I feel a Draft!

[Traveler]

Be afraid, be very afraid!


The Charleston Gazette

Wednesday 22 September 2004

Bush’s war needs troops!


Alarm is spreading that President Bush may seek a military draft, or mobilize more of the National Guard and Army Reserve, to obtain enough combat troops to wage his bogged-down Iraq war.

Two bills pending in Congress would launch a new draft for all young Americans ages 18 to 26, both male and female, with no college exemption. Also, a new border agreement with Canada is designed to prevent young Americans from fleeing northward to elude the draft.

When Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards spoke in Parkersburg last week, he vowed: “There will be no draft when John Kerry is president.” His declaration drew a standing ovation from the crowd.

Meanwhile, President Bush, campaigning in Missouri, promised that there will be no draft. He said improving military pay, housing and medical care will attract enough recruits to supply the needed fighting forces.

However, Bush plans a sneaky “backdoor draft,” Democrats Kerry and Edwards allege. Speaking Friday in Albuquerque, Kerry said Bush secretly intends a major Guard and Reserve mobilization just after the Nov. 2 election. Kerry charged:

“He won’t tell us what congressional leaders are now saying: that this administration is planning yet another substantial call-up of reservists and Guard units immediately after the election. Hide it from the people, then make the move.”

Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., a Marine veteran of Vietnam, said Pentagon insiders told him of the mobilization plan. A White House spokesman ridiculed the allegation.

Amid all this wrangling, it’s overwhelmingly clear that Bush’s war is draining America of thousands of young people and billions of dollars — and the nation is forced to meet both needs.

Tragically, the war is a waste. There never was a necessity for it. Bush’s far-right political clique planned to attack Iraq, even before he attained the White House. The 9/11 terrorist strike provided a “cover” — a surge of patriotism that Bush manipulated into justification for war against Iraq. All his pretexts for the invasion turned out to be false.

Although he declared “Mission Accomplished” last year, the fighting grows constantly uglier and more expensive. More than 1,000 young Americans have been killed. Bush needs more and more replacements.

Before the Nov. 2 election, he should tell the American people candidly how many more young soldiers he plans to order into combat — and how he will obtain them.

[alkemical]

its dated but:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6938.htmUniversal National Service Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)


HR 163 IH


108th CONGRESS


1st Session


H. R. 163


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.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES


January 7, 2003


Mr. RANGEL (for himself, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. STARK, and Mr. ABERCROMBIE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Wonder why no one in the "liberal media" will ask the chimp whether or not he will re-instate the draft if "re"-elected? (Not that he would tell us the truth anyway.)

http://www.bartcop.com/donwright2.gif

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Well, if Smirk does succeed in stealing another election, at least we won't have to listen to 90% of the bush supporters on this forum anymore.

They'll all be in Iraq (or Iran or Syria, or...) fighting for their beloved Halliburton/Carlyle administration.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

If Bush is the one bringing back the draft, where is Kerry going to get the manpower to increase the military by 40,000 like he's already stated he wants to do? All the lefties here say that the military can't reach its recruiting goals, so it obviously isn't going to come from that.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

its dated but:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6938.htmUniversal National Service Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)


HR 163 IH


108th CONGRESS


1st Session


H. R. 163


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.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES


January 7, 2003


Mr. RANGEL (for himself, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. STARK, and Mr. ABERCROMBIE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

That's funny, all I see are Dems at the bottom under sponsors and co-sponsors. Add in Hollings as the Senate sponsor of virtually the same thing, and it looks like the party that is trying to bring the draft back is not the Republican party. Weird.

[broncogary]

If Bush is the one bringing back the draft, where is Kerry going to get the manpower to increase the military by 40,000 like he's already stated he wants to do?

Hey, didn't you hear? Michael Moore is rallying the troops! :~ohyah!:

[Bronco_Beerslug]

That's funny, all I see are Dems at the bottom under sponsors and co-sponsors. Add in Hollings as the Senate sponsor of virtually the same thing, and it looks like the party that is trying to bring the draft back is not the Republican party. Weird.

Not true.......

Republican senator:
Bring back the draft
Nebraska's Chuck Hagel says 'all of our citizens' should 'pay some price' for U.S. Iraqi operation
Republican U.S. senator is calling for a return of the military draft so the cost of the Iraq operation could be borne by people of all economic strata.

Speaking at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on post-occupation 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."

Hagel, a member of the committee, says all Americans should be involved in the effort.

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

The senator also argued re-instituting the draft, which ended in the early '70s, would cause the burden of military service to be spread among all economic classes of people.

"Those who are serving today and dying today are the middle class and lower middle class," he claimed.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38139

[Hercules Rockefeller]

So is Hagel a co-sponsor of Hollings bill?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

So is Hagel a co-sponsor of Hollings bill?
Does he have to be to call for the draft?

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Does he have to be to call for the draft?

Even though I went to public schools, I do remember my Civics course teaching me that for something to become law, a bill has to be introduced and passed by both Houses of Congress. The two bills currently that would bring back the draft are sponsored by Democrats and have Democrats as the co-sponsors. Unless Hagel's name is on the legislation as a co-sponsor, simply calling for the draft is not the same thing as what Hollings and Rangel have done.

Let's see a Republican Senator calling for the draft when Al-Sadr's uprising was at its peak, or Dems in both Houses sponsoring legislation to bring back the draft. You tell me, which party at this point looks like it wants to reinstitute the draft? Also please tell me where Kerry is going to get his 40k in troops since you've posted multiple articles in the past that say the military is not hitting its recruiting goals?

[Exile_In_SJ]

well we'll just have to see what happens. Looks like it's basically lefty scare mongering.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

well we'll just have to see what happens. Looks like it's basically lefty scare mongering.

Don't worry dude.

You'll look good in desert fatigues.

:)

[Exile_In_SJ]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/07/rangel.draft/

Rangel introduces bill to reinstate draft
Rumsfeld says he sees no need for military draft
Wednesday, January 8, 2003 Posted: 4:28 AM EST (0928 GMT)



Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., wants to reinstate the military draft, saying fighting forces should more closely reflect the economic makeup of the nation. CNNfn's Peter Viles reports (January 8)




WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Rep. Charles Rangel introduced a bill in Congress Tuesday to reinstate the military draft, saying fighting forces should more closely reflect the economic makeup of the nation.

The New York Democrat told reporters his goal is two-fold: to jolt Americans into realizing the import of a possible unilateral strike against Iraq, which he opposes, and "to make it clear that if there were a war, there would be more equitable representation of people making sacrifices."




hmmm Rangel switched parties???????????

[watermock]

The proper mechanism is to increase incentives to existing personell.

Obviously it's difficult to get enlistments and re-enlistments in a time of a protracted civil war, but hopefully, as time continues, we will be able to lower the troop committment.

We have to take this time to thank our French, German and Russian friends in this time of tribulation against the very face of Satan.

Like spoiled brats that have been withheld their pacifier, the UN is a vindictive **** that wants it's just desert. What happened today at the UN was literally amazing.

How Kerry acted today was tantamount to treason, but that isn't anything new for him.

[Exile_In_SJ]

again just more lefty fear mongering...

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters Tuesday he sees no need for a draft. He said the military is managing to attract enough skilled recruits without one.

"We're not going to re-implement a draft. There is no need for it at all," Rumsfeld said. "The disadvantages of using compulsion to bring into the armed forces the men and women needed are notable."

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Unless Hagel's name is on the legislation as a co-sponsor, simply calling for the draft is not the same thing as what Hollings and Rangel have done.
Even though he didn't author legislation for the draft he is calling for it.
That means that it's not only democrats who see the need for the draft.

Let's see a Republican Senator calling for the draft when Al-Sadr's uprising was at its peak, or Dems in both Houses sponsoring legislation to bring back the draft. You tell me, which party at this point looks like it wants to reinstitute the draft? Also please tell me where Kerry is going to get his 40k in troops since you've posted multiple articles in the past that say the military is not hitting its recruiting goals?
Kerry's counting on international support something that Bush definitely will not get.
But like I've said before, in order to give troops and civilians the protection and support needed over there we need another 100,000 plus troops. That means we need to bring back the draft immediately. If we don't want to do that then we need to exit immediately instead of throwing away American lives and hundreds of billions of our tax dollars.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Don't worry dude.

You'll look good in desert fatigues.

:)

why would i even worry, Its been over 15 years since i graduated college, I'm a bit old.. rofl... but maybe you'll look good in a ......suit LAbs

[Exile_In_SJ]

what's funny is how would Flipper, er kerry even know, he doesn't even know what stance he'll take on it tomorrow. rofl

they call him flipper.... flipper.. hmmm de dmmm dmmmmmm

[Exile_In_SJ]

Kerry Spot [ jim geraghty reporting ]
[ kerry spot home | archives | email ]

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

John Kerry is now echoing Internet hoaxes! [Note: Yahoo changed the story, so I changed to a different page with the AP version.]

Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, citing the war in Iraq and other trouble spots in the world, raised the possibility Wednesday that a military draft could be reinstated if voters re-elect President Bush.
Kerry said he would not bring back the draft and questioned how fairly it was administered in the past.

Answering a question about the draft that had been posed at a forum with voters, Kerry said: "If George Bush were to be re-elected, given the way he has gone about this war and given his avoidance of responsibility in North Korea and Iran and other places, is it possible? I can't tell you."

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and other Pentagon officials have been asked numerous times whether they thought a draft would be necessary to maintain force levels in Iraq. They have said consistently that they think it is neither necessary nor desirable, since today's military is built on volunteer service and professionalism.


What next, is Kerry going to denounce the U.S. Postal Service's plan to tax e-mail?

This is not the move of a campaign confident about where it is in the polls.

UPDATE: Good heavens, this is the new message from all corners of the party! From John Edwards and Max Cleland and Howard Dean!

Here’s Dean:

Former Kerry rival Howard Dean, now traveling the country to drum up support for Kerry and raise money for Democratic candidates, said last week at Brown University in Providence, R.I., “I think that George Bush is certainly going to have a draft if he goes into a second term, and any young person that doesn't want to go to Iraq might think twice about voting for him.”
The leadership of the Democratic Party really does want to bring back the spirit of 1968: the anger, the societal divisions, the distrust, the protests in the streets, and the cultivation of an anti-American subculture. And their own lawmakers are introducing legislation to reinstate the draft in order to make it happen. Not one Republican has signed on to the legislation restoring the draft, and Rummy and Co. have sworn to high heaven that they don’t want one or need one — it would create more problems than it solves.

I have many Democratic friends who I think highly of. Well, I hope they’re proud of their leaders in this shining moment.




this just shows how desperate the Demos are. The cBS smear campaign blew up in their faces.. and now Flipper tries this..rofl

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Kerry's counting on international support something that Bush definitely will not get.
But like I've said before, in order to give troops and civilians the protection and support needed over there we need another 100,000 plus troops. That means we need to bring back the draft immediately. If we don't want to do that then we need to exit immediately instead of throwing away American lives and hundreds of billions of our tax dollars.

Kerry's full of it and he knows it. For someone who calls Bush's coalition one of the bribed, I'm curious how he's going to get other nations on board like our supposed ally the French who were working against us behind the scenes at the UN despite what they were telling us to our face. The Russians, Germans, French, and Chinese all profited from the Oil for Food Program and with illicit oil contracts from Saddam. They are not going to help the US despite what Kerry wants to believe, and it's going to cost a ton of money to bring them on board if it is even possible. A change in the WH is not going to change other nations attitudes towards Iraq, unless Kerry kow tows to their demands, which is probably what he's going to do.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

what's funny is how would Flipper, er kerry even know, he doesn't even know what stance he'll take on it tomorrow

Like Dim Son can't decide from one day to the next whether the war on terrorism can be won or not?

Gotcha.

[Exile_In_SJ]

LABs, gee one purported flip flop, against kerrys 100 or so.. gotcha 100 times over.

[Exile_In_SJ]

gee more evidence that this is just another fear mongering tactic used by kerry and edwards....


Whose Draft Is It Anyway?
Aaron posted in English @ 1:08 pm in General, Freedom of Speech
Every so often John Edwards pokes his little head out from wherever he is hiding to attack the President and Vice President. His latest ammunition has been this issue of the draft.

Certainly, the mention of the draft conjures up memories for some of burning draft cards, numerous protests, and a slurry of other issues. Generally, you mention the possibility of a draft and people run scared. Why?

And why is John Edwards mentioning the draft so much, and promising “there will be no draft when John Kerry is president.” Is he suggesting that with Bush as president that 18 year olds around the country better start packing their bags for Iraq? Is he not partaking in the “fearmongering” and “scare tactics” that he and his love muffin John Kerry–and their good buddy Terry McAuliffe–often accuse the Bush administration of doing? Why is their fearmongering and scare tactics fair, but anything coming from the Republicans is “wrong and un-American”?

Apparently, Edwards has served so little time in the Senate (probably as little time as Kerry) to realize who is actually trying to reinstate the military draft. As I have quite effectively proven before, liberals love to tell the world that President Bush wants to reinstate the draft, and they will lie like Dan Rather to get that point across. There are twin bills in Congress , Senate Bill 89 (SB 89) and House Resolution 163 (HR 163). Let’s look at who is behind these bills:

Looking first at Senate Bill 89, one can quickly and easily note that this bill was introduced on January 7, 2003 by Senator Fritz Hollings (D-South Carolina).

Now, looking at HR 163, one will note the names on the bill introduced the same day that Senator Hollings introduced SB 89: Representatives Charles Rangel (D-New York), Jim McDermott (D-Washington), John Conyers (D-Michigan), John Lewis (D-Georgia), Pete Stark (D-California) and Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii).

The score is 7-0 in favor of the Democrats. 7 Democrats in Congress are pushing legislation to reinstate the draft. Unfortunately for the liberals and Democrats everywhere, facts do not lie.


And these are not just any democrats… no sir. These are Bush-hating Democrats. Why is this important? Liberals will suggest that these congressmen are working at the behest of the President, under the cover of their party designation, to push “Bush’s Draft” through Congress. These Democrats are anything but friends of the President, they are the exact opposite.

Senator Hollings trashes Bush’s Middle East policies here.

Representative Rangel has called on Congress to impeach Bush’s Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and has rallied with President Bush’s opponent John Kerry.

Representative McDermott has insisted that Bush lied to gain favor for the war in Iraq and that Saddam Hussein’s capture was staged. He has also marched with anti-war protesters while accusing Bush of trying to be Emperor.

Representative Conyers hosted a meeting of anti-Bush advocates to discuss impeaching the President.

Representative Lewis endorses Senator John Kerry’s run for president and says he “cannot trust the Bush Administration to do the right thing.”

Representative Stark, on the eve of the initial bombing of Baghdad, called the plan to bomb Baghdad “an act of terrorism.”

Representative Abercrombie, while at a Howard Dean rally, described Bush as a “right-wing, Fascist, reactionary.”

It’s quite simple to deduce from the above evidence that the twin bills SB 89 and HR 163 are to reinstate the “Democrats’ Draft,” not “Bush’s Draft.”

Could it be that these 7 Democrats are trying to push this legislation forward for the purpose of using the draft as a campaign issue? It seems as though Edwards is taking the bait. Democrats failed to push a lie on to the American people with these forged memos courtesy of CBS. Perhaps they still think that Americans are too stupid to do a little research to see who in fact is behind the new draft legislation.

Someone ought to send a memo to John Edwards to let him know that it is his colleagues in the House and the Senate who are trying to reinstate the draft the Edwards promises will not happen if he and Kerry are elected.

The Kerry-Edwards plan to end the “backdoor draft” with the guarantee of no new manadatory draft could be construed as an oxymoron. The extension of tours of duty and calling up reserves and national guardsman can be considered methods of preventing the draft by employing the already volunteered military personel. If these methods were not explored, what else is left in the event of a shortage of military personel? The draft.

The draft is becoming the top scare tactic for Democrats, and another example of this tactic has been uncovered by Betsy’s Page, where she writes about an email being sent to college students trying to scare them into believing in the possibility of the draft, and urges them to tell everyone know, their “parents, aunts and uncles, grandparents, godparents, friends, teachers.” Betsy does a great job at recapping many of the facts I presented back in June.

Lies just don’t have as long a shelf life in the age of the Internet and enterprising blogs.

Michelle Malkin has more.

[Exile_In_SJ]

now thank god for the internet where a person can check out the true facts and not let the left/demos use fear mongering without being able to refute it. The Draft talk is coming from the left.

[watermock]

Who drafted Mr. Armstong and told him his head would be lopped off.

He wasn't a POW, he wasn't a combatant. He was a civil engineer.

So when I call for massive air strikes and you fcuking liberals don't have a clue, you can kiss my dingleberries.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

LABs, gee one purported flip flop, against kerrys 100 or so.. gotcha 100 times over.

You're really going to sit there and claim that bush has only one flip-flop to his credit?

And are you really suggesting that I have not provided lists detailing bush's numerous flip-flops here before?

Unbelievable.

The massive denials and delusions required to be a republican these days are simply mind-boggling.

But bush's supporters aren't really traditional republicans anymore, are they?

They're more like some creepy cult.

The Bush Davidians.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

This encore presentation brought to you by Exile:

Bush the flip-flopper

1. Department of Homeland Security

BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY...

"So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything."
[White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02]

..BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

"So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people." [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02]

2. Weapons of Mass Destruction

BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION...

"We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them."
[President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03]


BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

"David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons. And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out."
[President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]

3. Free Trade

BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE...

"I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue."

[President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02]

..BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE

"In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed
heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection."
[Washington Post, 9/19/03]

4. Osama Bin Laden

BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE...

"I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'"
[President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]

BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA "I don't know where he is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important."
[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]

5. The Environment

BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE...

"[If elected], Governor Bush will work to establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide."
[Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00]

BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE

"I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act."
[President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03]

6. WMD Commission

BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE...

"The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04]

..BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE

"Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction." [President Bush, 2/6/04]

7. Creation of the 9/11 Commission

BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION...

"President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing
a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02]

..BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION

"President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News, 09/20/02]

8. Time Extension for 9/11 Commission

BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION...

"President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." [Washington Post, 1/19/04]

..BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION

"The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work." [CNN, 2/4/04]

9. One Hour Limit for 9/11 Commission Testimony

BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR...

"President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said." [NY Times,
2/26/04]

..BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY

"The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock."
[White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04]

10. Gay Marriage

BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE...

"The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into."
[Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00]

..BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE

"Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush, 2/24/04]

11. Nation Building

BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]

..BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING
"We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people." [President Bush, 3/6/03]

12. Saddam/al Qaeda Link

BUSH SAYS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEEN AL QAEDA AND SADDAM...
"You can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror." [President Bush, 9/25/02]

..BUSH SAYS SADDAM HAD NO ROLE IN AL QAEDA PLOT
"We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in Sept. 11." [President Bush, 9/17/03]

13. U.N. Resolution

BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT...
"No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what
their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet.
It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam." [President Bush
3/6/03]

..BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE
"At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw
the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written." [Washington
Post, 3/18/03]

14. Involvement in the Palestinian Conflict

BUSH OPPOSES SUMMITS...
"Well, we've tried summits in the past, as you may remember. It wasn't all that long ago where a summit was called and nothing
happened, and as a result we had significant intifada in the area." [President Bush, 04/05/02]

BUSH SUPPORTS SUMMITS
"If a meeting advances progress toward two states living side by side in peace, I will strongly consider such a meeting.
I'm committed to working toward peace in the Middle East." [President Bush, 5/23/03]

15. Campaign Finance

BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD...
"George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression." [Washington Post, 3/28/2000]

BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW
"[T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law."
[President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold singing ceremony, 03/27/02]

[Rohirrim]

Isn't it ironic that an administration full of more draft dodgers than any in history would contemplate signing into law a draft that has no "deferment" provisions? rofl

Cheney - How do you sleep at night?

[bronco militia]

now the left errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr media is making **** up

ap headline:

Kerry Says Draft May Return Under Bush


now how did they come up with this gem?:

Answering a question about the draft that had been posed at a forum with voters, Kerry said: "If George Bush (news - web sites) were to be re-elected, given the way he has gone about this war and given his avoidance of responsibility in North Korea (news - web sites) and Iran and other places, is it possible? I can't tell you."

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...kerry&printer=1

[bronco militia]

its dated but:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6938.htmUniversal National Service Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)


HR 163 IH


108th CONGRESS


1st Session


H. R. 163


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.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES


January 7, 2003


Mr. RANGEL (for himself, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. STARK, and Mr. ABERCROMBIE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

Mr. Charles Rangel introduced this bill because he felt there were not enough whites in the military...

fckn racist....

[Rohirrim]

Mr. Charles Rangel introduced this bill because he felt there were not enough whites in the military...

fckn racist....

Wrong again. Rangel was debating this bill on all the talk shows a couple of months ago. His point wasn't about race, it was about wealth and power. He pointed out that if the rich and powerful (not to mention the politicians) in this country actually had to take into account that their own children might get yanked out of Harvard and Yale to participate in a war, they might be a little less inclined to start one.

[Mile High Shack]

why do people join the military then?

obviously the primary reason we have a military is to defend our country, do these people not think that eventually there will be a time they have to take up arms?

[Rohirrim]

why do people join the military then?

obviously the primary reason we have a military is to defend our country, do these people not think that eventually there will be a time they have to take up arms?

Hey, I'm for the Israeli plan. Every single American at the age of 18 enters the military for two years. Then, if you want to make a career of it, fine. Re-up. If you don't, back to college or whatever. No deferments except for proven medical disabilities, and even then, you still have to go, but just work in a non-combat capacity.

I agree with Rangel's point. If these politicians knew that their own kids would be on the front lines, they'd start thinking twice about rushing into war.

But to answer your question directly: If Cheney, Ashcroft, etc. etc. are any indication then no, they don't imagine a time when they themselves, or their families, will have to take up arms.

[alkemical]

well we'll just have to see what happens. Looks like it's basically lefty scare mongering.



yeah i guess cheney's statement of "vote for us or terrorists will attack" isn't fear mongering.

[bronco militia]

Wrong again. Rangel was debating this bill on all the talk shows a couple of months ago. His point wasn't about race, it was about wealth and power. He pointed out that if the rich and powerful (not to mention the politicians) in this country actually had to take into account that their own children might get yanked out of Harvard and Yale to participate in a war, they might be a little less inclined to start one.

yeah, he said that too, but you must have missed the part about "too many minorities on the front lines" part....I saw the fkn asshole on Hanity and Combs...

[bronco militia]

Rumors of a draft gather steam but Congress says it won't happen
© 2004 The Syracuse Post-Standard. ^ | Sunday, August 08, 2004 | By Peter Lyman


Posted on 08/08/2004 5:48:24 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines


There is no serious effort afoot to restore the draft, contrary to rumors circulating on the Internet. One Web site, bushdraft.com, claims to have "absolute proof that (President) Bush is making plans to reinstate the draft by the middle of 2005."

Like most rumors, these contain enough kernels of fact to sustain, if not a feeding frenzy, then a platter of tantalizing hors d'oeuvres for conspiracy enthusiasts:

Draft boards are indeed being maintained, but they have been routinely funded by Congress all along. The just-approved appropriation increases the previous year's spending on Selective Service by less than 1 percent.

Upon reaching their 18th birthday, American males are required to register with Selective Service.

Pending in subcommittee is a measure sponsored by Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., that would reinstate mandatory service. It includes women. A companion bill has been introduced in the Senate by Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S.C.

But virtually no one in Washington, including the bills' sponsors, gives them even a remote chance of becoming law.

Neither Bush nor Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry supports restoring the draft. Most members of the Senate and House have announced their opposition.

A pending defense authorization bill includes a proposal to increase the size of the Army by 30,000 and the Marine Corps by 9,000. Even if that provision is approved, there will be no need to reimpose the draft to fill the new slots.

The Pentagon also has voiced opposition to the draft. In a letter to House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., Department of Defense General Counsel William J. Haynes Jr. wrote that the all-volunteer force has proven to be "more combat-effective and cost-efficient than a conscripted force."

"In general,volunteers are more motivated than draftees, resulting in greater personnel retention and unit stability," Haynes wrote. "Volunteers yield a more experienced and productive military force."

Perhaps the highest hurdle to resuming the draft is the certain knowledge that such a move would be lousy politics. Last fall, a Gallup poll conducted for CNN and USA Today concluded that 81 percent of Americans oppose a return to conscription, and 17 percent support the idea.

Nonetheless, a persistent minority continues to push for resumption of the draft in some form. Rangel and other supporters contend that the current system is inherently unfair, relying upon volunteers of lower socioeconomic standing while members of the privileged classes avoid being placed in harm's way.

Opponents of the draft argue that it was never fairly applied, that it always ensnared young men of modest means in disproportionate numbers while their wealthier contemporaries [including former President Bill Clinton] were able to work the system for deferments or exemptions. A draft "lottery" begun during the Vietnam War did little to correct the inequities.

Draft advocates also argue that existing forces have been stretched too thin by the deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan. Some critics say extended tours of duty in combat zones and frequent call-ups of Reserve and National Guard troops have hurt morale.

"That's why we have a Guard and Reserve - for times of need," said Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-New Hartford, an opponent of resuming the draft. "Reserves should know they are subject to the call when the nation needs them."

More important to recruitment and retention, Boehlert said, is providing adequate pay and benefits for men and women in uniform.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1187310/posts

[alkemical]

bm

is this what you'd hear pre-election?

[bendog]

I googled iraq insurgency and found two sites (hindu) saying that an upcoming time mag issue would quote a former US intell guy as saying there are 100K insurgents. I heard a US general yesterday say as many as 50K. I find it hard to believe a draft is a possibility, but if the US truly intends to "stay the course" .... well, been there seen that once, and it sucked.

[alkemical]

i hear canada is going to ship "dodgers" back

[bronco militia]

bm

is this what you'd hear pre-election?

if you are talking about Rangel and the draft bill, yes.

I almost chucked my beer through the TV listening to that asshole.

[Crushaholic]

In Kerry's acceptance speech, he said he was going to ADD 40,000 more troops. That seems like a strong direction towards the draft to me.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Canada should turn over draft dodgers.

This draft kerfuffle is all manufactured by the left. Not Bush nor any of his administration plan on a draft. They've all said so.

But kerry asking for 40K more troops smacks of a need for a draft. Maybe it's the dems that want the draft, since they are sponsoring the bills.

[alkemical]

see bm & crushaholic -

that's why i view no matter what its going to happen

[Bronco_Beerslug]

This draft kerfuffle is all manufactured by the left. Not Bush nor any of his administration plan on a draft. They've all said so.

But kerry asking for 40K more troops smacks of a need for a draft. Maybe it's the dems that want the draft, since they are sponsoring the bills.
Pay attention. We need more than 100 thousand more troops in there to have any chance of policing that country and providing security to the thousands of civilians there. Kerry said he would call on international support for adding troops something Bush will not get. If we are not going to start the draft and commit the troops and then get OUT!

Republican senator:
Bring back the draft
Nebraska's Chuck Hagel says 'all of our citizens' should 'pay some price' for U.S. Iraqi operation
Republican U.S. senator is calling for a return of the military draft so the cost of the Iraq operation could be borne by people of all economic strata.

Speaking at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on post-occupation 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."

Hagel, a member of the committee, says all Americans should be involved in the effort.
"Why shouldn't we ask all of our citizens to bear some responsibility and pay some price?" Hagel said, arguing that restoring the draft would force "our citizens to understand the intensity and depth of challenges we face."

The senator also argued re-instituting the draft, which ended in the early '70s, would cause the burden of military service to be spread among all economic classes of people.

"Those who are serving today and dying today are the middle class and lower middle class," he claimed.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/a...RTICLE_ID=38139

[Hogan11]

Canada should turn over draft dodgers.

Why should they? Canada hasn't supported the action in Iraq at all and is anixous to show they're no pawn of the USA. W has shown himself to be no friend of Canada and has snubbed them in favor of Mexico several times, both pre and post 9/11....why Canada would work with his Administration to send conscientious objectors who are seeking aslyum from the draft back is beyond me.


This draft kerfuffle is all manufactured by the left. Not Bush nor any of his administration plan on a draft. They've all said so.

Yeah, like they're going to come out on the eve of an election and say they're going to reinstate the draft...in an election that is this close, do you think they're going to risk turning nearly a whole voting block (18 to 26) against them by being honest? Gimmie a break.


But kerry asking for 40K more troops smacks of a need for a draft. Maybe it's the dems that want the draft, since they are sponsoring the bills.

A good point...since he frequently says he's against a "backdoor draft" maybe they plan on installing a front door one...who knows? The truth is that you're not going to get a straight answer that is credible on this issue until after Nov. 2nd. If you're in the targeted age group and are apprehensive about the draft, you're really rolling the dice with your vote for one of these two guys when it comes to this issue.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Isn't it ironic that an administration full of more draft dodgers than any in history would contemplate signing into law a draft that has no "deferment" provisions?

Extremely ironic.

Bush supporters seem to be missing the irony gene.

Well, if the bush backers get their wish and Smirk & Sneer get "four more years," then maybe we'll be seeing pics of those same bush supporters in desert fatigues by next year.

I know they won't hesitate to put their lives (or those of their children) on the line for the Bush/Halliburton cartel.

Cheney's battle cry: "Must...make...money!"

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/not-draft-age.gif

[alkemical]

http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a1103.htm


Women will be called up as well as men. There will be absolutely no deferments of any kind permitted. Persons with medical problems such as diabetes, cardio-vascular disease, chronic asthma, physical deformities such as a club foot or hunch back, vision problems, etc. will be called up! If a draftee has a medical problem but can move around, they are subject to the draft but will be assigned to non-military positions such as clerk-typists, maintenance positions and so on. There will be absolutely no deferments for someone with a family to support or who is enrolled in any kind of a school. Students may be permitted to complete their semester and will then be compelled to report at once to their nearest enlistment center. For example, as I read it, an 18 year old girl with two children and no husband to support her will be subject to the draft. There was a discussion about what to do with the children and if the family cannot raise them during the draftee’s tour of duty, then some kind of Federal Child Care center will have to suffice. The nominal ages covered are from 18 through 26 but a special exception is now in the orders for anyone with what the Army calls “technical skills” such as proficiency in computers, foreign language skills and so on. These poor jerks are subject to the draft until they are 35!

[Cito Pelon]

I think GWB is pretty damn smart. I know that when I was US Army, the ranks were filled with the poorest boys and girls available, because that was their best opporutnity to get out of poverty. So a great strategy is to strangle middle-class families, whose kids have big dreams, thereby increasing the cannon-fodder class.

GWB's ultimate game is harnessing power to his elite, and creating the most cannon-fodder at the same time. He'd settle for less, but harnessing power to his elite, that's his Super Bowl. The cannon-fodder? Well, more, less, no big deal, the object is harnessing power, ultimately.

[patteeu]

Isn't it ironic that an administration full of more draft dodgers than any in history would contemplate signing into law a draft that has no "deferment" provisions? rofl

It might be if any of it were true.

[errand]

Does he have to be to call for the draft?

Wow! One Republican thinks a draft is a good idea, and it's all of a sudden something Bush wants to install?

Surely you got a document with his signature on it stating that he's bringing the draft back, no?

If not, I'm sure your liberal Democrat political party will produce one soon.........

[alkemical]

It might be if any of it were true.


Cheney used the same methods to avoid the draft that clinton did...

he also seems to vote against vetrans funds, just like john kerry!

[patteeu]

Cheney used the same methods to avoid the draft that clinton did...

he also seems to vote against vetrans funds, just like john kerry!

Well I won't argue that there aren't people in the administration who avoided service during Vietnam. But I don't know of anyone who actually dodged it (e.g. fleeing to Canada) and I don't even know of anyone who lied to the draft board and took off to England either. And there are plenty of people in the administration who did serve too.

OTOH, the second half of Roh's statement is pure BS.

an administration ... would contemplate signing into law a draft that has no "deferment" provisions?

There is no support for this statement. I don't know what goes on behind locked doors at the pentagon, but as far as public information is concerned, the only people contemplating this are democrats in congress.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Yeah but Clinton was a draft avoider and led us into war in the Balkans.

Clinton,whom I voted for was the ultimate CHICKENHAWK

[alkemical]

cheney would be that

[yisman]

BTW, the two Congressman who are pushing for a draft are Democrats.
This is ridiculous that it gets blamed on Bush. He's not the one behind it.
Charles Rangel and another Democrat are.

[alkemical]

i know...

i'm not voting kerry/edwards because they signed the patriot act.

but i'm not voting for bush.

[Exile_In_SJ]

the people behind the draft revealed....

[Mountainman]

the people behind the draft revealed....

LOL. That's funny.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Yeah but Clinton was a draft avoider and led us into war in the Balkans.

Clinton,whom I voted for was the ultimate CHICKENHAWK

More lies and distortions from Exile from Sound Judgment.

The war in the Balkans was a success (unlike AWOL Boy's Iraq debacle.)
Clinton is still given a hero's welcome (you know--the kind of welcome the neocons you're blowing said our troops in Iraq would get?) when he visits that part of the world.

Further, Clinton reported to his draft board when he received his induction notice and left himself vulnerable to the draft. Nixon subsequently instated the draft lottery and Clinton's number never came up.

The AWOL Monkey, on the other hand, didn't wait to receive an induction notice. He didn't leave himself vulnerable to the draft. His daddy pulled strings to get him into the champagne unit of the ANG--an assignment with no chance of deployment to Viet Nam and for which there was already a waiting list of hundreds.

Thus, bush is plainly the true chickenhawk here.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Nah, Clinton is. Bush was in the military, to be a chickenhawk you can't have been in the military Bush also volunteered to go to Viet Nam with a squadron of f-102's but was turned down because he had only 300 hours flight time at the time and he needed 500. Clearly Clinton is the definitive Chickenhawk. You lose again.

[Exile_In_SJ]

you see the draft avoider, Clinton, never served his country, then as president, he sent troops into battle. Thus he was the definitive chickenhawk.


Bush served in the military, earned an Honorable discharge, was considered by his commander to be in the top 5% of pilots in his command and then when he Became President, he sent troops into battle. Not a chickenhawk.

[Hercules Rockefeller]

The LA Times reported during the '92 race that Clinton's uncle, tried to get BC into the Arkansas Naval Reserve so he wouldn't be drafted. Clinton also promised to join an Army ROTC unit at Univ of Arkansas in order not to be drafted, but never joined after making that promise to his draft board. Let's not forget his comments about "loathing the military" either.

[Exile_In_SJ]

you see there are three definitions to the term chickenhawk

the first is a bird of prey who preys on chickens, the second is a sexual predator, the third is political.....

Political epithet
3. The term chickenhawk is used in a political sense to refer to a politician who is strongly pro-military intervention but has not himself served in the military.

[Exile_In_SJ]

so, LABs, to explain it for you, Bush SERVED HONORABLY in the military, thus he cannot be a chickenhawk.


Clinton, no matter what your excuses are, didn't serve in the military and sent troops into battle. Clearly, Clinton was the Chickenhawk, Bush wasn't. You lose again and again and again.

[alkemical]

So lets get this straight:

Clinton & Cheney used educational deferments to get out of the draft, and clinton is the chickenhawk?

The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
Henry Kissinger, New York Times, Oct. 28, 1973

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

so, LABs, to explain it for you, Bush SERVED HONORABLY in the military, thus he cannot be a chickenhawk.

Do you ever tire of being wrong, monkey?

First, the AWOL monkey didn't "serve honorably" in the military--he deserted during wartime. He failed to show for a mandatory physical and was suspended from flying (after the taxpayers spent millions on his flight training.)
Hardly "honorable" service by any definition.

Second, your own definition of "chickenhawk" refers to a politician who is "strongly pro-military"--hardly a description of Clinton.

If you want examples of politicians who never served but who are "strongly pro-military" (as in "advocating unilateral, pre-emptive invasions of countries that pose no threat and who haven't attacked us") then look no further than Smirk & Sneer and Wolfowitz and the rest of the crooks you're blowing.

Third, are you so thick as to not understand that your chickenhawk definition applies to you?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Clinton also promised to join an Army ROTC unit at Univ of Arkansas in order not to be drafted, but never joined after making that promise to his draft board. .

He never joined because he asked to be put back into the draft.

The ROTC wanted him.

Like the AWOL monkey, Clinton could have gone the ROTC route and guaranteed not having to risk putting his ass on the line, but, unlike Smirk, he left himself exposed to the possibility of going to Viet Nam.

The Smirking Sociopath deliberately avoided Viet Nam.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Bush...was considered by his commander to be in the top 5% of pilots in his command...

That was before he decided to blow off his obligations and desert, dumbass.

[watermock]

If Bush deserted he would of had a dishonorable discharge you dimwit.

Also, Clinton was in Oxford.

Even more funny is when you look into the Bosnian conflict, you would find out.

1. It was done during "splattergate"

2. The bombing assault was against Christians, not the Islamic Fundamentalists. Clintons million dollar cruise missles didn't even have a clue where they were heading. They blew up in the middle of the desert. It was totally rediculous.

Why don't you tell me in Clinton's own words what his missle strikes accomplished there dimwit?

Let's talk about how he tied up LAX by having his hair done at a cost of millions!

[Hercules Rockefeller]

He never joined because he asked to be put back into the draft.

The ROTC wanted him.

Like the AWOL monkey, Clinton could have gone the ROTC route and guaranteed not having to risk putting his ass on the line, but, unlike Smirk, he left himself exposed to the possibility of going to Viet Nam.

The Smirking Sociopath deliberately avoided Viet Nam.

3 points in my post and you address one. So what do you think about the LA Times' claim that one of Clinton's relatives tried to get him the Naval Reserves, and do you care to address his comment about "loathing the military"?

and actually Clinton never went to ROTC stuff because he pulled a draft number that made it unlikely he would go and therefore, at least for him, took away any incentive to be in ROTC. He wanted no part of Vietnam and was doing everything possible to avoid any type of service. He did not ask to be put back in just so he could be exposed to the possibility of going to Vietnam.

Weird how Vietnam was in the past in '92 with a D who admitted he wanted no part of the war (and current candidate Kerry said that too, that Vietnam is irrelevant at that point), but now it is so important for all the anti-Vietnam Dems to go after Bush's service.

[watermock]

I remember the Lottery.

I am crying allready.

We we were all sitting aound our oldest son. You don't have to believe me. The Patriarch of the familiy was against the war. We already had plans to shop Alan to Canada.

It wasn't cowardace, it was that the war was incredibly stupid.

I have told you about Walter Krueger who taught Eienhower and McArther.

He's my relative. By default I have just a little bit to say.

Everyone sit down and behave for now.

[watermock]

Crazy Cat is out and about.

If things were no so simple.

Generals have to work thru things.

It's not really that different than today.

It's much more luquid.

[Exile_In_SJ]

So lets get this straight:

Clinton & Cheney used educational deferments to get out of the draft, and clinton is the chickenhawk?

The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
Henry Kissinger, New York Times, Oct. 28, 1973




if you could readd, you'd see the comparison was between Bush and Clinton. Cheney and Clinton are in the same boat. If you call Cheney a chickenhawk you must call Clinton one too.

[Exile_In_SJ]

Do you ever tire of being wrong, monkey?

First, the AWOL monkey didn't "serve honorably" in the military--he deserted during wartime. He failed to show for a mandatory physical and was suspended from flying (after the taxpayers spent millions on his flight training.)
Hardly "honorable" service by any definition.

Second, your own definition of "chickenhawk" refers to a politician who is "strongly pro-military"--hardly a description of Clinton.

If you want examples of politicians who never served but who are "strongly pro-military" (as in "advocating unilateral, pre-emptive invasions of countries that pose no threat and who haven't attacked us") then look no further than Smirk & Sneer and Wolfowitz and the rest of the crooks you're blowing.

Third, are you so thick as to not understand that your chickenhawk definition applies to you?


I don't have a problem if dimwits like yourself want to apply names to me, it doesn't matter to me at all what you call me. You are a moron so anything that comes from your keyboard us basicallyy wasted typing.

Funny how Bush got an Honorable Discharge and most thinking people agree that he served honorably. I haven't been wrong once in this thread. You on the other hand haven't been correct at any moment, but I guess you are used to being wrong consistently

[Exile_In_SJ]

He never joined because he asked to be put back into the draft.

The ROTC wanted him.

Like the AWOL monkey, Clinton could have gone the ROTC route and guaranteed not having to risk putting his ass on the line, but, unlike Smirk, he left himself exposed to the possibility of going to Viet Nam.

The Smirking Sociopath deliberately avoided Viet Nam.


Blah Blah Blah, answer me this dimwit, it's real simple. Did Clinton serve in the military? No.

Did he use the military in his tenure as president? Yes.

He is a Chickenhawk without peer. You, nce again have been shown to be wrong. Again, and again, and again and again.