So blatant it'll probably work

[chucK]

"White House budget director Joshua Bolten said the administration will not make a request for a wartime supplemental for Iraq and Afghanistan until after the November elections."

(Emphasis added).

 

Since they're letting us guess about how much more we'll get socked for our overseas adventures, I'll just make a guess that perhaps one reason that budget item is not going to be specified until after the elections is because it will include costs for reinstating the draft.

[catbirdseat]

Cut tax and spend. Why don't we all just quit our jobs and then max out our credit cards?

[HRoark]

Chuck;

 

To me this seems like a realistic prioritization. When was the last time any of those fuckers in Congress voted for more spending right before an election? Probably never. Even if they tried to vote on it before the election, some political fuckwad (like Joe Lieberman) would stall it until afterwards.

 

For my own edification, can someone point me towards the source of all this "reinstate the draft" talk? Am I incorrect in thinking that 18 year old boys are still registering? When did this stop? THanks.

 

Roark

Edited February 2, 2004 by HRoark

[willstrickland]

For my own edification, can someone point me towards the source of all this "reinstate the draft" talk?

Roark

 

http://www.thememoryhole.org/mil/draft-boards.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-11-10-selective-service_x.htm

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/david_sarasohn/index.ssf?/base/editorial/1068210325284090.xml

http://www.thememoryhole.org/mil/defendamerica-draftboards.htm

http://www.kstatecollegian.com/issues/v103/sp/n138/news/citygov.ryun.furnas.html

[HRoark]

For my own edification, can someone point me towards the source of all this "reinstate the draft" talk?

Roark

 

http://www.thememoryhole.org/mil/draft-boards.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-11-10-selective-service_x.htm

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/david_sarasohn/index.ssf?/base/editorial/1068210325284090.xml

http://www.thememoryhole.org/mil/defendamerica-draftboards.htm

http://www.kstatecollegian.com/issues/v103/sp/n138/news/citygov.ryun.furnas.html

 

Sounds like a bunch of Chicken Little handwringing, just as I thought.

[chucK]

And to add to Will's excellent links here's this from cc.com ! It was a past discussion on this issue, with a link to the DoD website. Try clicking Iain's link to the DoD site. It's now gone .

 

Also here is a link to "Stars and Stripes" talking about the "stop-loss" order that disallows people leaving the military until a 90 day "cooling off period"

 

And I'll also throw in just one article about the current Army retention crisis.

 

You probably already know about the ham-handed use of the reservists, and how they are being stretched thin.

[chucK]

Chuck;

 

To me this seems like a realistic prioritization. When was the last time any of those fuckers in Congress voted for more spending right before an election? Probably never. Even if they tried to vote on it before the election, some political fuckwad (like Joe Lieberman) would stall it until afterwards.

 

Bush is obviously asking the Congress to vote on a whole shitload of spending RIGHT NOW (link to headline in any paper, "2.4 trillion budget blah blah). But one glaring thing he's not asking them to even discuss is more money to fight his war in Iraq.

 

You are right. It probably is more expedient to save it until afterward if he wants to get that money without throwing it in the public's face at how much he's spending on his war. This way too, he won't have to give a real figure, like he did with the Medicare bill.

[HRoark]

This way too, he won't have to give a real figure, like he did with the Medicare bill.

 

Notice I included ALL politicians, chuck. Bush isn't the only one who pulls this shit. You fucktard liberals are all a fucking joke thinking that Bush invented all this underhanded politician bullshit. For fuck's sake, the Kennedy family alone has been lying to the American people for better than 4 decades.

[chucK]

I find it interesting that the Bush apologists now seem to be down to one final argument, "other politicians are bad too".

[HRoark]

I find it interesting that you can't address me directly, Chuck, and that you would call me a "Bush apologist" when I've criticized what he is doing. It shows you don't care about the discourse, you just want to spew your shit. Sounds like you need another Caveman attitude adjustment. Bwahahahaha

[chucK]

It sure would be cool if you would can the "you're an idiot" thing and instead address ideas presented in the posts.

 

The usual the next step after "everybody else is doing it too", is the namecalling. You're falling right into the predictable course of those who have nothing of substance to say, but are unable to shut up.

[HRoark]

I don't think I called you an idiot. Did I? I'm not using the "everyone else is doing it" defense; I'm just pointing out that this is what all these fucktard politicians do - I am in no way defending GWB.

[chucK]

At least twice on this board you have deflected criticisms directed solely at the Bush administration by making statements about other politicians. If this is not defending Bush, then I must assume it is acquiescing that Bush is a slimy politician. Fine. You argree with me, a lot of "liberal fucktards" and all those Bush apologists.

Edited February 2, 2004 by chucK

[lummox]

Cut tax and spend. Why don't we all just quit our jobs and then max out our credit cards?

been there done that. they wont let you have anymore credit cards afterwards though.