judgment day

Eric Boehlert writes: "In a sign that the Bush team is taking the issue seriously, on Wednesday Bush's campaign spokesman questioned the integrity of the retired Guard commander who claims Bush failed to show for duty in 1972, citing the commander's recent donation to a Democratic candidate for president."

Now, let's see, the implicit warrant Holt offers is: The commander's Democratic leanings caused him to lie about Bush's lack of attendance. Is there another warrant that links those two statements? Oh yeah, because Bush was a no-show, the commander is looking to support someone who will replace him as Commander in Chief.

The Boston Globe reporter won't let the story die. Bush's Guard service: What the record shows: " Bush's official record of service, which is supposed to contain an account of his duty attendance for each year of service, shows no such attendance after May 1972. In unit records, however, there are documents showing that Bush was ordered to a flurry of drills -- over 36 days -- in the late spring and summer of 1973. He was discharged Oct. 1, 1973, eight months before his six-year commitment ended.
Through Bartlett, Bush insisted in 2000 that he had indeed attended military drills while he was in Alabama during 1972 and in 1973 after returning to his Houston base. At the time, Bartlett said Bush did not recall what duties he performed during that period.
Albert Lloyd Jr., a retired colonel who was the personnel officer for the Texas Air National Guard at the time, said in an interview four years ago that the records suggested to him that Bush 'had a bad year. He might have lost interest, since he knew he was getting out.'
Lloyd said he believed that after Bush's long attendance drought, the drills that were crammed into the months before Bush's early release gave him enough 'points' to satisfy the minimal requirements to earn his discharge. At the time, Lloyd speculated that after the evaluation of Bush could not be done, his superiors told him, `George, you're in a pickle. Get your ass down here and perform some duty.' And he did.'
In the last election, Vice President Al Gore declined to make an issue of Bush's military service, perhaps because Gore's credibility could have been an issue. That includes a claim by Gore that turned out not to be true, that he had been 'under fire' during his service in Vietnam."

In the current presidential campaign, echoes of the Vietnam War remain. Senator John F. Kerry, who was decorated for gallantry in action and wounded in Vietnam, is now the favorite to become the Democratic nominee.

Kerry has left direct criticisms of Bush's military record to surrogates, such as former US senator Max Cleland of Georgia. Cleland said in an interview yesterday that Bush as president "has been wrapping himself falsely in the flag."

But Kerry, at least implicitly, has sought to turn attention to Bush's military record. In an interview Tuesday night on Fox News, Kerry said: "I've never made any judgments about any choice somebody made about avoiding the draft, about going to Canada, being a conscientious objector, going into the National Guard."

Let me get this straight, if we tell religious groups that they can't get federal money if they discriminate based on religion in their hiring practices, we're discriminating against them? This must be because of the constitutional right to get federal funding, I suppose, and the waiver of federal laws provided for religious institutions in the Constitution. I must reread that document, looking for the parts that slid by me before.

Myoh my, am I shocked.

Here, here (or is that hear, hear?)