usanow said this in post #7 : This was a bill introduced by Democrat Charlie Rangel. The only two people who voted for it are Democrats. Even Rangel did not vote for it.
So Malcom, if you're really worried about the draft returning, be sure to vote Republican!
" We will NOT have an all volunteer army"
Rangel introduced his bill only to bring attention to the inequtiable burden that the lower class bears in the fighting and to get politcians children to participate. decisions would be different if their children were involved.
If their is no draft then:
Why is the Selective Service System restaffing draft boards now?
How can the pentagon maintain the level of troops required in IRAQ ?
Don't keep your head in the sand and listen only to what you want to hear and ask yourself the hard questions.
Yeah, this is old news, but it was introduced by Charlie Rangel so there would not be a rush to war, one of the few reasons a draft is instituted. If people know they're kids might be going, they may not be so quick to jump on the bandwagon and send the "all volunteer" army, who really didn't volunteer to fight bandwagon wars.
I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.
- Bill Cosby
The guy who takes a chance, who walks the line between the known and unknown, who is unafraid of failure, will succeed.
- Gordon Parks
Inner City Blue said this in post #10 : Yeah, this is old news, but it was introduced by Charlie Rangel so there would not be a rush to war, one of the few reasons a draft is instituted. If people know they're kids might be going, they may not be so quick to jump on the bandwagon and send the "all volunteer" army, who really didn't volunteer to fight bandwagon wars.
Nothing is written in stone with this party. With control over the government and the supreme court conservatives can ratify any law or policy in this country no matter how sacred.
this may be slightly off topic, but it addresses issues touched on in this thread.
republicans seem to frequently have a hard time understanding how d.c. politics work, and jump to false conclusions about voting records.
why do i say that? because they've shown a proclivity to do just that, time and again in this campaign, witness the ridiculous 'flip flop' mantras.
it's not only not uncommon, but actually IS common, to vote against something to make a point. doesn't it strike you as strange that someone who introduces a bill later turns around and votes against it? it is often done just to demonstrate to the public how various congressmen stand on a particular issue.
congressmen often vote against a bill which they are essentially in favor of but does not do enough, trusting that new, more favorable legislation will be introduced.
and yes, congressmen also vote against a bill when they previously voted in favor of a similar bill, because of changing facts and circumstances, or because a segment of the otherwise favored bill is objectionable and cannot be eliminated from the entire bill.
and, by the way, changing one's mind or demonstrating that one has had a change of heart is far more admirable than refusing to admit an obvious mistake. doing the right thing in the end is what is paramount, not stubborning refusing to admit a screw-up till the end of time.
No doubt that when Charlie Rangle (D) introduced the bill he was trying to make a point. But to then come out and say that Bush was in favor of a draft when no republican or Bush had anything to do with it?
Let me ask this, if the bill would have passed, who's fault would it have been?
Democrats because they introduced the bill?
or
Bush because the Republicans are in the majority?
It just shows how Democrats are twisting the issue to try and pin it on Bush.
Now let me ask another question, How does Kerry plan to increase our military by 2 divisions (40,000 troops)? Not to mention the equipment they would need? And how would he pay for it? With the Taxes from those making over $200,000? They might as well just give the Kerry Governement all their money because that is what it would take.