Bored Dems propose military draft
True to accusations from the right, Dems are showing America that they have no plans to deal with issues that trouble the nation. Social Security. Poverty. The Iraq War.
Before the election they campaigned hard to the left, swearing to act quickly to get troops out of the Middle East. Hasn't even been two weeks and those promises are DOA on the House steps.
And now there's Charlie Rangel, proposing again, a military draft. You'll remember the last time he proposed it, he went all over television accusing the Bush White House of seeking to reinstate a draft (even though it was his own bill and did not come from the administration at all). And then, he promptly voted against his own bill so that he could say "I voted down the draft".
Apparently, the Dems are bored, having no real platform other than "Buck Fush", and Rangel has again proposed the draft while a coalition of his own partymates have declared intent to vote it down. Ahhh, the joys of having power again. Must make people proud to have voted them into a majority...
Comment(s) »
» Leave a comment
- Your E-mail address is never displayed. If you enter it, it will only be visible to the blog author
- Since there already are over 25 comments to this post, your eventual comment will no longer trigger a notification e-mail to the persons that commented before you.
- The line and paragraph breaks automatically
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/20 @ 04:52 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2006/11/20 @ 05:34 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2006/11/20 @ 05:23 PM — (Reply)
Rangel claims to believe that we would be less likely to go to war if everyone's children had an equal chance of getting drafted. Does that mean he doesn't believe rich white kids could use daddy's money to buy their way out of service? So now, he's bucking the DNC talking points - apparently, Bush did serve honorably...???
Comment by Cate— 2006/11/20 @ 05:33 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/20 @ 05:37 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2006/11/20 @ 05:43 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2006/11/20 @ 05:58 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2006/11/20 @ 06:21 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2006/11/20 @ 06:25 PM — (Reply)
Where're my glasses?
Comment by Cate— 2006/11/20 @ 06:28 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2006/11/20 @ 07:10 PM — (Reply)
If the military doesn't want the draft...
If Republicans don't want the draft...
If Democrats (other than Rangel) don't want the draft...
If we haven't had a draft since '72...
Why did Reagan bring back the Selective Service, and why is it still in existence after 20 years of doing NOTHING except collecting names??
Can we all agree on getting rid of that useless waste, or am I missing some element here?
Comment by Michael— 2006/11/20 @ 08:34 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/20 @ 08:40 PM — (Reply)
Definitions of Selective Service on the Web:
Selective Service refers to the government agency charged with registration for the military draft. Male students who are US citizens and have reached the age of 18 must be registered with Selective Services in order to be eligible for federal financial aid.
conscription: compulsory military service
The Selective Service System is the means by which the United States administers military conscription. It entails registering all males over the age of 18 with the system for the purpose of ready information available about potential soldiers in the event of war.
So in other words, if you want our help for college, then you must be prepared to "pay the piper" should we go to war. You will be called up in times of war to serve, even though you may have paid back the student loans. Am I reading that right. 18 yr old males are signing up voluntarily to be drafted unvoluntarily should war break out and we needed them? Okay, so maybe we should be like lots of other countries: You live here, you get the freedoms that we all enjoy as Americans, then maybe like the princes in England, if they all had to serve a mandatory 2 years or whatever, maybe if we all knew that this was a price for living free, then everyone would be prepared to pay that piper. And once that service was over, we could qualify for all of the other benefits. I don't know. I, as a mother of daughters, would not know the pain of sending my son off to war. I am one of those old fashioned women who believe that women should not go to war. I can't explain why. I just do. But, there you go. The definition of Selective Service.
Comment by Verity— 2006/11/21 @ 12:55 PM — (Reply)
You fail to mention that it is ONE sole Democrat proposing the re-instatement of the draft. And you also fail to mention that Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer have already said that proposal is essentially DOA. They have no plans whatsoever to add Charlie Rangel's proposal to their legislative agenda.
More importantly, though, you fail to get at the heart of WHY Charlie Rangel is calling for a re-instatement of the draft.
He has said that he simply wants to have a conversation in this country, about the fact that the children of the President of the United States, and U.S. lawmakers (the very people who send our men and women into war) don't have their OWN children serving.
This is a quote from Rep. Rangel the other day:
"There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way."
http://progressiveminds.bloghi.com/2006/11/19/rangel-calls-for-reinstating-the-draft.html
Comment by SMillard— 2006/11/21 @ 03:20 PM — (Reply)
And so if Rangel thinks a draft would insure that all of American's sons and daughters have an equal opportunity to serve then he is dumber than a box of rocks. Right now, the military is wealthier and more educated (not to mention a good deal more sober and less high) than the last time the draft was used.
I know you ignored those stats when they were released after the last John Kerry gaffe, Shalana, but just because they don't support the race baiting argument of "our poor inner city children are being disproportionately sucked into service" doesn't mean they aren't true.
Comment by Cate— 2006/11/21 @ 03:26 PM — (Reply)
As he's been talking about his legislation, he's been talking about WHY he's proposing it. And he's been talking about the fact that if the POTUS and our lawmakers KNEW that their children would be forced to serve, they might be less likely to lead us into a war based on false pretenses.
He is trying to engage the rest of America into this conversation.
Also, I find it curious that you say the military is more educated, more sober and less high than the last time the draft was used.
Actually, because the military has been having such a tough time meeting its recruitment goals (likely due to the war in Iraq), they have been issuing more "moral waivers" to potential recruits with criminal records.
From a CBS Denven article:
(CBS4) DENVER A CBS4 investigation shows how the U.S. Army is accepting more applicants with criminal records, including drug problems, through a system of "waivers" to bypass regulations.
With a high demand for soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army has struggled to meet its recruiting and retention goals in past years. However, in the 2006 fiscal year, the Army exceeded its goal by enlisting 80,635 new troops.
The Army failed to reach its goal by 8 percent in 2005 which is a year they said was a less challenging recruiting environment.
The factors for an increase in enlistment include the change of the age limit from 40 to 42, a lowering of aptitude test score standards and an increase in what the Army calls "moral waivers."
Nationally, the Army has increased its acceptance of moral waivers from 7,640 in 2001 to 11,018 in 2006.
The rest of the article can be read at:
http://cbs4denver.com/local/local_story_325001958.html
Comment by SMillard— 2006/11/21 @ 04:00 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2006/11/21 @ 04:06 PM — (Reply)
Commentators speculate that his expressed motivation when he introduced a similar bill several years ago was not his real agenda and they are doing it this time too.
It will be interesting to see if democrats follow up on this or blow it off like they did to Rangel's previous draft bill.
Personally I find the national service portion a very good idea (this isn't a negative or postive about the remainder of it).
Comment by Barry G.— 2006/11/21 @ 05:13 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/21 @ 08:01 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/21 @ 07:59 PM — (Reply)
If you want to take it to that level, I'm game.
Now if we can get back to the subject at hand.
Yes, of course I know what a moral waiver is.
The point is that the military has been issuing more of these moral waivers. They are lowering their normal standards, in order to try to meet their recruitment goals.
Are you even aware that just this past summer, it came to light that hate groups are infiltrating our military?
The U.S. government used to have a ZERO TOLERANCE policy towards hate groups in the military.
However, in order to help meet their recruitment goals, the military has knowingly let people associated with hate groups join.
From a New York Times article from July 2006:
Hate Groups Are Infiltrating the Military, Group Asserts
By John Kifner
The New York Times
Friday 07 July 2006
A decade after the Pentagon declared a zero-tolerance policy for racist hate groups, recruiting shortfalls caused by the war in Iraq have allowed "large numbers of neo-Nazis and skinhead extremists" to infiltrate the military, according to a watchdog organization.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks racist and right-wing militia groups, estimated that the numbers could run into the thousands, citing interviews with Defense Department investigators and reports and postings on racist Web sites and magazines.
"We've got Aryan Nations graffiti in Baghdad," the group quoted a Defense Department investigator as saying in a report to be posted today on its Web site, www.splcenter.org. "That's a problem."
A Defense Department spokeswoman said officials there could not comment on the report because they had not yet seen it.
The center called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to appoint a task force to study the problem, declare a new zero tolerance policy and strictly enforce it.
The report said that neo-Nazi groups like the National Alliance, whose founder, William Pierce, wrote "The Turner Diaries," the novel that was the inspiration and blueprint for Timothy J. McVeigh's bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building, sought to enroll followers in the Army to get training for a race war.
The groups are being abetted, the report said, by pressure on recruiters, particularly for the Army, to meet quotas that are more difficult to reach because of the growing unpopularity of the war in Iraq.
The report quotes Scott Barfield, a Defense Department investigator, saying, "Recruiters are knowingly allowing neo-Nazis and white supremacists to join the armed forces, and commanders don't remove them from the military even after we positively identify them as extremists or gang members."
Mr. Barfield said Army recruiters struggled last year to meet goals. "They don't want to make a big deal again about neo-Nazis in the military," he said, "because then parents who are already worried about their kids signing up and dying in Iraq are going to be even more reluctant about their kids enlisting if they feel they'll be exposed to gangs and white supremacists."
The 1996 crackdown on extremists came after revelations that Mr. McVeigh had espoused far-right ideas when he was in the Army and recruited two fellow soldiers to aid his bomb plot. Those revelations were followed by a furor that developed when three white paratroopers were convicted of the random slaying of a black couple in order to win tattoos and 19 others were discharged for participating in neo-Nazi activities.
Rest of the article at:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/070706K.shtml
Comment by SMillard— 2006/11/21 @ 08:13 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2006/11/21 @ 05:42 PM — (Reply)
Later.
Comment by Cate— 2006/11/21 @ 04:11 PM — (Reply)
Please you thought white phosphorous was a chemical weapon.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/21 @ 08:16 PM — (Reply)
Do you know what the standards are for military service? for specific jobs in the service? mental? moral? physical?
I can name you at least ten friends over 40 who have VOLUNTEERED to go back on active duty. Believer or not Shalana there are people who want to serve. People of good moral, mental and physical character.
I suggest you stick to stuff you know.
I don't know how Rush Limbaugh got into the conversation. Segue Shalana....I don't see one.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/21 @ 08:24 PM — (Reply)
Perhaps YOU should stick to stuff you know, because you obviously cannot read. Either you can't read, or you were unwilling to read the New York Times article I provided the link to.
But just on the slim chance that you CAN read, the following is from a New York Times article in July of this year, which talks about the hate groups attempting to infiltrate the military:
A decade after the Pentagon declared a zero-tolerance policy for racist hate groups, recruiting shortfalls caused by the war in Iraq have allowed "large numbers of neo-Nazis and skinhead extremists" to infiltrate the military, according to a watchdog organization.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks racist and right-wing militia groups, estimated that the numbers could run into the thousands, citing interviews with Defense Department investigators and reports and postings on racist Web sites and magazines.
"We've got Aryan Nations graffiti in Baghdad," the group quoted a Defense Department investigator as saying in a report to be posted today on its Web site, www.splcenter.org. "That's a problem."
-snip-
The report said that neo-Nazi groups like the National Alliance, whose founder, William Pierce, wrote "The Turner Diaries," the novel that was the inspiration and blueprint for Timothy J. McVeigh's bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building, sought to enroll followers in the Army to get training for a race war.
The groups are being abetted, the report said, by pressure on recruiters, particularly for the Army, to meet quotas that are more difficult to reach because of the growing unpopularity of the war in Iraq.
The report quotes Scott Barfield, a Defense Department investigator, saying, "Recruiters are knowingly allowing neo-Nazis and white supremacists to join the armed forces, and commanders don't remove them from the military even after we positively identify them as extremists or gang members."
-snip-
An article in the National Alliance magazine Resistance urged skinheads to join the Army and insist on being assigned to light infantry units.
The Southern Poverty Law Center identified the author as Steven Barry, who it said was a former Special Forces officer who was the alliance's "military unit coordinator."
"Light infantry is your branch of choice because the coming race war and the ethnic cleansing to follow will be very much an infantryman's war," he wrote. "It will be house-to-house, neighborhood-by-neighborhood until your town or city is cleared and the alien races are driven into the countryside where they can be hunted down and 'cleansed.' "
He concluded: "As a professional soldier, my goal is to fill the ranks of the United States Army with skinheads. As street brawlers, you will be useless in the coming race war. As trained infantrymen, you will join the ranks of the Aryan warrior brotherhood."
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/070706K.shtml
Comment by SMillard— 2006/11/21 @ 08:34 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Ernie Els— 2006/11/22 @ 05:41 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/21 @ 08:51 PM — (Reply)
If YOU read the article it only speculates there are thousands when evidence of only 320 was offered. "They're communicating with each other about weapons, about recruiting, about keeping their identities secret, about organizing within the military," he said.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/21 @ 08:58 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/21 @ 09:01 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/21 @ 09:06 PM — (Reply)
Some recruits also signed up after the Army waived criminal records that would have previously barred them. The armed services as of this writing do not take felons.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/21 @ 09:17 PM — (Reply)
excerpt:
Charles Rangel has been so far the only Congressman to introduce a bill to reinstate the military draft, arguing that there should be an equal representation in the armed forces of the wimps, the nerds, and the computer geeks. The resulting deterioration of U.S. military power will further level the playing field for emerging Third World powers that deserve a fair chance in pursuit of world domination.
Rangel's non-partisan initiatives have generated massive support among such non-partisan organizations as ACLU, United for Peace and Justice, International ANSWER, and - most surprisingly - NoDraftNoWay.org whose members yet need to be informed that the only politician in the world whom they oppose is Charles Rangel.
with the following comments: LOL
I think that in the name of international fairness and justice we should change sides in this war every once in a while. It isn't fair that we're always fighting for America. We need to show the world how broad minded we are and sometimes attack ourselves
Al Qaeda, being a COMMUNITY OF COLOR, deserves reparations. We should tax, and then deport, rich white Christians and Republicans and especially Jews, to make room for our new Brothers of Color. Just as African-Americans are still in chains, so the Capitalist Zionist Dogs are keeping Al Qaeda in chains. Our community DEMANDS justice! No justice, no peace, no Zionist Pigs.
We need more upper-class Americans doing the work of the lower classes, and more of the lower-class Americans doing the work of the upper classes.
To make it fair, we also need to see more professional athletes working as plumbers, more plumbers working as doctors, more doctors picking potatoes, more potato pickers running corporations as CEOs, more CEOs playing "midnight basketball," more welfare recipients working as engineers, more engineers stripped of their citizenship, and more undocumented workers working as professional athletes.
Only then can we say with confidence that the "American Dream" has been distributed evenly among all Americans and we indeed live in a fair equitable society
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/21 @ 09:33 PM — (Reply)
Hey Millard guess what it's still the policy. The reporter should have done what I did today. I called a local recruiting office. Heres the skinny:
USN Rep: Hello US Navy Recruiting this is Petty Officer G.
EB: Can you please tell me when the policy was changed concerning enlisting people from the Aryan Nation and groups like that?
P.O. G: The policy hasn't changed.
EB: So you are not hiring or actively seeking people who participate in such groups?
P.O.G: No, as a matter of fact there is an addendum to the enlistment contract the applicant is required to sign. They can never have been part of a hate group, terrorist group or gang and they have to promise to never become part of one.
EB: and the standard penalty of a $10,000 fine and five years in jail applies in this situation as well.
P.O. G. : oh yeah
OOhh I love my job!
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/11/22 @ 07:40 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Ernie Els— 2006/11/22 @ 07:44 PM — (Reply)