| It appears Charlie Rangel has inadvertently given
liberals an "out" from ever having to defend the country ever again. He as
you are all aware has called for the reinstatement of the
draft... "As long as Americans are being shipped off to war," Rangel says, "then everyone should be vulnerable." According to Rangel's office, all men and women up to 42 years of age would be eligible conscripts. He would exempt only those who have health problems or "reasons of conscience." In the event there are some hysterical liberals reading this I shall make it easier for them to see where I am going with this by re- typing Rangel's statement with the bit that intrigues me cleverly highlighted. Ready? "As long as Americans are being shipped off to war," Rangel says, "then everyone should be vulnerable." According to Rangel's office, all men and women up to 42 years of age would be eligible conscripts. He would exempt only those who have health problems or "reasons of conscience." Has anyone ever met a liberal that didn't have reasons of conscience when it comes to defending America? There's a big difference between going war and Defending the country in my book. Hitler. Remember him? Short chap, silly mustache, invented World War Two. He conscripted the Germans to take over the world. We conscripted to prevent a sequel to Pearl Harbor, and to prevent the guy with silly the mustache from seeing his demented ideology come to fruition. Big difference. By 1969 burning your draft card was the "in thing" to do. It was all the rage. The final step to being "en vogue" if you will. Step one: buy a VW minivan. Step two: Drop out of school but continue to live off mommy. Step three: Stop bathing. Step four: burn your draft card. The precursor to Cindy Sheehan was complete. Fast forward to 2006 and the flight plan to becoming a full fledged hysterical liberal is basically the same. Simply replace the VW with a Prius and replace the draft card with your voter registration card. liberals don't like defending the country. Liberals are always Democrats. (The liberals who think there smarter than the rest vote green party). So by proxy, if you're a Democrat you can be excused from serving by showing off the "D" on your card. In other words under Rangels grand plan the entire states of New York, California, and Connecticut are exempt from the draft. If you though Rangel's plan is the worst one since Mr. Hitler said to Mrs. Hitler "Doris, let's go upstairs. I'm feeling a little saucy tonight" . It looks worse when you measure it up against facts. According to Congressman Rangel "for those who say the poor fight better, I say give the rich a chance.". In other words the entire military is made up of poor, urban, minority males. Bollocks. All one needs to do is search for the numbers from the Department of Defense and we find curiously enough that the overwhelming majority of military personnel killed in action in Afghanistan and Iraq -- nearly 74 percent -- have been white. Hispanic/Latino deaths make up about 11.5 percent; blacks account for less than 10 percent. Yet, the overall U.S. population of more than 300 million is 14 percent Hispanic and 12 percent black. Then there is the issue of education. 99.9 percent of the enlisted forces have at least a high school education, 73.3 percent have some college, 16.2 percent have an associate’s degree or equivalent semester hours, and 4.7 have a bachelor’s degree. Over 85 percent of field grade officers have advanced degrees – 70.7 percent have master’s degrees, 12.1 percent have professional degrees and 2.5 percent have doctorate degrees. In other words why the hell should we infect the military with Liberal Democrats taking Basket Weaving, and Women's studies courses in the local University? Either way, presented with these facts the left can come to only three conclusions. 1: The DoD Lied. Two: minorities hide better on the battlefield. Three: Rangel is an idiot. I'm Guessing they do not Pick number three... I am however wondering what the military makeup would be under Rangel's plan to balance the economic makeup of the forces. One could envision the 1st Cavalry Welfare brigade. Or the 21st Infantry Middle Class division. Or perhaps the moderately wealthy national guard. Perhaps Rep. Rangel simply wants to kill more white people. Who knows? Rangel, in typical leftist fashion fails to elaborate on his grand plan. How will it be decided if ones "reasons of conscience" are to be excepted as an excuse for not serving? If we examine page 23 of the liberal playbook, stating that you think we should "engage in dialogue" with the enemy rather than defeat them you will get a pass. or better yet simply state it's all George Bush's fault and you just might get a comfy job working in the French Embassy.... Most importantly he hasn't explained how he would maintain the Military’s high exacting standards. The results of an audit buy the GAO found that "at least half of today's youth between the ages of 16 and 21 are not qualified to serve in the military because they fail to meet the military's entry standards for education, aptitude, health, moral character or other requirements." (I think they mean Liberals). By opening the doors to anyone and everyone would certainly lower the standards exponentially. With even a modicum of research Charlie would have stumbled across Lyndon Johnson's "Project One Hundred Thousand". Take a high school drop out, replace his pot with a gun and send him off to war where he suddenly has to be Responsible, brave, and competent. In other words take the dregs of society and send them to Vietnam. Needless to say the program was a disaster. The only thing that stopped the "unqualified" individuals from losing the Vietnam war for us was that most of them headed for Canada. How they found Canada I have no idea. Apparently Charlie Rangel did not learn from History. Democrats usually don't. After all they continue to re elect John Kerry....... -Bert |