Some people are stating that Kerry pledged to sign the form and release the records (I can’t find that statement made by Kerry either).
So, two questions:
Did Kerry ever pledge to sign the 180 form?
If so, did he ever sign it?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6886726/
As far as I can tell (and this is mostly from websites with a partisan bent…so make of that what you will), Mr. Kerry has not signed the form.
I’m not real familiar with the form in question…or whether there is a substantive difference between what he DID release and what would happen with the 180 form.
If he were other than honorably discharged, wouldn’t that be a matter of public record, even without his release? Doesn’t seem much point in it, if nobody ever has to know about it.
Here is a link whereby you can learn about obtaining military records for any veteran.
http://www.stolenvalor.com/foia.HTM
Granted, you can learn more information if the veteran is cooperative, but there is still some information that is available to the public.
I think everyone has heard that a “Dishonorable Discharge” follows you the rest of your life. I’m sure an individual’s discharge status must be available to all who inquire. Otherwise, why doesn’t someone say “I got a Dishonorable Discharge - so if I don’t sign the DD-180, no one will ever know.” I don’t think things work that way.
This is an edited version of what you will find at the link.
It is from BG Burkett’s “Stolen Valor” site.
THE PROCESS - STEP ONE
National Personnel Records Center,
Army (Air Force or Navy) Records Center,
9700 Page Boulevard,
St. Louis, MO, 63132.
To obtain the records of other veterans: (that is NOT for yourself),
*if you have the veteran’s cooperation, ask him to sign a Form DA-180 *(available through the National Archives and Records Administration), which is a proxy statement giving the National Personnel Records Center the authority to give the researcher all the data in the file releasable to the veteran, including the DD-214, which is not available under the Freedom of Information Act.
Send that form to the National Personnel Records Center along with your letter, the veteran’s full name and social security number. (We have not used this method ourselves, so we cannot vouch for how quickly or easily a response will be received.)
If the veteran is not a cooperative subject, you must request the record under the federal Freedom of Information Act. Send a letter to the National Personnel Records Center, saying something like this: “Dear Sirs or Madams: I am requesting, under the federal Freedom of Information Act, the publicly-releasable form of the military record of John Jones Smith.”
You MUST cite the Freedom of Information Act to obtain a military record that is not your own.
Be sure to use a full and correctly-spelled name. With more than 80 million individual personnel records in the system, going back to the Revolutionary War, it’s difficult to get a military record unless you have a full name and service number (for service prior to 1969) or social security number (post-1969). It also helps to include date of birth, home town, and general time of service, if you know it.
A little clarification here:
The DD-214 (mentioned in wolf_meister’s quote) is your official discharge record, which includes the type of discharge and all other pertinent information (dates of service, training received, awards, duty assignments, etc).
Note that the DD-214 is NOT available under the FOIA; the only way to obtain the DD-214 of someone other than yourself is if that person signed a DD-180.
So how does a dishonorable discharge follow you for life? Almost any employer will, upon finding out that you were in the military, request a copy of your DD-214 prior to employment. Since you are providing the copy of your own record there is no FOIA or DD-180 nonsense involved. A dishonorable discharge on your DD-214 pretty much ruins your job-seeking chances. Not providing a copy of your DD-214 is akin to admitting that you had a dishonorable discharge and the result is the same: no job.
Now, without sending this thing to GD or the Pit, getting elected to Congress or the Senate is not like getting hired at your local bank: no one asks for your DD-214.
I don’t know if Kerry has provided his DD-214 or not, but I thought I should point out some of the finer points of the 214 vs 180.
Don’t believe the hype. The website cited in the OP is operated by an extremist neo-conservative group and they are trying John Kerry by innuendo. IIRC, Character of Service is easily obtainable under FOIA, as is information on units/locations where a particular veteran served and other non-personal information. Private, non-releasable information consists of such things as medical records, disciplinary records (particularly non-judicial proceedings), counseling statements and efficiency ratings from superiors, investigative reports supporting awards and decorations, and the like.
The Federalist Patriot is on a fishing expedition for more information to quote out of context and smear Senator Kerry.
-
-
- Kerry has refused to allow public access to his full service records, and without that, nothing he says or posts on his website can be verified. It’s not hype, just sound reasoning: if he will not allow full public disclosure, then there is some aspect of his service records that he does not want the public to be able to see for themselves. The quickest, easiest way to end these questions would have been for Mr Kerry to sign the DD-180–and he refused to ever do that.
-
…The leading speculation I read of was that part of his reason for discharge was health-related, and he did not want those facts to come to light and ruin his political prospects.
~
Take a look at the website cited in the OP. They specifically imply that Kerry’s exit from the Navy may have been less than honorable and that they want a DD-180 from him to prove otherwise. FOIA-releasable information would specifically refute that (and has). As I said, it is a fishing expedition.
Speaking of fishing expeditions, George W Bush also hasn’t signed a DD-180. Something having to do with pots and kettles seems appropriate here.
Signing a DD Form 180 is a personal choice and refusing to do so is a right held by all veterans. My father ran for political office (state senate) without signing one. I don’t believe Wesley Clark signed one, either. It would be interesting to know if John McCain signed one (I rather doubt that he has). Even public figures have some right to privacy.
The thing is, Kerry keeps promising to sign it. If he had simply said, “None of your damned business”, then I’d agree with you. But every time he’s interviewed and the question comes up, he says, “Yes, I will sign that form”. Then he just waits for everyone to forget the promise.
Why the hell is this even an issue at this point? It’s like people still beating up Clinton. It’s in the past…it’s done. Kerry will never run for President again (despite what he may wish personally).
Does the issue have to be currently* relevant to be asked?
*And by currently, the definition would have to mean less than 6 months since that would put us back to the election in November.
I don’t think the records need to be released, and if I ever run for office, I’m not releasing mine. My records are fine, mind you, even quite good, but I don’t like the presumption that a veteran needs to release them, or that the public has an automatic right to that information.
That said, however, if Kerry has promised their release, he should up and do it.
I’ve read those records Kerry himself released, especially his officer fitreps, which showed that had he chosen to stay in the Navy, he would have found himself unpromotable in short order. And not all of his fitreps were there.
It is not wild speculation to say that there are things in that service record Kerry doesn’t want us to see. At this point, that seems to be the simplest conclusion the evidence is pointing to.
SamStone
Has Kerry actually said he was going to sign the form? The interview with Tim Russert does seems as if he will sign it - but when others sign theirs.
I can see the point in not signing one.
Any negative remark in a candidate’s military record would be used against him. As sewalkstated, the record contains among other things “disciplinary records (particularly non-judicial proceedings)”. A political opponent could say “Candidate Smith was reprimanded in the military for rebroadcasting events and desritptions of a Major League baseball game without getting prior permission from Major League Baseball !!! Is this the kind of person we want for public office? I think not !!”
I suppose this might tip the toe in Great Debates, but I don’t read Kerry’s answer in the Russert interview as being a contingent answer. I read it as saying (among other things) Yes I will sign the form, but I ALSO think that other candidates should do as well.
I have no idea whether the records that he DID release are substantively the same or different than what would happen with the form. Nor do I really have an opinion about whether it’s a big deal or not.
Sounds like the answers are “Yes” and “No,” respectively.
BeagleDave
Okay, I can accept your interpretation of Kerry’s answer.
I suppose Kerry could always take a page from the book of “Bill Clinton’s Rules of Semantics, Sophistry and Subtrefuge” and emphatically proclaim:
“I said I will definitely sign a Form DD-180 … but I didn’t say when”.
OR
“I did sign a Form DD-180. But I kept it and did not submit it to anyone.”
Wow a politician going back on his word? Hmmm I seem to remember “Read My Lips … NO NEW …” ahhh but that’s another story.
(I just felt I had to toss in that last remark in order to present a bipartisan point of view).
As others have said, it is unlikely John Kerry will get the Democratic Presidential nomination for 2008 so this discussion is purely academic.
It’s not purely academic, as the good senator will probably run for something at some point.
If you think his last election is behind him, you’re nuts.
Mr Moto
I don’t think that John Kerry is going to retire from public life and become a recluse. Far from it !! However, I think the office of Senator is about as far as he will ever go for an elected position. (Well there aren’t that many higher elected postions are there?)
I think he is seriously deluding himself if he thinks he has a chance for the Presidency in the 2008 election. If he wants to go after the Democratic nomination, I think the leading Democrats should give him a serious lecture as to why that would be extremely inadvisable. Basically, I don’t think the “Red States” will ever have a change of heart in 2008 and think - “Gee that’s the guy we shoulda voted for.” Nope. I don’t think he will ever be popular among the “Red States”. Ever.
If you think his last election is behind him, you’re nuts.
Gee Mr Moto, I didn’t think my sanity was being called into question. 
I guess he’ll run for Senator again and probably get re-elected. I doubt the issue of signing a DD-180 will even be brought up and that is the reason I think it is academic.
NOTE–PLEASE STOP DERAILING GQ THREADS WITH POLITICAL DEBATE AND EXTRANEOUS OPINIONS AND GENERAL FOLDEROL.
I guess the OP has been answered as well as possible.
Before this thread get any more derailed into politics, I’m closing it.
If anyone comes up with new info re: the OP, email me and I’ll let you post it here.