Ok, so now there is indisputable evidence that Bush failed to meet his requirements when he was in the Air National Guard. Somehow, despite these facts, the president was still given an honorable discharge. Too top it all off, Bush has
publicly claimed many, many times that he fufilled all his service requirements to get his honorable discharge.
Normally, you'd think this would cry out for an investigation. Normally, you'd think the media would rise to the occasion because this is an issue of charecter and credibility. Has the president been lieing? How did the president recieve his honorable discharge? From the facts, it appears the president was AWOL in AL and MA- was the president never held accountable for this because of his political connections?
Maybe those are the questions you'd hear if we lived in a "normal" world. Instead, our discourse can be polluted by clearly partisan interests that shovel bullshit about the service record and honors earned by one canidate without any facts to back up their claims. Our press will trump charges like this while ignoring or presenting actual
facts in the case of the president as "politics".
I don't have a solution to this. I've come to the conclusion that the media as a whole is acting in their own self-interest instead of the publics. They've been ignoring or downplaying clear facts for years (even before Bush) and I doubt it's because they're afraid of the "liberal media" tag. What's so liberal about presenting the facts? My father was a journo for decades (even in the service) and he's always said that's the job.
Seeing the presidents handlers come out claiming the revelations of the facts of Bush's military record is nothing but "politics" (nevermind that a FOI request had to be filed to even see the docs) pisses me off to no avail. In the meantime, a dishonest political attack on Kerry's record wasn't referred to as such for over a week.
Sadly, I doubt the press will deal with the facts regarding Bush's military service in a serious manner.