The Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight: Dems Off
Target on Bush AWOL Charge
February 13, 2004
by
Brian O'Connell
It’s almost Valentine’s Day, and the fair and balanced national
media is once again wooing Terry McAuliffe and the Democratic National
Committee with an “all hands on deck” assault on President Bush and
his military record.
Okay, that’s no story. It’s not exactly front-page news when the
national media starts singing from the DNC hymnal. The real
story is how the media has fallen for the woefully misreported story
of Bush and his National Guard service spoon-fed to them by Democratic
party operatives. Worse, in reporting the story, the media has failed
miserably, as Tom Daschle might say, in getting the facts right on
this story.
I have my problems with Mr. Bush these days – the absence of WMD's,
exorbitant budget spending, a leaky immigration policy vessel, for
starters. But the national guard story is nothing more than a partisan
political fantasy concocted by Michael "The Next Fact I Get Right
Will Be the First" Moore and that serial election loser Terry
McAuliffe. The fawning national media is only too happy to carry water
for the likes of Moore and McAuliffe, with an investigative journalist
performance that would shame a high school newspaper reporter.
Here are the facts that the media couldn’t be bothered to check .
. .
The AWOL imbroglio was triggered by Walter Robinson, a writer for
my hometown paper The Boston Globe in 2000. Robinson interviewed
Alabama Air National Guard General William Turnipseed, who ran the
base at the time in question. Based on his interview with Turnipseed,
and some baseless accusations by left-wing Internet provocateurs,
Robinson questioned Bush's service record while he was in Alabama.
But Robinson had evidently engaged in some sloppy reporting -- at
least Turnipseed thought so. The general responded to the piece by
saying that Robinson -- like most members of the media -- had no clue
as to how the military and the National Guard operated. He said that
Bush was NEVER assigned to a unit at Alabama and was never ordered
to do so. Bush was, in fact, still a member of the Texas National
Guard during his stay in Alabama to run a political campaign. According
to the excellent article “The
Real Military Record of George W. Bush: Not Heroic, but Not AWOL Either”
that appeared in the October 10, 200 issue of George magazine.
Bush did try to apply for Alabama Air National Guard status, in spring,
1972 but was rejected on the grounds that the base did not offer duties
that were equivalent to his duties in the Texas Air National Guard.
Later in 1972, in September, Bush was given the courtesy by
the AANG of fly times and drill schedules so he could earn some extra
credit while in Alabama (which he took limited advantage of but enough
to secure the points he needed to satisfy his national guard obligations).
But attendance, Turnipseed has said (and the Texas National Guard
confirms this) was never compulsory. So, how can you be "AWOL"
as McCauliffe carelessly states, when you have nothing to be AWOL
from?
What's worse, few major media outlets (in fact, I haven't seen any)
even went back to ask Turnipseed to get the story straight. One exception
is The Globe’s Robinson, who has recants the charges in a
recent story in the newspaper.
I also don't think it's fair that the left's hatred for Bush has
resulted in an unwarranted smear campaign against the guy – enthusiastically
aided and abetted by the supposedly objective media. Watching NBC's
David Gregory and ABC's Terry Moran waving pom-poms on behalf
of the Democratic National Committee's at a fractious White House
press conference on February 10 was appalling. All they had to do
was to gather the facts. Instead they seemingly relied on DNC talking
points on the “story” to hammer beleaguered White House Press Secretary
Scott McClellan
I understand the lefty media’s frustration -- a president that liberals'
deem dim-witted and slow has, in 36 months, ousted two terrorist regimes,
put others on notice (hello Libya; you too Syria, Iran and North Korea),
brought the economy back from one of the US's worst recessions ever;
cemented GOP majorities in the US House, US Senate and state governor
offices, and has kept America safe from terrorists since 9/11. For
Americans who view politics through a 9/11 prism, Bush is a fighter.
That's an attractive quality in a President these days.
But to squander a legitimate political issue (the National Guard
story has pushed the WMD disaster off the front pages and now the
Kerry intern issue will continue to do so) in favor of a libelous,
baseless accusation against Bush's military service is a dumb move
by Democrats, with or without the aid of the press. The backlash issue
alone will hurt whoever wins the party’s presidential nomination,
never mind letting Bush off the hook and off the front pages on the
WMD issue. That story had traction – but the Democrats chose to move
on. Terry McAuliffe wouldn’t make much of a poker player -- he'd fold
on two aces and go all in on a four and a six off suit..
Ultimately, the Bush AWOL story is a fantasy, right up there with
the existence of the tooth fairy and the ability of leprechauns to
locate gold. Yet it worries me that the media once again overlooks
the facts to sharpen its teeth on the ankles of a public figure and
smear his reputation. Bush, like Hillary Clinton or any one else,
is fair game if you do a little digging and have the facts. But if
you don't even try to dig up an easy paper trail, or worse, ignore
the facts uncovered by that paper trail, and attack anyway, then the
inmates are truly running the asylum.
The American public must think we in the media are all incompetent
at best or vicious partisans at worst. And by the evidence presented
in the national guard story, you really can't blame them.
Brian O'Connell