Republicans prevent Democrats from bringing back the draft
 

It's funny how the Democrats want to force people to join the military and then want to lie and make Republicans look bad. I'm glad they were stopped.



House Republicans seek to quash military draft rumor

Wednesday, October 6, 2004 Posted: 1:07 AM EDT (0507 GMT)



WASHINGTON (AP) -- House Republicans sought to quash a persistent Internet rumor that President Bush wants to reinstate the draft if he is re-elected, engineering an overwhelming vote Tuesday killing legislation that would do just that.

Republicans accused Democrats of feeding the rumor mill to scare young voters and their parents into voting against Bush.

"This campaign is a baseless, malevolent concoction of the Democratic Party and everyone in this chamber knows it," said House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas.

The House voted 402-2 to defeat the draft bill offered last year by Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/....ap/index.html

-Rudey

So to all the Democrats who forwarded these emails along or posted about it on places like Greekchat, do you want to be called ignorant, dumb, or just plain malicious?

-Rudey

While I didn't pass on any rumors, nor have I suggested that Bush was pushing for this, I do want to point out that a month before an election, any politician who is up for re-election would be ending his own campaign by voting for this bill. That said, I wouldn't be completely suprised, no matter who wins, if this issue comes up again, especially if we end up in more theatres than we're in now. (Thinking North Korea, Iran or Sudan)

Dee

But who brought it up?? I mean come on. What was the point of ever trying to pass this legislation?

And from the point of the common American, please I would love to know who started the rumors and why so many Democrats just passed these lies on.

-Rudey

It isn't as though the ones who brought it up got much support, since we rarely see a vote so decisive in this very divided Congress. I'm still curious how the vote would go if it wasn't a month before the election though.

No idea who started the rumors...

Dee

Did Charlie support this at the end? Charlie is the man who helped get this all started.

-Rudey

Oh yes Democrats wanted to force people into the draft. Thats why all those votes for the draft were by democrats. :rolleyes: Talk about misleading title. Just because 1 democrat brought up the bill doesn't mean anything how many votes did it get to pass? (2)

I dunno..

In Kerry's speach at the Democratic convention, he said he'd double the number of troops in Iraq. He also said that he would not be using reserves or national guardsmen to do this.

So, uh, what the hell was he talking about then? Or, like usual, was he just talking out both sides of his mouth?

A couple of people on GC have missed their calling.

They should be headline writers for The National Enquirer.

OK let's see:

The bill was offered last year by Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y.

Two people voted for the bill: Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., and Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif.

So this bill was introduced by a Democrat and ALL THE VOTES FOR IT WERE BY DEMOCRATS.

Now let's go further:
"Even [Charles Rangel] urged Democrats to vote against the bill, and charged Republicans were cynically trying to use the measure to escape election-season questions about the war in Iraq."

So basically a Democrat introduced this bill, only Democrats voted for the bill, and then the Democrat who introduced it didn't want to back it to make it seem as if it wasn't a Democrat bill.

So Brandon, how is this title misleading??

And DeltAlum you're pretty close to retirement age so no need to get another job at the Enquirer.

-Rudey

So do any other Democrats have any response to this?

Would any folks who like to proclaim themselves as moderates like to eat their shoes and really show their bias?

-Rudey

Because you imply all Democrats wanted the draft then will blame it on republicans even though 2 voted and one started the bill.

"It's funny how the Democrats want to force people to join the military" . Certainly sounds like your implying all to it.

So if a Republican started a bill to renamed the US, "dubyaland" and two republicans voted for it, it would be ok to say. Republicans wanted to name the US "dubyaland"?

You know what this is a group label. This isn't the same hting as all Democrat voters or all Democrat legislators. It was an effort by Democrats that was supported by Democrats.

It didn't say all Democrats voted for something. And when I say Democrats voted for something, of course some may not. Heck there are tons of Republican bills out there that don't have all Republicans voting for them, but they are still Republican.

In terms of grammar and in terms of substance I am right here.

Don't try and post the same label you put on Hoosier on me.

-Rudey

Sometimes I hope that the Democrats will retake the House so that Charlie Rangel will become Chairman of the Ways & Means Committee. The entertainment value of that alone sorta makes it worth it (because he's a "fight in the gutter" type of pol.)

Sometimes I think if we went mining for oil in his hair, the US would be the largest exporter of crude oil.

-Rudey