954 Points
Retired Air Force Colonel John Wambough has what, in a sane world with a rational Democrat party, would be the last word on Bush's Air Guard service:
Read the whole thing, of course - but the money quote is here:
An issue that keeps popping up is: why Lt. Bush didn't take an annual flight physical? The answer is simple. Lt. Bush was not going to continue flying F-102's in the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron. His squadron was scheduled to convert from an operational to a training squadron. Since Lt. Col Killian is deceased, it is impossible to know the dialogue that went on between Lt. Bush and Lt. Col Killian. What we do know is that Lt. Bush received an honorable discharge.
Like all Guard members, Lt. Bush was required to accrue a minimum of 50 points (annually) to meet Guard service requirements (a minimum of 300 points in six years). What the liberal media may not have covered in their many articles about Lt. Bush's ANG service is that Lt. Bush accumulated 954 points - exceeding the six-year Air National Guard requirement for service - threefold. Of course, everyone knows this, right? All those investigative reporters must have brought this fact out a dozen times. I just must have missed it.
Wambough includes the annualized point totals that Byron York publicized quite some time ago:
May-68 to May-69
Minimum Annual Requirement - 50
ANG Points Earned by Lt. Bush - 253
May-69 to May-70
Minimum Annual Requirement - 50
ANG Points Earned by Lt. Bush - 340
May-70 to May-71
Minimum Annual Requirement - 50
ANG Points Earned by Lt. Bush - 137
May-71 to May-72
Minimum Annual Requirement - 50
ANG Points Earned by Lt. Bush -112
May-72 to May-73
Minimum Annual Requirement - 50
ANG Points Earned by Lt. Bush - 56
Jun -73 to Jul-73
Minimum Annual Requirement - 50
ANG Points Earned by Lt. Bush - 56
Ref:
http://www.hillnews.com/york/090904.aspx
Minimum Annual Requirement - 300
ANG Points Earned by Lt. Bush - 954
So Bush served for six years. In those six years, he accrued enough service points for
eighteen years of minimal guard service.
So, Democrats - where's the beef, here?
Read the rest of Wambough's piece, by the way - it's great fodder for the next time your annoying liberal officemates start yapping about the Guard "issue".
Posted by Mitch at
September 24, 2004 07:29 AM
| TrackBack
Why? WHY? Because whether or not he was going to continue serving is irrelevant! It was a requirement for his service! Who is he to judge which requirements to follow and which ones to ignore like a coked-up frat boy? The Government wants you to take a physical, YOU TAKE A PHYSICAL! Spiders! In my hairpiece! You didn't tell me! How long have they been there? GAAHH!
Posted by: Brian Jones at September 24, 2004 08:47 AMHonestly, who cares? Did Bush dodge a physical in 197X? Did Kerry snatch a lucky hat from a CIA spook during a secret mission to Cambodia during four months of service in Vietnam? This stuff, though mildly amusing to me, doesn't much matter. I wasn't even born yet.
Posted by: Ryan at September 24, 2004 09:16 AMThis seeming "pox on both their houses" mentality ignores the fact that Kerry wanted to use Vietnam as a stick to hit Bush over the head with by wrapping himself in the untouchable mantle of a hero while painting Bush as a shirker. Bush didn't ask for this fight. Now that he's won it, look for the Dems, once again hoping that the electorate's recall is less than 5 minutes, to try to paint Bush as wallowing in the past.
Posted by: Brian Jones at September 24, 2004 11:11 AM