Username: Password: lost p/w?
home | help | subscribe | search | register
RNC attacks Rock the Vote
Posted by AdminCodeWarrior in on October 14, 2004 at 6:47 PM



Thanks to Tom Barger for the heads up on this news article!

Page One

http://images2.dmusic.com/users/c/o/d/codewarrior/34880.jpg

Page two

http://images2.dmusic.com/users/c/o/d/codewarrior/34881.jpg

(* NOTE- since it takes up two images, I have taken the first page off and leave it as two links)
=======================================
The Response from the Rock the Vote organization is as follows:
"October 14, 2004

Mr. Ed Gillespie, Chairman
Republican National Committee
310 First Street, SE
Washington, DC 20003

VIA FASCIMILE: (202) 863-8774

Dear Chairman Gillespie,

The letter I received from you yesterday was quite a surprise. It struck us
as just the sort of ³malicious political deception² that is likely to
increase voter cynicism and decrease the youth vote. In fact, it is a
textbook case of attempted censorship, very much in line with those that
triggered our organization¹s founding some fifteen years ago.

I am stunned that you would say that the issue of the military draft as an
³urban myth² that has been ³thoroughly debunked by no less than the
President of the United States.²

I have some news for you. Just because President Bush, Vice President
Cheney, and Secretary Rumsfeld, and for that matter Senator Kerry, say that
there is not going to be a draft does not make it so. Just because Congress
holds a transparently phony vote against the draft does not mean there isn¹t
going to be one. Anyone who thinks that the youth of America are going to
take a politician¹s word on this topic is living on another planet.

By your logic, there should be no debate about anything that you disagree
with. There¹s a place for that kind of sentiment (and your threats), but
its not here in our country.

There are questions that the politicians are running away from. How long
can we keep 138,000 U.S. troops or more on the ground in Iraq? What if
full-scale civil war erupts there, as the CIA has warned is a realistic
possibility? Would the next President be faced with a choice of pulling out
of Iraq rather than institute a draft? Would women be drafted? What
exactly would the draft-age be?

According to the Pentagon¹s own internal assessment, there are ³inadequate
total numbers² of troops to meet U.S. security interests. The current issue
of Time magazine reports that, ³General John Keane, who retired last year as
the Army's No. 2 officer, says the continued success of the all-volunteer
military is not guaranteedŠ Keane has told Congress that adding more than
50,000 troops to the Army would require thinking about a return to the
draft.²

But you want young people to believe that the draft is just an ³urban myth.²
I was expecting that you were going to present some facts to back up your
assertion. But, instead, you have demanded that we stop talking about it.

Although the draft may not be a discussion topic for someone of your age, we
have found that young people - Republicans, Democrats and Independents - are
very interested in this issue. We believe in the capacity of young
Americans to make their own judgments when fairly presented with the facts.
That is why we are actively promoting an informed, educated dialogue. I urge
you to review the ³Debunking the Myths² section on our website where we
address misperceptions about the draft.

Mr. Gillespie, this is a generational issue. Nothing cuts closer to the core
of the very reason Rock the Vote exists. We think young people deserve to
know where the politicians stand on this issue‹and that a generation that
could be called to service deserves more than the phony debate they are
getting. We believe that it is only by asking questions‹not by censoring
debate‹that our democracy can remain strong and vital.

Issues such as jobs, health care, Iraq, taxes, and education have energized
the electorate, and the draft issue deserves the same serious treatment and
candor. Blanket denials do not square with the facts and do not level with
the electorate.

As far as the possibility that Rock the Vote¹s efforts might ³decrease the
youth vote,² we are feeling very confident at this point that the opposite
is true. More than 1.1 million people have used our website to fill out
voter registration forms this election cycle. Our street teams and ground
partners have registered hundreds of thousands more. Young voters are going
to surge at the polls on Election Day and make the difference for whichever
candidate does the best job reaching out to them.

Despite the strong and often strident tone of your letter, I would hope that
we could both agree that honest and open debate is the surest guarantor of
our democracy and liberty.

Sincerely,

Jehmu S. Greene
President"
###
~CW


User Comments

DMemberJLBRMECHANIC
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 6:48 PM
I support Rock The Vote.
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 6:51 PM
JLB...I had to post this as a picture...can you read the letter ok?
Alternative-MW-
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 6:58 PM
i can read it good... thank you CW...

it seems to me that some left-winged non-profit organization is abusing its rights... tsk tsk... targeting children none the less...

the lying should be left to the politicians... they do enough of it...
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 7:24 PM
From Leonard Cohen's tune "In My Secret Life"
"Looked through the paper.
Makes you want to cry.
Nobody cares if the people
Live or die.
And the dealer wants you thinking
That it’s either black or white.
Thank G-d it’s not that simple
In My Secret Life"
Advancedcarla60626
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 7:27 PM
And the president also said this urban myth was going around on the internets.
Yeah, I trust this man.
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 7:28 PM
actually...more from the song is apropos as well...
"I smile when I’m angry.
I cheat and I lie.
I do what I have to do
To get by.
But I know what is wrong,
And I know what is right.
And I’d die for the truth
In My Secret Life.

Hold on, hold on, my brother.
My sister, hold on tight.
I finally got my orders.
I’ll be marching through the morning,
Marching through the night,
Moving cross the borders
Of My Secret Life.

Looked through the paper.
Makes you want to cry.
Nobody cares if the people
Live or die.
And the dealer wants you thinking
That it’s either black or white.
Thank G-d it’s not that simple
In My Secret Life.

I bite my lip.
I buy what I’m told:
From the latest hit,
To the wisdom of old.
But I’m always alone.
And my heart is like ice.
And it’s crowded and cold
In My Secret Life."
DMemberAzurre
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 7:29 PM
I don't think that anyone would have a problem with filesharing, if the majority of file sharing did not involve copywrited material. Now whether you think copywrite is wrong or write, most of what is shared is copywrite and shouldn't be. I love filesharing, and if we can make it so that people don't share illegal files, then I don't think anyone would have a problem with it.
Advancedcarla60626
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 7:36 PM
NO, Wrong.
filesharing is fair use.
Copyrighted material or not.
Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 7:37 PM
They are right on. Too many lies have been told by this administration. As long as we keep the "There will be no draft" theme on the public radar, they may not be able to slip it past at the 11th hour...
However, I do have a bone to pick with them. "Although the draft may not be a discussion topic for someone of your age, we have found that young people - Republicans, Democrats and Independents - are very interested in this issue." Age has nothing to do with it. Ignorance has a lot to do with it.
Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 7:42 PM
You showed remarkable restraint, Carla--write or wrong. ;) (Wink)

The problem is this, Azurre: The people who own the copyrights don't want you to have access to anything they don't own the rights to. Get it now?
Advancedcarla60626
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 7:45 PM
I figured it was a kid.
DMemberfreeforall
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 8:00 PM
Im willing to bet there will be another draft. Our troops are soread thin..You have two other countries chasing the nuclear carrot and all the Bush administration needs is another reason to invade. Our rotating troops/reserves are taking a beating and they are having trouble filling the gaps as active dutie personnel leave. History always repeats! years after Vietnam they said we would never get involved in another conflict such as Vietnam, I heard that over & over .....but oh look the Bush administration doesn't like media coverage of the all fimiliar home-comming body bags. Its Vietnam all over again but this time its for oil. Like the old Peter Paul & Mary song "will they ever learn"?
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 8:14 PM
Just some facts and quotes...
http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/Read%20my%20lips:%20No%20new%20taxes
"
Bush delivering the famous line at the 1988 convention"Read my lips: No new taxes" was a famous pledge made by Republican Presidential candidate George H.W. Bush at the 1988 Republican convention in his acceptance speech on August 18. While the impact of the speech was great at the time and helped Bush win the 1988 United States presidential election when he raised taxes during his time in office the clips became potent ammunition for his 1992 challenger: Bill Clinton.
The exact phrase "Read my lips: No new taxes" was used first in the New Hampshire primary, and throughout the primary Bush's pledge not to raise taxes was a consistent, if not central issue. The phrase rose to great prominence in Bush's acceptance speech at the New Orleans convention."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1229268/posts
"No, we're not going -- we don't need the draft. Look, the all-volunteer Army is working. The all-volunteer Army... I know Senator McCain and I agree on this issue for certain, the all-volunteer Army works."
~ President George W. Bush, August 10, 2004"

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/america_at_war/article/0,1299,DRMN_2116_2961385,00.html
"GIs marching away from re-enlistment
War may have some Fort Carson troops leaving the ranks

By Dick Foster, Rocky Mountain News
June 14, 2004

COLORADO SPRINGS - Army re-enlistments have dropped suddenly and dramatically at Fort Carson and several other posts where combat units have recently returned from Iraq.

The surprising decline within the past 21/2 months has jolted recruiters and military analysts and provoked questions about the war's effect on the Army's recruiting ability."

http://www.nbc13.com/news/3759685/detail.html
"Army National Guard Fails To Meet Recruiting Goals
Retention An Issue In Alabama, Guard Says

POSTED: 5:13 pm CDT September 24, 2004
UPDATED: 6:36 pm CDT September 24, 2004

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. -- For the first time in 10 years, the Army National Guard isn't going to meet its national recruiting goal.


"The Guard takes it seriously. We'll probably increase the number of recruiters who actively recruit in Alabama," said Lt. Col. Wade Desmond, of the 20th Special Forces Group.

"(The drop is) not surprising, based on the number of deployments. People don't like being away from home,” said Desmond.

The numbers are about 5,000 short nationally, but Alabama is meeting expectations.

"The state of Alabama actually increased recruiting numbers this year opposed to last year,” said Desmond.

Though recruiting isn't the problem in Alabama, retention to the Guard is. The number of troops retiring is higher than those coming in."

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/20046/
"Shortly after 9/11, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith began coordinating Pentagon planning for an invasion of Iraq. The challenge facing Feith, the No. 3 civilian in the Defense Department, was to establish a policy rationale for the attack. At the same time, Feith’s ideological cohorts in the Pentagon began planning to take the administration’s "global war on terrorism," not only to Baghdad, but also to Damascus and Tehran.

In August it was revealed that one of Feith’s Middle East policy wonks, Lawrence Franklin, shared classified documents – including a draft National Security Presidential Directive formulated in Feith’s office that outlines a more aggressive U.S. national security strategy regarding Iran – with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and Israeli officials. The FBI is investigating the document transfer as a case of espionage. "
============SNIP=================
To me, the draft issue has to be approached from a statistical and logistics standpoint.

We are moving our National Guard to the hot war "in country".

The National Guard was never meant to do that...as its name implies...it is to guard the nation. Those of us old enough remember that at Kent State..the Guard killed student protestors...I say killed, perhaps MURDERED is the right word.

If the USA wants to make Georgie Porgie the Emperor, and this country become a Neo Roman Empire, spreading our empire around the world and stationing troops in every country, there is no way that this is going to be accomplished. We are seeing the coersion used against soldiers now to make them stay in the service.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_5272.shtml
"Army to Soldiers: Re-enlist Now or Face Immediate Deployment to Iraq
By Staff and Wire Reports
Sep 17, 2004, 07:48
Email this article
Printer friendly page

The Army is threatening American soldiers with immediate deployment to Iraq, along with involuntary extension of their tours of duty, if they don't sign up for re-enlistment right away. Those who don't sign face reassignment to combat units headed for the war.

While the Army confirms that a "re-enlistment drive is underway," military brass claim no threats have been made.
But hundreds of soldiers from the 3rd Brigade Combat Team at Fort Carson, Colorado, were presented with that message and a re-enlistment form in a series of assemblies last week, say two soldiers who refused to sign the form. According to emails received by Capitol Hill Blue this week, the same message was delivered to soldiers at other bases.

A Fort Carson spokesman confirmed the assemblies and the form which,if signed, would extend each soldiers tour with the 3rd Brigade until Dec. 31, 2007.

"They said if you refuse to re-enlist with the 3rd Brigade, we'll send you down to the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, which is going to Iraq for a year, and you can stay with them, or we'll send you to Korea, or to Fort Riley (in Kansas) where they're going to Iraq," one of the soldiers, a sergeant, told The Rocky Mountain News.

The second soldier, an enlisted man who was interviewed separately, confirmed the story.

"They told us if we don't re-enlist, then we'd have to be reassigned. And where we're most needed is in units that are going back to Iraq in the next couple of months. So if you think you're getting out, you're not," he said.

The threats outraged many soldiers who are near the end of their tours, the sergeant told the newspaper.

"We have a whole platoon who refuses to sign," he said.

A Fort Carson spokesman at first confirmed soldiers were told they "may" go to Iraq then stopped responding to inquiries.

"I can only tell you what the retention officers told us: The soldiers were not being told they will go to Iraq, but they may go to Iraq," said the spokesman, who gave that explanation before being told later to direct all inquiries to the Pentagon.

"There's probably a lot of places on post where they could put those folks (who don't re-enlist) until their time expires. But I don't want to rule out the possibility that they could go to a unit that might deploy," said Lt. Col. Gerard Healy at the Pentagon."
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 8:58 PM
"The truth of that matter is, if you listen carefully, Saddam would still be in power if he were the president of the United States, and the world would be a lot better off." —George W. Bush, second presidential debate, St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004

WTF? He would still be in power if he were the President of the United States>>>>?????? Adjust your bulge George, the signal is garbled!
Folktomsong
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 9:13 PM
Hey that's a good one for the T-shirt slogan:

ADJUST YOUR PACKAGE

It reminds one of ET Call Home.
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 9:15 PM
I think I should give equal time to a few words from our President...just to be fair :) (Smile)


"The truth of that matter is, if you listen carefully, Saddam would still be in power if he were the president of the United States, and the world would be a lot better off." —George W. Bush, second presidential debate, St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004

"When a drug comes in from Canada, I wanna make sure it cures ya, not kill ya... I've got an obligation to make sure our government does everything we can to protect you. And one — my worry is that it looks like it's from Canada, and it might be from a third world." —George W. Bush, presidential debate, St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004

"We all thought there was weapons there, Robin. My opponent thought there was weapons there." —George W. Bush, second presidential debate, St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004

"Let me see where to start here. First, the National Journal named Senator Kennedy the most liberal senator of all." —George W. Bush, referring to Sen. Kerry, second presidential debate, St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004

"The enemy understands a free Iraq will be a major defeat in their ideology of hatred. That's why they're fighting so vociferously." —George W. Bush, presidential debate, Coral Gables, Fla., Sept. 30, 2004

"You know, it's hard work to try to love her as best as I can, knowing full well that the decision I made caused her loved one to be in harm's way." —George W. Bush, presidential debate, Coral Gables, Fla., Sept. 30, 2004

"I saw a poll that said the right track/wrong track in Iraq was better than here in America. It's pretty darn strong. I mean, the people see a better future." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Sept. 23, 2004

"I'm not the expert on how the Iraqi people think, because I live in America, where it's nice and safe and secure." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Sept. 23, 2004

"It's the Afghan national army that went into Najaf and did the work there." —George W. Bush, referring to Iraqi troops during a joint press conference with Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, Washington, D.C., Sept. 23, 2004

"The CIA laid out several scenarios and said life could be lousy, life could be OK, life could be better, and they were just guessing as to what the conditions might be like." —George W. Bush, New York City, Sept. 21, 2004

"Free societies are hopeful societies. And free societies will be allies against these hateful few who have no conscience, who kill at the whim of a hat." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Sept. 17, 2004

"Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB-GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country." —George W. Bush, Poplar Bluff, Mo., Sept. 6, 2004 (Watch video clip)

"We will make sure our troops have all that is necessary to complete their missions. That's why I went to the Congress last September and proposed fundamental — supplemental funding, which is money for armor and body parts and ammunition and fuel." —George W. Bush, Erie, Pa., Sept. 4, 2004

"Had we to do it over again, we would look at the consequences of catastrophic success, being so successful so fast that an enemy that should have surrendered or been done in escaped and lived to fight another day." —George W. Bush, telling Time magazine that he underestimated the Iraqi resistance

"They've seen me make decisions, they've seen me under trying times, they've seen me weep, they've seen me laugh, they've seen me hug. And they know who I am, and I believe they're comfortable with the fact that they know I'm not going to shift principles or shift positions based upon polls and focus groups." —George W. Bush, interview with USA Today, Aug. 27, 2004

"I hope you leave here and walk out and say, 'What did he say?'" —George W. Bush, Beaverton, Oregon, Aug. 13, 2004

"So community colleges are accessible, they're available, they're affordable, and their curriculums don't get stuck. In other words, if there's a need for a certain kind of worker, I presume your curriculums evolved over time." —George W. Bush, Niceville, Fla., Aug. 10, 2004

"Let me put it to you bluntly. In a changing world, we want more people to have control over your own life." —George W. Bush, Annandale, Va, Aug. 9, 2004

"As you know, we don't have relationships with Iran. I mean, that's — ever since the late '70s, we have no contacts with them, and we've totally sanctioned them. In other words, there's no sanctions — you can't — we're out of sanctions." —George W. Bush, Annandale, Va, Aug. 9, 2004

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004 (Watch video clip)

"Tribal sovereignty means that; it's sovereign. I mean, you're a — you've been given sovereignty, and you're viewed as a sovereign entity. And therefore the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Aug. 6, 2004 (Watch video clip)

"I cut the taxes on everybody. I didn't cut them. The Congress cut them. I asked them to cut them." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Aug. 6, 2004

I want to thank my friend, Senator Bill Frist, for joining us today. You're doing a heck of a job. You cut your teeth here, right? That's where you started practicing? That's good. He married a Texas girl, I want you to know. Karyn is with us. A West Texas girl, just like me." —George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., May 27, 2004
====SNIP==========
I would say not just ANY West Texas Girl Georgie...you remind me of the Church Lady from Saturday Night Live
http://patents.gusmanolaw.com/archive/church_lady.jpg
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 9:20 PM
ignore that last link...
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 9:35 PM
"Bush delivering the famous line at the 1988 convention"Read my lips: No new taxes" was a famous pledge made by Republican Presidential candidate George H.W."

yep he lied about that. seems to me I heard a democratic presidental candadate make a simular promise during a debate reguarding those making less than $200,000 lets see who was that............

agreed 100% about the national guard. it's being misused. however we need to stop this mess about the draft rumors. this was started by democrats in the house and senate and spead by all those with an agenda against Bush. there is absolutly no evidence that Bush supports this and both he and Kerry say it won't happen. if one's a liar then the other is too.

Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 9:37 PM
Not necessarily, compmore, but they are both politicians. Only trust them as far as you can throw them.
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 9:44 PM
yes, you're right. my point exactly. criticizing one candadate about a rumor he has nothing to do with is premature
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 9:46 PM
they're both politicians, IE they are both liars. Politic's is defined....

Poly - Latin meaning many
Tic's - Blood sucking parasites
Advancedundeath
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 9:54 PM
"I have some news for you. Just because President Bush, Vice President
Cheney, and Secretary Rumsfeld, and for that matter Senator Kerry, say that
there is not going to be a draft does not make it so. Just because Congress
holds a transparently phony vote against the draft does not mean there isn¹t
going to be one. Anyone who thinks that the youth of America are going to
take a politician¹s word on this topic is living on another planet."

I agree fully with this statement. What happened the last time a president or high-ranking official said there wouldn't be a draft? Very soon after, there was a draft. There is absolutely no reason to believe ANYONE about it, no matter how much they know about the subject.
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 10:00 PM
true, and that works both ways. I'm not saying there isn't one coming. I'm saying so far it's all speculation and rumors. nothing official has ever been proposed.
DMemberfreeforall
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 10:07 PM
Lets see pres Jhonson (dem)was in during the build up of the Vietnam war 1965 after that Nixon (R) to what 74/75? carpet bombed Hanoi and the war did not end until 74. So how long has the Iraq war been going not including daddy bush's ist war. Yes I think were in for the long haul only this war is bit more involved than Vietnam . I would be real surprized if there was not a draft. Remember they are both bonesman members of the secret society, striving for the same quest. So your right it doesn't matter which candidate you vote for were screwed!
DMemberJLBRMECHANIC
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 10:08 PM
Code I read every thing fine. thank you.
what I can't understand is why the Republicans are upset at Rock the Vote, and people like micheal Moore who want people to vote and gathering that momentum. I would think they would be happy that people are turning out in record numbers to go to vote. no?
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 10:13 PM
Thanks JLB :) (Smile)

And now, for a few words from a CONSERVATIVE online news magazine...NEWSMAX.com
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/6/24/104815.shtml
"U.S. Readies for Draft
Dave Eberhart, NewsMax.com
Friday, June 25, 2004
Despite denials that the U.S. plans to re-institute the draft, the Pentagon has stepped up preparations for a new Selective Service System that could allow for a full-blown draft by next year.


Every few months Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld gets peppered with the nettlesome question about whether the administration, straining to keep boots on the ground around the globe, is considering reviving the compulsory military service draft – moribund since 1973. The answer is always an unqualified “No.”

Story Continues Below



Inquiries by NewsMax – and a persistent host of others, says the agency – to the Selective Service System (SSS) about an impending return to the draft are answered as well with an explicit canned denial:

“Notwithstanding recent stories in the news media and on the Internet, Selective Service is not getting ready to conduct a draft for the U.S. Armed Forces – either with a special skills or regular draft.

“Rather, the Agency remains prepared to manage a draft if and when the President and the Congress so direct. This responsibility has been ongoing since 1980 and is nothing new.

“Further, both the President and the Secretary of Defense have stated on more than one occasion that there is no need for a draft for the War on Terrorism or any likely contingency, such as Iraq.

“Additionally, the Congress has not acted on any proposed legislation to reinstate a draft. Therefore, Selective Service continues to refine its plans to be prepared as is required by law, and to register young men who are ages 18 through 25.”

Is Getting Ready

But savvy draft-watchers, including author, radio personality and attorney Col. Ron Ray, USMCR (Ret.), dispute the “is not getting ready” phrase, suggesting that there is, indeed, evidence indicating a new, heightened urgency within the agency, which these days is independent and no longer falls under the aegis of the Department of Defense. Ray himself had served as a Pentagon official during the Reagan administration.


For sure, “The Selective Service System’s Annual Performance Plan for Fiscal Year 2004,” is a document that leaves the careful reader with anything but the impression of a sleepy agency drilling for a fire it knows will never flare.


By early next year, the government will be test firing a mobilization infrastructure of 56 state headquarters, 442 area offices, and 1,980 local boards.

Funding is in the coffers to kick off a rigorous “Area Office Prototype Exercise,” which will “test the activation process from SSS Lottery input to the issuance of First Armed Forces Examination Orders.”

Ramping up is the “Selective Service System’s High School Registrar Program,” a plan to put volunteer registrars in at least 85 percent of the nation’s high schools – an increase from 65 percent in 1998.

At the head of the busy-work list – a no-nonsense commitment to report to the president by March 31st, 2005 that the system is ready to roll full steam within 75 days, which would clear the decks for a first lottery by June 15th, 2005.
Meanwhile, helping the agency to reach its goals and objectives is a little known provision of the No Child Left Behind Act that requires schools to provide contact information for every student – upon pain of losing federal aid dollars.

Standby Plans

Alyce Burton, a spokeswoman for the Selective Service, says that at the request of the Pentagon, SSS has been developing standby plans for drafting doctors, nurses and medical technicians.

Furthermore, SSS has been mulling draft procedures for other types of specialists – in particular linguists and computer programmers. But true to form, Burton is careful to add the stock denial: “We’ve been told that a draft of untrained manpower would not be necessary in the future.”

But that gratuitous disclaimer aside, Col. Ray, who defended Specialist Michael New, the U.S. soldier who refused to wear the U.N. uniform, tells NewsMax regarding the agency’s heady agenda: “If you were working for the intelligence service of an enemy foreign government, all the indicators are there [for a headlong ramp-up to a draft].”

Ray further points to what he suggests is a telling February 2004 statement the director of the Selective Service agency sent to the Pentagon:

“In line with today’s needs, the Selective Service System’s structure, programs and activities should be re-engineered toward maintaining a national inventory of American men, and for the first time, women, ages 18-34, with an added focus on individuals with critical skills.”

Despite SSS’s studious low profile and careful tidbits promulgated for public consumption, draft-return rumors recently abounded on the heels of word that the Selective Service was racing to fill vacancies on local draft boards. Advertisements were appearing in local newspapers calling for recruits to man the review panels.

Business As Usual

However, SSS quashed the furor by simply stating that all was just business as usual: The longest anyone can serve on a local draft board is 20 years and most of the members were appointed in 1980 when President Jimmy Carter reinstated registration for the draft.

What appeared to be a frantic exercise was nothing more than a mundane routine replacement of warm bodies, soothed the agency. The canned response by SSS to a frantic media and public:

“There is NO connection between this ongoing, routine public outreach to compensate for natural board attrition and current international events. Both the president and the secretary of defense have stated on several occasions that a draft is not needed for the war on terrorism, including Iraq.”

In truth, some experts don’t outright dismiss the government’s pro forma dismissals of an untrained manpower draft – at least for the near term.

At the heart of the matter is the election year, and selective service is a hot button issue that neither contestant in November is raring to push.

A recent CNN-USA TODAY-Gallup Poll indicates that no less than 80 percent of Americans are against a return to the draft. Furthermore, only 17 percent say they support a draft.

Little Support

It should be noted that just prior to the Iraq war, support for the draft was at 27 percent. And, finally, a no-brainer: the poll also found that young people were least likely to support a draft.

Second in the hit parade of reasons why an untrained manpower draft is unlikely at this time is Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. When he was a young congressman from Illinois, Rumsfeld introduced one of the first bills in Congress to abolish the draft.

These days the still anti-draft Rumsfeld is careful not to suggest that draftees are by their nature second-class soldiers because they are coerced to serve.

Having taken a hit for just that sentiment not long ago, the secretary now points to the more academic of his rationales – high turnover and a complicated deferment system that a draft engenders.

Rumsfeld’s most recent pronouncement on the subject: “I don’t know anyone in the Executive Branch who thinks it’s appropriate or necessary to reinstitute the draft.”

Third reason: The Army – albeit experiencing serious shortfalls of military policemen, linguists, interrogators, civil affairs specialists and medics – has ready access to a handy pool of manpower, the Individual Ready Reserve, the inactive component of the military that consists of vets who have completed their enlistment contracts but still have time remaining on a total 8-year commitment. As many as 6,500 could be recalled to active duty.

Fourth: Stopgap measures by the DoD are working to keep the outposts manned. “Stop loss” and “stop move” orders are in effect. The first bar members of the military from retiring or resigning. The second extends overseas assignment involuntarily – as was the case with the 20,000 troops kept overtime in Iraq.

Fifth: Troop shortages related to the war in Iraq and other deployments are being eased by turning over to civilians jobs now done by members of the armed forces. Rumsfeld hopes to reassign to civilian employees jobs now performed by no less than 300,000 uniformed men and women.

Sixth: Trust that Congress will bail the armed forces out in time. A cadre of both Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill are pushing to permanently increase the size of the Armed Forces by at least 30,000.

Draft Already Begun?

The inevitable critics of the DoD’s stopgap measures, however, say that many volunteers already have served one or more tours of duty in Kosovo, Afghanistan or Iraq. “Stop move” obviously frustrates those who are ready to be honorably discharged.


Some even suggest that this device amounts to nothing less than constructive conscription – a draft. Instead of drafting the civilian population, the military is “drafting” the soldiers who already are enlisted by forcing them to serve longer than usual.


Col. Ray, who served on a presidential commission on women in the military, is one of these skeptics, telling NewsMax, “Stop loss is nothing less than the beginning of a draft.”

Such arguments have not gone unheeded.

Just days after the Pentagon extended the tours of 20,000 troops in Iraq, Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., said, “There’s not an American ... that doesn’t understand what we are engaged in today and what the prospects are for the future.”

“Why shouldn’t we ask all of our citizens to bear some responsibility and pay some price?” Hagel added, arguing that restoring the draft would force “our citizens to understand the intensity and depth of challenges we face.”

Indeed, a pair of bills was introduced in Congress last year that would bring back the military draft.

The Senate version of the legislation, sponsored by Sen. Fritz Hollings, D-S.C., says its purpose is “to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.”

The House of Representatives version of the bill was sponsored by Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y.

Neither bill is winning a footrace on the long road to passage. And therein rests the overriding reason why some experts are not looking to see the draft revisited any time soon.

Obstacles to Reinstatement

Congress must pass legislation authorizing the reinstatement of the draft. It’s not something that can be done by the Chief Executive with the stroke of a pen on an executive order.

If, however, another front appears on the nation’s already extended battle lines – N. Korea or Iran, for instance – all bets may be off. And the preparations underway today could mean that a draft could be up and running in just a matter of months.

Col. Ray already sees the writing on the wall, referring to the writings of former NATO Supreme Commander Gen. Wesley Clark, who has suggested that there was and may be yet afoot a rather ambitious, albeit clandestine, agenda for American arms, mentioning war scenarios for Iran, North Korea and even ostensible ally Saudi Arabia.

Ray wrinkles his brow and rubs his forehead, mulling over what he sees as a dogging question: “Why have we kept the numbers of troops artificially low? We’re half the combat strength we had in 1991, yet we are manning 735 bases around the world.”

Ray doesn’t suggest to NewsMax that he has the answer to the conundrum. Yet he sees the draft as perhaps an inevitable consequence of our war on terror."

and those left wing Commies at pbs.org say :
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/july-dec04/draft_10-13.html
"Military service in the United States is strictly voluntary-- men and women serving in the armed forces do so by choice. But, during times of war, that can change. Mandatory service, called conscription but known popularly as the "draft," allows governments to require men, and sometimes women, of a certain age to serve in a military crisis.
In the United States, the draft has been used as a tool since the Civil War. In 1940 President Franklin D. Roosevelt instituted the first peacetime draft, which allowed the government to draft citizens at any time.

"We must and will marshal our great potential strength to fend off war from our shores," Roosevelt said as he enacted the Selective Training and Service Act.

Though controversial, the peacetime draft remained in place until America pulled out of Vietnam in 1973. Today, Congress can give the military the right to draft troops during wartime.



Current draft concerns



Recently, many Americans have begun to worry that the shortage of troops caused by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan may lead President Bush or his successor to reinstate the draft.

Reading and Discussion Questions
The fears have been compounded by the numbers. Of the country's 1.4 million active duty troops, according to a New York Times report, 655,000 are Army and Marine personnel, the pool from which troops in Iraq are drawn. Because the 191,000 troops currently stationed in Iraq and elsewhere in the world must be rotated often, military resources could deteriorate fast.

In addition, both President Bush and his opponent Senator John Kerry have called for more troops to help secure peace leading up to Iraq's first Democratic election in January. The problem is no one seems to know where those troops would come from.

The president has proposed pulling troops out of places like Europe and South Korea. However the current nuclear crisis with North Korea could require troops to remain in the region. Sen. Kerry has said if he's elected he would expand the Army by 40,000 members but, according to Army National Guard reports, recruiting levels are already low.

"We have put ourselves in a position where we don't have the capability to handle another major contingency," Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island told the New York Times.

Both President Bush and Senator Kerry have denied any plans to reinstate a draft, though many Americans still worry that it could happen. A recent survey, conducted by the National Annenberg Election Survey, found that out of 1,500 adults between the age of 18 and 29 surveyed, 51 percent believe that President Bush would bring back the draft."
Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 10:18 PM
JLBRMECHANIC--Think about it for a minute: why would the Republicans be upset because a record number of voters are registering for this election? I wonder if anyone has taken a survey to find out how many new voters are signing up to vote for Anybody But Bush Again?
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 10:19 PM
AND, FOR FAIRNESS...A WORD FROM YOUR FRIEND AND MINE...THE SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM...
http://www.sss.gov/
"On October 5, 2004, the House of Representatives voted 402 - 2 to defeat H.R. 163, the bill cited as proof that the Selective Service was preparing to reinstate a military draft. The vote made official what has been a reality since January 7, 2003, when H.R. 163 was introduced despite nearly total opposition in Congress to restoring the draft. Without Congressional support, the draft cannot be reinstated. A similar bill languishes in the Senate.

Both President George W. Bush and Senator John F. Kerry have stated for the record that they oppose a draft. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld also has opposed the draft on numerous occasions.

Since 1980, the Selective Service System has discharged its mission of preparing to manage a draft if and when Congress and the President so direct. The House action proves that the Selective Service has gotten no such direction. That being the case, the Agency will maintain its readiness as required by law, and to register young men between the ages of 18 and 25. That mission has been reaffirmed frequently by successive Administrations and by Congress under the leadership of both parties."
======SNIP============
Having a selective service system in place and functioning, and saying they have no plans to reinstitute the draft, reminds me of the village bully holding a club in his hand, aiming it at you like a batter holding a bat, and claiming he has no plans to hit you.

Having a selective service system in place and functioning, and saying they have no plans to reinstitute the draft, reminds me of a jihadist, wearing a long trenchcoat on a hot day in Iraq, and claiming he has no intention to bomb anyone...

One has a system in place to intitiate an action, only if there is a chance you might need to perform that action.

I don't keep my 357 loaded and near my bed, just because I like to watch gleaming steel in the moonlight :) (Smile)
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 10:24 PM
and for the record, it's not where my cats can get at it...i caught one of them standing on a box near the front door trying to turn the door knob like she sees me do when I leave the house...if she had hands instead of claws, she would have made a break for the woods around our house long ago :) (Smile)
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 10:32 PM
that's the fatal flaw in the imposed (not constitutional) system of elections shadowmom. We have been so occupided the past 20 to 30 years of voting for someone just because we hate the other guy instead of voting for who we think will do the best job.

I cannot respect anyone (including myself) who votes for kerry cause they hate Bush or votes for Bush because they hate Kerry. I'm ashamed of myself lately for letting my emotions get the best of me.

As much as I hate this stupid idiodic name calling (like so many freshman writing students trying to see how many derogatory adjatives they can cram into one sentence against Bush) I lost sight of what I believe. I need to vote for the person I think is best reguardless. And I can guarentee it won't be Kerry or Bush.

It took a Kerry worker last night telling me they believed in Nader but it's a wasted vote. I disgustingly told her that voting for Kerry when you really don't believe in him just because you hate Bush is the wasted vote. I was more disguested with myself.

If anyone here wants Kerry because they Honestly believe he's the best person for the job I can and do respect your choice. but if you vote for him only because you hate Bush, I won't respect that. First I need to act on my beliefs so I can respect my choice this year.
DMemberBrandonH
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 10:33 PM
I would like to read the comment the RNC made to Rock the Vote. While I think someone needs to couteract RTV, but the RNC should let someone else do that. RTV is not as non-partisan as they would have everyone believe.
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 10:34 PM
Code you know that the government of both parties have had all kinds of plans in place for every contingency just in case something drastic happens. most of which have never seen the light of day.
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 10:38 PM
there have been nuclear contingencies but no one ever seriously considered using them.
RockgdZiemann
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 11:05 PM
Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 11:26 PM
Compmore, let me tell you why I registered to vote for the first time in my life this year. I was always disenchanted with government, and didn't care what they did as long as they basically let me and mine alone. They crossed my line. It's that simple. I'm old enough not to worry about a lot of their changes affecting me, and I wouldn't fight them over most of them. But these people are taking rights--not liberties--rights, away at an alarming rate. And why? Terrorism. I honestly believe we have more to fear from our own government than I do from terrorists. They have divided us so totally and completely, this could be worse than what happened in the sixties--and I'm old enough to remember that. Are you?

This administration has systematically been instilling fear into every facet of our lives because they know that if they can just get us scared enough, most of us will agree to anything. That's why the kids are the ones who have to start the fight--they have less fear than their elders, but they also know it's their future that is being gutted.

Do I believe Kerry is going to make everything right? Hell, no, he'll only be the president--not some almighty omniscient omnipotent being. Do I believe he will try? Yes, I do. He comes from a liberal stronghold -- and liberal is not a bad word, in spite of what the Republican Hatemachine would have you think--unless you think it's wrong to help those less fortunate than you are. He comes from Kennedy country--and I do have a particular fondness for that name, even though Ted comes from the narrow end of the gene pool. He seems to share a lot of their beliefs. So, is that bad?

The damage Dubya has done to our reputation overseas borders on insane. The only support we have is from a few governments, like the British. And Tony Blair seems intent on going down with the ship. Read a few newspapers online from around the world, you can't miss the wonderment. They don't "get" Bush, and neither do I.

George can erect all the fences he wants, comp, and he still can't stop someone who is really intent on doing us harm. The only way you can stop them is to go after them, not wait for them to come to your doorstep. The cops can't even keep killers and rapists and child molestors off our streets--you have that much more faith in "Homeland Security?" It's a myth. And they use it to scare you. I choose not to be afraid of my own government this year, and that means the man in the white house must go. In four more years, if Kerry can't improve things, I will be just as sure to vote Anybody But Kerry Again.
Advancedawehr
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 11:41 PM
The so called "freedom tower", with its unoccupied upper half, is symbolic of the bush administration on so many levels.

Cowardice, empty headedness, uselessness.. its all there.

Who on earth builds a half empty tower?
The victims of 9/11 are rolling over in their graves.
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 11:43 PM
this could be worse than what happened in the sixties--and I'm old enough to remember that. Are you?

sure do.

I never suggested suporters of Kerry thought he had all the answers. just weather they believe in him. You obviously believe strongly in what Kerry stands for and that I can respect and is exactly what I was talking about.

I don't have the gloomy outlook you do, in fact I had a much more pesimistic outlook during the watergate era but that the differences in our politics and that's ok. as far as loosing our rights, I am very worried but the powers that is causing it are not republician or democrat. the parities are just puppets for the real power so the only defense against the loss of our rights is the awareness that code and others so vigerously work on. that makes the politicians afraid of loosing their jobs.

"The only way you can stop them is to go after them, not wait for them to come to your doorstep."

right or wrong, good or bad that is exactly what Bush is trying to do weather anyone agrees with it or not. I'm not defending Bush I'm just trying to look at it from a more objective perspective. However I think all this name calling and derogitory statements just insults the intellegence of those who do it and those who are looking for unbiased information.
Alternative-MW-
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 11:45 PM
CodeWarrior: "The truth of that matter is, if you listen carefully, Saddam would still be in power if he were the president of the United States, and the world would be a lot better off." —George W. Bush, second presidential debate, St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004

WTF? He would still be in power if he were the President of the United States>>>>?????? Adjust your bulge George, the signal is garbled!"
END QUOTE

This is Michael Moore esque if I've ever seen it. This statement was at a debate and obviously aimed towards John Kerry. I'm starting to become overwhelmingly irritated with your FAR left spin on everything. I don't call myself a Republican or a Democrat but I'm getting tired of your propaganda and complaints. If Bush bothers you so bad then that's fine by me. A nice saying is that it's better to be thought of as a fool than speak and remove all doubt. We know you don't like Bush, point made. If you disagree with this article that YOU posted, then you can do so in a clean and responsible manner. It is not necessary to further convince me that all Democrats are disgruntled fools.
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 11:47 PM
Every election is critical. we need to start looking for candidates we believe in instead of having our knee jerk reactions to things we don't like. that's why I'm getting started now..
Advancedawehr
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 11:48 PM
Yes compmore.. he is going after them.. but is it absolutely necessary to take down whole governments with them?

a well armed commando team could have surgically removed bin laden without trampling the sovreignty of another nation, and might have been more successful.

All out war vs. surgical strike.. its much easier to avoid a mac truck than a mosquito.
Advancedawehr
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 11:49 PM
mack* sorry
Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 11:56 PM
compmore, I hope I never called you a name--if I did I apologize. But I will not apologize for what I call the Republican Party. Over the years, I believe they have done enough things to deserve it. And no matter how you cut, when it comes to politics and religions you gotta have a bias. That's just the way it is. And I believe the "unbiased information" goes at the top. The rest is for discussion, correct?
Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: October 14, 2004 @ 11:59 PM
Oh, it's so late, past my bedtime--forget the beer, I like wine --"no matter how you cut, " should obviously be "no matter how you cut it,"

'Night all.
DMemberchrisbacke
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 12:09 AM
i'll be burning my draft card like the feminists burned their bras
Advancedcarla60626
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 12:16 AM
Eloquently stated ShadowMom.
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 1:01 AM
shadowmom you didn't insult me. I was refering to the name calling of Bush. I think it's simplistic to blame one person or even one party. It doesn't do anything but continue the division in this country that has been going on and building for years between both parties. It's childish and offensive to independents like myself.

when it comes to politics and religions you gotta have a bias.

but how far does that bias go? the venum I hear from both sides over the years is more distructive to our system and country than any patriot act.

awehr a well armed commando team would trample the sovernty of another nation if that team goes in without the governments consent. if something went wrong our team would be held up as political pawns and guess what would happen at the UN. If the government of that nation supports and encourages terrorists then taking out Bin Ladden doesn't help because that country would continue to support those who are left. in either case those commando teams would be ineffective in the over all mission even if they got Bin Laden. Sometimes it is necessary to take out a nation. I still make this comparisson and it is accurate. we didn't stop Hiter when we should have and as a result we still had to face him and lost millions of lives nedlessly because of the Neville Chamberlins of the world with noble ambitions that turned a blind eye to reality. I may not like what Bush has done overall but as far as Iraq goes He was 100% right in going in. These people do not play by the rules of a civilized world. they only do when they can get something from it. the only option is either letting them get their way (which is murdering Americans) or standing up. I'm very proud of my son who served over there. He would do it again and I would support him.
DMemberDemandRelevance
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 1:04 AM

-MW- wrote: "It is not necessary to further convince me that Democrats are disgruntled fools."

It is not necessary to further convince me that Republican-coddlers are misguided fools.
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 1:11 AM
Us independents feel that way about both sides.

BTW if on the obscure chance the draft did go through my other son would refuse to serve and I would support him and help him in that decision as well.
Americanabillhudson
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 1:18 AM
WellI I for one am hoping Bush and his kind leave, and leave soon., Time is up.
As To the song, Peter, Paul, and Mary did, "When will they ever learn?" It is really a Pete Seeger tune.
Still Pickin'
Bill H.
DMemberDemandRelevance
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 1:19 AM

Independents SHOULD be respected. Good point.

Actually, I could respect ANYone's opinion...if I could just be sure they weren't misguided. :) (Smile)
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 1:33 AM
:) (Smile)
DMemberCapt-n-Jack
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 2:01 AM
I have a strong feeling RTV is partisan, even though they may verbally tell you they are not. The idea to use the word, "draft," I believe, is to scare people. No republican I know, even mentioned this as an option. Certainly, politicians can change their minds, but who even brought the thought up in the first place?? I'll tell you, it was Rep. Charles Rangel (a Democrat) who first brought this up!! Remember this when you vote for Democratic candidates!!

There's an old saying, "Don't change horses in midstream."

Don't be surprised by the Election results come Nov. 2nd. It would be nice if everyone would just accept the outcome. I expect to hear plenty of bitching and moaning Nov. 3rd!! I even heard on O'reily that people are already filing election related lawsuits...sheesh!!!
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 2:21 AM
yeah aint that a shame. the problem with this election is the Dems are still fighting 2000. for some reason they don't believe in the constitution in choosing a candadate. in 2000 the republicans were smarting from their loss to Clinton and were vicous themselves. In 1992 the dems were angry because of the Regan revolution which swept Bush the 1st in office. Kinda reminds me of the mid east. everybody is so damn worried about vengence no one really can remember how it all started.
Otherindependentm...
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 5:53 AM
The DNC and the Kerry campaign a betting EVERYTHING on the belief that all the independents/progressives will pick the lesser of two evils. Unfortunately perhaps, and in the short term, they pissed too many of us off by becomming such a corrupt party and by moving to far to the right to get many of our votes. (They also stole the nomination from the populist "outsider" Howard Dean with dirty tricks and media manipulation.) Today's Democratic Party is too dominated from the Washington insider mindset and the likes of Terry McCallif. They are taking a BIG gamble with this election and very well may loose (and deserve to loose) because they do not represent the will of a lot of die hard Democrat voters anymore. The "Nader Factor" will probably be the very thing that gets Bush re-elected...

But God Damnit, I am NOT gonna vote for a party which has turned it's back on me and become indistinguishable from the "enemy" in it's tactics and platform.

Plus, there are too many Dems on the hill who are bought and paid for by the RIAA/MPAA.

CodeWarrior/Ziemann in '04
Barger for Senate!

Shmoo, of Electric Gypsy
Support Local and Independent Music!
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 8:01 AM
I just quoted Bush.
I can't help if it he is Hoppy, the Village Idiot and can't seem to say anything without making a joke of himself without his handlers. Bush's mouth is his own worst enemy. These are accurate quotes..this fool actually SAYS these things in public!
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 8:05 AM
I was just surprised the Repubs have chosen to have
a talking Shaved Bush to represent them.

Who would have thought that the debates would allow a Shaved Bush to be shown on national TV.

It's daring enough to show a shaved Bush on primetime..but one that talks...Dios Mio...ayyyyyyyy Caramba!
:) (Smile)
Intermediateautodidact
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 9:15 AM
LEST WE FORGET, I believe it was in the fall of last year that John Kerry was saying that we needed to increase troops in Iraq, to send as many as necessary to secure the country and win the peace. (Of course, a few months later he suggested we should adopt a firm date for withdrawl -- which is exactly the same plan he proposed for withdrawing from Vietnam.)

But assuming he still wants to win the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time, and also making the logical assumption that as President Kerry he will ask the nations of the world to join us in fighting the wrong war/wrong place/wrong time, and that they will all tell him to put it where the moon don't shine -- just how will he accomplish it without a lot more troops? And how will he get a lot more troops without a draft?

But isn't the key question whether Congress would approve a draft under either a Kerry or Bush administration? Under current conditions, I doubt they would. If we suffer another major terror attack, they might.

If Kerry flipped one way, he can flop back just as easily. I don't know whether he truly believes we should increase troop levels or not. But we know that Bush has resisted calls to increase troops for many months now. Bush's resolve is tested on this issue, and I see no reason not to believe him. Unlike his father, who fell over for new taxes like a feather in the wind.
DMemberDemandRelevance
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 9:25 AM

Yeah, so sorry (not) that anyone is offended by the printing of the very words spoken in public by King George the Dubya.
If mispoken words were the only errors that Dubious Dubya the Warmonger made, things wouldn't be nearly so bad. But even then, his administration would still deserve to be swept out because of the clear and present danger posed by his accomplices Ashcroft and Rumsfeld.
Advancedpinemikey
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 11:05 AM
Even die hard Republicans who will vote for a mannequin with a republican sticker on it have to admit that the biggest threat to internet user's freedoms is from the Department of Justice under the iron fisted rule of John Ashcroft. It seems the varied attempts to push through misguided and plain stupid legislation has opponents in the congress and senate.

However, John Ashcroft has only the president to stop him...and it doesn't look like Bush is going to reign him in anytime soon. You would think that Karl Rove would be telling Ashcroft not to do anything stupid during the election cycle...but I'm not sure they realize the votes they are losing among Internet users who are being attacked by Ashcroft's obsessions with intellectual property.

If you remove Ashcroft and appoint someone else then naturally the DOJ will get back to higher priorities that are ignored under Ashcroft. I'm sure the real people who work in that department are counting the days when they will be rid of that nutcase.
DMemberYoItsDeluxSon
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 7:11 PM
We had spirt day this week, my friend mark was Dubya, adam was Cheney, Mike was Colin Powwel, sean was Rumsfield, and I was Ashcroft, we had much fun pissing people like you off.
DMemberYoItsDeluxSon
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 7:12 PM
Let me re-phrase that, we had spirit week this week and thursday was hero day, where we dressed as our heros.
DMemberAdjacentAxis
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 7:29 PM
More power to you YoItsDeluxeSon.

Anything MTV-based has got to be ridiculous.
Advancedcarla60626
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 7:44 PM
You do know that Ashcroft has declared war on filesharing, don't you?
Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 7:46 PM
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. With both barrels yet.
DMemberYoItsDeluxSon
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 8:04 PM
Thats why i was so happy to announce that i was the one who dressed as him.
Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 8:22 PM
Congratulations! Did you wear a "Kick Me" sign on your back?
DMemberAdjacentAxis
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 10:03 PM
I'm well aware of the fact that 'war' has been declared on 'filesharing'. You also realize, of course, that if by the slightest possible chance Kerry is elected, he will be in favor of hunting down those who offer files freely as well, and putting all-around filesharing to an end ?

It's almost as if Kerry will be the 'savior' for the pirates, and all of these lawsuits and subpoenas will magically end, or start to die down. Republicans as well as Democrats would never go for that.

And if my memory serves me, it's only the copyrighted works being uploaded that they're after, correct ?
Advancedcarla60626
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 10:15 PM
No, Kerry is not the savior for the pirates. He's the savior for the country. When he's elected, will be on him and the Congress like white on rice.
AdvancedLachatte
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 10:39 PM
AdjacentAxis: If Bush goes, Ashcroft goes.
And no, I don't think your memory is serving you.
Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 10:52 PM
According to the RIAA, they are only after copyrighted materials. However, since no one has been taken to court yet, we only have their word on what they are truly after. You trust them that much?
Advancedcompmore
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 11:54 PM
if he's the savior for the country then we don't need to be on him to do the right thing
AdvancedLachatte
Date: October 16, 2004 @ 12:10 AM
This is from the forums:
"paulruss
Subject: Re: Bush or Kerry
Date: October 15, 2004 @ 11:14 PM
tj, like I said, this is a non issue, Bush's administration has lied about every single policy it has had. They've led America into an unnecessary war against Iraq that has cost over a thousand american soldier's lives and tens of thousands of iraqi citizen's lies. They have turned a trillion dollar surplus into a hundreds of billion dollar deficit, lost over a million us jobs, cut taxes for the wealthiest 1% of america while offering no substantial benefit to the other 99% of america, attempted to privatize social security, which is no way in danger, made medicare exponentially more expensive for people as time goes on and significantly more expensive for seniors now, banned the reimportation of prescription drugs from canada, which would reduce costs for americans significantly, made deals with energy companies that would increase greenhouse emmisions while calling it the "clear skies initiative", dropped out of the Kyoto protocol to reduce greenhouse emissions, squandered the global sympathy and support from the world after 9/11 by calling the UN "irrelevant" and going it basically alone in Iraq because the UN didn't buy his WMD bullshit (which has been proven to be bullshit time and time again) and has basically fucked America so hard in the ass that most of us will be sneezing bush's foul jizz for generations.

Oh, yeah, all those boys he sent to war? While he says he supports them he cut veteran's health and financial benefits, including those of the families of the fallen by nine billion dollars.

So do you actually believe anything he might say about file sharing? Do you still care after hearing all that?

It's not an issue, America is being poisoned by Herr Bush, file sharing and or the prosecution of filesharers is NOT IMPORTANT. Now is not the time to fight that battle and, most importantly, WHO YOU VOTE FOR AS PRESIDENT HAS NO IMPACT ON THIS ISSUE. File sharing is an active citizen issue, it's something you fight for regardless of who is in power in the white house. And, as I said, with everything going on in the world and with as much at stake as there is, file sharing is waaay low on any president's priority list.

Use some common sense here, you don't vote a crook into office just because he supports an issue that he will never ever address in his term as president. Nor will he vote the way he says he will, he'll try to get votes from file sharers and then cave to pressure from the recording industry, who is likely donating millions to his campaign.

whew.

man, I could write forever on that fucktard, Bush. "
Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: October 16, 2004 @ 12:21 AM
Don't be so wishy-washy, paulruss!! Tell us how you really feel!
AdvancedLachatte
Date: October 16, 2004 @ 12:24 AM
Paulruss said it all so well. I couldn't help myself. I just had to copy and paste. ( LOL )
Otherindependentm...
Date: October 16, 2004 @ 3:36 AM
Saw/heard a great NON "politically correct" joke today...

"Why is voting for Bush like running in the Special Olympics"

"Because, even if you win, you are STILL a RETARD!"

:) (Smile)

(sorry, that was VERY nasty of me to repeat it... but I thought it was a funny joke!)
Otherindependentm...
Date: October 16, 2004 @ 3:40 AM
You can change Bush to Kerry if you like... won't make a diff to all those with handicaps, they will STILL be insulted.

(I deserve any punishment for being so insensitive that I get for repeating that joke!)

Advancedcarla60626
Date: October 16, 2004 @ 8:18 AM
After Rodney died, I was reminded of my favorite politically incorrect joke of his.

Sex? I wouldn't get any sex if it wasn't for what I am......a rapist.

Chief Op OfficerShadowMom
Date: October 16, 2004 @ 10:33 AM
Shmoo, you are so politically incorrect--you have just insulted mentally challenged people everywhere. :) (Smile)
JazzJazzmary2U
Date: October 18, 2004 @ 12:27 PM
Schmoo.. no more jokes until you are registered and vote! :)) (Very Happy) Actually, there is much, much more than the presidential race here, folks.. there is CONGRESS.. remember the fools that voted on this Patriot Act and DMCA garbage?? FIRE 'EM!!! Only your vote will do it.. not protest, not political correctness, not whining. Take your A** to the polls, take your Flipping The Bird and VOTE!!!!
JazzJazzmary2U
Date: October 18, 2004 @ 12:31 PM
autodidact.. I would go for "flip-flop" anyday over "flim-flam."
You must be logged in to post replies to news articles.
Log in or register with the form at the top of the page.

 

 

 

search

news tree


advertising



 

 
© DMusic LLC - Advertising | Employment | TOS | Subscribe