They just took control house/senate and look .....

[stripersnipr]

Originally Posted by spence

This statement is simply a way to avoid discussing the issue at any cost!!!

Seriously, I'm sick of the Dems are wimps mantra.

Charles Rangle is a freaking Combat Veteran for christmas sake.

-spence

Utter Nonsense but if the shoe fits. At this point my premise is "If Spence is against it, its good for America".

[Backbeach Jake]

I think thay Rangle's point is this: If we had a draft, those who represent us and vote for war would think twice about voting for war if their own sons and daughters were subject to that draft. After seeing how our present leadership personally handled the draft, I think that Rangle could use a lesson in cynicism. Our All-Volunteer Soldiers are the best that ever put a boot to the Earth. And they've been betrayed by our politicians.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Backbeach Jake

Our All-Volunteer Soldiers are the best that ever put a boot to the Earth. And they've been betrayed by our politicians.

AMEN.

-spence

[Bronko]

Originally Posted by stripersnipr

Utter Nonsense but if the shoe fits. At this point my premise is "If Spence is against it, its good for America".

The gloves are off.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Bronko

The gloves are off.

Be careful what you wish for

His statement was idiotic...I'll restrain myself.

-spence

[stripersnipr]

Originally Posted by spence

Be careful what you wish for

His statement was idiotic...I'll restrain myself.

-spence

Utter Nonsense

[spence]

Your post was nonsense as it's easily refuted by publicly available statements. Your interpretation is based on how you want to see his stunt, and not for what it really is.

-spence

[stripersnipr]

Originally Posted by spence

Your post was nonsense as it's easily refuted by publicly available statements. Your interpretation is based on how you want to see his stunt, and not for what it really is.

-spence

Hmmm.....So you think I'm the only one who holds that opinion. Your interpretation of publicly available statements is sound (only if you agree with them) and all other interpretations are "utter nonsense", but on the other hand if you dont agree with publicly available statements they become right wing spin and are totally dismissed. When someone takes exception to the "G.I's are stupid" mantra, you accuse them of "piling on" a silly post. You respond to others opinion by quickly reverting to veiled insults and third person name calling with your: idiocy, nonsense, makes no sense routine; All the while accusing others of not debating the issue. And dont forget, nothing personal here but "Its the Policy Stupid".

[spence]

Originally Posted by stripersnipr

Hmmm.....So you think I'm the only one who holds that opinion.

I think the Rangle issue has been distorted by both sides, few people are really listening to his own words anymore!

Your interpretation of publicly available statements is sound (only if you agree with them) and all other interpretations are "utter nonsense", but on the other hand if you dont agree with publicly available statements they become right wing spin and are totally dismissed.

No, I only claimed your interpretation of Rangle's stunt was nonsense

When someone takes exception to the "G.I's are stupid" mantra, you accuse them of "piling on" a silly post.

The only "G.I.'s are stupid" mantra is the one used to defame war critics by accusing them of defaming the troops.

I don't believe Scooby thinks our troops are dumb...but I do think he made a very inarticulate statement.

But considering how the Military is having to lower standards in order to meet enlistment targets, it's easy for some to draw a parallel to Vietnam era stigma's...in a slippery slope sort of way.

You respond to others opinion by quickly reverting to veiled insults and third person name calling with your: idiocy, nonsense, makes no sense routine; All the while accusing others of not debating the issue. And dont forget, nothing personal here but "Its the Policy Stupid".

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

My comments are in context.

Unlike many, I don't cherry pick fringe kookisims and whitewash others so I can define my opponent as I'd like to see them. It's you who are trigger happy as any with the "left wing loony" retort to anything which is uncomfortable or difficult.

My insults are not veiled, I'm calling BULL%$%$%$%$ on this intellectually sloppy and boorish mode of communication you so embrace, which avoids the real issues in favor of a poke to the liberal straw man with an overworn stick.

Instead of getting all in a huff, how about responding to my utter nonsense post? The meat, the substance of the issue.

Would Congress and the President view using US force differently if the burden was shared not by just those who choose to sign up...but by those who enjoy it's protection!

It's a valid and perhaps critical question to ask at this juncture in the history of our country. As I've said before, yes, it's a stunt...but given how receptive the political climate has been for constructive debate, perhaps that's the only way to get the question addressed.

-spence