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
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
