Written by Byron York from the National Review
Bush’s National Guard years
Before you fall for Dems’ spin, here are the facts
What do you really know about George W. Bush’s time in the Air National
Guard?
That he didn’t show up for duty in Alabama? That he missed a physical? That
his daddy got him in?
News coverage of the president’s years in the Guard has tended to focus on
one brief portion of that time — to the exclusion of virtually everything
else. So just for the record, here, in full, is what Bush did:
The future president joined the Guard in May 1968. Almost immediately, he
began an extended period of training. Six weeks of basic training. Fifty-three
weeks of flight training. Twenty-one weeks of fighter-interceptor training.
That was 80 weeks to begin with, and there were other training periods
thrown in as well. It was full-time work. By the time it was over, Bush had served
nearly two years.
Not two years of weekends. Two years.
After training, Bush kept flying, racking up hundreds of hours in F-102
jets. As he did, he accumulated points toward his National Guard service
requirements. At the time, guardsmen were required to accumulate a minimum of 50
points to meet their yearly obligation.
According to records released earlier this year, Bush earned 253 points in
his first year, May 1968 to May 1969 (since he joined in May 1968, his service
thereafter was measured on a May-to-May basis).
Bush earned 340 points in 1969-1970. He earned 137 points in 1970-1971. And
he earned 112 points in 1971-1972. The numbers indicate that in his first
four years, Bush not only showed up, he showed up a lot. Did you know that?
That brings the story to May 1972 — the time that has been the focus of so
many news reports — when Bush “deserted” (according to anti-Bush filmmaker
Michael Moore) or went “AWOL” (according to Terry McAuliffe, chairman of the
Democratic National Committee).
Bush asked for permission to go to Alabama to work on a Senate campaign. His
superior officers said OK. Requests like that weren’t unusual, says retired
Col. William Campenni, who flew with Bush in 1970 and 1971.
“In 1972, there was an enormous glut of pilots,” Campenni says. “The
Vietnam War was winding down, and the Air Force was putting pilots in desk jobs. In
’72 or ’73, if you were a pilot, active or Guard, and you had an obligation
and wanted to get out, no problem. In fact, you were helping them solve
their problem.”
So Bush stopped flying. From May 1972 to May 1973, he earned just 56 points —
not much, but enough to meet his requirement.
Then, in 1973, as Bush made plans to leave the Guard and go to Harvard
Business School, he again started showing up frequently.
In June and July of 1973, he accumulated 56 points, enough to meet the
minimum requirement for the 1973-1974 year.
Then, at his request, he was given permission to go. Bush received an
honorable discharge after serving five years, four months and five days of his
original six-year commitment. By that time, however, he had accumulated enough
points in each year to cover six years of service.
During his service, Bush received high marks as a pilot.
A 1970 evaluation said Bush “clearly stands out as a top notch fighter
interceptor pilot” and was “a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for
leadership.”
A 1971 evaluation called Bush “an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot”
who “continually flies intercept missions with the unit to increase his
proficiency even further.” And a 1972 evaluation called Bush “an exceptional
fighter interceptor pilot and officer.”
Now, it is only natural that news reports questioning Bush’s service — in
The Boston Globe and The New York Times, on CBS and in other outlets — would
come out now. Democrats are spitting mad over attacks on John Kerry’s record
by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
And, as it is with Kerry, it’s reasonable to look at a candidate’s entire
record, including his military service — or lack of it. Voters are perfectly
able to decide whether it’s important or not in November.
The Kerry camp blames Bush for the Swift boat veterans’ attack, but anyone
who has spent much time talking to the Swifties gets the sense that they are
doing it entirely for their own reasons.
And it should be noted in passing that Kerry has personally questioned Bush’
s service, while Bush has not personally questioned Kerry’s.
In April — before the Swift boat veterans had said a word — Kerry said Bush
“has yet to explain to America whether or not, and tell the truth, about
whether he showed up for duty.” Earlier, Kerry said, “Just because you get an
honorable discharge does not, in fact, answer that question.”
Now, after the Swift boat episode, the spotlight has returned to Bush.
That’s fine. We should know as much as we can.
And perhaps someday Kerry will release more of his military records as well.
Byron York is a White House correspondent for National Review. His column
appears in The Hill each week. E-mail: _byork@thehill.com_
(mailto:byork@thehill.com)
