Politics: J'accuse!

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by bilmore
Point is, that's who the military gets in a draft, but not in the present volunteer situation.

Wouldn't necessarily be the case anymore. You no longer get a deferment while you are in college (deferral is only until the end of the semester, or end of the academic year if you are a senior).

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
As Josh Marshall points out, the CPA thoughtfully borrowed the code for its website from the Brookings Institution's website.

I think that's a standard MT template.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
Puhleeze. I rebelled at 15, so by 18 I had learned to just do what I was told.

And according to Maurice Clarett, 18-year-olds want to be in the draft.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Not Me

So, were you for this type of program when you were 18? I wasn't and I bet you weren't either.

You think I was kidding when I described my old job as a "cleaner"?

The drinking and all that was in high school for me. Drugs were literally just never an option for me, and I'd done my rebelling from 14-17 anyway. By 18, I decided that my parents were ok.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
Wouldn't necessarily be the case anymore. You no longer get a deferment while you are in college (deferral is only until the end of the semester, or end of the academic year if you are a senior).

I watched a military guy debate this draft/no draft issue a while ago. (Like, three, four months.) His main point was that the incoming ranks were generally much more intelligent, trained, educated, and amenable to supervision when there is no draft. His main characterization of a drafted army revolves around the "frag the officers" theme.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
his thinking on this came across as sincere and fair.

I am sure it is sincere, it is just not smart. As for fair, building a military shouldn't be about making up for unfairness in our society. It should be about building the best possible military that we can to protect American's interests. The military brass think an all volunteer military is a better military.

If our military starts to falter because it is over extended and they cannot recruit volunteers, they will no doubt change their minds on this. Only time will tell if this will occur.

The military is not a tool to be used to social engineer and make up for unfairness in our society. That is what the tax code is for.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Well, I'll sign up for your plan if you sign up for mine of a uniform head tax to replace the income tax.

That wouldn't be fair, would it? Us lawyer's have heads that are worth way more than the little guys.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
The drinking and all that was in high school for me. Drugs were literally just never an option for me, and I'd done my rebelling from 14-17 anyway. By 18, I decided that my parents were ok.

Rebelling in high school doesn't preclude one from gorging on sex and alcohol in college. You missed out on a good time. As for drugs, well, you missed out on a good time.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me


And I'm absolutely certain that a premise for Rangel back then (6 or 8 months ago?) was that there should not be exceptions for education or money or whatever else was used previously. I promise you, even if I had 500 other reasons to spit on the guy, his thinking on this came across as sincere and fair.

It's sincere, but not necessarily fair. It's no different than any of the other disadvantages of a lack of wealth. Should we refuse to authorize the payment of money to 3d world nations to receive our toxic waste? Should we prohibit anyone from living near certain potential sources of contamination? Should we not allow poor people to take shit jobs for shit wages?

It's a volunteer army. Question all you want whether someone without money or prospects can truly be said to be a volunteer, but that can be said about absolutely any job such a person might take that involves any risk or repugnant job requirement. The military has opened up, perhaps moreso than any private employer, opportunities for those that don't have many alternatives, providing training, a steady job, decent benefits, and the hope of either long-term employment or a good job experience that the private sector seeks out.

By requiring all people to engage in some sort of national military service simply displaces those opportunities for many people who truly need, and perhaps, even want those experiences in favor of supporting those who are forced to engage in that service.

What's more, Rangel's claim rings a little bit hollow when far from every person who enters the military is forced into actual combat. A friend's brother joined the navy. What was his job? Cooking on an aircraft carrier. I have no idea if the ship ever got near battle, but I'm quite sure that he was not exposed to hostile fire and was probably safer there than stirring the same glop back at his local mcdonalds. If you want to go into the military and avoid combat missions, you can, and still get some of the other benefits. Your choice.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Not Me
Not me.

Congratulations. You waited for that set up for a long time.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Not Me

The military is not a tool to be used to social engineer and make up for unfairness in our society. That is what the tax code is for.

I'm not sure you are adequately grasping the analogy of the tax code and volunteering etc.... Volunteering is having a choice and taking it. In my example, the military would be a choice. Perhaps one choice among many. So, in that sense, you'd presumably get the same set of kids as you do now who would "volunteer" for th military. Particularly if you continued to pay them the same benefits (and paid volunteers in other programs less).

Hello

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Not Me
The PC crowd, though, prevents us from talking about the religion being at the root cause of the problem and in so doing, they seal the fate of these women.

By all means, talk about it. If 2,500 ironic "Islam is a religion of peace" posts prevents even one Arab woman from being beaten, it will have been worth it.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Well, I'll sign up for your plan if you sign up for mine of a uniform head tax to replace the income tax.

You want to tax head?!?!?!

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
Wouldn't necessarily be the case anymore. You no longer get a deferment while you are in college (deferral is only until the end of the semester, or end of the academic year if you are a senior).

So I whiffed. I think I missed your point when I first replied. (But, maybe not - is this no-deferment rule a very new thing?)

[Berry Hunter]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Also, Marshall reveals that he is actually a Penske sock. Who isn't?

Finally, a reason to actually read Josh.

On the draft issue, reinstatement of a draft (with or without the national service alternative) will significantly impact the economy, and not just through a sizable rise in government spending. If McDonald's, Pizza Hut, KFC et al can't hire 18-19 year olds at dirt cheap wages, either (a) there should be a massive surge in illegal immigration, or (b) measurable wage inflation would result as service industries compete for a depleted pool of potential workers.

Fuck the draft, save the 99 cent double cheesburger!