Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Charles Rangel joins Jon Carry

What the heck is up with the 1968 mythos and it’s pervasive influence upon certain Congressional members? No matter how many times you refute it, some will simply not believe that the current Armed Forces of the United States are not made up of the futureless, down-and-out of our society.

WALLACE: Congressman Rangel, you caused quite a stir this week when you said that you’re going to introduce a bill to reinstate the draft. Here’s what you said this week in a newspaper article. Let’s take a look. “The great majority of people bearing arms in this country, for this country in Iraq, are from the poorer communities in our inner cities and rural areas.”

But a recent and very detailed study by the Heritage Foundation, Congressman, found the following and I’m going to put that up: 13 percent of recruits are from the poorest neighborhoods. That’s less than the national average of people living in those neighborhoods. Ninety-seven percent of recruits have high school diplomas. Among all Americans, the graduation rate is under 80 percent. And blacks make up 14.5 percent of recruits for the military; the national average is 12 percent.

Congressman, in fact, contrary to what you’ve been saying, isn’t the volunteer army better educated and more well-to-do than the general population?

RANGEL: Of course not. I want to make it abundantly clear that I have been advocating a draft ever since the president has been talking about war, and none of this comes within the jurisdiction of the Ways and Means Committee.

But I want to make it abundantly clear, if there’s anyone who believes that these youngsters want to fight, as the Pentagon and some generals have said, you can just forget about it. No young, bright individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits. And most all of them come from communities of very, very high unemployment.

If a young fellow has an option of having a decent career or joining the Army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq.

So anyone who supports the war and is against everyone sharing in the sacrifice is being hypocritical about the whole thing. The record is clear, and once we are able to get hearings on this, everyone will see what they already know, and that is that those who have the least opportunities at this age find themselves in the military, as I did when I was 18 years old.

Full transcript here.

100 Replies to “Charles Rangel joins Jon Carry”

  1. Slartibartfast says:

    Facts?  We don’t need no steenking facts!

  2. Dan Collins says:

    Abject indecency.

    Major John, I’m 46.  How can I serve?

  3. Paul Zrimsek says:

    This is the second time today I’ve seen “Jon Carry”. Is this the successor to “Democrates” and “Algore” in the list of annoyingly pointless misspellings?

  4. Rusty says:

    Charlie Rangle just wants to offer up a dog and pony show so he can sell the draft.After all look what it did for Lyndon Johnsons political career.

  5. Major John says:

    Dan, please pay your taxes, enjoy your freedoms (and exercise them).  Howzabout that?

    The wrest of uss unforshunates wil tak care of the fiGting.

  6. Dg says:

    This Rangel dude is pissing me off.

    I just wrote in my local paper to some dunce loving rangel for this.

    And I also noticed he did not respond to Mr. Wallace directly, directly to his questions.

    Why?

    Because it goes against his preconceived notions of ‘truth’, so here we go on the next wave of ‘truthiness’ arguements.

    If the heritage foundation’s facts are to be taken as truth then I guess I am all for a draft.

    As it would force liberals to fight for the freedom they take ever so for granted.

    Being that it would appear that mainly conservative, educated, well to do folks tend to enlist more than liberals (of any ilk).

    Well I take that back, some liberals enlist….

    for the creds……. just in case they will run for president some day… Yeah, that’s a hardy fuck you to you Mr. Kerry. And you can toss your sergant at arms Rangel in with that vote of confidence too.

    Yes, so let us share the burden: liberals, vote for the draft that would force you to fight for what you say you believe in. And stop the ‘free schooling’ trend that they seem to think the military is only good for.

    The military isn’t in the habit of paying for 4 years of college just for filling sand bags at your local home depot during an ‘emergency’…

    “To defend the constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic”… If I remember my oath correctly (oh, so long ago).

    Careful what you ask for Rangel, careful, you might get it.

  7. Jeff Goldstein says:

    Let’s hope that Rangel at least has the decency to vote for his own proposal this next time, in the unlikely event it ever makes it to the floor.

    And of course, nothing will turn heet, monkyboy, actus, et al into voting booth Republicans faster than Democratic party calls for the reinstatement of a draft lottery.

    Because those folks are only for forcing on others what it is they want. Having it turned on them is just, well, unseemly—particularly after all they’ve done to agitate for retreat.

    HAVE YOU NO LOYALTY TO THE NETROOTS, MR RANGEL?

  8. ahem says:

    Rangel is as disgraceful and cynical a douchebag as you can find in the Democratic party and that’s damning him with faint praise. The thing to remember is that, all protestations to the contrary, the Dems hate the military. Never forget that.

    The only reason he’s doing this is to precipitate anti-war sentiment. Fuck him.

    Go to his contact page and tell him what you think of his remarks. Enter the address and zip code of his New York office to get around the filter. I did.

  9. Bush Derangement syndrome taken to its logical conclusion:  This congresscritter wants to f*** over the U. S. military, arguably the single most effective, most fair institution in the country, just to embarrass the current president.

  10. Walter E. Wallis says:

    We know Rangel is wrong about the makeup of the Army, but I can assure you we all know about the makeup of congress.

  11. lunarpuff says:

    No young, bright individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits.

    Yeah. That’s the only reason they sign up.

    That makes we want to vomit.

  12. Major John says:

    Dg,

    I speak for me, and every other soldier I know…

    NO DRAFT, IN THE NAME OF GOD, NOOO!

    Our people join (and retain) because they want to – I want the finest soldiers on Earth (ie. the 3/116th INF) to go with me when I take a patrol to some troubled spot – not someone from the local ANSWER chapter that couldn’t eat his draft card fast enough.

    Jeff, I sure hope you are right… at least vote for your own proposal Rep Rangel!

  13. wishbone says:

    Our story so far:

    The Speaker-to-be gets it handed to her in her choice for minority leader.

    That choice was Jack Murtha.

    Now Alcee Hastings is likely to be nsmae the House Intelligence Committee Chair, because he’s black.  I can’t WAIT for the Democrats who voted to impeach him to spin that one.

    Charlie Rangel is unseriously media grandstanding about the draft.

    Rangel voted to impeach Hastings, by the way.

    And George Friggin’ McGovern is offering advice on waging a war:  SURRENDER NOW!

    Nice new direction.

  14. Jeff Goldstein says:

    I’m beginning to like Rangel’s proposal.

    I mean, first there were Jews for Jesus.  Next it’ll be Kos Kidz for Condi.

    Delicious!

  15. Mark says:

    …annoyingly pointless misspellings?

    For the most part I agree with your annoyance Paul, like when they spell Reagan, Regan; or pronounce Cheney, Cheeeney; or pronounce Bush, Shrub, etc…

    But the “Jon Carry” misspelling was neither annoying nor pointless, it was an expression of disdain for John Kerry by our troops in the field in Iraq and you will not disparage their right to do that.

  16. Nice new direction.

    oh wishbone, they haven’t even taken over yet. maybe we should wait til January to see what they do.  *snerk* no, no, I can’t do it. WE’RE DOOOMED, DOOOOOOOMED!

  17. wishbone says:

    By the way, just for the record:

    1968 sucked.

    Look it up, if you don’t believe me.

  18. Jeff Goldstein says:

    Well, 1968 sucked unless you had a daisy fetish.  Because for those folks it totally fucking rawked!

    Just to be clear.

  19. Major John says:

    This is the second time today I’ve seen “Jon Carry”. Is this the successor to “Democrates” and “Algore” in the list of annoyingly pointless misspellings?

    Posted by Paul Zrimsek

    See this for origin of “Jon Carry”

  20. Jeff Goldstein says:

    Paul —

    I think it’s military members like Major John who are using “Jon Carry” to ironize his suggestion that they were just a notch above chimps in terms of their cognitive abilities.

    Immediately after Kerry’s boner, pics out of Iraq and Afghanistan featuring soldiers holding purposely misspelled banners began appearing—a clear shot at Kerry’s smug, elitist presumptuousness.

    Rangel has now joined him—but then, the dude still wears pomade, so it’s hard to take him seriously.

  21. Jeff Goldstein says:

    Oops. Major John beat me to it.

  22. wishbone says:

    the dude still wears pomade

    I thought it was Quaker State 10W-40.

    HAIRIST!!!

  23. lunarpuff says:

    That was a great sign!

    Jon Carry inspired me to register as a Republican. Not meaningful in any way, but I couldn’t really slap him, so that was the next best thing.

  24. ahem says:

    Correction: 1968 sucked. Unless you were into cheap pot and firm, youthful breasts.

  25. wishbone says:

    Correction: 1968 sucked. Unless you were into cheap pot and firm, youthful breasts.

    It is intellectually dishonest to claim a discrete time period is uniquely demonstrative of a universal principle(s).

    Just saying…

  26. Dan Collins says:

    Now I’ve gotten rid of my house, Major John, I have more latitude.  When I was in graduate school, I helped some of the military guys complete their degrees.  I remember in particular Michael O’Donnell, who hosted our band practices and who died a couple of years after he left Iowa, while jogging with his recruits.

  27. monkyboy says:

    Another combat veteran being swiftboated because he he’s not on the team?

    Guess nobody is safe…

  28. wishbone says:

    Guess nobody is safe…

    Let’s see–out front for the Dems are combat veterans Kerry, Rangel, Murtha, and McGovern.

    I have another word for them, monky and it starts with “i”.

    The two are not mutally exclusive, you know.

  29. lunarpuff says:

    So, then monky you’re ok with the draft?

  30. monkyboy says:

    Does that apply to those currently serving, wish?

  31. Jeff Goldstein says:

    COMBAT VETERANS HAVE ABSOLUTE MORAL AUTHORITY!

    …unless they happen to agree with the war. In which case they are dullards who can’t think for themselves.

    HOW DARE YOU SWIFTBOAT A NON-DULLARD DULLARD!

  32. wishbone says:

    And Pelosi is swiftboating Charlie, too, monky.  See paragraph 4.

    Did I mention that you are an idiot, too?

  33. Walter E. Wallis says:

    No, Rangel served worthily. I know, because 56 years ago today I was in Kunu Ri with Charlie as the Chinese advanced on us. Charlie’s Nickel-O-Three had to wade the river in 30 below weather. I gave him my place in a warmup tent, saving his life. Cold was brutal, cold and wet was fatal.

    It was afterward that Charlie went nuts.

  34. wishbone says:

    I’d do a ven diagram for you, monky, but you wouldn’t understand it.

  35. Scrapiron says:

    Dig a little and you find more phony combat vet’s in the dim party. Who was the ferry pilot (now senator) who bragged for years about his combat missions in Vietnam? If a dim tells you a war story it will be just that, a story. Lying seems to be bred into them.

  36. Lost Dog says:

    Jeff –

    My best post ever and I get that F—ing screen that says:

    ERROR. 

    I am a musician, and have noticed that the best stuff cannot be recorded. When you’re hot, something always goes wrong with the recorder. Does this mean that I have been “Left Behind”? Or does it mean that, if there is a God, he hates me?

    I wouldn’t be too surprised…

    I know my wife does…

  37. The_Real_JeffS says:

    So, then monky you’re ok with the draft?

    monkyboy is not only ok with the draft, he’s anticipating the bill passing, and will be volunteering for the military first thing Monday morning.  Just to show that the nutroots really cares.

    And now we need us a double pool: which branch of the service monkyboy joins, and how long he lasts. 

    Put me down for $5 on the Marines, and $5 for him lasting just until just before getting his recruit haircut.

    TW: record54.  Possibly.  We shall see.

  38. lunarpuff says:

    In which case they are dullards who can’t think for themselves.

    Remember, they’re poor, uneducated minorities.

    Monky and his ilk are the only ones allowed to speak for them.

    Good God, they can’t be allowed to go off all willy-nilly on their own thinking they’re doing something for freedom and the American way. How dare they make such bold statements on their own… like enlisting. And re-enlisting.

    How dare they ;<

  39. Dan Collins says:

    Lost Dog,

    God’s pretending to be on your wife’s side.  It’s his way.  He likes Him the ladies till push comes to shove.  Then He’s all, like, judgmental.

  40. wishbone says:

    $5 Navy.

    $5 on first day of Nuclear Field “A” School:  “It was my understanding that there would be no math…”

  41. lee says:

    From the Tribune link:

    ,” Rangel said he was confident that the war in Iraq never would have been started if there were a draft. The congressman said politicians who commit troops to a war but do not want their own children to serve are hypocritical.

    I just don’t see how anyone can support the war and not support the draft,” he said.

    (emphasis mine)

    ~~sigh~~

    It’s great we have such visionary leadership.

    Or should I say Bazaro post-visionary leadership?

  42. monkyboy says:

    If America faced an actual threat, I’d support a draft, though we wouldn’t need one.

    To fight a phantom made of equal parts racism and paranoia, I think therapy and medication would be more effective…

  43. wishbone says:

    Bazaro post-visionary leadership

    I prefer “hypocritical bullshit artists”, but that’s just me.

  44. The_Real_JeffS says:

    Go to his contact page and tell him what you think of his remarks. Enter the address and zip code of his New York office to get around the filter. I did.

    So did I.

  45. Rusty says:

    Put me down for $5 on the Marines, and $5 for him lasting just until just before getting his recruit haircut.

    TW: record54.  Possibly.  We shall see.

    This is assuming he can get past the recriuter. The services want people who have the capacity to learn and the boy ain’t that bright.

  46. wishbone says:

    To fight a phantom

    Tell that to everyone in New York, Washington, and United 93 on September 11, 2001.

    Tell that to the crew of the USS Cole on October 20, 2000.

    Tell that to the staffs of the US embassies in Dar es Salaam and Nairobi on August 7, 1998.

    I could keep going, but that would just waste bandwidth.

    Monky, you’ve crossed the line from troll to disgusting.  Go physically join the other side.  You’re already there mentally.

  47. Lost Dog says:

    Dan –

    Thanks. I think you are almost as sick as I am. You know? I try to do my best, but sometimes you marry a bim who thinks you are Donald Trump+.

    Oh well. I have always known that you get what you need

    Thanks for the laughs.

    Lost Dog

  48. monkyboy says:

    The people who attacked us died in the attacks themselves, wish.

    What’s disgusting is the idea that we should avenge ourselves on innocents.

  49. Noel says:

    Charlie doesn’t want a draft–he wants draft riots. The days when almost all young men felt it was their duty to serve are over–ironically, in no small part due to the efforts of liberals like Charlie. Nor does the military want recruits who don’t want to be there.

    Regardless, a draft might someday become absolutely necessary to our national survival and Rangel shouldn’t play politics with this.

  50. $5 on air force, and he’ll last until they run out of hot towels in the dining hall. ;p

  51. 6Gun says:

    monky, you little vermin, I take it that since you’ve elected to also pollute this thread with your leavings, you still can’t tell me where I said things were going swimmingly in Iraq. 

    But if they’re not, I herewith promote the notion, Democrat-like, that that’d only be your “racism and paranoia” talking.

    Since we’re trading reality-based facts and all.

    Bitch.

  52. wishbone says:

    What’s disgusting is the idea that we should avenge ourselves on innocents.

    And the innocents in your world are the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and Saddam Hussein?

    You are fucked up beyond repair, shitheel.

    FOAD.

  53. Charlie doesn’t want a draft–he wants draft riots.

    I think you’re on to something there, Noel. a couple weeks ago I saw a clip of Rangel saying he didn’t want a yes or no vote on the draft, he wanted a hearing.

  54. okay, guys, I know I haven’t heeded my own advice, but it’s time to ignore monkyboy. religiously. why he hasn’t been banned yet, I’ll never know.

  55. wishbone says:

    From this moment, Maggie–you’ve got a deal.

  56. The congressman said politicians who commit troops to a war but do not want their own children to serve are hypocritical.

    Howsabout a compromise?  From now on, you can’t run for Congress unless you have a son or daughter currently serving.  And NO, your own prior service doesn’t count, and neither does theirs, and neither do other relatives, even if current. 

    Only those with offspring currently in harm’s way have the Absolute Moral Authority necessary to sit in Congress.

    Just think how it will narrow the field of candidates!

  57. Tink says:

    Who was the ferry pilot (now senator) who bragged for years about his combat missions in Vietnam?

    Scrap,

    That would be Tom Harkin-D-Iowa.

    We’re so very proud. ::koff::

    And Major John? You can speak for hubs any time..’cept he’s a little partial to that Red Bull on the shoulder of the soldiers in the “Jon Carry” pic.

  58. lunarpuff says:

    If America faced an actual threat

    It boggles my mind to think what it would take people like this to think we faced an actual threat.

    How many buildings, how many cities, how many people?

    Of course, if they can come up with any numbers, it will be prefaced with some notion that the numbers don’t reflect the real threat, because it’s all our fault. The numbers would never have been there if W hadn’t been elected.

    I’ll never be able to get my brain to understand these people, and I’ve really tried.

    Thank God for our military.

  59. monkyboy says:

    By all means ignore me.

    Otherwise, you might have to face the possibility that all the carnage we’ve caused…was for nothing.

  60. Darleen says:

    monky

    So 19 Islamist terrorists on 9/11 thought it up all on their lonesome?

    And we should ignore all the plots, writings, videos, fatwas, etc, issued by all manner of Islamists in their oft repeated promises to make us convert, submit or die?

    From Danny Pearl to Theo Van Gogh, to Danish Cartoonists to Oriana Fallaci … get this through your QuakerOatmeal brain

    Islamism is the 21st Century threat to Western Civ that fascism and communism was to the 20th century

    Unless you’re willing to convert to their brand of Islam, you are not going to be spared…

    Or have you already converted?

  61. TerryH says:

    To fight a phantom made of equal parts racism and paranoia, I think therapy and medication would be more effective…

    Don’t forget the balloons.

  62. monkyboy says:

    Still waiting for a scenario explaining how the “Islamofascists” are going to take over America, darleen.

    Win an election?

    An invasion perhaps?

    I’m no Quaker, but slaughtering civilians for a little phony revenge doesn’t appeal to me…or a majority of Americans, it would seem.

  63. Darleen says:

    maggie

    the spewings of MB serve one purpose

    To show the absolute moral degradation that passes for “progressive thought”.

    Most leftists are just wrong, MB is that creature that is delighted with his own indecency.

  64. lunarpuff says:

    He’s converted and he doesn’t even deserve a balloon.

  65. ahem says:

    If America faced an actual threat, I’d support a draft, though we wouldn’t need one.

    Thanks for the laugh, bitch. (Actually, three laughs–one for each absurd idea in the sentence.)

  66. sure, Darleen, I just figure we’ve seen enough of it at this point.

  67. ahem says:

    Otherwise, you might have to face the possibility that all the carnage we’ve caused…was for nothing.

    Bring up the violins.

  68. Darleen says:

    monky

    Still waiting for a scenario explaining how the “Islamofascists” are going to take over America, darleen. MB 2006

    Still waiting for a scenario explaining how the “Nazis” are going to take over America, Franklin. Charles Lindbergh 1941

  69. McGehee says:

    Still waiting for a scenario explaining how the “Islamofascists” are going to take over America, darleen.

    Win an election?

    They seem to think they have.

  70. lunarpuff says:

    Don’t forget, the Chinese will show up on our shores first!

    On the west coast and he never did explain how they were going to take Compton.

  71. monkyboy says:

    I take it our new allies Iran and Syria won’t get a warm welcome from you guys?

  72. Darleen says:

    McGehee

    And CAIR’s pet candidate will be taking the oath of office on the Koran.

    I wonder, will he insist that the infidel judge holding the Koran wear white gloves?

  73. Ric Locke says:

    Y’know, if Rangel (and Kerry) were a little less transparent, and if I hadn’t learned some things in the last couple of years that were counterintuitive at first, I would probably be supporting the proposal.

    Noel is correct. Rangel is suffering from nostalgia. He doesn’t want a draft. He wants marches in the streets, unwashed chicks in tie-dye watching admiringly as unwashed post-teens with greasy dirty long hair burn their draft cards, and Kent States. He thinks it will make him young again.

    But at one time I would have supported the idea, though for different reasons. I’m a “68er”, or sort of—graduated from high school in ‘66, joined the Navy in ‘69. In my day the stereotype that Rangel and Kerry are spouting was a pretty accurate description of what went on. People with good educations either had jobs or schooling that resulted in deferments, became officers instead of grunts, or joined the Reserves. With honorable exceptions, the enlisted ranks were composed of people who couldn’t manage any of those things. They’re wrong as Hell on today’s data—but that’s because they haven’t been paying attention.

    When I first heard of the “all volunteer” principle I was against it, for two reasons: Praetorians and elitists.

    The draft ensured that lots and lots of people got exposed to the military and military discipline, both the good and the bad parts. Whether or not they’d done a good job in the military is pretty much irrelevant—they at least knew what the military was all about. One of the major disadvantages that we’re laboring under is that so many of the people in the Blue States and in academia are talking through their asses. They have no idea what the military is, what it means, or what it stands for—and the stereotypes they use as a substitute for knowledge are at best out of date, and more usually simply wildly wrong. The result is bad decisions: GIGO. As exemplified by Rangel and Kerry, whose data wasn’t bad when it was new but is now sadly out of date.

    The other problem flows at least partially from the first. In an all-volunteer system, some join the military and some do not (well, duh). It is an inevitability of society that people tend to look to their peers for examples. As fewer people in a particular subculture join the military, positive feedback sets in—fewer join, therefore fewer examples, therefore fewer are inspired to join… The result will eventually be a pretty complete disconnect between those who know and join the military, and those who do not… and the military has the weapons, where (this may be an accident) by and large the non-military not only do not have weapons, they consider weapon knowledge, let alone ownership, to be crude, common, plebian. Dirty. It isn’t necessary to be a historian to come up with parallels, or to list places where they resulted in some fairly sad consequences.

    I’m still a little suspicious. Not of Major John or any of his contemporaries, nor of the soldiers we have today—the military has put great emphasis on training, and on the responsibility of the military to society in general. The generals of the future are shavetails now, and at least until that cohort passes through the system a Praetorian Revolution isn’t in the cards. I am less confident that that situation can continue indefinitely. I am even less confident that it can be staved off if the supposed superiors of the military, the civilian authorities they are sworn to obey, continue to treat them with derision and contempt.

    But whatever the solution may be, at this point it isn’t a draft. The result of a draft would be to make the polarization worse and destabilize the situation further, and the fact that Rangel actually sees that and considers it desirable is the surest indication that he’s a loon—but a dangerous loon; he may have enough power to make his nostalgic good-old-days come back. He wasn’t a hippie—when he first went to Congress, ex-hippies couldn’t make it in politics—he was a hippie-wannabee, thus his romanticism of the era. It’s actually tempting to suggest shooting him, but besides being illegal, immoral, and containing trans fats, that’s just another, fairly dramatic way of making the situation worse. All we can do is work to balk him politically, and that won’t solve anything. It may buy us time to solve the problem, but I’m in a pessimistic mood tonight.

    Regards,

    Ric

    tw: fear29. Yup.

  74. Darleen says:

    Ric

    And it doesn’t help when major colleges and universities keep ROTC off campus

    and Nanny Pelosi’s own Frisco dumps the very popular and successful JROTC off high school campuses

    The Friscoites think the high school’s mission is to teach “peace” and the military = “war”

    A draft will never be necessary IF we actually make teaching “citizenship” in school.

  75. Ric Locke says:

    Darleen,

    Yup. But those are symptoms, not the problem itself. They’re the result of the peer-pressure system dividing the whole into two parts.

    It’s worth remembering that the folks who incited, and prolonged, WWII on the Japanese side were relatively young. Their only memories were of the new, growing, industrializing Japan, and all their concepts were built around the resulting assumptions and preconceptions.

    If I were still in the military I’d be an Admiral (have to be—I’d be coming up on forty years service) and I’d be keeping a close eye on the Lieutenants and jaygees and a few of the Lieutenant Commanders, and I’d be advising my colleagues on the Chiefs to be watching their company-grade guys, trying to keep up with what their political leanings and their over-beer scuttlebutt were like. I think the separation has grown to an alarming degree, and any notions that the guys who know what’s what need to start cleaning house need to be nipped in the bud. As I say, I don’t think there’s enough of that to be worrisome, really, but, then, I don’t have a close view of the real situation, and I’m a natural pessimist anyway.

    Regards,

    Ric

  76. Walter E. Wallis says:

    The Monk wants to know how IslamoFascist will take over the United States.

    Look at Great Britain with Londonistan, at

    France with hundreds of no-go areas, look at Canada…

    It happens not with a bang but with a whimper.

  77. Ric Locke says:

    The Monk wants to know how IslamoFascist will take over the United States.

    No. Moneyboy doesn’t want to know anything. He’s absolutely certain that there’s no danger whatever, and is ridiculing those who think otherwise. In fact, he’s as totally confident as a German Jew in, say, 1924.

    Regards,

    Ric

  78. SteveG says:

    Let me get this straight. The guys who piloted passenger filled airliners into targets did so 100% on their own?

    Criminal law in the US demands justice from those who conspire to murder, and extends justice out to those who aid and abet murder.

    US criminal law demands justice upon anyone who assaults or kills people attempting to enforce these laws.

    I’m also trying to figure out how your logic works with the current PC thinking that says this jihadi thing is all our fault. I’d think intellectual honesty and consistency of thought would exclude the application of double standards, but evidently I am wrong.

  79. SteveG says:

    Oh yeah…. the local paper in our very blue niche of a very blue state interviewed a collection of high school students at the three local public schools asking about the draft.

    They all parroted their teachers and said they’d go to Canada, Costa Rica (how come no one picked Cuba or Venezuela) before serving. Nearly all cited the “illegal” nature of the war on terror…. a clear tipoff that their teachers are not approaching the issue even handedly since the “illegality” of the war has not been found by any body with ultimate jurisdiction…. but I digress.

    The paper evidently could not find one student who’d even show up to report if drafted, much less one who’d just say “I’m enlisting next year anyway, so who cares if there is a draft?”.

    Reminds me of the late 60’s and early 70’s.

    I say good riddance to all of those who choose the cowards way out. I was a young teenager back in those groovy days and can compare first hand the difference between the quality of the men and women who enlist today versus the draft dodgers of my era.

    It is clear that people like monky would never report if drafted, and that his/her absence would be a net benefit to both monky and the military…

    I also think we should pass a law that declares countries that accept draft dodgers either have to keep them…. or extradite them to Venezuela.

  80. furriskey says:

    The draft is only acceptable when it is universal, applies only to those who have the vote, and is necessary to preserve the nation from destruction.

    All other forms of the draft are iniquitous.

    From the professional military standpoint, a draft army is a nightmare. You have to decide whether to keep your best officers and NCOs to train the volunteer army, in which case you will create a two-tier military, part useful and part useless as you are forced to use your second best to train the reluctant conscripts, or you take your best to train the conscripts and use the second best to train the regulars in which case you drag the whole thing down to the lowest common denominator.

    From the civic perspective, a selective or lottery draft is simply inequitable and will cause more problems than it solves.

    The reason America was able to go to war in Iraq, and the only reason America still stands a chance of obtaining the solution it needs in Iraq, is because America now has a professional army.

    To that extent it may be true to say that had there been a draft, war would have been less likely.

    However, that argument has never led to that conclusion anywhere else at any other time, as far as I know.

    Maybe your little simian mascot can put me right.

  81. TomB says:

    MB seems to have dragged the discussion away from the original point. First MB, what exactly is “swift boating” about posting Rangle’s exact quotes?

    Is it now enough to simply point out their idiocy to be “swifting” them?

    And do you agree with him?

  82. Rusty says:

    I’m tellin ya. The kid will start cryin for his momma as soon as he sees the yellow feet painted on the pavement.

  83. N. O'Brain says:

    No young, bright individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits. And most all of them come from communities of very, very high unemployment.

    If a young fellow has an option of having a decent career or joining the Army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq.

    Way to slur America’s finest, Rep. Asshelmet.

  84. Paul Zrimsek says:

    OK, I guess there’s a point to “Jon Carry” in this particular context. But if we keep using it it could get pretty lame pretty fast. (Any Heinlein fans out there can refer to the definition of “funny-once” in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.)

    Rangel’s sort of got a point. I mean, he was in the military and few people have had a more indecent career.

  85. Major John says:

    Paul,

    Unlike MIKE, I know the difference between funny once (“Wyo Knott”) and funny always…

    “Jon Carry” has a limited shelf life.  I still think I beat the expiration date by a few days.

  86. Farmer Joe says:

    Ric –

    One of my biggest regrets is not having served. I’d go even farther than a draft, I’d favor universal service. Everyone does two years active when they turn 18, and then becomes part of the reserve for some time after that. This strikes me as better than a draft because you’re not sitting around waiting for your number to come up. You know you’re going to serve, so you might as well deal with it.

  87. Mikey NTH says:

    Charlie Rangel was in the Army in the 1950’s, and it seems he hasn’t quite figured out that the 1950’s US Army doesn’t exist anymore.  My dad was in during the mid 1950’s, and there were people who were illiterate, alcoholics, the full range.

    So Rep. Rangel was correct, based upon the US Army he was in fifty years ago.  Of course, he’s wrong because that isn’t the army we have today – no more than the armed forces of the Spanish-American War were any way indicative of the armed forces of World War Two.

    Both Sen. Kerry and Rep. Rangel are living in the past, basing what they are to do by the way things were forty and fifty years ago.  Odd how today’s progressives are so reactionary.

  88. ahem says:

    Speaking of no-go zones in France, commenter ‘Arthur’ as Ace’s pointed out <a href=”http://i.ville.gouv.fr/divbib/doc/chercherZUS.htm “ target=”_blank”>this link</a> to France’s ‘Sensitive Urban Zones’. Wow.

  89. slackjawedyokel says:

    Howsabout a compromise?  From now on, you can’t run for Congress unless you have a son or daughter currently serving.  And NO, your own prior service doesn’t count, and neither does theirs, and neither do other relatives, even if current.

    I’d like to take this opportunity to announce my candidacy for Rep. Rangel’s current seat.  I’m not a resident of New York, but what the hell—if Hillary can do it . . .

    Campaign slogan:  YOU WANT ABSOLUTE MORAL AUTHORITY?  I GOT YER MORAL AUTHORITY RIGHT HERE, SUCKA!

  90. ahem says:

    The link corrected. 751 no-go zones.

  91. eLarson says:

    Howsabout a compromise?  From now on, you can’t run for Congress unless you have a son or daughter currently serving

    Sounds like a PSA from the Church of Nothing Higher Than Your Own Personal Experience.

  92. Pablo says:

    Mikey NTH,

    My dad was in during the mid 1950’s, and there were people who were illiterate, alcoholics, the full range.

    So Rep. Rangel was correct, based upon the US Army he was in fifty years ago.

    Right. Now the military is professional and the institution full of morons, drunks, crooks and perverts is the United States Congress.

    tw: girls16

    I don’t think we need to go there, do we?

  93. Umm... says:

    How about a draft strictly for the War on Christmas? Sort of an intermediate phase to get the country used to it. If it worked it could be expanded to Iraq–a reserve of battle hardened Christmas Warriors thrown into the Sunni Triangle could really tip the balance.

  94. Matt, Esq. says:

    *Correction: 1968 sucked. Unless you were into cheap pot and firm, youthful breasts. *

    Being “into” something doesn’t necessarily mean you had unfettered “access” to those things, does it ?

    If there was some guarantee of access (socialism and all), it would probably be the first time I’ve been disappointed that I missed the 60’s.

  95. neoconsstink says:

    Just an idea, but did anyone ever think that Rangel’s problem isn’t with the current military, but with the current elite in our country?  I think Rangel is saying the kind of kid who is a Senator’s son or CEO’s daughter or University President’s son is going to join the investment banking firm or the law firm or some other private sector venture where they can begin a career based on the Ivy League education and parental connections to which most of us are not privy.

    In other words, Jack Kennedy was in World War 2; is Ted Kennedy’s son in the Armed Forces?  Bush ‘41 was a distinguished fighter pilot and Bush ‘43 joined the military because of the impending draft.  Is John Kerry’s son in the military?

    These are the sorts of people, Rangel is saying, who help make the decisions in this country, but have no stake in the human cost of their decisions.

    I’m pretty sure it’s a bad idea as well.  Certainly, it would never pass Congress.  But, I think, the man raises an interesting point about the silver spoon set in this country.  Given the choice between joining the Armed Forces or being an associate in a law firm for 85,000/yr, most 24 year olds are going to pick the latter.  And, it’s those kids’ parents who decide whether we go to war or not.

  96. Walter E. Wallis says:

    Rangel discounts patriotism.

    Rangel is wrong. Again.

  97. Walter E. Wallis says:

    Soldiers in the line resent officers in the rear ordering them around, but that’s the way it goes.

    I was in the Army with Rangel, and we had drunks, screwups and patriots. A professional Army has fewer of the first two, more of the last. I was with Rangel and ahead of Kerry.

  98. Mikey NTH says:

    Pablo, my second paragraph is thus…

    So Rep. Rangel was correct, based upon the US Army he was in fifty years ago.  Of course, he’s wrong because that isn’t the army we have today – no more than the armed forces of the Spanish-American War were any way indicative of the armed forces of World War Two.

    I’m not defending Rangel, I’m pointing out how sadly out of touch he is with the truth of the armed forces today.  You know, a “progressive” who is totally living in the past.  Odd, what?

  99. Sigivald says:

    wishbone: Sadly, cheap pot is not a universal.

    Though they tell me it’s stronger these days, so maybe price-per-unit-potency is stable? Who knows?

    Maybe we should ask some hippies.

  100. Drumwaster says:

    Given the choice between joining the Armed Forces or being an associate in a law firm for 85,000/yr, most 24 year olds are going to pick the latter.

    So does this mean you would support cutting a few of those worthless social programs in favor of giving our troops enough of a pay raise to enlist all of the soldiers we would need?

    Or are you just posturing in a transparent effort to score a political point on the backs of men whose shit you are not worthy to shovel?

    And, it’s those kids’ parents who decide whether we go to war or not.

    Actually, it’s people like Jon Carry and Hillary Clinton who will decide if and when we go to war. (Both of whom voted in favor of the Iraq War, I might add…)

Comments are closed.