bush
> > signed documents pledging to meet training commitments or face a
> > punitive call-up to active duty.
> >
> > He didn't meet the commitments, or face the punishment, the records
> > show. The 1973 document has been overlooked in news media accounts.
> > The 1968 document has received scant notice.
> >
> > On July 30, 1973, shortly before he moved from Houston to Cambridge,
> > Bush signed a document that declared, ''It is my responsibility to
> > locate and be assigned to another Reserve forces unit or mobilization
> > augmentation position. If I fail to do so, I am subject to involuntary
> > order to active duty for up to 24 months. . . " Under Guard
> > regulations, Bush had 60 days to locate a new unit.
> >
> > But Bush never signed up with a Boston-area unit. In 1999, Bush
> > spokesman Dan Bartlett told the Washington Post that Bush finished his
> > six-year commitment at a Boston area Air Force Reserve unit after he
> > left Houston. Not so, Bartlett now concedes. ''I must have misspoke,"
> > Bartlett, who is now the White House communications director, said in
> > a recent interview.
> >
> > And early in his Guard service, on May 27, 1968, Bush signed a
> > ''statement of understanding" pledging to achieve ''satisfactory
> > participation" that included attendance at 24 days of annual weekend
> > duty -- usually involving two weekend days each month -- and 15 days
> > of annual active duty. ''I understand that I may be ordered to active
> > duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory
> > participation," the statement reads.
> >
> > Yet Bush, a fighter-interceptor pilot, performed no service for one
> > six-month period in 1972 and for another period of almost three months
> > in 1973, the records show.
> >
> > The reexamination of Bush's records by the Globe, along with
> > interviews with military specialists who have reviewed regulations
> > from that era, show that Bush's attendance at required training drills
> > was so irregular that his superiors could have disciplined him or
> > ordered him to active duty in 1972, 1973, or 1974. But they did
> > neither. In fact, Bush's unit certified in late 1973 that his service
> > had been ''satisfactory" -- just four months after Bush's commanding
> > officer wrote that Bush had not been seen at his unit for the previous
> > 12 months.
> >
> > Bartlett, in a statement to the Globe last night, sidestepped
> > questions about Bush's record. In the statement, Bartlett asserted
> > again that Bush would not have been honorably discharged if he had not
> > ''met all his requirements." In a follow-up e-mail, Bartlett declared:
> > ''And if he hadn't met his requirements you point to, they would have
> > called him up for active duty for up to two years."
> >
> > That assertion by the White House spokesman infuriates retired Army
> > Colonel Gerald A. Lechliter, one of a number of retired military
> > officers who have studied Bush's records and old National Guard
> > regulations, and reached different conclusions.
> >
> > ''He broke his contract with the United States government -- without
> > any adverse consequences. And the Texas Air National Guard was
> > complicit in allowing this to happen," Lechliter said in an interview
> > yesterday. ''He was a pilot. It cost the government a million dollars
> > to train him to fly. So he should have been held to an even higher
> > standard."
> >
> > Even retired Lieutenant Colonel Albert C. Lloyd Jr., a former Texas
> > Air National Guard personnel chief who vouched for Bush at the White
> > House's request in February, agreed that Bush walked away from his
> > obligation to join a reserve unit in the Boston area when he moved to
> > Cambridge in September 1973. By not joining a unit in Massachusetts,
> > Lloyd said in an interview last month, Bush ''took a chance that he
> > could be called up for active duty. But the war was winding down, and
> > he probably knew that the Air Force was not enforcing the penalty."
> >
> > But Lloyd said that singling out Bush for criticism is unfair. ''There
> > were hundreds of guys like him who did the same thing," he said.
> >
> > Lawrence J. Korb, an assistant secretary of defense for manpower and
> > reserve affairs in the Reagan administration, said after studying many
> > of the documents that it is clear to him that Bush ''gamed the
> > system." And he agreed with Lloyd that Bush was not alone in doing so.
> > ''If I cheat on my income tax and don't get caught, I'm still cheating
> > on my income tax," Korb said.
> >
> > After his own review, Korb said Bush could have been ordered to active
> > duty for missing more than 10 percent of his required drills in any
> > given year. Bush, according to the records, fell shy of that
> > obligation in two successive fiscal years.
> >
> > Korb said Bush also made a commitment to complete his six-year
> > obligation when he moved to Cambridge, a transfer the Guard often
> > allowed to accommodate Guardsmen who had to move elsewhere. ''He had a
> > responsibility to find a unit in Boston and attend drills," said Korb,
> > who is now affiliated with a liberal Washington think tank. ''I see no
> > evidence or indication in the documents that he was given permission
> > to forgo training before the end of his obligation. If he signed that
> > document, he should have fulfilled his obligation."
> >
> > The documents Bush signed only add to evidence that the future
> > president -- then the son of Houston's congressman -- received
> > favorable treatment when he joined the Guard after graduating from
> > Yale in 1968. Ben Barnes, who was speaker of the Texas House of
> > Representatives in 1968, said in a deposition in 2000 that he placed a
> > call to get young Bush a coveted slot in the Guard at the request of a
> > Bush family friend.
> >
> > Bush was given an automatic commission as a second lieutenant, and
> > dispatched to flight school in Georgia for 13 months. In June 1970,
> > after five additional months of specialized training in F-102
> > fighter-interceptor, Bush began what should have been a four-year
> > assignment with the 111th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron.
> >
> > In May 1972, Bush was given permission to move to Alabama temporarily
> > to work on a US Senate campaign, with the provision that he do
> > equivalent training with a unit in Montgomery. But Bush's service
> > records do not show him logging any service in Alabama until October
> > of that year.
> >
> > And even that service is in doubt. Since the Globe first reported
> > Bush's spotty attendance record in May 2000, no one has come forward
> > with any credible recollection of having witnessed Bush performing
> > guard service in Alabama or after he returned to Houston in 1973.
> > While Bush was in Alabama, he was removed from flight status for
> > failing to take his annual flight physical in July 1972. On May 1,
> > 1973, Bush's superior officers wrote that they could not complete his
> > annual performance review because he had not been observed at the
> > Houston base during the prior 12 months.
> >
> > Although the records of Bush's service in 1973 are contradictory, some
> > of them suggest that he did a flurry of drills in 1973 in Houston -- a
> > weekend in April and then 38 days of training crammed into May, June,
> > and July. But Lechliter, the retired colonel, concluded after
> > reviewing National Guard regulations that Bush should not have
> > received credit -- or pay -- for many of those days either. The
> > regulations, Lechliter and others said, required that any scheduled
> > drills that Bush missed be made up either within 15 days before or 30
> > days after the date of the drill.
> >
> > Lechliter said the records push him to conclude that Bush had little
> > interest in fulfilling his obligation, and his superiors preferred to
> > look the other way. Others agree. ''It appears that no one wanted to
> > hold him accountable," said retired Major General Paul A. Weaver Jr.,
> > who retired in 2002 as the Pentagon's director of the Air National
> > Guard.
> >
> >
> > © Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.

[Rich S.]

"Barnyard BOb -" > wrote in message
...
>
> Is the above, fact or fiction?
> Read this and then decide.....

Ditto, BOb..........

================================================== ===========

Begin quote:

Unlike McCain, Bush, and Gore; Kerry has adamantly refused to authorize the
release of his military records. Most think it's because of his phony battle
medals. I think the real reason is below. He was not granted an Honorable
Discharge until March 2001, almost 30 years after his ostensible service
term had ended! This is very much out of the ordinary, and highly suspect.


There are 5 classes of Discharge: Honorable, General, Other Than Honorable,

Bad Conduct, and Dishonorable. My guess is that he was Discharged in the
'70s, but not Honorably. He appealed this sometime while Clinton was doing
trouser-tricks in the Oval Office. Political pressure was applied, and the
Honorable Discharge was then granted.

His file is probably rife with reports of this, submissions and hearings on
the appeal, reports of his "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy, along with
protests that were filed with respect to his alleged valor under fire.

This will blow up in his face before October 15th.

================================================== ==============


On 18 Feb. 1966 John Kerry signed a 6 year enlistment contract with
the Navy (plus a 6-month extension during wartime).

On 18 Feb. 1966 John Kerry also signed an Officer Candidate contract
for 6 years -- 5 years of ACTIVE duty & ACTIVE Naval Reserves, and 1 year of
inactive standby reserves (See items #4 & $5).

Because John Kerry was discharged from TOTAL ACTIVE DUTY of only 3
years and 18 days on 3 Jan. 1970, he was then required to attend 48 drills
per year, and not more than 17 days active duty for training. Kerry was
also subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Additionally, Kerry,
as a commissioned officer, was prohibited from making adverse statements
against his chain of command or statements against his country, especially
during time of war. It is also interesting to note t! hat Kerry did not
obtain an honorable discharge until Mar. 12, 2001 even though his service
obligation should have ended July 1, 1972.

Lt. John Kerry's letter of 21 Nov. 1969 asking for an early release
from active US Navy duty falsely states "My current regular period of
obligated service would be completed in December of this year."

On Jan. 3, 1970 Lt. John Kerry was transferred to the Naval Reserve
Manpower Center in Bainridge, Maryland.

Where are Kerry's Performance Records for 2 years of obligated Ready
Reserve, the 48 drills per year required and his 17 days of active duty per
year training while Kerry was in the Ready Reserves? Have these records
been released?

Has anyone ever talked to Kerry's Commanding Officer at the Naval
Reserve Center where Kerry drilled?

On 1 July 1972 Lt. John Kerry was transferred to Standby Reserve -
Inactive.
On 16 February 1978 Lt. John Kerry was discharged from US Naval
Reserve.

Below are some of the crimes Lt. Kerry USNR committed as a Ready
Reservist, while he was acting as a leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the
War:

1. Lt. Kerry attended many rallies where the Vietcong flag was
displayed while our flag was desecrated, defiled, and mocked, thereby giving
aid and comfort to the enemy.
2. Lt. Kerry was involved in a meeting that voted on assassinating
members of the US Senate.
3. Lt. Kerry lied under oath against fellow soldiers before the US
Senate about crimes committed in Vietnam.
4. Lt. Kerry professed to being a war criminal on national
television, and condemned the military and the USA.
5. Lt. Kerry met with NVA and Vietcong communist leaders in Paris, in
direct violation of the UCMJ and the U.S. Constitution.

Lt. Kerry by his own words & actions violated the UCMJ and the U.S.
Code while serving as a Navy officer. Lt. Kerry stands in violation of
Article 3, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. Lt. Kerry's 1970 meeting
with NVA Communists in Paris is in direct violation of the UCMJ's Article
104 part 904, and U.S. Code 18 U.S.C. 953. That meeting, and Kerry's
subsequent support of the communists while leading mass protests against our
military in the year that followed, also place him in direct violation of
our Constitution! 's Article 3, Section 3, which defines treason as "giving
aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of warfare.

The Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, states, "No person
shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President
and Vice-President ... having previously taken an oath . to support the
Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or
rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."


By A. L. "Steve" Nash, MAC Ret, UDT/SEAL SEAL Authentication Team -
Director AuthentiSEAL Phone 707 438 0120 "The only service where all
investigators are US Navy SEALs" http://www.authentiseal.org/

[Ken Finney]

"Stan Premo" > wrote in message
...
> My recollection is that Bush went AWOL one other time that people tend to
> forget. While the civilians were dealing with the aftermath of 911, bush
> left Florida hell-bent for leather...not to his post...but westward for
> safety under fighter escort...later to claim a "radar lock" made him do
it.
> Of course, the VP was still around...or more correctly, underground.

When I become President, remind me not to hire you as part of my
Secret Service.

[W P Dixon]

HAHA, Some people just have no sense. When an attack is commited against the
USA, it is the Secret Service's JOB to get the President to a place of
reasonable safety, as with the Vice President and other leaders. It is
called "protecting the chain of command". If you have ever served this
nation in the military , you would know this.
i think the biggest thing with this election is the man who claims to be
a Democrat is not one, he is a Commie. Look at the FBI files on John Kerry,
they are public record. His going to Paris against the UCMJ and our
Constitution just proves to the beliefs of the FBI back in the early 70's. I
do not agree with alot of Bush policy but I will NEVER vote for a COMMIE! I
swore to uphold the Constitution against all enemies foreign and
domestic....John "Commie" Kerry is such an enemy. I would advise some
serious homework on Kerry before deciding to throw away our country to
Communism. Remember their are two problems in this country Republicans and
Democrats...it's time for people to think for themselves and not have a
"party" think for you. The USSR had a two party system too...remember!
But I see the threat of this election as a Communist saying he is a
Democrat..John "Commie" Kerry.
"Ken Finney" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Stan Premo" > wrote in message
> ...
> > My recollection is that Bush went AWOL one other time that people tend
to
> > forget. While the civilians were dealing with the aftermath of 911, bush
> > left Florida hell-bent for leather...not to his post...but westward for
> > safety under fighter escort...later to claim a "radar lock" made him do
> it.
> > Of course, the VP was still around...or more correctly, underground.
>
> When I become President, remind me not to hire you as part of my
> Secret Service.
>
>
>

[RobertR237]

>> My recollection is that Bush went AWOL one other time that people tend to
>> forget. While the civilians were dealing with the aftermath of 911, bush
>> left Florida hell-bent for leather...not to his post...but westward for
>> safety under fighter escort...later to claim a "radar lock" made him do
>it.
>> Of course, the VP was still around...or more correctly, underground.
>
>When I become President, remind me not to hire you as part of my
>Secret Service.
>
>
>

Bush was taken to SAC Headquarters at Offut AFB, just outside of Omaha. That
happens to be one of a several full command posts setup for just such a
purpose. It has all of the communications and control systems necessary to
command any response to an attack. It wasn't that Bush chose to go there, it
was one of the predetermined locations to be used until the extent of the
threat could be determined.

Only a totally ignorant fool would consider those actions to be something to
find fault with. So consider the source.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Darrel Toepfer]

RobertR237 wrote:

> Bush was taken to SAC Headquarters at Offut AFB, just outside of Omaha.

But first he stopped off here in Louisiana, our B52 base in Shreveport
as I remember... Had a close encounter with a GA vehicle on the way from
Florida too, as I also remember...

[Barnyard BOb -]

On 8 Sep 2004 11:36:55 -0700, (Tammy) wrote:

>Forget Alabama. The news today is that Bush transfered to
>Massachusetts and not even the Bush campaign claims that he fulfilled
>his service there. Not only didn't he fulfill his service, he didn't
>even show up. How many times can a man go AWOL during wartime and not
>get punished. Evidently, at least twice, if you are a Bush.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Yoo hoo...
Are you awake?
Ths WAS addressed in the attached BOSTON Globe piece.
Let me snip all else so you might see....


>> On July 30, 1973, shortly before he moved from Houston to Cambridge,
>> Bush signed a document that declared, ''It is my responsibility to
>> locate and be assigned to another Reserve forces unit or mobilization
>> augmentation position. If I fail to do so, I am subject to involuntary
>> order to active duty for up to 24 months. . . " Under Guard
>> regulations, Bush had 60 days to locate a new unit.
>>
>> But Bush never signed up with a Boston-area unit. In 1999, Bush
>> spokesman Dan Bartlett told the Washington Post that Bush finished his
>> six-year commitment at a Boston area Air Force Reserve unit after he
>> left Houston. Not so, Bartlett now concedes. ''I must have misspoke,"
>> Bartlett, who is now the White House communications director, said in
>> a recent interview.
>>
>> © Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.

[John]

According to todays newspaper in Virginia Beach, Va. . . ((I have not
personally researched this!) so don't shoot me).

"The new documents surfaced as the Bush administration for the first time
released the president's logs, which have been the focus of repeated
archival searches and Freedom of Information Act requests dating to the
2000 presidential campaign. The logs show that Bush stopped flying in April
1972 after racking up more than 570 hours of flight time between 1969-1972,
much of it on an F-102 interceptor jet."

I know they just said "much" not how many hours. Like I said I didn't see
the logs myself just the newspaper article.
John

Yes he was a F-102 pilot yes he did serve (and probably got off light
because of his "pull") but he did not trash his fellow pilots and crews
after leaving the service ala Kerry!






> ONE MORE TIME....
> My_ONLY_reason for being here is to dispute the
> notion that GWB had the F-102 flying time claimed
> in this thread. Nothing more, nothing less.
>
> From what I can glean, GWB completed basic
> student flight training and F-102 training over 18 months.
> That may be worth a grand total of 120 flight hours.
> Dunno fer sure, 'cause my USAF pilot training days
> were a decade before GWB.
>
> Other than that....
> **** the agenda of politics, hidden or otherwise.
> For me, leopards don't change their spots over
> 35 minutes.... or 35 years. What GWB was 35 years
> ago, he still is today.
>
> YMMV.
>
>
> Barnyard BOb -

[Barnyard BOb -]

"Rich S." wrote:

>
>Begin quote:
>
>Unlike McCain, Bush, and Gore; Kerry has adamantly refused to authorize the
>release of his military records. Most think it's because of his phony battle
>medals.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Defend Bush to the hilt.
Smear Kerry.
Whatever.
I don't care.

No question that....
GWB played the system for all it's worth.
GWB is still playing the system for all it's worth.
Good for him.
Ditto for Kerry milking the system, too.
Ditto Bill Clinton.
Ditto Monica Lewinsky....
ad nauseam.

I came into this thread in an attempt to show that there
is little chance that Bush could have the F-102 flying
time that was being touted/claimed here since most
GWB documentable time was spent anywhere but
near an F102..... or any military installation/facility.

If GWB is concealing nothing....
His logbook(s) or copies are available for public
scrutiny via military and/or personal documents.
Please tell where they may be viewed....
or do we have TWO PHONIES running for President?


Barnyard BOb - if their lips are moving, they're lying.

[RobertR237]

>
>>
>>Begin quote:
>>
>>Unlike McCain, Bush, and Gore; Kerry has adamantly refused to authorize the
>>release of his military records. Most think it's because of his phony battle
>
>>medals.
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>Defend Bush to the hilt.
>Smear Kerry.
>Whatever.
>I don't care.
>
>No question that....
>GWB played the system for all it's worth.
>GWB is still playing the system for all it's worth.
>Good for him.
>Ditto for Kerry milking the system, too.
>Ditto Bill Clinton.
>Ditto Monica Lewinsky....
>ad nauseam.
>
>I came into this thread in an attempt to show that there
>is little chance that Bush could have the F-102 flying
>time that was being touted/claimed here since most
>GWB documentable time was spent anywhere but
>near an F102..... or any military installation/facility.
>
>If GWB is concealing nothing....
>His logbook(s) or copies are available for public
>scrutiny via military and/or personal documents.
>Please tell where they may be viewed....
>or do we have TWO PHONIES running for President?
>

We have to candidates who's past military record has nothing to do with their
current abilities to be President. Way too much time has been expended on what
they did 35 years ago and too little on what they can and will do for our
country. So far, I have not seen any good reasons to vote for either one, only
some reasons for possibly voting against both.

>
>Barnyard BOb - if their lips are moving, they're lying.
>
>
>
>


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Mark Hickey]

Barnyard BOb - > wrote:

>I came into this thread in an attempt to show that there
>is little chance that Bush could have the F-102 flying
>time that was being touted/claimed here since most
>GWB documentable time was spent anywhere but
>near an F102..... or any military installation/facility.

One of the documents that just surfaced (documents that procedurally
should have been destroyed over thirty years ago, but weren't) shows
his actual logged time in each type of aircraft. I don't remember
specifically, but he had over 300 hours of PIC time of an F-102.

>If GWB is concealing nothing....
>His logbook(s) or copies are available for public
>scrutiny via military and/or personal documents.
>Please tell where they may be viewed....
>or do we have TWO PHONIES running for President?

One of the candidates signed the form opening every document in his
military background for scrutiny (which is obviously coming in waves).
The other has yet to do so.

Mark Hickey

[Barnyard BOb -]

On 09 Sep 2004 12:37:28 GMT, (RobertR237)
wrote:


>>If GWB is concealing nothing....
>>His logbook(s) or copies are available for public
>>scrutiny via military and/or personal documents.
>>Please tell where they may be viewed....
>>or do we have TWO PHONIES running for President?
>>
>
>We have to candidates who's past military record has nothing to do with their
>current abilities to be President. Way too much time has been expended on what
>they did 35 years ago and too little on what they can and will do for our
>country. So far, I have not seen any good reasons to vote for either one, only
>some reasons for possibly voting against both.
>
>
>Bob Reed
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

ONE MORE TIME....
My_ONLY_reason for being here is to dispute the
notion that GWB had the F-102 flying time claimed
in this thread. Nothing more, nothing less.

From what I can glean, GWB completed basic
student flight training and F-102 training over 18 months.
That may be worth a grand total of 120 flight hours.
Dunno fer sure, 'cause my USAF pilot training days
were a decade before GWB.

Other than that....
**** the agenda of politics, hidden or otherwise.
For me, leopards don't change their spots over
35 minutes.... or 35 years. What GWB was 35 years
ago, he still is today.

YMMV.


Barnyard BOb -

[Barnyard BOb -]

>Barnyard BOb - > wrote:
>
>>I came into this thread in an attempt to show that there
>>is little chance that Bush could have the F-102 flying
>>time that was being touted/claimed here since most
>>GWB documentable time was spent anywhere but
>>near an F102..... or any military installation/facility.
>
>One of the documents that just surfaced (documents that procedurally
>should have been destroyed over thirty years ago, but weren't) shows
>his actual logged time in each type of aircraft. I don't remember
>specifically, but he had over 300 hours of PIC time of an F-102.

>Mark Hickey
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

How convenient. <g>

Who has seen this proof?
Where can it be seen NOW...
and who has judged the authenticity?

Got any reliable references that I can research?


Barnyard BOb - trust, but verify.

[Tammy]

I must have been asleep - does that qualify me to be the Republican
Candidate for President?

My only excuse is that I'm a blonde, and it was all Bill Clinton's
fault.

Barnyard BOb - > wrote in message >...
> On 8 Sep 2004 11:36:55 -0700, (Tammy) wrote:
>
> >Forget Alabama. The news today is that Bush transfered to
> >Massachusetts and not even the Bush campaign claims that he fulfilled
> >his service there. Not only didn't he fulfill his service, he didn't
> >even show up. How many times can a man go AWOL during wartime and not
> >get punished. Evidently, at least twice, if you are a Bush.
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Yoo hoo...
> Are you awake?
> Ths WAS addressed in the attached BOSTON Globe piece.
> Let me snip all else so you might see....
>
>
> >> On July 30, 1973, shortly before he moved from Houston to Cambridge,
> >> Bush signed a document that declared, ''It is my responsibility to
> >> locate and be assigned to another Reserve forces unit or mobilization
> >> augmentation position. If I fail to do so, I am subject to involuntary
> >> order to active duty for up to 24 months. . . " Under Guard
> >> regulations, Bush had 60 days to locate a new unit.
> >>
> >> But Bush never signed up with a Boston-area unit. In 1999, Bush
> >> spokesman Dan Bartlett told the Washington Post that Bush finished his
> >> six-year commitment at a Boston area Air Force Reserve unit after he
> >> left Houston. Not so, Bartlett now concedes. ''I must have misspoke,"
> >> Bartlett, who is now the White House communications director, said in
> >> a recent interview.
> >>
> >> © Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
Barnyard BOb - > wrote:

> On 09 Sep 2004 12:37:28 GMT, (RobertR237)
> wrote:
>
>
> >>If GWB is concealing nothing....
> >>His logbook(s) or copies are available for public
> >>scrutiny via military and/or personal documents.
> >>Please tell where they may be viewed....
> >>or do we have TWO PHONIES running for President?
> >>
> >
> >We have to candidates who's past military record has nothing to do with
> >their
> >current abilities to be President. Way too much time has been expended on
> >what
> >they did 35 years ago and too little on what they can and will do for our
> >country. So far, I have not seen any good reasons to vote for either one,
> >only
> >some reasons for possibly voting against both.
> >
> >
> >Bob Reed
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> ONE MORE TIME....
> My_ONLY_reason for being here is to dispute the
> notion that GWB had the F-102 flying time claimed
> in this thread. Nothing more, nothing less.
>
> From what I can glean, GWB completed basic
> student flight training and F-102 training over 18 months.
> That may be worth a grand total of 120 flight hours.
> Dunno fer sure, 'cause my USAF pilot training days
> were a decade before GWB.
>
> Other than that....
> **** the agenda of politics, hidden or otherwise.
> For me, leopards don't change their spots over
> 35 minutes.... or 35 years. What GWB was 35 years
> ago, he still is today.


That then leaves us with a choice between a potential shirker of duty
and one who betrayed his buddies and trashed them publicly.

What a choice!

[BllFs6]

>> **** the agenda of politics, hidden or otherwise.
>> For me, leopards don't change their spots over
>> 35 minutes.... or 35 years. What GWB was 35 years
>> ago, he still is today.
>
>
>That then leaves us with a choice between a potential shirker of duty
>and one who betrayed his buddies and trashed them publicly.
>
>What a choice!
>
>
>
>
>
>

Screw 35 years ago....unless you have a murder conviction to roll out.....

Both guys risked THEIR LIVES 35 years ago...one in combat...one flying old
style jets....and NEITHERs story is squeaky clean.....

You know Bushs history as president for almost 4 years, and before that his
work as gubner of Texas

And then you have what Kerry says he will do and what he has "done" the in the
past 10 to 20" years.....

Decide on THAT and then vote....

geez, whats next ? presidential candidates potty training records?

Blll

[Ken Finney]

"RobertR237" > wrote in message
...
> >> My recollection is that Bush went AWOL one other time that people tend
to
> >> forget. While the civilians were dealing with the aftermath of 911,
bush
> >> left Florida hell-bent for leather...not to his post...but westward for
> >> safety under fighter escort...later to claim a "radar lock" made him do
> >it.
> >> Of course, the VP was still around...or more correctly, underground.
> >
> >When I become President, remind me not to hire you as part of my
> >Secret Service.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Bush was taken to SAC Headquarters at Offut AFB, just outside of Omaha.
That
> happens to be one of a several full command posts setup for just such a
> purpose. It has all of the communications and control systems necessary
to
> command any response to an attack. It wasn't that Bush chose to go there,
it
> was one of the predetermined locations to be used until the extent of the
> threat could be determined.
>
> Only a totally ignorant fool would consider those actions to be something
to
> find fault with. So consider the source.
>

Just for clarity, I was the person responding to Robert's posting who typed
"When
I become President", and I was defending GWB not going back to Washington
DC.
There was a real fear that something like a Learjet was going to try to
collide with AF1,
so they decided:
1. Not to fly back to DC
2. Send out disinformation that AF1 was heading for Wright-Patterson AFB.
3. Send AF1 to Offut AFB.

Damn good work on the Secret Service's part. Full marks.

[Cy Galley]

Thursday, Sept. 2, 2004 12:08 a.m. EDT Navy Challenging Kerry's Medals

The United States Navy is challenging the authenticity of Sen. John Kerry's
Vietnam War medals, in a development that could prove to be the most
damaging yet to the embattled Democrat's presidential campaign.

A Navy spokesman is calling Kerry's Silver Star citation with Combat V
"incorrect" as it appears on his campaign web site, explaining in an
interview with Chicago Sun-Times reporter Thomas Lipscomb that the Navy has
never issued a Combat V at any time for the Silver Star.



The Navy is also questioning the listing on Kerry's web site for four bronze
campaign stars for his service in Vietnam. The official naval record credits
Kerry with just two Vietnam campaigns. "That is sufficient for the wearing
of the Vietnam Service Medal for one campaign bearing one campaign star for
the additional campaign - not four," reports Lipscomb in today's New York
Sun.

Kerry's campaign has repeatedly cited the Navy as the ultimate authority on
the candidate's war record, saying they wouldn't have awarded him medals he
didn't deserve.

But with the Navy now publicly challenging Kerry's decorations, that defense
has been rendered inoperative.

Noting that Kerry has refused to authorize the release of his full military
records, the legal watchdog group Judicial Watch called on Kerry this week
to remove any questionable citations from his Web site pending a formal
investigation by the Navy.

"It is to your best interest to have your record in good order," General
Thomas Wilkerson, the president of the U.S. Naval Institute, told Lipscomb.
"If it is wrong, you are accountable. And if you use it to advance your
career, it is even more important."




>
> How convenient. <g>
>
> Who has seen this proof?
> Where can it be seen NOW...
> and who has judged the authenticity?
>
> Got any reliable references that I can research?
>
>
> Barnyard BOb - trust, but verify.

[Barnyard BOb -]

Tammy wrote:

>I must have been asleep - does that qualify me to be the Republican
>Candidate for President?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Oh my....
A blatant attempt to upstage the beloved Ronnie Ray-Gun. <g>


Barnyard BOb -

[Barnyard BOb -]

John > wrote:

>According to todays newspaper in Virginia Beach, Va. . . ((I have not
>personally researched this!) so don't shoot me).
>
>"The new documents surfaced as the Bush administration for the first time
>released the president's logs, which have been the focus of repeated
>archival searches and Freedom of Information Act requests dating to the
>2000 presidential campaign. The logs show that Bush stopped flying in April
>1972 after racking up more than 570 hours of flight time between 1969-1972,
>much of it on an F-102 interceptor jet."
>
>I know they just said "much" not how many hours. Like I said I didn't see
>the logs myself just the newspaper article.
>John
>
>Yes he was a F-102 pilot yes he did serve (and probably got off light
>because of his "pull") but he did not trash his fellow pilots and crews
>after leaving the service ala Kerry!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Interesting, John.
Consider yourself... NOT shot. <g>

Thanks.
Barnyard BOb -

[Barnyard BOb -]

>>
>> How convenient. <g>
>>
>> Who has seen this proof?
>> Where can it be seen NOW...
>> and who has judged the authenticity?
>>
>> Got any reliable references that I can research?
>>
>>
>> Barnyard BOb - trust, but verify.
=====================================

"Cy Galley" > wrote:

>
>Thursday, Sept. 2, 2004 12:08 a.m. EDT Navy Challenging Kerry's Medals
>
>The United States Navy is challenging the authenticity of Sen. John Kerry's
>Vietnam War medals, in a development that could prove to be the most
>damaging yet to the embattled Democrat's presidential campaign.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

<large snip of unrelated info>

I didn't see any info pertinent to GW Bush F-102 flight time.
Your post does not appear helpful in this regard.
Perhaps you misunderstood my request.
Thank you so much for your effort anyway, Cy.

In the name of factualness...
Judicial Watch is requesting a Kerry investigation, not the Navy.
Paybacks are hell????? <g>

Judicial Watch, Inc. (hereinafter "Judicial Watch") is a nonprofit,
nonpartisan public interest group that investigates and prosecutes
government corruption. Judicial Watch, in the interests of the
American public, hereby files this formal complaint and request for
investigation, determination and final disposition of awards granted
to Lieutenant (junior grade) John Forbes Kerry, U.S. Naval Reserve,

http://www.vnsfvetakerry.com/navy_challenging_kerry's_medals.htm


Barnyard BOb -

[Ken Finney]

"Barnyard BOb -" > wrote in message
...
> >>
> >> How convenient. <g>
> >>
> >> Who has seen this proof?
> >> Where can it be seen NOW...
> >> and who has judged the authenticity?
> >>
> >> Got any reliable references that I can research?
> >>

I posted a couple of weeks ago that on Democrats.com
they stated he had "over 300 hours" in an F-102, but
they didn't give a cite. In the last week's releases,
the AP reported "336 hours".

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/08/politics/main641928.shtml

[RobertR237]

>
>
>>>If GWB is concealing nothing....
>>>His logbook(s) or copies are available for public
>>>scrutiny via military and/or personal documents.
>>>Please tell where they may be viewed....
>>>or do we have TWO PHONIES running for President?
>>>
>>
>>We have to candidates who's past military record has nothing to do with
>their
>>current abilities to be President. Way too much time has been expended on
>what
>>they did 35 years ago and too little on what they can and will do for our
>>country. So far, I have not seen any good reasons to vote for either one,
>only
>>some reasons for possibly voting against both.
>>
>>
>>Bob Reed
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>ONE MORE TIME....
>My_ONLY_reason for being here is to dispute the
>notion that GWB had the F-102 flying time claimed
>in this thread. Nothing more, nothing less.
>
>From what I can glean, GWB completed basic
>student flight training and F-102 training over 18 months.
>That may be worth a grand total of 120 flight hours.
>Dunno fer sure, 'cause my USAF pilot training days
>were a decade before GWB.
>

His logbook has been made public and showed something over 360 hours in the
F-102.

>Other than that....
>**** the agenda of politics, hidden or otherwise.
>For me, leopards don't change their spots over
>35 minutes.... or 35 years. What GWB was 35 years
>ago, he still is today.
>
>YMMV.
>
>
>Barnyard BOb -


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Stan Kap]

My sentiments exactly, He's still an idiot.

Stan K.

"Barnyard BOb -" > wrote in message
...
> On 09 Sep 2004 12:37:28 GMT, (RobertR237)
> wrote:
>
>
> >>If GWB is concealing nothing....
> >>His logbook(s) or copies are available for public
> >>scrutiny via military and/or personal documents.
> >>Please tell where they may be viewed....
> >>or do we have TWO PHONIES running for President?
> >>
> >
> >We have to candidates who's past military record has nothing to do with
their
> >current abilities to be President. Way too much time has been expended
on what
> >they did 35 years ago and too little on what they can and will do for our
> >country. So far, I have not seen any good reasons to vote for either
one, only
> >some reasons for possibly voting against both.
> >
> >
> >Bob Reed
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> ONE MORE TIME....
> My_ONLY_reason for being here is to dispute the
> notion that GWB had the F-102 flying time claimed
> in this thread. Nothing more, nothing less.
>
> From what I can glean, GWB completed basic
> student flight training and F-102 training over 18 months.
> That may be worth a grand total of 120 flight hours.
> Dunno fer sure, 'cause my USAF pilot training days
> were a decade before GWB.
>
> Other than that....
> **** the agenda of politics, hidden or otherwise.
> For me, leopards don't change their spots over
> 35 minutes.... or 35 years. What GWB was 35 years
> ago, he still is today.
>
> YMMV.
>
>
> Barnyard BOb -

[Mark Hickey]

Barnyard BOb - > wrote:

>How convenient. <g>
>
>Who has seen this proof?
>Where can it be seen NOW...
>and who has judged the authenticity?
>
>Got any reliable references that I can research?
>
>
>Barnyard BOb - trust, but verify.

Then you shouldn't trust NBC...

Some of the new documents you mentioned questioning GWB's service (and
detailing all the "special treatment" he got are obvious forgeries...

Think about it... early 1970's, and the boneheads at NBC expect us to
think that a typewriter produced documents that had:

1) Times New Roman font (not yet developed)
2) Propotional font spacing (ditto, other than some very high-end IBM
typewriters - unlikely given the office in question)
3) Superscript font on the "th" following the squadron number. No
typewriter on earth would have done that in the early 1970's.

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/BushGuardmay4.pdf

It should be interesting to see how they handle getting caught in this
obvious attempt to affect the opinion of their viewers. It will be
even more interesting to see if the OTHER networks backtrack on any of
their use of the information.

It will be even MORE interesting to find out WHO faked the documents.
Heh.

Mark "trust but verify indeed" Hickey

[Mark Hickey]

Mark Hickey > wrote:

"NBC" when it should have been "CBS"...

>Barnyard BOb - > wrote:
>
>>How convenient. <g>
>>
>>Who has seen this proof?
>>Where can it be seen NOW...
>>and who has judged the authenticity?
>>
>>Got any reliable references that I can research?
>>
>>
>>Barnyard BOb - trust, but verify.
>
>Then you shouldn't trust NBC...
>
>Some of the new documents you mentioned questioning GWB's service (and
>detailing all the "special treatment" he got are obvious forgeries...
>
>Think about it... early 1970's, and the boneheads at NBC expect us to
>think that a typewriter produced documents that had:
>
>1) Times New Roman font (not yet developed)
>2) Propotional font spacing (ditto, other than some very high-end IBM
>typewriters - unlikely given the office in question)
>3) Superscript font on the "th" following the squadron number. No
>typewriter on earth would have done that in the early 1970's.
>
>http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/BushGuardmay4.pdf
>
>It should be interesting to see how they handle getting caught in this
>obvious attempt to affect the opinion of their viewers. It will be
>even more interesting to see if the OTHER networks backtrack on any of
>their use of the information.
>
>It will be even MORE interesting to find out WHO faked the documents.
>Heh.
>
>Mark "trust but verify indeed" Hickey

[RobertR237]

>
>Barnyard BOb - > wrote:
>
>>How convenient. <g>
>>
>>Who has seen this proof?
>>Where can it be seen NOW...
>>and who has judged the authenticity?
>>
>>Got any reliable references that I can research?
>>
>>
>>Barnyard BOb - trust, but verify.
>
>Then you shouldn't trust NBC...
>
>Some of the new documents you mentioned questioning GWB's service (and
>detailing all the "special treatment" he got are obvious forgeries...
>
>Think about it... early 1970's, and the boneheads at NBC expect us to
>think that a typewriter produced documents that had:
>
>1) Times New Roman font (not yet developed)
>2) Propotional font spacing (ditto, other than some very high-end IBM
>typewriters - unlikely given the office in question)
>3) Superscript font on the "th" following the squadron number. No
>typewriter on earth would have done that in the early 1970's.
>
>http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/BushGuardmay4.pdf
>
>It should be interesting to see how they handle getting caught in this
>obvious attempt to affect the opinion of their viewers. It will be
>even more interesting to see if the OTHER networks backtrack on any of
>their use of the information.
>
>It will be even MORE interesting to find out WHO faked the documents.
>Heh.
>
>Mark "trust but verify indeed" Hickey

I just heard that on the news too. Wouldn't that be a hoot, to find out that
it is another of the USA Today type of fabrications? How nice that the author
of documents just happens to be dead. The son of the guy has also denied that
the documents were found where they were claimed to have been found.

It just gets more and more interesting but is still not relevant to the
election.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[ChuckSlusarczyk]

In article
>, Orval
Fairbairn says...

Sadly that always seems to be the choices we get, take your pick, cancer or
leprosy. Although given the choice of the two I can't get a warm and cozy
feeling for a guy that betrayed his fellow soldiers for political gain. Bush in
the eyes of some didn't do enough but he sure did a lot more then Clinton and
Bush's critics were silent about Clintons draft dodging and war protesting.

I feel Kerry had a right to protest the war but he didn't have to trash his
former comrades while doing it. Who would have thunk it,an admitted war criminal
now running for President in an era when we still hunt down and punish Nazi war
criminals for war crimes .

God help us

Chuck S

>That then leaves us with a choice between a potential shirker of duty
>and one who betrayed his buddies and trashed them publicly.
>
>What a choice!

[John]

Tammy wrote:

> Are you saying that being a blonde is like having alzheimer's?


That's why you never give a blonde the weekend off. . . You have to retrain
them on Monday!
I'm ducking and getting outta here!
John

[Tammy]

Barnyard BOb - > wrote in message >...
> Tammy wrote:
>
> >I must have been asleep - does that qualify me to be the Republican
> >Candidate for President?
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Oh my....
> A blatant attempt to upstage the beloved Ronnie Ray-Gun. <g>
>
>
> Barnyard BOb -

Are you saying that being a blonde is like having alzheimer's?

[Barnyard BOb -]

>It just gets more and more interesting but is still not relevant to the
>election.
>
>
>Bob Reed
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Nonsense.
You parrot others of your 'ilk'. <g>

For you this may well be true.
For others, it's a data point on a larger picture.


Barnyard BOb - never had too much info

[Stan Premo]

Think how blissful life must be for the insipid dolts who have no
expectations of their elected officials other than they can be selected
simply by voting a straight-party ticket...they're never disappointed, and
history continues to repeat its mistakes!
"Barnyard BOb -" > wrote in message
...
>
> >It just gets more and more interesting but is still not relevant to the
> >election.
> >
> >
> >Bob Reed
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Nonsense.
> You parrot others of your 'ilk'. <g>
>
> For you this may well be true.
> For others, it's a data point on a larger picture.
>
>
> Barnyard BOb - never had too much info
>
>

[Rich S.]

"Stan Premo" > wrote in message
...
> Think how blissful life must be for the insipid dolts who have no
> expectations of their elected officials other than they can be selected
> simply by voting a straight-party ticket...they're never disappointed, and
> history continues to repeat its mistakes!

I have a primary ballot in front of me now which *requires* me to select a
single party, and then vote *only* for candidates in that party. Ain't that
just ducky?

Rich "marching in lockstep" S.

[Rich]

ChuckSlusarczyk > wrote in message >...

> I feel Kerry had a right to protest the war but he didn't have to trash his
> former comrades while doing it.

If your white, and you see a white guy beating up a black guy, do you
turn you head just becaue the guy doing the dirty deed is the same
color as you?

Substitute nationality for skin color in the previous example. Does
it change what you do?

Bad things happen in war. And just because your country sees itself
as the "good guys", doesn't mean you all are. Take any random sample
of 100 people and your bound to have a few bad apples, otherwise, our
prisons would be empty. And we sent tens of thousands to Vietnam. So
the idea that none of those tens of thousands did anything wrong is
ludicrous.

I think being an American means standing up for what's right,
regardless of who that puts in the wrong. Kerry did what he thought
was right, and I personally think that what he did took alot more
courage then simply ignoring the atrocities.

Rich

[W P Dixon]

I could not agree more! I know so many who vote Dem or Rep just because
their Daddy did all his life, and like you said the same dolts are put in
year after year with no change to the system. In fact the 2 parties have
done everything they can do to keep a "normal" person from running from
office. For change to happen it will take a change of mindset of the
American public...think for yourself and don't let a party do it for you.
"Stan Premo" > wrote in message
...
> Think how blissful life must be for the insipid dolts who have no
> expectations of their elected officials other than they can be selected
> simply by voting a straight-party ticket...they're never disappointed, and
> history continues to repeat its mistakes!
> "Barnyard BOb -" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > >It just gets more and more interesting but is still not relevant to the
> > >election.
> > >
> > >
> > >Bob Reed
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > Nonsense.
> > You parrot others of your 'ilk'. <g>
> >
> > For you this may well be true.
> > For others, it's a data point on a larger picture.
> >
> >
> > Barnyard BOb - never had too much info
> >
> >
>
>

[Barnyard BOb -]

>> Think how blissful life must be for the insipid dolts who have no
>> expectations of their elected officials other than they can be selected
>> simply by voting a straight-party ticket...they're never disappointed, and
>> history continues to repeat its mistakes!
>
>I have a primary ballot in front of me now which *requires* me to select a
>single party, and then vote *only* for candidates in that party. Ain't that
>just ducky?
>
>Rich "marching in lockstep" S.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There is a sound reason for your plight.

Here in Missouri -
Our PRIMARIES are wide open, but....

It can lead to all kinds of mischief if a
bunch of Democrats get organized and
select the weakest Republican candidate
to run against their more electable one...
or vice-versa.

Now you have the 'rest of the story'.
Go in peace, my son. <g>


Barnyard BOb -

[Barnyard BOb -]

"W P Dixon" > wrote:

>I could not agree more! I know so many who vote Dem or Rep just because
>their Daddy did all his life, and like you said the same dolts are put in
>year after year with no change to the system. In fact the 2 parties have
>done everything they can do to keep a "normal" person from running from
>office. For change to happen it will take a change of mindset of the
>American public...think for yourself and don't let a party do it for you.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

My 'daddy' kinda' pulled a switcher-roo.

He raised us as Democrats when he had nothing.
So, early on, I followed in his footsteps.

Later in life when he had substantial net worth,
I caught him voting Republican. When asked why,
he let me know in no uncertain terms he didn't like the
idea of the Democrats redistributing his hard earned
wealth amongst our nation's poorer citizens.

You can take it from there....

Barnyard BOb -

[Rich S.]

"Barnyard BOb -" > wrote in message
...
>
> Here in Missouri -
> Our PRIMARIES are wide open, but....

Not for long. The Feds have ruled this is illegal. That is the reason
Washington has changed it's form.

> It can lead to all kinds of mischief if a bunch of Democrats get
> organized and
> select the weakest Republican candidate to run against their more
> electable one...
> or vice-versa.

It can. However, a bunch of Republicrats can still choose to vote the
opposite party in the primary and select the weak sisters of the opposition.
Then, in the "Open" regular election, vote for their own candidate and win.

It made no difference in supressing the type of tactic you cite. What it did
was to give strength to the also-ran party candidates who would lose votes
from their own faithful. It is a flawed system.

Rich "Vote for me for King - I'll straighten them out!" S.

[Ed Sullivan]

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:40:07 -0500, Barnyard BOb -
> wrote:

>
>"W P Dixon" > wrote:
>
>>I could not agree more! I know so many who vote Dem or Rep just because
>>their Daddy did all his life, and like you said the same dolts are put in
>>year after year with no change to the system. In fact the 2 parties have
>>done everything they can do to keep a "normal" person from running from
>>office. For change to happen it will take a change of mindset of the
>>American public...think for yourself and don't let a party do it for you.
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>My 'daddy' kinda' pulled a switcher-roo.
>
>He raised us as Democrats when he had nothing.
>So, early on, I followed in his footsteps.
>
>Later in life when he had substantial net worth,
>I caught him voting Republican. When asked why,
>he let me know in no uncertain terms he didn't like the
>idea of the Democrats redistributing his hard earned
>wealth amongst our nation's poorer citizens.
>
>You can take it from there....
>
>Barnyard BOb -

Yeah, my old daddy being an Irishman from eastern Canada was an
automatic liberal, while my mother a Californian who read a lot sort
of leaned me towards conservatism. Furthermore I always kind of
figured if I ever managed to amass any money I would stand a better
chance of keeping it under Republicans. Neither situation prevailed
but that was my motivation.

Ed Sullivan

[Barnyard BOb -]

> It is a flawed system.
>
>Rich "Vote for me for King - I'll straighten them out!" S.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hmmmm.

Perfection may await you
via your heavenly reward.

If you're not yet prepared, may I suggest...
making lemonade from your earthly lemons.


Barnyard BOb - the ol filosofer

[Stan Kap]

Amen, brother.

It takes balls to stand up for what is right. So many followers, not enough
leaders.

Stan K.

"Rich" > wrote in message
om...
> ChuckSlusarczyk > wrote in message
>...
>
> > I feel Kerry had a right to protest the war but he didn't have to trash
his
> > former comrades while doing it.
>
> If your white, and you see a white guy beating up a black guy, do you
> turn you head just becaue the guy doing the dirty deed is the same
> color as you?
>
> Substitute nationality for skin color in the previous example. Does
> it change what you do?
>
> Bad things happen in war. And just because your country sees itself
> as the "good guys", doesn't mean you all are. Take any random sample
> of 100 people and your bound to have a few bad apples, otherwise, our
> prisons would be empty. And we sent tens of thousands to Vietnam. So
> the idea that none of those tens of thousands did anything wrong is
> ludicrous.
>
> I think being an American means standing up for what's right,
> regardless of who that puts in the wrong. Kerry did what he thought
> was right, and I personally think that what he did took alot more
> courage then simply ignoring the atrocities.
>
> Rich

[StellaStar]

Some guy with Hickeys claims...>Think about it... early 1970's, and the
boneheads at NBC expect us to
>think that a typewriter produced documents that had:
>
>1) Times New Roman font (not yet developed)

But, "Times New Roman was created by the esteemed British typographer Stanley
Morison for the Times of London in 1932."

http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2095809&

[RobertR237]

>
>>It just gets more and more interesting but is still not relevant to the
>>election.
>>
>>
>>Bob Reed
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>Nonsense.
>You parrot others of your 'ilk'. <g>
>
>For you this may well be true.
>For others, it's a data point on a larger picture.
>
>
>Barnyard BOb - never had too much info
>

And I don't think either one has any reason to be overly proud of their record
in that regard. Based on Kerry's testimony, he had reason to be ashamed of his
actions in Viet Nam.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[RobertR237]

>> Think how blissful life must be for the insipid dolts who have no
>> expectations of their elected officials other than they can be selected
>> simply by voting a straight-party ticket...they're never disappointed, and
>> history continues to repeat its mistakes!
>
>I have a primary ballot in front of me now which *requires* me to select a
>single party, and then vote *only* for candidates in that party. Ain't that
>just ducky?
>
>Rich "marching in lockstep" S.

Excuse me but that is the purpose of the primaries. For the members of each
party to select their candidates for the general election. You are allowed to
chose your party and then you are allowed to chose your candidates. That is
NOT voting a straight-party ticket. Voting a straight-party ticket is done in
the general election when a voter picks the candidates for all offices based on
party.



Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[RobertR237]

>
>>Later in life when he had substantial net worth,
>>I caught him voting Republican. When asked why,
>>he let me know in no uncertain terms he didn't like the
>>idea of the Democrats redistributing his hard earned
>>wealth amongst our nation's poorer citizens.
>>
>>You can take it from there....
>>
>>Barnyard BOb -
>
>Yeah, my old daddy being an Irishman from eastern Canada was an
>automatic liberal, while my mother a Californian who read a lot sort
>of leaned me towards conservatism. Furthermore I always kind of
>figured if I ever managed to amass any money I would stand a better
>chance of keeping it under Republicans. Neither situation prevailed
>but that was my motivation.
>
>Ed Sullivan
>

I started as a Kennedy Democrat, quickly realized that Johnson wanted to take
everything I earned and give it away to those who didn't want to work and
became an independent. I then realized that an independent is just an excuse
for not having any convictions, sort of luke warm on everything. I becam a
Republican based on picking the party that best represents the majority of my
views. Although I have been a registered and fairly active republican for 30
years, I have never voted a straight party ticket and don't expect that I ever
will.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[RobertR237]

>
>I think being an American means standing up for what's right,
>regardless of who that puts in the wrong. Kerry did what he thought
>was right, and I personally think that what he did took alot more
>courage then simply ignoring the atrocities.
>
>Rich
>

Did he? Did he stand up for what was right when he was in Viet Nam or did he
participate in the events only to come home and then claim remorse for having
done so? From his testimony, that is the apparant conclusion that could be
drawn.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Barnyard BOb -]

>>>It just gets more and more interesting but is still not relevant to the
>>>election.
>>>
>>>
>>>Bob Reed
>>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>Nonsense.
>>You parrot others of your 'ilk'. <g>
>>
>>For you this may well be true.
>>For others, it's a data point on a larger picture.
>>
>>
>>Barnyard BOb - never had too much info
>>
>
>And I don't think either one has any reason to be overly proud of their record
>in that regard. Based on Kerry's testimony, he had reason to be ashamed of his
>actions in Viet Nam.
>
>Bob Reed
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

One of them is going to be President all the same.

Therefore, your observation is.... "not relevant". <g>


Barnyard BOb -

[Mark Hickey]

(StellaStar) wrote:

>Some guy with Hickeys claims...>Think about it... early 1970's, and the
>boneheads at NBC expect us to
>>think that a typewriter produced documents that had:
>>
>>1) Times New Roman font (not yet developed)
>
>But, "Times New Roman was created by the esteemed British typographer Stanley
>Morison for the Times of London in 1932."
>
>http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2095809&

.... but not used on any typewriters (ever) apparently, certainly not
one that would be used by someone in the ANG in 1972.

I'm amazed that CBS is continuing to try to prop up these obvious
forgeries - I never had any faith at all in Dan Rather, but I didn't
think he was as dumb as he apparently really is. It only shows the
desperation of CBS's conviction that the truth is a far, far less
important issue than their political agenda.

Mark Hickey

[RobertR237]

>
>>Some guy with Hickeys claims...>Think about it... early 1970's, and the
>>boneheads at NBC expect us to
>>>think that a typewriter produced documents that had:
>>>
>>>1) Times New Roman font (not yet developed)
>>
>>But, "Times New Roman was created by the esteemed British typographer
>Stanley
>>Morison for the Times of London in 1932."
>>
>>http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2095809&
>
>... but not used on any typewriters (ever) apparently, certainly not
>one that would be used by someone in the ANG in 1972.
>
>I'm amazed that CBS is continuing to try to prop up these obvious
>forgeries - I never had any faith at all in Dan Rather, but I didn't
>think he was as dumb as he apparently really is. It only shows the
>desperation of CBS's conviction that the truth is a far, far less
>important issue than their political agenda.
>
>Mark Hickey

Why amazed, this is not the first time CBS and in particular, the 60 minutes
program, have been found to fabricate evidence or accept and defend evidence
knowing the were probably wrong. Hell, look at the ratings and attention they
have gotten as a result.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[jls]

No, he's not a real pilot. He's a fake.

[Rich S.]

"RobertR237" > wrote in message
...
>
> Excuse me but that is the purpose of the primaries. For the members of
> each
> party to select their candidates for the general election. You are
> allowed to
> chose your party and then you are allowed to chose your candidates. That
> is
> NOT voting a straight-party ticket. Voting a straight-party ticket is
> done in
> the general election when a voter picks the candidates for all offices
> based on
> party.

Bob.............

For the past 70 years the purpose of the primaries in Washington State has
been to select the top two candidates for an office without regard to party
affiliation. The winner is then selected in the general election. Many, many
voters here are ****ed off about this new federally-mandated system.

Both systems are open to manipulation; however, in real life, this sort of
thing has not been a factor in Washington. The new rules are another
solution to a non-existent problem.

Regards,
Rich S.

[RobertR237]

>
>"RobertR237" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> Excuse me but that is the purpose of the primaries. For the members of
>> each
>> party to select their candidates for the general election. You are
>> allowed to
>> chose your party and then you are allowed to chose your candidates. That
>> is
>> NOT voting a straight-party ticket. Voting a straight-party ticket is
>> done in
>> the general election when a voter picks the candidates for all offices
>> based on
>> party.
>
>Bob.............
>
>For the past 70 years the purpose of the primaries in Washington State has
>been to select the top two candidates for an office without regard to party
>affiliation. The winner is then selected in the general election. Many, many
>voters here are ****ed off about this new federally-mandated system.
>
>Both systems are open to manipulation; however, in real life, this sort of
>thing has not been a factor in Washington. The new rules are another
>solution to a non-existent problem.
>
>Regards,
>Rich S.

Sorry but in this case, I believe the federally-mandated system is correct.
One man, one vote. That is the basis of our system and while each system can
be abused, the system in Washington State seems much more prone to abuse than
the party candidate system.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Rich S.]

"RobertR237" > wrote in message
...
>
> Sorry but in this case, I believe the federally-mandated system is
> correct.
> One man, one vote. That is the basis of our system and while each system
> can
> be abused, the system in Washington State seems much more prone to abuse
> than
> the party candidate system.

The Washington legislature passed a bill which would allow the "Top Two"
system instead of the party candidate slate, but the Governor vetoed it. The
citizens of this state will be allowed to override his veto by passing
Initiative 872 which calls for the Top Two system.

"Ballot Title
Initiative Measure No. 872 concerns elections for partisan offices. This
measure would allow voters to select among all candidates in a primary.
Ballots would indicate candidates party preference. The two candidates
receiving most votes advance to the general election, regardless of party."
http://www.blanketprimary.org/

I believe it will sail through. We "Left Coasters" do not like to be
manipulated by the cronyism of party bosses. We'll leave that sort of thing
to New Jersey and Massachusetts, to name a couple of machine states.

Rich S.

[Mark Hickey]

Richard Riley > wrote:

>On 11 Sep 2004 03:25:24 GMT, (StellaStar) wrote:
>
>:Some guy with Hickeys claims...>Think about it... early 1970's, and the
>:boneheads at NBC expect us to
>:>think that a typewriter produced documents that had:
>:>
>:>1) Times New Roman font (not yet developed)
>:
>:But, "Times New Roman was created by the esteemed British typographer Stanley
>:Morison for the Times of London in 1932."
>:
>:http://www.slate.com/Default.aspx?id=2095809&
>
>But not licensed for use by anyone *but* the Times until the mid '80s.
>
>There are so many problems with these documents that I can't even
>begin to list them. But my favorite is the inconvienent fact that
>Brigadier General "Buck" Staudt retired 18 months before the memo says
>he's putting pressure on Killian to "sugar coat" Bush's fitness
>reports.

Now CBS is saying that it's possible the General still exerted
influence over the Guard AFTER retirement. That's about as dumb as
their claim that the obvious proportional spacing is due to the
copying and faxing of the document (and that that makes it impossible
to tell what the font really is).

How DUMB does CBS count on its viewers being, anyway? I knew they
hoped we were dumb, but I guess they hope we're deaf, dumb and blind.

I hope y'all remember this when you are flipping channels trying to
get a handle on what's really going on in the world...

Mark Hickey

[Rich S.]

"Mark Hickey" > wrote in message
...
>
> How DUMB does CBS count on its viewers being, anyway? I knew they
> hoped we were dumb, but I guess they hope we're deaf, dumb and blind.
>
> I hope y'all remember this when you are flipping channels trying to
> get a handle on what's really going on in the world...

I still say the NRA should have deferred building their new multi-jillion
dollar headquarters building and bought CBS when it was for sale. Wouldn't
that be something? I can see the program listings now. . .

Rich "The Ted Nugent Comedy Hour" S.

[Mark Hickey]

"Rich S." > wrote:

>"Mark Hickey" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> How DUMB does CBS count on its viewers being, anyway? I knew they
>> hoped we were dumb, but I guess they hope we're deaf, dumb and blind.
>>
>> I hope y'all remember this when you are flipping channels trying to
>> get a handle on what's really going on in the world...
>
>I still say the NRA should have deferred building their new multi-jillion
>dollar headquarters building and bought CBS when it was for sale. Wouldn't
>that be something? I can see the program listings now. . .
>
>Rich "The Ted Nugent Comedy Hour" S.

It would probably be a lot funnier than most of the drivel on CBS
though....

Mark Hickey

[Jim Carriere]

Mark Hickey wrote:
> How DUMB does CBS count on its viewers being, anyway? I knew they
> hoped we were dumb, but I guess they hope we're deaf, dumb and blind.
>
> I hope y'all remember this when you are flipping channels trying to
> get a handle on what's really going on in the world...

I'm with you there!

Here is my premise on most of "The Media." I consider myself to know
more than the average person does about aviation. (Note, most
participants in this group are a good cut of people and similarly
smart on aviation.) Whenever an aviation related story is in the
news, I often find a lot of mistakes in it, some of them pretty
stupid and due to laziness on the part of the media.

Extrapolating from this, what about stories in areas where I am about
average or relatively ignorant? In other words, I wonder how much
they screw up the facts on pretty much everything!

Now, there are good sources of news out there, but network TV
invariably caters to the lowest common deonominator.

[Mark Hickey]

Jim Carriere > wrote:

>Now, there are good sources of news out there, but network TV
>invariably caters to the lowest common deonominator.

The way I've come to view it is that the media never lets the facts
stand in the way of a good story.

Mark Hickey

[Matthew P. Cummings]

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:22:15 -0500, Barnyard BOb - wrote:

> Here in Missouri -
> Our PRIMARIES are wide open, but....

Sort of. We have to choose which ballot we want and then vote for the
people on that ballot only.

What you proposed about voting for the opposition party weak guy, that's
commonly done now. I know of many many people who do that and consider
that to be how the system works. So, I guess what we have running are the
2 weakest people we can find.

[ChuckSlusarczyk]

In article >, Rich says...

>I think being an American means standing up for what's right,
>regardless of who that puts in the wrong. Kerry did what he thought
>was right, and I personally think that what he did took alot more
>courage then simply ignoring the atrocities.

It would have been right if he had the courage to say it then and there when it
happened. He should have turned himself in for what he said "he" did,that's
courage. But to wait until it would politically advance his career was just an
opportunist taking advantage. The fact he met with the VC after he was out puts
him in the same league as Jane Fonda. In my book he's a traitor on par with
Benedict Arnold who also started off as an American war hero. I don't have any
use for back stabbers. Just my opinion.

See ya

Chuck S

[Rich S.]

"Rich S." > wrote in message
...
> "Stan Premo" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Think how blissful life must be for the insipid dolts who have no
>> expectations of their elected officials other than they can be selected
>> simply by voting a straight-party ticket...they're never disappointed,
>> and
>> history continues to repeat its mistakes!
>
> I have a primary ballot in front of me now which *requires* me to select a
> single party, and then vote *only* for candidates in that party. Ain't
> that just ducky?
>
> Rich "marching in lockstep" S.

Just for the record, I can still taste the glue on my absentee ballot
envelope. If we had the "old style" primary, I would have voted for the
candidates whom I considered best qualified to represent me.

With the "new style" of ballot where I had to select a party and then vote
only within that party, I selected the opposition party and voted so as to
give *my* party the most advantageous position in the general election.

This action was taken in a fit of pique that ill becomes me and I regret
that circumstances force my actions. However, it's the best way to apply my
vote to defeat those who I don't feel are qualified to clean public toilets,
much less become Governor. With so many people either refusing to vote, or
deliberately voting contrary to the rules (11% in that case), my vote
becomes even more important.

Think I'll go out in the back yard and empty a few magazines out of my
assault rifle.

Rich S.

[Richard Isakson]

"Rich S." wrote in message ...
> With the "new style" of ballot where I had to select a party and then vote
> only within that party, I selected the opposition party and voted so as to
> give *my* party the most advantageous position in the general election.

Rich,

The Washington State Republican Party announced a long time ago that they
were going to use the Caucus results to pick their candidate not the primary
results. The Demoncrats aren't bound by the primary results either.

Rich

[Rich S.]

"Richard Isakson" > wrote in message
...
>
> The Washington State Republican Party announced a long time ago that they
> were going to use the Caucus results to pick their candidate not the
> primary
> results. The Demoncrats aren't bound by the primary results either.

Oh, crapola. Now I'll go to my grave knowing that I voted for one of *them*!

Rich S.