November 19, 2006

GOOD POLICY, AWFUL POLITICS (via Bryan Francoeur)::

Top Democrat: Bring back the draft (AP, 11/19/06)

Americans would have to sign up for a new military draft after turning 18 if the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee has his way.
In keeping with the Democrats' apparent decision to make every one of the mistakes Republicans made in 1994, count this as Newt's call for more orphanages.

Posted by Orrin Judd at November 19, 2006 7:55 PM
Comments

Newt's proposal for orphanages to replace the largely profit driven foster care program was a good one. Of course, the media immediately went into its Dickensian mode of David Copperfield and poor houses.

It's amusing that liberals who want to centralize and control everything, nixed the idea of placing at-risk children in home-like situations with transparent professional care givers in charge and preferred to stay with a broken foster care system that, at least here in Florida, has put many of these kids at further risk.

When we lived in Vermont, I sat on various boards and was stunned at the cavalier and callous attitude towards the "clients" by those in the social services system. As can be imaged, when I demurred, I was treated to the compassion the left reserves for those who oppose their Newspeak. Shouting and curses ensued and name calling. One of their favorites was Nazi. Funny even back then it was a moonbat favorite although I'd bet that not one person around the table knew what it meant.

Rangel invoking the specter of the draft is a disgraceful gambit to revisit the left's golden years of anarchy. A by-product of the dumbing down of our public school curriculum is that today's teenagers have no knowledge of the issues that transfixed anti-war movement of our late and unlamented cultural revolution 40 years ago.

Posted by: erp at November 20, 2006 9:26 AM

Yes, the draft is likewise good policy but terrible politics.

Posted by: oj at November 20, 2006 9:40 AM

I admire Rangel for sticking with his proposal now that he's in a position to do something about it...and thank him for his small part in making the Dem. circus bigger and better than even I anticipated. All of these urban Dems. with seats-for-life (Rangel, Pelosi, Waxman, Conyers, Dingell etc etc) are going to ensure that the next Dem. majority occurs long after my death.

Posted by: curt at November 20, 2006 9:45 AM

Just wondering - if Pelosi allows this to come to the floor, will Rangel vote against it (like he did last spring)?

Posted by: jim hamlen at November 20, 2006 9:59 AM

Well, a draft is not a bad thing from the point of view of universal military education. What is most important is that a draft not become is what Rangel hopes for, a marshalling of cowardice as the servant of treason.

We could take the good without the bad by recalling the RA/US distinction: Regular Army--volunteers/Army of the United States--draftees. The "US" folks would not be employed in combat zones, but they could free a man to fight.

Posted by: Lou Gots at November 20, 2006 10:47 AM

I admire Rangel for sticking with his proposal now that he's in a position to do something about it...and thank him for his small part in making the Dem. circus bigger and better than even I anticipated. All of these urban Dems. with seats-for-life (Rangel, Pelosi, Waxman, Conyers, Dingell etc etc) are going to ensure that the next Dem. majority occurs long after my death.

Posted by: curt at November 20, 2006 11:52 AM

I doubt anybody is less interested in a draft than the military itself.

Posted by: Twn at November 20, 2006 11:54 AM

Interesting bug there OB. I posted just once.

Posted by: curt at November 20, 2006 1:41 PM
« SHOULD HAVE STUCK WITH THE GOP--THE PEACE PARTY...: | Main | THE HIGH PRICE OF HARRIET: »