October Thread #2: Decision 2004

[ACArmstrong]

>>> the democrats are trying to get the draft reinacted and bush opposes it.<<<

Sorry, Janie - that's just plain wrong. Yes, two democrats have proposed absolutely absurd legislation that talks about the draft - one is Charles Rangel (sp?) - he's a black man who has seen first-hand how the Vietnam draft destroyed the lives of the poor and minorities. He has made it clear that his legislation was a way of creating public discussion about a possible draft and how the wealthy (Bush, Cheney, Delay) never pony up their young to fight the wars. Somehow, they always get out of it. Rangel's point was that if this war is worth fighting - it's worth sending Bush's twins, right? Wrong - it got the exact reaction Rangel wanted in Congress. It was defeated by the Republican majority handily.

That's another scare tactic. John Kerry and John Edwards adimantly OPPOSE a draft and have vowed NOT to institute one on their watch.

[Todd Patten]

Andy -- I'll give Janie this. Kerry did propose on his web site mandatory service for high school students in exchange for college tuition. Here's the archive link

This is not a draft. It's proposed as a service, whether it be community or armed. This proposal is very much like the current system in other democratic countries, such as Israel, where young men and women are simply obligated to contribute to their country in some way or shape. It's an interesting idea, but I definitely don't support it.

Janie -- get real about the draft however. The Democrats are the LAST party that would be supportive of a draft. I'm curious how much research you do with this stuff or if this is echoing the National Review and Rush's argument of the day. Personally, I love listening to Rush, Glen beck and others. I then spend time researching their accusations. Many are grossly inaccurate or slanted. However, it scares me that there is a HUGE percent of our population who do not bother to check the facts and take Rush as "truth".

Back to the facts. This matter does not scare me a bit. Let's face it, neither idea would pass in any form of legislation. Given that both are likely to be shot down by Democrats, and there is no way in hell the Republicans are going to support anything Kerry puts up there, it's a non-issue.

Lastly, how can those who support Bush accuse Kerry of wanting to abandon the efforts in Iraq and make our country a more dangerous place ( ) in one voice, then accuse Kerry of wanting to commit troops via the draft in the other? Which one is it? Bush supporters are throwing tons of illogical crap against the wall and checking to see what sticks.

mjm -- Anyone who understands the current voting system knows that while the electoral college system is flawed, it's more accurate than a straight popular vote. If we were to elect purely based on popular vote, candidates could concentrate purely on the east coast, california and major cities in between and win the election. Rural states would be left completely out of the loop. No one would ever bother to concern themselves with Montana, North Dakota and Vermont. Most importantly, people have to stop whining about Florida and move on.

You may not think your vote matters, but I completely disagree. If we learned anything from Florida -- no matter who you supported, it is that every vote counts.

Janie -- I want to get back to your comments for a second then I will end my diatribe. It scares the heck out of me that Bush may just be re-elected. If for only the Patriot Act. If Bush is re-elected, with a Republican dominated congress and no consequences for the next election, there's a good chance that this legislation will be renewed. Legislation that rapes the rights of people all across the country. Legislation that uses tactics exactly like those that the Soviet Union used. You know, we used to comment about people "just dissappearing" in the Soviet Union because they voiced dissent? The Patriot Act allows this to occur in our own country. This piece of legislation, with multiple parts that have already been shot down by various courts as being unconstitutional, has a good chance of being made permanent. Why? because the American public can be convinced that it makes them safer. But at what expense?

I don't agree with Kerry on a lot of accounts. But this election, for me, goes beyond my personal money matters (taxes). There are things that are far more important. Intangibles that will effect our country for centuries to come.