| Merc. News | 0 | |
| Big Govt | Obama’s Shock Troops: SEIU and Political Intimidation in St. Louis |
0 |
| NYT | 0 | |
| WSJ | 0 | |
| Sac Bee | Many California jobs ‘saved’ by stimulus funds weren’t in jeopardy |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
Whiner-in-Chief:
"[W]hether the grumbling is about Republicans on Fox or bloggers in pajamas, there's a word for what the president and his aides are doing. That word is "whining." And nothing [...] does more damage to Obama's credibility or authority than the sense that a popular president is becoming the whiner-in-chief."
- John Nichols, Nation Magazine - 10/12/09
Rep. Charlie Rangel disrespects our military – again
This guy just can’t stop sticking his foot in his mouth, can he?:
I want to make it abundantly clear: if there’s anyone who believes that these youngsters want to fight, as the Pentagon and some generals have said, you can just forget about it. No young, bright individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits. And most all of them come from communities of very, very high unemployment. If a young fella has an option of having a decent career or joining the army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq.
One wonders if Rep. Rangel has seen Heritage’s study on “who bears the burden” in the military? Not only that, but I watched a little bit of Hannity and Colmes not long after Rangel re-introduced the idea of a draft, where Fox News had gone out and interviewed several constituents from Rangel’s own district who were not in favor of the idea and who essentially said that Rangel is not representing them on this bill – yet he still wants to introduce it.
Keep in mind one thing, though: the rationale behind Rangel’s desire to reinstate the draft isn’t just insulting to our men and women currently serving, but it’s also a direct slam from Rangel to the President and VP. Rangel – and other Democrats who won’t openly admit it – believe that “rich” “chickenhawks” like Bush and Cheney don’t have any concept of what war is like because they didn’t stand on the front lines in a war, and their kids haven’t either. Rangel’s statement from earlier this month:
“There’s no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm’s way.”
Allah’s got an alternative suggestion for Rangel:
If Rangel’s serious about addressing economic inequality in the military, there’s an easy way to do it without imposing a draft. Simply repeal all major economic incentives to enlistment. Per RangelLogic, let the morality of every war be judged by the number of patriots willing to volunteer for it. “Bad” wars will attract few enlistees and end quickly in defeat as we run out of troops; “good” wars, just the opposite. He’d never accept that proposal, of course, because it could conceivably require him to admit that certain wars he opposes are “good” and, worse, that the troops who signed up for them are morally culpable in their execution.
Bingo.
And while we’re on the topic of Rangel, our troops, and the Iraq war, here’s a reminder of what our upcoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee had to say a little over a month before the election on funding for the Iraq war:
“I can’t stop this war” a frustrated Rangel said in a recent interview, reiterating his vow to retire from Congress if Democrats fall short of a majority in the House.
But when pressed on how he could stop the war even if Democrats control the House during the last years of President Bush’s second term, Rangel paused before saying, “You’ve got to be able to pay for the war, don’t you?”
Prior:
- Pelosi says leadership will not support Rangel’s draft measure
- Rangel again calls for reinstituting the draft
- Rangel said he meant “no offense” by “who the hell wants to live in Mississippi?” remark
- Rangel loses control – again, and calls VP “SOB”
- Rangel condemned Chavez? BFD.
- Charlie Rangel: Moral relativist extraordinaire
- Race-baiting Democrats and the media’s complicity
- State rep gets more coverage than Rangel
- More nonsense from Charlie Rangel
- How to support the troops: by Charlie Rangel
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
17 Responses to “Rep. Charlie Rangel disrespects our military – again”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
This man is so dumb. I heard him on FNS today saying how it was in the 60’s when he was a young man. This is his rationale. Cuz in the 60s poor men and women joined the military. Uhhhh Duh, Charlie, times change you idiot. I cannot believe that these guys are so willing to jepordize 2008 with stupid petty things like this. – Lorica
I never looked at Rangel as an elitist Democrat like I look at Kerry.
Perhaps it is time to take a closer look?
Has anyone asked rangle if he has any kids or grandkids who have joined the military or would he prefer they get drafted like he demands of the Bush twins?
Why can’t these ill informed people just shut up and go away.
If a young fella has an option of having a decent career or joining the army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq.
The friends I have that are in Iraq could get better jobs than mine.
If a Republican made a comment about that – your post would be about their censure.
Justin Thank you for pointing out the fact that you personally know people who could do better than the Army. There are many men and women just like that. My Nephew got out of the Army about a year ago and went right to a 50,000 a year job working with computers based on only the education he received in the Army. Not too bad if I do say so myself.
If I remember correctly our Armed Services still require a High School Diploma, or the equivilent. It seems to me that the people Charlie is talking about, are HS dropouts. They wouldn’t qualify for Service in any branch of the Military. Perhaps someone should look at the dropout rate for Charlie’s district.
But to my main point. I remember a few years back how the 5.1 percent unemployment under the Clinton Administration was “statistically Full Employment”. So Charlie, what ya sayin’?? Those same news stories said that if a bright and young person wanted a job all they had to do is apply. They said, those that are still unemployed are people who don’t want to work. If we had full employment with 5.1 percent unemployment then how much better is it now with 4.4 percent unemployment?? Hell now jobs should be thrown at the bright and young job seekers. You aren’t making any sense here Charlie. I personally think Charlie just wants to ruin our military. He talks about his own experience in the military, and it seems that he is bitter. And now he is just trying to get back at the military, and of course attempting to stab at GW. This will fail, and it will show to the American people that the Democratic Party is full of failures. Seems to me we have a 2001 – 2002 Congress all over again. With people like this in power in the Dem party they are just not going to be able retain that power for long. – Lorica
You’ve hit it, Lorica. Rangel wants to cripple our military and hamstring our foreign policy. The all volunteer force is too successful for him. A US military that’s feared and reviled instead of respected – that’s his goal.
“You’ve got to be able to pay for the war, don’t you?”
- Just one problem with your little “plan” Charlie. As politically soft in the brain as she might be, even Nancy Pelosi is dumb enough to stand in front of the camera’s and explain how and why the Democrabs jerked the financial rug out from under the military.
- Rangle is another congress critter tugging against the leadership. This whole ploy is nothing but baldfaced race warfare, and a dishonest one at that. But hey, it worked when the Dems lied about the economy, so why not.
- Bang
- previous should say “not even Nancy Pelosi…”
I disagree, BBH. I think she’s exactly that dumb – you had it right at first.