Corrupt Congressman Rangel wants to re-instate the draft - again

And he does not want to take any responsibility for results. He wants to recreate the '60s all over again. Here is his website.

WASHINGTON - Congressman Charles Rangel on Thursday introduced H.R. 5741, a bill that would reinstate a compulsory military draft, or alternative national service, during times of war, for men and women, aged 18 to 42, who are citizens or permanent residents of the United States.

"What troubles me most about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is the total indifference (LIE) to the suffering and loss of life among our brave young soldiers on the battlefield," Congressman Rangel said. "The reason is that so few families have a stake in the war which is being fought by other people's children. (Rangel is lying. Total Indifference? This man is delusional and is using this perception as a way to justify his moral cowardice. He doesn't want to be seen de-funding the war, so he uses this premise.)

"The test for Congress, particularly for those members who support the war, is to require all who enjoy the benefits of our democracy to contribute to the defense of the country. All of America's children should share the risk of being placed in harm's way. (No child shares the risk. If fact, there is NO risk of being placed in harm's way. Every ADULT CHOSE to enter the military. If no one chooses, then no one is at risk.)

"In other words, if you support the war, you should support a compulsory military draft," Congressman Rangel said. (So, he supports the war? But wants to end the war? By having a draft?)

The bill, which the Congressman first introduced in 2003 as the nation prepared for the invasion of Iraq, and offered again in 2004, 2006, and 2007, provides for:

• A national service obligation--either military or civilian--for every citizen and permanent resident, male and female, of the U.S., aged 18 to 42.

• Persons may inducted to perform military service only if a declaration of war is in effect, or if the President declares a national emergency necessitating the induction of persons to perform military service and immediately informs Congress of the reasons for the declaration. (Does Congress have to APPROVE or just be notified? No responsibility here...)

• Defines "national service" as either military or civilian service as defined by the President that promotes national or homeland security. (Defined by whom? Not a written criteria? The President gets to decide?)

• Give the President the authority to establish the numbers of persons to be selected for military service and the means of selection. (Currently, the quotas for enlistment are approved by Congress. I mean, they pay for it. If this went through, this would remove responsibility from Congress on how much they want to pay.)

• Requires those not selected for military service to perform their national service obligation in a civilian capacity for a period of two years. (Since it may take two years just to train a military member, this seems a little low.)

• Directs the President to prescribe the regulations necessary to carry out the act. (Congress abrogating responsibility again)

• Deferments for education are only permitted through completion of high school, to a maximum age of 20.

• Deferments may be made for physical or mental disability, or under claims of conscientious objector. (Or, now, they can just NOT ENLIST. No need to be an objector.)

BRINGING THE TROOPS HOME

Rangel said that he was not challenging President Obama's handling of the war in Iraq or Afghanistan, conflicts with few options that the President had inherited from the previous Administration. (Unlike what he did to Bush under the SAME conflict.)

"I support the President's intentions to withdraw our troops, but I'd like to see it happen sooner. In my view, no additional tax dollars should be appropriated for any reason except to bring home our brave and exhausted young men and women. The loss of 5,500 lives and 38,000 wounded is enough." (Hey Rangel. That's YOUR job. DO IT! IF YOU OBJECT, PUT YOUR DEFUNDING WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS.)

A combined total of 160,000 Americans are currently deployed. More than 2 million men and women have served in the two conflicts, nearly half of them for more than one tour of duty. And because of a shortage of manpower, some of them have been deployed as many as six times.

"The 3.3 million military households, representing only one percent of American families, have become a virtual military class who are unfairly carrying the burden of war," Congressman Rangel said. "If there were a draft, there would be no shortage of troops to fill the ranks without repeatedly deploying the same exhausted troops over and over." (Of course there would be shortages. Does he think that this would magically create millions of soldiers overnight?)

So far, the numbers of casualties may not be as high, or as shocking, as those suffered in previous wars. But the physical and mental damage to individual soldiers is not only heartbreaking but is taking place at rates never before seen in modern warfare. (BS. We just weren't able to diagnose it in WWII.)

The reason is that advances in medical technology have allowed more wounded soldiers to survive the loss of limbs, and serious head and brain injuries. "The result is a practical epidemic of cases of post traumatic stress disorder, suicides, and family disruptions," Congressman Rangel said. (So what are you saying? Better to be dead on the battlefield?)

Again in this war, troops recruited from large urban centers with high unemployment(HIS CODE WORD FOR BLACKS) and from economically depressed small towns, are carrying the heaviest burden of service. Enlistment bonuses are as high as $40,000. Incentives for reenlistment range from $1,000 for the lowest-skilled privates to $27,000 for staff sergeants with special skills. (100K for special forces. 80k for Navy nukes.) Combined with the economic recession these incentives have produced record-breaking recruiting results this year. (Record breaking? With a war on? Amazing what happens when the press stop badmouthing the war every day. Statistics show that small town whites are the, by ratio, the most likely to enlist. Urban blacks enlist in about, or a little greater, ratio as they are a minority. They do not tend towards combat positions. They tend towards miiltary jobs that have job skills for a later civilian life. The combat arms are mostly white, with minorities in a smaller ratio than they are in the population.)

"The question of whether we need a universal compulsory military draft will be important as long as this country is placing thousands of its young men and women in harm's way," Congressman Rangel said. (There's no question. The military has stated repeatedly and loudly that a draft would HARM military readiness.)

"We make decisions about war without worry over who fights them. Those who do the fighting have no choice; when the flag goes up, they salute and follow orders," Congressman Rangel said. (Of course they have a choice. EVERY SINGLE MILITARY MEMBER SERVING TODAY CHOSE TO BE THERE DURING A COMBAT TOUR. EVERY SINGLE ENLISTEE JOINED DURING WARTIME.)

Rangel does this only to make a political point. The last time it came up for an actual vote, he voted NO.

Hypocritical Oath

Paul Ryan on Medicare and the GOP: No Hypocrisy Here
There are big differences between Ryan's free market plan and Obamacare's command and control rationing system.

Liberal New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote on Friday that Republicans are a bunch of hypocrites because they criticized the $500 billion in Medicare cuts (it's actually $800 billion over 10 years) in the Democrats' health care legislation, but Republican Paul Ryan of Wisconsin has proposed a long-term budget "Roadmap" that would, as Krugman contends, "dismantle the whole [Medicare] program."

(Apparently Krugman didn't have enough room in his column to point out that Democrats might be hypocrites for denouncing Medicare cuts under Clinton, then proposing Medicare cuts in Obamacare, then denouncing Paul Ryan's reform as "abolishing" Medicare--while simultaneously pushing to pass Obamacare's Medicare cuts through reconciliation. But I digress.)

More after the jump.

Town Hall Protests finally become violent. Guess who is to blame.

Congress was ordered to pass the ObamaCare bill before they went home. Obama did not want the representatives to hear what their constituents had to say. They knew that most Americans don't want the government to control their health care. Medicare/Medicaid are accepted as necessary evils, but, no one wants to rely on them. And nobody likes HMOs, another government scheme, invented by Senator Kennedy. Remember, HMOs were the first attempt to "control health care costs." And how do they do it? Restrictions and rationing. But, at least they aren't the government.

And how did our esteemed Congressmen and Senators react? By locking out constituents from the meetings. By calling voters Nazis and mobs. By provoking fights with their constituents as a Carnahan staffer did. By packing the meetings with SEIU union supporters that are exempt by law, from the details in HR3200. They have hypocritically called protesters paid servants for special interests and astroturf. Hmmm, that sounds like the SEIU, the GOVERNMENT WORKER'S union. Who is paying them to show up? Our tax money?

Btw, the SEIU are supporters of HCAN, the lobbying group for Obama care. Here is the steering committee. I don't see too many medical groups or non-partisan groups. It looks like pay back for campaign workers:

Our Steering Committee includes: ACORN, AFL-CIO, AFSCME, AFT, Americans United for Change, Campaign for America’s Future, Center for American Progress Action Fund, Campaign for Community Change, Children’s Defense Fund Action Council, Communications Workers of America, International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW), MoveOn.org, NAACP, National Council of La Raza, National Education Association, National Women’s Law Center, SEIU, UFCW, USAction, Women's Voices, Women's Vote and Working America.

The media is rife with stories about "scary mobs" and "violent citizens egged on by talk radio" and "intimidation." The same representatives that lock out voters and import union thugs lies the next day about just wanting a dialogue with voters. Google Carnahan, union thugs, townhall.

Well, the violence has started. The anger and hatred were finally released. A mob attacked an innocent man.

August 7, 2009

Dear Mr. Hennessy:

I am Kenneth Gladney’s attorney. Kenneth was attacked on the evening of August 6, 2009 at Rep. Russ Carnahan’s town hall meeting in South St. Louis County. I was at the town hall meeting as well and witnessed the events leading up to the attack of Kenneth. Kenneth was approached by an SEIU representative as Kenneth was handing out “Don’t Tread on Me” flags to other conservatives. The SEIU representative demanded to know why a black man was handing out these flags. The SEIU member used a racial slur against Kenneth, then punched him in the face. Kenneth fell to the ground. Another SEIU member yelled racial epithets at Kenneth as he kicked him in the head and back. Kenneth was also brutally attacked by one other male SEIU member and an unidentified woman. The three men were clearly SEIU members, as they were wearing T-shirts with the SEIU logo.

Kenneth was beaten badly. One assailant fled on foot; three others were arrested. Kenneth was admitted to St. John’s Mercy Medical Center emergency room, where he was treated for his numerous injuries. Kenneth was merely expressing his freedom of speech by handing out the flags. In fact, he merely asked people as they exited the town hall meeting whether they would like a flag. He in no way provoked any argument or altercation, as evidenced by the fact that three assailants were arrested.

The rest is at St. Louis Tea Party. com.