MartiniPundit

Shameless Democrats

Honestly, sometimes I cannot fathom how anyone can be a Democrat.

It’s been well-known in the Blogosphere that Democrat Charlie Rangel wants to reinstate the draft, primarily as a means to get people to oppose the war. I won’t comment further on how despicable that is.

But this takes the cake. Michelle Malkin has posted the text of an e-mail to college students being sent out by the Democrats:

Mandatory draft for boys and girls (ages18-26) starting June 15, 2005

There is pending legislation in the House and Senate, S89 and HR 163,to reinstate mandatory draft for boys and girls (ages18-26) starting June 15, 2005. This plan includes women in the draft, eliminates higher education as a shelter, and makes it difficult to cross into Canada.

The Bush administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public’s attention is on the elections. The Bush administration plans to begin mandatory draft in the spring of 2005, just after the 2004 presidential election.

· The Congress has added $28 million to the 2004 selective service system budget to prepare for this military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005.

· Bush has ordered the Selective Service to report to him by March 31, 2005 on their readiness to implement the draft by June 2005

· The pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide.

Please act on this:

· Tell everyone you know - parents, aunts and uncles, grandparents,
godparents, friends, teachers

· Call and write to your U.S. Senator and your U.S. Representatives and ask them why they aren’t telling their constituents about these bills.

What they’re not telling you is that this bill is opposed by Republicans, has no chance whatsoever of passing, and that the Democrats who are peddling this crapola are lying through their teeth.

I don’t see how one can draw a different conclusion. Shameful. How desperate are these guys?

1. What’s even more ridiculous is that the fact that the Navy and the Air Force are both forcibly cutting personnel right now.  Yes, they really are; in order to match personnel levels authorized by congress but temporarily waived due to 9/11 the Air Force needs to cut about 24,000; they expect 10,000 will retire or get out for their own reasons; in the meantime personnel are being forcibly retrained from overmanned (by law) jobs to undermanned ones, or being told to get out.  The Navy is in even worse shape; they may have to cut as many as 60,000 people.  The Army is a bit light, and can add as many as 20,000 (maybe a little more, I’m not sure of this number), but the bottom line is that force structure needs have not been addressed since Clinton left office, and his take on it was always fewer people, more mission, pay ‘em less… The bottom line is that the idea of a draft being implemented is beyond ludicrous.  It’d be something akin to rumors of Enron trying to double the workforce right in the middle of their public meltdown.  (Not that the services are melting down… we’re just feeling a little bit toasty.)

   Posted by  on  09/22  at  11:22 AM

2. Wow! Are the Democrats FINALLY playing by the same rules as the Republicans?!?!?!

   You know ‘John Kerry voted for this and then against it’ without mentioning that the bills were very different.  That kind of thing.

   I don’t know wether I should distressed or awed.

   BTW - it’s really easy to be a Democrat. To quote Bill Clinton “when people think, Democrats win”

   Posted by  on  09/23  at  11:32 AM

3. So it’s OK that the Democrats are lying because you think the Bush folks are?

   It wasn’t two different bills - Kerry voted for a proposed amendment to the bill which failed, and then voted against the bill itself.  He’s the one quoted as saying “I actually voted for the $87B before I voted against it.” He never voted for the $87B - he voted to repeal the tax cuts.

   But then I guess I’m not thinking.  Ever, apparently.

   Posted by  on  09/23  at  12:00 PM

<< Back to main

Home