Rangel to introduce bill to reinstate the draft tomorrow........

[INdemo]

this guy doesn't give up does he..Just how far will this be allowed to go to prove a point? If this bill makes it out of committee then I become a little worried that this could become a reality..

[EstimatedProphet]

1. Good for him!

This is about making a point.

[Hieronymus]

6. Yes, an important point too.

[Beelzebud]

If he wanted to make a real point he'd introduce a bill to cut funding to the war.

[EstimatedProphet]

19. And hopefully that will be coming too

The population is coming out of a state of deep hypnosis, and it will take a lot of things to wake people up.

[originalpckelly]

26. Just like Bush, he's playing politics with American lives.

Where is this man in introducing a resolution to cut the funding?

[Mike Daniels]

86. If he wanted to make a point he'd vote for his own bill

but he won't just like he didn't the last time he proposed it.

[Deja Q]

2. Only if he enlists to prove his point in a way no rechickenpub ever could.

There is a certain logic to the draft - but not doubt the rich will find away to dance around it.

[tabasco]

4. Rangel is a Korean war veteran.

He was a Sergeant in the Army.

[rebel with a cause]

23. How old is that dude?

I was five years old then, and I consider myself old. Maybe people are right, sixties are the new middle age. :hippie:

[mmonk]

3. Heh heh

Go Charlie go.

[David Dunham]

5. Bad move. Many Dem voters strongly OPPOSE a draft.

[Jim Warren]

7. Yeah I don't get it.

I know many here feel it's a bluff to flush out the chickenhawks but I've got an 18yo son.

[EstimatedProphet]

13. It will never make it out of committee

It is intended to start discussion about what is wrong, that's all.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

17. Here we go again -- you are exactly correct E P

This is to show what Bush has done to this country. It is a statement on the failed policy of this administration.

[originalpckelly]

30. No, a statement on the failed policy for this administration...

would be a resolution to end the war in Iraq. Where is that?

[HCE SuiGeneris]

33. it is coming. n/t

[originalpckelly]

36. No, why he is not introducing that, and instead introducing a cop-out resolution...

which would place even more Americans in danger in a pointless war?

[HCE SuiGeneris]

41. It is to build heightened

awareness and fear with the more conservative base. It is not intended to be passed -- and will not be. This is a prelude to the resolution to end this war and an impeachment.

[originalpckelly]

46. No, I see it as a pointless cop out which has been introduced before...

and which only makes Democrats look bad.

None of these people have the balls to stand up and say NO to Bush. He could still veto an amendment to the IWR, but I'd be understanding if the Congress at least did as much as it could. They could also attach a rider to the emergency spending bill and say that the funding could only be used to remove the troops. They could even refuse to pass such an emergency appropriation.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

55. I am not here to defend this as a brilliant

strategic move. I was -- and still am -- making the observation that this is a tactic to stir the conservative side to withdraw support for *'s agenda and reveal the hypocrisy of the Surge. No real effect will be had in Iraq with a small surge. And a draft will never occur. Ergo -- a change in policy... withdrawal is needed.

[originalpckelly]

29. Where is he and the rest of Congress in ending the war the real way?

Why not pass an amendment to the Iraq War Resolution, ending the war?

They don't have enough balls to do something which would actually end the war now.

[Zhade]

61. Man, I sure hope your wild not-based-on-evidence guess is right.

I'd sure hate for it to get anywhere, to make a point to a public that already opposes the war 2-1.

[Megahurtz]

8. What a Fucking Idiot!

So what if the NeoCons bite the bait?

Rangel is making all Democrats look like Idiots.:grr:

NO TO THE DRAFT!!!

[mmonk]

15. If the neocons bite, they are done. Charlie knows that.

[Megahurtz]

24. It doesn't seem like a good idea

to bluff like this. There's really no predicting what could happen in the outcome.
Plus there are people who would take him seriously.

[originalpckelly]

32. They have a simple way to end the war, or at least do as much as they can...

they can pass an amendment to the IWR saying it's grant of authority has ended. They won't do that, they have no place doing this.

[originalpckelly]

31. Where is Charlie in introducing an actual resolution to end the war?

Where? I don't see anything else but another politician playing politics with American lives.

[Megahurtz]

71. That's really the way that I see it.

It's not good.

[TahitiNut]

93. "Rangel is making all Democrats look like Idiots"??

Seems to me, as an independent liberal, that many/most need no help from Rangel to do that. :evilgrin:

[Maru Kitteh]

9. I wish he would wait until after the 100 hours to do this

I LOVE Charlie to pieces and I even support him in this action, I just wish it were saved for say, the 101st hour.

[EstimatedProphet]

16. Not in the face of a 20,000 troop increase

What Rangel is saying is this: if Bush keeps insisting on escalating Iraq because because it's so important, then why isn't he acting like it and really committing?

[originalpckelly]

34. No, if Rangel really opposes the war, he should be introducing legislation to actually end it...

not some pathetic and dangerous attempt to increase troops and call Bush's bluff.

[Beelzebud]

37. Exactly. Want to make a bold statement? Introduce a bill to cut the funds for this madness.

[ellisonz]

10. Untimely and too open to spin.

Individual slip ups will screw us all over.

:evilfrown:

[liberalnurse]

11. It will take the draft to

stop this corporate driven false/fake pretense called a war. I support this action.

[TahitiNut]

43. Ditto

[originalpckelly]

48. No, what would stop this war is a resolution to amend the IWR...

to specifically state Bush must exit Iraq. Bush could veto it, but it would be what the Congress could do without being accused of putting the troops in harms way.

They could definitely end it by cutting funding. That's how this war will stop, not by any of this bullshit, which will if passed, only give this madness more victims.

[WI_DEM]

12. It won't pass, but he is making a point.

[MistressOverdone]

14. Hopefully his point will be made and

it will die.

[tnlefty]

59. Welcome to DU, MistressOverdone!

:hi:

[MistressOverdone]

63. Thank you so much for the kind welcome.

I am looking forward to taking part in some good discussions.

[tnlefty]

72. You're quite welcome. I hope that you enjoy the discussions here.

Sometimes things get a bit rowdy, and tonight may be one of those nights...so fasten your seatbelt and enjoy.

I'm thinking the first few words from the mouth of Dimson** will start things off rather nicely.

edited a transposition :blush:

[MistressOverdone]

87. I hear you

And I'm writing this after the fact, but I think this just might just be one area we all agree upon! I watched two minutes and felt my stomach churn and had to turn it off. My husband, who is rather neutral, said it was a condescending performance and the worst he has seen from Mr. Bush. I'm glad I went to bed.

[SammyWinstonJack]

18. Rangel can go Cheney himself! The rich will always find a way to keep their spoiled brats out of

the military. Meanwhile, a draft will only devastate the middle and lower class. He can shove his draft proposal where the sun don't shine! How about this, NO MORE WARS!!!!!!!!!!

[EstimatedProphet]

20. This is to wake up his freeper base, not the rich

And it'll do it in spades!

[SammyWinstonJack]

25. I doubt that. Besides which, shouldn't his freeper base who apparently support his war

be willing to volunteer to serve him? Why would they need to be drafted? The military is slowly evolving into indentured servitude as it is. A draft will only compound that and it won't be the rich that serve. History proves that. And give bush the power of the draft, his base won't have a choice. bush has repeatedly shown that he doesn't give a rat's ass what we the people care about. So like I said, Rangel can go Cheney himself!............

[EstimatedProphet]

39. Shouldn't they be? Well, yeah...

How many do you see volunteering? I don't see a whole lot.

The freepers are going to have to pony up if this goes through, rather than put a magnet on their car. They won't like it one bit. They want to support the war so long as it's convenient for them, and they don't have to risk anything. It won't take 5 minutes of a draft threat before Bubba and Goober start griping about how unfair it is that they have to go serve, and every time they try to push it off on Rangel the point will be made that Bush was the one that made it necessary. So there goes Bush's idjit base. Also, Bush will never let a draft go through because of what will happen to his support for the war.

Understand, I do not want a draft. I just believe this is a political intrigue, and a good one at that.

[SammyWinstonJack]

56. Right, his real base and not the haves and have more, will be subjected to a draft

right along with the rest of the middle and lower class. I don't care what rangel is proposing, "no distinction" the rich will always find a way out of serving. That is my point! Rangel is delusional if he thinks his proposal will include "everyone". :rofl: :rofl: It won't happen. And with the Neo Cons preclusion toward perpetual war, a draft is their dream. No draft and No war! Imagine that!

[EstimatedProphet]

85. Well, no it won't. You're right.

The rich will find a way around a draft, just like before. And they will keep trying to support wars of imperialism too.

And they'll be very much alone. That's my point about the bill.

[4nic8em]

28. Charlie has never taken the view

of an Iraq war freeper. Indeed, he is on record as rejecting the invasion of Iraq, from the very beginning and continually from then until now and he continues to do so. The Freep squad has consistently hated him for his "unbelievable" stance of not supporting their chimpster God-king and his war.

[4nic8em]

21. This is brilliant...

just like the last time he tried this. His perspective is that ALL of America should bear the brunt of war if it's worth fighting. If he repeats his previous attempt, the draft will require NO deferments, NO exclusions, NO excuses for anyone called to serve. That being said, it will show who on the dark side is willing to fight this glorious Bush war if "they" have to sacrifice the lives of their own and not just the "poor". This will once again prove to the country how willing the republics are to "sacrifice" for their God-like President. IMO, the repukes will NOT support the draft if they have to participate in personal "sacrifice" for the war effort also. Charlie also makes another point that the so called "surge" is essentially soldiers and ground troops who are being recycled for a second, third and fourth tour in this bloodbath while there are many in the USA who are not participating in this "war on terror" that they so lovingly and adamantly support. I hope he submits this, we shall see the true devotion of the repubs to this "war".

[SammyWinstonJack]

38. Yeah, brilliant!

:eyes:

[Beelzebud]

40. I guess the other 3 times he's done this wasn't brilliant enough. He had to try one more time...

/me pukes.

[SammyWinstonJack]

45. Can I join in that puke?

:puke:

[4nic8em]

44. Can I assume

from your "rolling eyes" that you expect this "draft" to actually occur? Ain't gonna happen...just like it didn't happen before, and for the very same reasons.

[SammyWinstonJack]

49. You can assume from my rolling eyes that I think Rangel is an idiot

and no you can not assume that it won't happen, just as I can't. bush and his neo cons are on a roll and no one has stopped them as yet and they need more troops and only a draft will provide them with what they need. Do not assume anything as long as the current mis administration reigns supreme. Why give them what they want and will abuse? :eyes: Calling their bluff hasn't worked to date, why think it will now or in the future? That is insane!

[Megahurtz]

75. Agreed! Total Insanity!!!

:crazy::nuke::crazy:

[originalpckelly]

50. We know it's not gonna happen. However, you know what could happen?

They could pass a resolution to end the war, or they could cut funding.

[Beelzebud]

51. Exactly. I'm tired of empty rhetoric. END THE WAR

[4nic8em]

58. I think it's already

starting to happen. Voinovich (remember him?)and about 10 other neonut senators are now saying publicly that this "splurge" is "not good". They may be be taking this point of view because this whole Iraq thang is going down the shitter, which is unbelievably the way most of this country feels NOW...things have turned around a hell of a lot in 2 1/2 months. Bullshit aside, 70% of the USA agrees with us "libruls" regarding Iraq, and since this country was about 50/50 two years ago, I can assume that a good portion of that 70% are newly converted "stay the course" republics.

[4nic8em]

80. I think this is a great idea...

let me know when the republics in the Senate decide to override the "Decider" en mass. I think (and hope) that it can happen...and Charlie's idea may hasten that republic response.

[Roxy66]

22. He is pushing it...BIG TIME!! He is not making me a fan!

[leftchick]

27. Is there a link for this?

:shrug:

[4nic8em]

35. Here is one of many...

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/07/rangel.draft/

[leftchick]

64. thank you

but that is from 2003? The OP made it sound like yet another?

[4nic8em]

70. Sorry, wrong link...

Here's another...

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/nation/16409079.htm

[leftchick]

74. thanks again

:)

[IndyOp]

42. Rangel: 'For those who say the poor fight better, I say give the rich a chance.'

Congressman Rangel -> :yourock:

[originalpckelly]

52. He'd rock if he'd actually introduce something which would work...

and actually end the war in Iraq. I think this is just another example of bullshit which doesn't really do anything, but even if it did get passed, it would cause more people to be sent to Iraq, which is the opposite of what we want.

[Zhade]

81. And if this version didn't have loopholes, he'd maybe have a point.

But IIRC, this version DOES have loopholes.

[bobbolink]

47. Go Rep. Rangel!!!!

:applause:

[TahitiNut]

94. ((bobbolink))

:applause:

[Clarkie1]

53. I have the utmost respect for Rangel. There is a message behind this action.

War should demand sacrifice of all Americans. Whether or not I agree with reinstating the draft is not the point; I respect Charlie Rangel, and I respect his integrity.

He puts action behind his moral principles.

[pampango]

107. I support Rangel, too, but in the case of any particular piece of legislation

I reserve the right to support or oppose. He is entitled to his belief that the political posturing of proposing legislation that he does not believe in and does not believe will be enacted is a smart thing to do.

I suppose that you could make the argument that another Democrat could strategically introduce legislation eliminating taxes on the rich, privatizing Social Security, invoking free trade with the whole world. All would be very thought provoking and would never pass, but is that how politician practices his/her craft?

[Coyote_Bandit]

54. If the draft is reinstated

then lots of people suddenly become personally invested in the war simply because somebody they know and love just might be sent to fight, be injured or die. Far too easy to send somebody else's kid. Assuming deferrments and exemptions are nearly impossible to obtain then this just might wake up some of the apathetic Amerikans....

[NYC Liberal]

57. Apathetic Americans?

Americans ALREADY oppose the war! In droves! To the tune of 60%+ disapproving of this debacle.

Why do we need to reinstate the draft to convince people who are ALREADY convinced.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

60. 60% of respondents

that does not encompass the whole population. We are an apathetic nation as our turnout rate for elections will attest.

[NYC Liberal]

67. So you want to have a draft until 100% of the population is against the war?

Sorry, but that's just stupid. You are not going to convince 30% of the country that Bush was or is wrong. Not going to happen, EVEN IF you send their kids to war. They will still support Bush, and we should not be sending MORE Americans to die for a lie, ESPECIALLY not to prove a point!

We have a majority in Congress now, and therefore we can end this war in other ways, such as by gradually defunding it (and outright refusing to defund this "surge"). We do NOT need to send kids to die to do it.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

73. If you read any of my posts

you would realize I am not advocating a draft.

[NYC Liberal]

82. Yes I realize that. But introducing this bill will turn Americans off.

60%+ already oppose the war. Talking of a draft and introducing a bill (even if it isn't intended to be passed) does nothing except provide an image of the Dems SUPPORTING this war.

There's no reason to make this bold of a statement when most already agree that this war is a clusterfuck and that we need to leave.

[renate]

92. I agree

I really like Charlie and I think he had an important point to make when he introduced draft legislation before, when most people still liked Bush and supported the war (or at least didn't care about it). These days very few people are still undecided about Iraq.

Times are different now, and there is a Democratic House now, and the entire context is different. Probably the majority of people who still support the war are the folks who already believe a couple of years military service should be mandatory, so I have a hard time imagining that this bill will change anybody's mind this time.

[4nic8em]

65. Hasn't worked

on the chimpster, has it? We all know he's the "Decider". I interpret that to mean "Fuck the Dem Congress". If 60% or 70% of this country oppose this surge, why does he persist in thwarting us Murkans?

[NYC Liberal]

68. Fuck Chimpy. He has NO clout with the electorate.

His fuckup(s) contributed GREATLY to the massive Dem victory in 2006 (or rather, the Repukes' support of his policies).

We CAN defund this war. It is what the pople WANT. We have the "political capital", as Bush puts it, to do so.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

77. It is the members of the House that have the dreaded (R)

in front of their title that we need swayed to our side. This is Rangel's intent.

[SammyWinstonJack]

66. !!

:thumbsup: :applause: :yourock:

[Coyote_Bandit]

78. Yes, apathetic Amerikans

From:
http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/16424082.htm

"Yet there's one thing that people on both sides of the debate agree on: Discussions about Iraq, deaths and sacrifice tend to be warped by the fact that - with the all-volunteer military - the burden of the war is divided unevenly. One study found that 68 percent of U.S. troop deaths in Iraq came from towns or ZIP codes where average household income is below the national median."

"Some observers think the uneven division of military service and risk across American society is one reason why unhappiness with the war and with the death toll tends to be laced with seeming indifference."

'"I don't see any end to this war because the American people don't care," said Patrick Resta, 28, who fought in Iraq with the North Carolina Army National Guard in 2004 and who now lives in South Philadelphia and studies nursing at Drexel. "They haven't had to sacrifice monetarily or send their children. So why should they care?"'

*******

In other words, talk is cheap. It is easy to say you oppose the war - especially when you are taking some anonymous poll. But it requires a certain amount of commitment and initiative to criticize the war effort to family, friends, co-workers, other citizens through whatever method. It takes even more commitment to become actively involved politically to help ensure those who share your values hold office. If Amerikans were not so apathetic then Al Gore would be President and shrubbie would never have had the opportunity to start a war. And if he draft were reinstated then those casualty numbers would carry different implications and many would be far less indifferent toward our little war.

[NYC Liberal]

83. This war is on it's way out.

The only reason Chimpy is keeping us there is because he doesn't have to worry about public opinion.

And he's stubborn.

So no matter what, you are not gonna convince him otherwise. He is irrational and the best course is to start by NOT funding this surge, and then gradually defund this war.

There is NO WAY the next Prez, Dem or Repuke, is keeping us in Iraq. Not after what happened in November.

[doublethink]

62. I understand the poker game Rangel is playing ...... but .......

One false flag attack, or real attack on this Country by terrorists .... and bingo .... the draft becomes reality. Still don't like playing games with kids lives. That is all.

[RiverStone]

79. Agreed. And as a parent to a 13 year old son...

Charles should shut the F--K up! Does he have any soon to be draft age kids?

We all understand the immoral war of aggression the criminal BushCo regime started needs to stop.
We all understand the burden of that war is being fought be a disproportionate amount of minorities and lower income soldiers.

We get the point, but don't make that point - if by doing so you edge my kid closer to fighting a corporate war for oil profits that BushCo dreamed up

[aquart]

69. Go, Charlie!

Make them all explain why their sons and daughters shouldn't be required to die in Iraq.

[Jacobin]

76. It'll make the RWers think twice, that's for sure. Prolly head off Iran, too

I like it for what it lets people know they are getting into if the neocons start in on Iran in a more serious way

[Penndems]

84. We're probably gonna need it to support Bush's war

He's gonna ask Congress tonight for 20,000 more troops to be sent to Iraq, but I'd be willing to bet twenty bucks that, in reality, it's gonna be more like 50,000 troops. We simply do not have the military manpower to send 50K at this juncture, so the only way to meet The Village Idiot's goal is to reinstate the draft. The man has lied so much, I hardly think he's gonna stop at 20,000.

Impeachment, anyone? :shrug:

[INdemo]

89. Bush could re-instate the draft with a stroke of a pen and Congress couldn't do anything about it

Its called an executive order......

[TahitiNut]

99. Not without appropriations, he can't.

No money. :shrug: The Selective Service System is an independent federal agency operating with permanent authorization under the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.). It is not part of the Department of Defense. As such, it operates solely under funding appropriated by the Congress.

[NaturalHigh]

88. What a loser.

He's not getting my kid, nor is any other cretin who proposes a draft.

[951-Riverside]

90. If this passes we can kiss our chances of winning anything goodbye for awhile n/t

[Rosemary2205]

91. Personally, I LIKE it and hope they pass it.

IMHO the draft is our best tool to avoid even more war because of the massive public outcry that will ensue.

[TahitiNut]

95. Agreed. 100%.

Pelosi says "impeachment is off the table" and (many) DUers agree, tucking tails between their legs and running in FEAR that 'golly! let's not fight! we might get hurt!'
Rangel says "if some serve then all serve" and (many) DUers scream in agony, tucking tails between their legs and running in FEAR that 'golly! let's not fight! we might get hurt!'

Do I sense a consistent theme here? :eyes:

Funny about that ... and now I see the convenient claim in this thread that a draft isn't the "way to do it" but that impeachment or defunding the war (delusional proposal given the FACT that the appropriations have passed) is the "way to do it" ... bizarre!!

[Rosemary2205]

96. On the funding...............

I'm pretty sure the only leverage they have is any requests for additional spending. Congress can put conditions up the wazoo on it.

Whatever's already been passed in the budget is already gone and I don't think there's a legal way for Congress to take it back. On what's already been passed the only option I know of is oversight, oversight oversight.

[TahitiNut]

97. Yep. Agreed again.

:thumbsup:

[MadHound]

98. Bad, bad move

Yes, I'm fully cognizant of the point Rangel is trying to make. Trouble is that Rangel is playing chicken with peoples' lives here. What if the Republicans take up Rangel's dare? What if they all vote in favor of this draft? Add that to those Democratic voices who are also "trying to make a point?" Bang, the bill passes, we have a draft, and Bushboy has all the soldiers he needs to fulfill his wildest dreams of empire.

This is a foolish, misguided bill, that in this climate of a president calling for new troops, beating the drums of war against Iran and Syria, could very well wind up backfiring and becoming law. And the Dems are going to have a hard time explaining to the American public that they were "just trying to make a point" as their children are marched off to the meat grinder.

There are better, more effective and less dangerous ways of making the same point without endangering an entire generation of Americans, nor promoting a further widening of this illegal, immoral war. You don't wave red meat in front of a bear that you're trying to drive off, and that is exactly what Rangel is doing with this bill. Stupid, foolish, and irresponsible are what immediately comes to mind, and Rangel would be wise to back off this madness before it blows up in his, and all of our faces.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

100. "Only making a point"?

It's a good point, and worthy of being brought up for debate. Put everyone's kids at risk, and the pressure to end the war will increase. Bush's kids will be exempt, of course, or at most serve a hitch in some state's Air National Guard, mostly out of harm's way.

If enough people think it's a good idea, it'll pass. So what? A draft is not a "Republican" tool for war. Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson all used it. I don't know about Carter, I don't remember when the draft was suspended.

[MadHound]

101. Guess you've been out of the loop for awhile, like since the last election

The public pressure to end this war is immense, it was this pressure that enabled Dems to gain majorities in the last election. Overwhelming numbers of Americans are against the war, hell polls going around today find that the people who are for this latest escalation are in a distinct majority, both amongst the populace at large and amongst self identified Republicans and conservatives.

The goddamn point has already been made, and there is absolutely no sane reason to risk peoples' lives in order to beat this point home. Rangel's bill is not only foolish and unnecessary, but it is utterly batshit crazy. Like I said earlier, the man is playing with fire. I could easily see the Republicans calling his bluff, voting for the bill, and combine that with those other foolish Dems who are also needlessly wanting to "make a point", there will be enough votes to pass this damn thing. Then look at where we will be, an exponentially larger pool of warm bodies to send to Bushboy's war, and widen it further into Iran and Syria. The only thing that is really preventing this from happening now is the lack of soldiers. Give him these warm bodies and away we'll go.

Do you comprehend the danger that Rangel is courting? Do you understand that this is a point that no longer needs to be made? Do you get it?

Or do you just not care what a draft will do, how it will broaden and escalate this war, how it will cost lives, not only of our soldiers, but also innocent people abroad. I don't know you, but I'm willing to bet with that callous attitude of yours, you are not of draft age yourself, and probably don't have any children who are of draft age either.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

102. You're right, I am not of draft age ...

... but I was drafted. And the president was a Democrat.

Do I comprehend the dangers? Uh, yeah, I think so.

[MadHound]

104. So why in the hell are you backing this madness?

What, do you want a wider war in the Mid East? Do you want to increase the carnage and body count? Or do you just want to take revenge on this current generation for what happened to your generation?

Again, there is no need for a draft to sway peoples' opinion. The American public has finally woken up and is opposing this war. Enacting a draft will only enable Bush to continue his war for oil and empire. Is that what you really want to do?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

103. Hasn't he got better legislation to propose?

Withdrawing the troops for instance?

I get the joke. I just wish congressmen would better use our time.

[Lilith Velkor]

105. He wants to make sure all the kids *I* nagged to the polls don't bother next time.

All those poor sods wanted was to stop the war before *their* asses get drafted.

Now they're scrambling to leave the country. Hope nobody Democratic needs their votes...

[EdwardM]

106. Way to make democrats look bad.

Now if the Republicans ever have to institute the draft because they need even more soldiers, we can blame Rangel for leading the charge.