For catching an error in this op-ed by University of Washington assistant political science professor, Christopher Parker. Here are the first two paragraphs of Gulliford's letter.
As a U.S. Air Force veteran, I thought University of Washington political science professor Christopher Parker was doing fairly well in his column on possible veteran swing voting ["Veterans could be the swing vote," guest commentary, July 7], especially noting the administration's less-than-commendable veterans' care efforts. However, I was sadly disappointed by what I hope was Parker's unintended slur against President George Bush and our National Guard active-duty service members and veterans when he wrote "Many vets thus feel the military is being misused in Iraq, broken by a man [Bush] who never served."
Pretty sloppy for a UW professor: If this were in a term paper or test, I would give him a "D-".
Not just an error, but a nasty implied slur on every person who has served in our National Guard.
Not only did Bush serve, but he served in a unit that was regularly sending pilots to Vietnam — and Bush volunteered, informally, to go to Vietnam. (He was rejected because he did not have enough flight experience.) The airplane he flew, the Delta Dagger, was notoriously dangerous, so Bush did not escape risk, even flying over Texas.
Professor Parker apparently did not know these facts about Bush's service. Nor, I assume, did the Seattle Times editor who accepted this piece. And that is simply amazing, in both cases. Did they both miss the little controversy that cost Dan Rather his job? Are they both so consumed by Bush Derangement Syndrome that they are unable to remember one of the basic facts about Bush's service to this country?
Some time ago, I jokingly accused the Seattle Times editorial page editor, James Vesely, of deliberately trying to discredit academics by running pieces such as this one. (He denies it.) But this latest example makes me wonder whether there isn't some truth in my joke, whether someone at the Times is trying to make local academics look like fools. (Incidentally, I would approve of that, were it happening, since our colleges and universities are in desperate need of reform.)
Cross posted at Jim Miller on Politics.
(There were two other letters criticizing Parker's piece, one from Doug Roulstone (yes, that Doug Roulstone) and one from retired U.S. Air Force major Gerald Stiles.
This is a smaller point, but I think that Parker should not imply that his "research" shows something, without giving us at least a brief description of that research.)
My apologies for closing this post, but one commenter kept posting off-topic, and, in my opinion, possibly slanderous comments.
Posted by Jim Miller at July 11, 2008 05:09 PM | Email ThisAnd if a top priority for Parker's own vote for president is knowing the candidate DID serve, then I presume he is NOT voting for Barrack Obama.
Posted by: Michele on July 11, 2008 05:32 PMI truly believe they do not care. Seattle is an ideological city and perpetuating a convenient and certainly self-serving lie/rumor (especially about Bush!) by omission is perfectly acceptable. What shocks me, Jim, is that you are surprised.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on July 11, 2008 06:23 PMWhat about the fact that Bush is the only "pilot" to get trained as a pilot "in" the National Guard, where ALL other pilots joined the guard after leaving the Air Force, Navy, or other branches. Oops. Forgot also how Bush got out of flying, by refusing to take a urine test, and the fact that ALL his military records were shredded, in triplicate. I'm just sayin..... Then there's the AWOL thing.....
Bush was, is, and always will be remembered as a disgrace to our military. I don't care what some retired Republicons say.
Call it Bush derangement syndrome. Today, they called it war crimes.....
Posted by: All Facts Support My Positions on July 11, 2008 07:29 PMJust like a liberal; spout and stake a position when one actually has not clue.
Some ex-active duty military personnel join the national guard, but one can also join the guard w/o having formerly served in the active duty military.
The F-104 was nicknamed the "Widow Maker." Planes of that era - and that includes the F-102 that President Bush flew - were difficult to fly.
From her command center, "All my opinions support my opinions" will continue to pleasure herself.
But she has not concept of the military
Posted by: Obi-Wan on July 11, 2008 09:11 PMLie. The TANG was hunting for pilots at the time.
"What about the fact that Bush is the only "pilot" to get trained as a pilot "in" the National Guard, where ALL other pilots joined the guard after leaving the Air Force, Navy, or other branches."
another lie. see above
"Then there's the AWOL thing"
a fake story with no legs.
Trying to be your own Dan Rather or Mary Mapes, "facts". Guess you are filth like them.
Posted by: iconoclast on July 11, 2008 10:23 PMYou have Bush derangement syndrome, but only in your dreams will it amount to war crimes. The loony Speaker of the House is OK about going forward on a call for impeachment on Bush. What a stupid waste of taxpayer money - first off Bush won't be in office long enough, even if anything were to stick. This is nothing more than a political stunt, it was tried before and nothing stuck- but Kucinich thinks that there is enough evidence. Keep jousting at windmills, dude...
Bush may be bad but with his judgment and naive policies and influence from the moonbat left, Obama could easily be much worse !
Don't be insane, Vote for McCain !
Posted by: KS on July 11, 2008 11:05 PMThe only thing worse than voting for a Republican, is voting for a Democrat.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 12, 2008 12:57 AMEasily be much worse? All you do is bleat over and over and over again about "socialism", without any real understanding of what that word means. And broken records make very poor policy analysts.
Posted by: demo kid on July 12, 2008 01:00 AMI don't think the Commies give out membership cards anymore, but today the could just drop them off at KOS, Acorn, and the Democratic Party Headquarters and save a lot of postage.
Posted by: keb on July 12, 2008 07:35 AMAsk Rather what you get when you shine the light on slimy Republiconvicts. Fired. The GOP operates like the mafia. They are a stain on our country, and our constitution. Their greedy, ignorant, power mad rich man's "club" has destroyed our military, our nation's standing in the world, and our children's future. America may never recover from the damage Bush has done, of course with the help of the GOP, every step of the way.
Defend this lying, torture authorizing, warmongering, elitist all you want. It only shows how sad, and out of touch you (the 28%ers) are.
I would rather see him at the Hague, testifying why the crimes we convicted the Japanese of, are now not crimes, just because he is Bush.
I feel sorry for anyone still supporting him in any way. They need therapy. Real bad.
Posted by: All Facts Support My Positions on July 12, 2008 07:58 AMRather and Mapes tried to pawn off a forgery supported by a liar (denounced by his own daughter as well as refuted by all the TANG officers and records) and got caught. All your wishing, dreaming, and addled-hoping doesn't change that one bit. Bush served honorably in a difficult and dangerous position for 4 years in one of the top fighter ANG units in the USA.
WRT to AWOL allegations, muster records and personal affadavits of observation by senior officers in Alabama completely destroy that slander. Sorry about that, loon.
wrt to "war crimes" prosecution, that will never happen. Even if Captain Bullshit is elected, his advisors will never let him use the machinery of government to pursue a baseless vendetta against prior POTUS because to do that would begin a tit-for-tat exercise criminalizing policy differences that EVERYONE will lose. I don't expect a loon like you to understand that, but unless the Obamassiah picks a nut like you as AG this is the way it will be.
The Hague? Don't make me laugh. Attempting to snatch a former POTUS will just result in lots of injured Europeans. But if they want to prove themselves completely irrelevant and impotent through a "prosecution" of Bush--cue the Stalinist show trials--be my guest. Just don't get caught trying to serve Bush; the Secret Service will take an extremely dim (and potentially violent) view of any effort along those lines.
Regarding his service, the allegations, and all that... I find it absolutely brilliant that in this case, all facts support YOUR positions, as long as you twist them around enough.
Simply put, the guy didn't want to get shot at. Completely reasonable for some people, and given that his father had influence, it was easy for him not to be in that position. However, you can't go from exalting the virtues of military service, to lauding attempts to get out of serious military service.
I mean, c'mon... he might as well have been cleaning the decks of an aircraft carrier if that were the criterion you were using! If he was serious about being a combat pilot, he'd be in combat missions. That's it.
Are you going to tell me next that the five deferments that Dick Cheney received were "noble" and "honorable" and showed "service to his country"?
Posted by: demo kid on July 12, 2008 10:00 AMBut idiots like you are the worst kinds of bottom feeders, right or left. I don't know what specific allegations you want to try to make, but being a POW is not always the glamorous story of the human spirit that gets immortalized in action movies. It's brutal, it's dirty, and it's violent. To look back at it and to claim that he should have done something else is despicable Monday morning armchair quarterbacking. I don't think that he should be wringing as much out of this as he has, but he also shouldn't have to defend his war record from the likes of you.
Posted by: demo kid on July 12, 2008 10:21 AM2. Don't post slanderous material unless you want to be banned from Sound Politics. (And every other decent site.)
3. I give a little more leeway to people who use their real email addresses.
And I can't believe that I'm defending McCain, but let's stick to the issues here. I don't like some of the guy's policies, I wouldn't vote for him, but I also think that you're dwelling solidly in tinfoil-hat-wearing territory.
Posted by: demo kid on July 12, 2008 11:20 AMBut at this point, we'll probably have to leave it to future historians to figure out why and how in this supposed "Information Age" did someone like Bush not only get elected (sort of...) but even reelected. (I personally have the feeling that maybe 10 years from now, few will ever admit to having ever voted for him.)
Posted by: BC on July 12, 2008 11:59 AMPlease troll elsewhere. In fact, why aren't you hooking up with the rest of the Kos Kids, scumbags that they are, celebrating Tony Snow's all too soon death from cancer?
Posted by: hinton on July 12, 2008 12:45 PM