Kerry concedes, Bush still President.

[tylor2000]

Try Genesis chapter 22.  No one actaully dies, but God tells Abraham to offer his son Issac as a burnt offering.  Just before he does, God stops him.

tylor

[Xenophanes]

THERE WILL BE NO DRAFT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111111111one!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Damn straight! :razz:

I look forward to 2008, so that it can be clearly demonstrated that the country, indeed, has not gone to hell after eight years of W.

[tricia]

I love though how no one who was talking about the draft even addressed that point.

[PIBby]

Four more years.

[jjthefourth]

I love though how no one who was talking about the draft even addressed that point.

Bush has lied ten million times before, so why should I believe him about the draft?  I don't TRUST the man.  If after 4 years it turns out he actually told the truth for once, I will humbly admit that I was wrong on this matter.

[tricia]

I love though how no one who was talking about the draft even addressed that point.

Bush has lied ten million times before, so why should I believe him about the draft?  I don't TRUST the man.  If after 4 years it turns out he actually told the truth for once, I will humbly admit that I was wrong on this matter.

uhh...


Posted October 6, 2004 – House Republicans Tuesday shot down a bill introduced by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) that could have restored the military draft.

It required 18- to 26-year-olds to sign up for two years of military service. But Democrats accused the Republican-controlled House of scheduling the vote at a time it would face certain defeat, during a close presidential race rife with rumors that a draft was eminent if President Bush were to be reelected.  The vote tally was an overwhelming 402-2.

“To bring up this bill on the eve of an election is hypocritical and insulting both to the House of Representatives and the men and women in the military,” said Rangel, a Korean War veteran.


“Bringing up this bill today, without hearings, without any formal discussion, is a political maneuver meant to avoid a substantial discussion of the dire needs of our military.”

Rangel had introduced the bill after criticizing the all-volunteer military for putting an unfair burden on lower-income groups, who he said are more likely to join for job training or money to pay for college.

In a lively debate on the House floor, Republicans accused Democrats of deliberately fueling speculation that the White House would reinstitute the draft. Democrats shot back that the Bush administration's conduct of the war has led many Americans to fear that a draft might be necessary to support an overextended military.

Members of Congress had received a flurry of letters and phone calls from their constituents regarding the likelihood of a draft. Their fears were fed by chatter on the Internet that has escalated as fighting intensifies in Iraq and Afghanistan, and as the Pentagon struggles to keep troop deployment at current strengths by extending tours in combat zones and recalling retired soldiers to active duty.

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry said Sunday he had no plans to revive the military draft if he were elected. A CBS/MTV poll of 18- to 29-year-olds by found last month that 78 percent of respondents opposed reinstating the draft to provide soldiers for Iraq, while just 18 percent favored it.

So...the bill was introduced by a Democrat...supported by a Democrat...voted on by 2 Democrats, and you all still think Bush is going to reinstate the draft? o_O

[tricia]

Just a little more info on the "draft bill".  The guy who presented it to the House didn't even vote for it!  The only 2 representatives who did were Democrats.

One lawmaker spoke in favor of the bill, saying it was time Congress gave some thought to future military manpower needs.

"I believe we have to start looking at this right now," said Representative John Murtha of Pennsylvania, a leading Democrat on military issues. He was joined in backing the bill by Representative Fortney Stark, Democrat of California.

You can find a plethora of information on this by googling "draft bill in house" or something to that effect and it all says the same thing:  the bill was put forth as a protest to the war by Democrats because they wanted people to be afraid of a draft.  Most Democrats don't want a draft.  No Republicans have supported a draft, and all those who have come out against it, including the President and Donald Rumsfeld, have come out STRONGLY against it.

Now one criticism I've read over and over is that people voted for Bush only out of fear, but if the draft was one of your big issue, that's also fear, right?  Fear of the draft...which is a non-issue because it's not going to happen.

[jjthefourth]

:roll: Ugh, even with no draft I don't trust him.  So it's a non-issue.  Let it go.  Let it go.

[tylor2000]

I agree with jjthefourth.

I also agree with:

One lawmaker spoke in favor of the bill, saying it was time Congress gave some thought to future military manpower needs.

Not that I favor a draft.  But have you ever thought of how, if, we want to continue the way we are, with our current, and most likely Bushes future, plans we might be forced to install a draft?  That is one reason I voted for Kerry.  I WANT him to be a good ole politician and seek as many political alternatives as possible.  Not just run off to war and acted as stupid as he can militarly and politically.  I want him to change positions and be just as his job title implies, a politician.

That is why Bush can promise no draft; he doesn't think. I HATE BS.  But a politician full of crap is better than a STUPID politician. Hence, the best of two evils.

tylor

[Scotty]

I'm sad Cobb didnt win :cry:

[jlmusicchick]

I agree with jjthefourth.

I also agree with:

One lawmaker spoke in favor of the bill, saying it was time Congress gave some thought to future military manpower needs.

Not that I favor a draft.  But have you ever thought of how, if, we want to continue the way we are, with our current, and most likely Bushes future, plans we might be forced to install a draft?  That is one reason I voted for Kerry.  I WANT him to be a good ole politician and seek as many political alternatives as possible.  Not just run off to war and acted as stupid as he can militarly and politically.  I want him to change positions and be just as his job title implies, a politician.

That is why Bush can promise no draft; he doesn't think. I HATE BS.  But a politician full of crap is better than a STUPID politician. Hence, the best of two evils.

tylor

exactly! in my opinion a draft is inevitable. but, that's just my opinion. i could be wrong, in which case i will admit to being so. but until the end of the next four years i'm set in saying the chances of there being a draft, or something of that sort, is very very likely.

[Grakthis]

I agree with jjthefourth.

I also agree with:

One lawmaker spoke in favor of the bill, saying it was time Congress gave some thought to future military manpower needs.

Not that I favor a draft.  But have you ever thought of how, if, we want to continue the way we are, with our current, and most likely Bushes future, plans we might be forced to install a draft?  That is one reason I voted for Kerry.  I WANT him to be a good ole politician and seek as many political alternatives as possible.  Not just run off to war and acted as stupid as he can militarly and politically.  I want him to change positions and be just as his job title implies, a politician.

That is why Bush can promise no draft; he doesn't think. I HATE BS.  But a politician full of crap is better than a STUPID politician. Hence, the best of two evils.

tylor

exactly! in my opinion a draft is inevitable. but, that's just my opinion. i could be wrong, in which case i will admit to being so. but until the end of the next four years i'm set in saying the chances of there being a draft, or something of that sort, is very very likely.

I don't think you people get it.

A draft CANNOT happen in modern times barring a MAJOR war.  There is no possible way congress would approve a draft.  NONE.  ZERO.

Barring something like England getting invaded, the US will just scale back our overseas activities to accomdate the # of troops we have.

In other words, BUsh won't send anyone into NKorea until we are done with Iraq and can spare the troops.

So get this whole draft notion out of your head.  It is a non-issue.

[Grakthis]

Someone tell me where the Bible says it's okay to murder people.

Actaully there are places in the old testement where people are killed in God's name.  Even genocide.

tylor

Hmmmm... I don't remember genocide?  I remember there being a few wars that God played a part in.  But I sure don't remember genocide.  Refresh my memory?

Also, note that Limey said "Murder" not "kill"

God takes lives all the time in the Bible.  Neither God nor God's people commit murder.  Murder is a sin.  Taking lives in rightousness would not be BECAUSE it is done by God (or in God's true name) and God is incapable of sin.

[zurielshimon]

...all the people that voted to keep bush in will understand when the economy continues to fail...

I really wish people would stop blaming the President for the state of the economy.  The economy is no more than a collective state of mind.  The reason it "fails" is because a great number of people in the nation get spooked by something they think they heard someone in Washington say and start getting cautious with their money.  Then when people don't spend, business don't profit; and when businesses don't profit, they cut back; and when they cut back, people lose jobs; and when people lose jobs, they can't spend; and the whole bleeding thing goes back around.  Lighten the фук up!

[Grakthis]

...all the people that voted to keep bush in will understand when the economy continues to fail...

I really wish people would stop blaming the President for the state of the economy.  The economy is no more than a collective state of mind.  The reason it "fails" is because a great number of people in the nation get spooked by something they think they heard someone in Washington say and start getting cautious with their money.  Then when people don't spend, business don't profit; and when businesses don't profit, they cut back; and when they cut back, people lose jobs; and when people lose jobs, they can't spend; and the whole bleeding thing goes back around.  Lighten the фук up!

...

No.  Sorry.  But you're just flat out wrong.  Economics is infinitly more than simple sociology.  It's the distribution of limited resources amongst unlimited wants.  It involves sociology, but you're description is like saying that statistics is just the probability of a coin comming up heads.

I'm not going to give you the 3 page dissertation on why you are wrong, because you have oversimplified a topic I've spent 6 years studying to the point where I'd have to spend 2 hours getting you up to speed.

But suffice it to say, a president CAN and DOES influence the economy.  He influences it with his words.  He influences it with the intiatives he supports in congress.  He influences it with his appointed officials.  He influences it with his policies on things like welfare, social security and school vouchers.

Now, I don't blame our last economy dipp on Bush.  I blame it on the previous administration.  But don't think for a SECOND Bush couldn't crash our economy in a hurry if he wanted to.