… and not just under the aegis of the cable show’s motor-mouth host. [Who watches that?--ed. No one, evidently.] Tonight the more successful “Sixty Minutes” is going to feature some trash talk of its own about Bush’s National Guard service (or lack thereof) by a fellow named Ben Barnes, who once alleged that he got Bush into that same Guard when he (Barnes) was Lt. Governor of Texas. This claim can seen on this video link sent me by my friend JPod. It seems there’s a problem — Bush was sworn in by the Nat’l Guard on May 27, 1968. Barnes wasn’t Lt. Gov. of Texas until 1969. When Bush joined the NG, BB was US Representative to the UN in Geneva.
Well, maybe Barnes “misspoke” (oh, that again) and did the whole thing long distance from Switzerland. But it certainly doesn’t smell good. Ultimately, however, who knows and who cares? The trash-talking about Bush is obvious payback for the Swift Vets. But there is a big difference. Bush never claimed to be a war hero and is not running on his Vietnam War record. He’s not running as an “anti-war candidate” either, paradoxical or fungible as that is, today or yesterday. [What is Kerry running on anyway?--ed. Self-regard.]
AND MEANWHILE… for those who still think that what Kerry really stands for is “consulting with our allies”… well, the answer, my friend, is blowing in the–you know the rest.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
22 Comments
1. M. Simon:You can read more about Ben Barnes here:
http://blogspirator.blogspot.com/2004/08/exclusive-dirt-on-ben-barnes-claims.html
You may hve to scroll down.
Sep 8, 2004 - 8:50 am 2. Silicon valley Jim:Kerry and the rest of the anti-Bush folks sure have a problem with consistency, don’t they? Kerry talks about being in Cambodia on Christmas Eve 1968 while Nixon was denying that there were troops in Cambodia – but Nixon wasn’t President then. Now Barnes claims that he used his position as lieutenant governor to get Bush into the National Guard – but he wasn’t yet lieutenant governor.
My guess is that nobody would catch this if it weren’t for the web.
Sep 8, 2004 - 8:56 am 3. Tom Grey:Has Hardball had the,
balls,
to get somebody to say these two words.
Kerry Lied.
He lied about Cambodia (strong, small lie),
and he lied about American soldiers being war criminals as policy (the Big lie).
Peace (AND Genocide) vs. Fighting Evil.
Kerry chose P & G.
Sep 8, 2004 - 9:01 am 4. Gaius Livius:Amazing just how much in the tank for Kerry these people are – Clarke and Wilson are hustled out on “60 Minutes” to make wild accusations against the president, with evidently little or no advance vetting of their stories.
When they’re utterly discredited, there are no corrections, no retractions, no apologies.
Now, there’s this Barnes fellow, being trotted forth to utter another slanderous accusation that – with just a little research – looks bogus on its face, from a man with an obvious partisan interest.
And now, we find that NBC’s “Today” show will breathlessly interview Kitty Kelley on her latest slime job, when even Time and Newsweek wouldn’t touch it.
It’s telling to compare, though, how both CBS and NBC have treated the Swift Vets for Truth. Oh, these guys, they can’t be trusted, they’re a bunch of Republican liars, ignore them unless it’s to attack them.
You’d think they wanted Kerry to win, or something.
Sep 8, 2004 - 9:24 am 5. Charlie (Colorado):It’s a little late perhaps — the comment eater apparently got my first try (which was, by the way, first post, *snif*) — but the Today show plans three days of Kitty Kelly interviews….
Sep 8, 2004 - 10:09 am 6. geezer:Roger, please get out of my head and haunt somebody else! I had just finished pointing out to my wife what you just said above, 15 minutes before checking your site.
One thing you left out: why isn’t anyone pointing out that candidates and voters are perfectly entitled to question any part of a candidate’s record, especially IF said candidate makes this or that a key reason to vote for him or her? There is no special requirement to be a former this or that when it comes to sizing up someone who’s asking for your vote. It’s obviously smart voter research to take into account what suject matter experts may say about the this or that, but in the end, it’s the voter who’s being asked to back the candidate, and they’ll have to live with that vote a very long time.
Sep 8, 2004 - 10:13 am 7. Retread:Kerry should have made time to be briefed. Or, if he *was* briefed, he’s advocating joing the enemy. Oh, wait, he’s done that before….
Sep 8, 2004 - 10:24 am 8. CERDIP:Maybe if Kerry stopped making his platform a moving target, he would get a bounce from it ?
Sep 8, 2004 - 10:37 am 9. Kara Logan:CBS is nothing more than a wholly owned subsidiary of the DNC. The old news Barnes interview is just further proof that Dan Rather has been on a jihad against President Bush and his father.
Sep 8, 2004 - 12:56 pm 10. Catherine:I’m thrilled we’re going to spend two weeks on Kitty Kelly & Bush’s service in the National Guard.
That should make it next to impossible to get a word in edgewise on what’s wrong with Bush’s Iraq policy (arguably) while keeping the spotlight on the WOT.
Sounds win-win to me.
Sep 8, 2004 - 1:34 pm 11. Terrye:Are these people just dense?
For years we are told to ignore Clinton’s problem with the ladies, it is just sex after all and so what if he spent his formative years chasing British women instead of fighting in Nam? Nam is over. Personal lives are off limits.
Unless it works for them.
If it so important then shouldn’t Kerry unseal his divorce records and sign a form 180 and release his military records now? And while he is at it how about his medical records and Tereza’s taxes?
The Kerry people should stop digging.
Sep 8, 2004 - 3:03 pm 12. Syl:You know what I didn’t understand? With all the protests in NYC for the RNC convention, and some counter protests as well…why didn’t we see a crowd of protestors from our side in front of the NYTimes building?
Sep 8, 2004 - 8:47 pm 13. Jody:Hate to rain on your parade, but that’s not what’s said in the transcript:
DAN RATHER:
Help people understand what’s the relationship between — you were then-speaker of the House?
BEN BARNES:
Yes.
So Barnes says he made the call while he was speaker of the house in 68, which is ok by the timeline.
I suspect that your correspondent was confused by the extended discussion of Barnes making recommendations (as Barnes terms it) as both speaker and Lt Gov.
Anyhoo, I’m voting Bush as I have his actual tenure as commander-in-chief to determine his fitness for the position.
Sep 8, 2004 - 8:57 pm 14. jack risko:I have done the SEC research on this disreputable Barnes. Check out this fraud:
http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/2004/09/05/the-next-msm-scandal-ben-barnes-on-cbs/
Thank you.
Jack Risko
Sep 8, 2004 - 11:13 pm 15. 68plexi:Jody -
I’m all for accuracy, but according to the Texas Monthly link that M. Simon provided,
“[Barnes] was a member of President Johnson’s Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, U.S. representative to the NATO Conference in 1967, and United Nations Representative to Geneva, Switzerland, in 1968.
In 1969, Barnes was elected lieutenant governor of Texas and served from 1969 to 1973.”
I guess the UN Rep to Geneva gig may not have lasted all year but Barnes seems to have been spending more time in Europe than in Tejas from ‘67 to ‘68.
Sep 8, 2004 - 11:44 pm 16. 68plexi:Jody -
Check out this whopper:
“”I got a young man named George W. Bush into the National Guard when I was lieutenant governor of Texas, and I’m not necessarily proud of that, but I did it,” Barnes said in the 45-second video, which was recorded May 27 before a group of John Kerry supporters in Austin. Barnes, who was House speaker when Bush entered the Guard, later became lieutenant governor.”
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040828_194.html
Hey M. Simon – A big thank you for that link. That’s one of the best, most complete debunkings of a claim I think I’ve ever seen.
Sep 8, 2004 - 11:58 pm 17. Jody:I stand corrected.
I’ve also found this which gives Barnes’ bio which states that Barnes was the UN rep to Geneva in 68 (and rep to NATO in 67).
Sep 9, 2004 - 9:48 am 18. Steven Smith:The relevance of the story isn’t that Bush ducked service during the Vietnam War by getting a plush position in the TANG, or even that he might have been AWOL on occasion. The issue is that he has told numerous stories about what he was doing from 1972-3, none of which have checked out. As the 60 Minutes report last night showed, it took the discovery of documents from a third party to force the Bushies to release the same devastating documents, months after they had claimed to have released his whole file. Bush may not be running on his “service” in Vietnam, but he is campaigning on his honesty, integrity, and “leadership” neither of which seem to be evident in this sorry tale on his part. With even more bombshells about ready to explode, we may finally see the blogosphere come of age, forcing an issue to the forefront that the media ignored in 2000.
Sep 9, 2004 - 10:05 am 19. Jody:But apparently not so corrected…
Barnes does appear to have been speaker of the house during the time in question (67-68). (link)
Apparently he really was holding down two jobs.
Sep 9, 2004 - 10:07 am 20. Knucklehead:The most fervent ABB BDS sufferer who still sorta, sometimes, communicates with me is “refuses” to talk about Bush and the TANG or Kerry and Vietnam anymore – its time to move on to discussing issues.
I suggested discussing the bias and perfidy of the MSM, but that doesn’t seem to be a “legitmate” issue. Its almost funny and certainly amusing.
Sep 9, 2004 - 10:44 am 21. blogaddict:This seems like a pretty convincing refutation to me: http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2004/09/ben_barnes_and_.html
Then there’s this: http://www.hillnews.com/york/090904.aspx
And lastly, this, about a possible forgery. Definitely quite a bit more iffy, but interesting nonetheless: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007760.php
Sep 9, 2004 - 11:21 am 22. Silicon valley Jim:Thank you, Jody! I spent a fair amount of time this morning looking for a site that stated clearly the years for which Barnes was Speaker of the Texas House. I don’t think that it’s a serious matter that, during one statement, he stated that he was lieutenant governor at the time (despite what I posted earlier), and I’m a staunch Bush supporter.
Now, my understanding is that the records of the trial in which Barnes testified have been sealed. I think that there is a difference between official trial records that show that he made his statement under oath and just a statement from him today that he made the statement under oath. Am I right that there is no available official record of Barnes’s testimony?
Sep 9, 2004 - 12:07 pm