SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   PoliticsPolitics for Pros- moderated


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: LindyBill who started this subject9/22/2004 6:11:31 PM
From: SiouxPal
   of 785823
 
Charge! Bush will be sending your kids to fight the good fight soon!
Kerry: Draft Likely to Return Under Bush
news.yahoo.com.

By MARY DALRYMPLE, Associated Press Writer

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news - web sites), citing the war in Iraq (news - web sites) and other trouble spots in the world, raised the possibility Wednesday that a military draft could be reinstated if voters re-elect President Bush (news - web sites).

Kerry said he would not bring back the draft and questioned how fairly it was administered in the past.

Answering a question about the draft that had been posed at a forum with voters, Kerry said: "If George Bush (news - web sites) were to be re-elected, given the way he has gone about this war and given his avoidance of responsibility in North Korea (news - web sites) and Iran and other places, is it possible? I can't tell you."

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and other Pentagon (news - web sites) officials have been asked numerous times whether they thought a draft would be necessary to maintain force levels in Iraq. They have said consistently that they think it is neither necessary nor desirable, since today's military is built on volunteer service and professionalism.

His voice scratchy and breaking from a cold, Kerry called the president's proposal to give workers partly private Social Security (news - web sites) accounts a windfall for financial companies and one that will cut benefits for senior citizens.

"He's driving seniors right out of the middle class," Kerry said in a battleground state rich with voters keenly watching the candidates talk about two pillars of retirement, Social Security and Medicare.

"I will never privatize Social Security, ever," Kerry said, repeating promises not to raise the retirement age or cut benefits.

Kerry's two-day swing through Florida, which began Tuesday, follows deadly hurricanes that nearly halted polling and politicking in the state. Bush made his third campaign-season trip to Florida this week to assess damage caused by Hurricane Ivan. Kerry has been to the state that decided the 2000 election nine times this year.

Kerry opened the town hall-style meeting about government benefits by repeating his charges that the president is divorced from realities in Iraq and ignoring the manhunt for terrorists in Afghanistan (news - web sites). "Osama bin Forgotten," Kerry said.

Noting that the campaign Tuesday night neared Disney's "fantasy land" in Orlando, Fla., Kerry said: "The difference between George Bush and me is that I drove by it. He lives in it."

Returning to seniors' issues, Kerry said Bush made life harder for seniors with a Medicare drug benefit that doesn't let the government bargain for lower costs.

Kerry also cited a study by Austan Goolsbee, a University of Chicago business professor and informal adviser to the Kerry campaign, to say the president's Social Security proposal will cost seniors.

Bush favors allowing young workers to create voluntary personal savings accounts with some of the money they now pay into the Social Security system, a change he insists will not increase payroll taxes or change benefits for retirees or near retirees.

Goolsbee examined one model that proposes workers set aside a small percentage of their pay in private accounts as a method to adjust Social Security to a rapidly graying population, concluding that fees charged by financial companies could reap them hundreds of billions of dollars and eat 20 percent of the benefits in an account held by a worker making an average salary.

The Bush-Cheney campaign said the study makes assumptions based on policy decisions not yet made and contended that Kerry hasn't explained how he'd meet the challenges posed to Social Security by aging Baby Boomers.

"His record is one of voting for higher taxes on current retirees and ignoring the needs of future retirees," said Bush campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt.

Kerry wants to bolster the retirement program by reducing the deficit and expanding the economy. Some experts say economic growth might be insufficient to cover future benefits because those benefits grow as wages increase.

The Massachusetts senator also wants to improve Medicare by retooling the recently passed prescription drug benefit to let the government negotiate for bulk discounts on drugs.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (67202)9/22/2004 6:12:08 PM
From: TimF
   of 785823
 
Look up the Altadena incident.

google.com

returns nothing

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Neeka who wrote (72634)9/22/2004 6:12:32 PM
From: Bridge Player
   of 785823
 
The United States wants to maintain a hard stance against Iran over the "axis of evil" nation's nuclear program, but by doing so Washington runs the risk of inflaming a neighbor of war-wracked Iraq.

That's a risk? LOL! I thought Iran was already pretty "inflamed" against the U.S.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: unclewest who wrote (72620)9/22/2004 6:17:21 PM
From: Captain Jack
   of 785823
 
<<"As a Senator, Kerry has fought harder for the Vietnamese communists than he ever did against them during his four months as a Swift Boat commander. Kerry's picture hangs in the Vietnamese communist's war museum in Ho Chi Minh City (formerly Saigon), in which he is immortalized in tribute to aiding the communists in winning the war.">> The antics of Kerry caused more casualties than any VC or NVA ever could. It should never be forgotten how he sold the POWs down the river & signed their death warrant so his cousin could makes hundreds of millions,, possibly billions by now. All US dollars provided to NVN thanks to Kerry.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


To: LindyBill who started this subject9/22/2004 6:19:21 PM
From: SiouxPal
   of 785823
 
I thought George looked great on that carrier.
karlandkinggeorge.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: SiouxPal who wrote (72654)9/22/2004 6:19:58 PM
From: gamesmistress
   of 785823
 
Maybe you and Kerry should read more reliable sources of information. Like the Urban Legends web page:

Draft Fear

Claim: The U.S. military will be reinstating the draft by Spring 2005.

Status: Probably not.

Example: [congress.org, 2004]

...both the Congressional bills were introduced back in January 2003 and have languished in committee ever since with seemingly little support, and the Selective Service maintains that the timing of ads to fill draft board positions was coincidental, part of a process of filling expired board positions that has been underway for several years:

snopes.com

And BTW, the bill in the House were introduced by:

January 7, 2003
Mr. RANGEL (for himself, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. STARK, and Mr. ABERCROMBIE)

And in the Senate by:
Mr. HOLLINGS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services

Most if not all of whom are Democrats, loudly complaining that Bush will reinstitute the draft! Isn't that special?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (3)


To: Captain Jack who wrote (72657)9/22/2004 6:22:20 PM
From: Neeka
   of 785823
 
Hume/FOX just ran hard on Kerry's two visits to Paris in 70-71.

Good to see.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: gamesmistress who wrote (72659)9/22/2004 6:24:20 PM
From: SiouxPal
   of 785823
 
George did great at the convention, but the night before....
karlandkinggeorge.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Ilaine who wrote (72641)9/22/2004 6:26:02 PM
From: Captain Jack
   of 785823
 
CB Well,, they did a nice job provideing a smile. A dnation is in order..

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: LindyBill who started this subject9/22/2004 6:28:49 PM
From: SiouxPal
   of 785823
 
Who's this Juan Cole, Natalie's brother or what?
by Juan Cole*

Bush gave a long speech Thursday night, which sounded like a laundry
list of promises more than anything else. He pointed to few genuine
accomplishments during the past four years, and seemed stuck in fall,
2001.

If you think about George W. Bush as CEO of America, Inc., it becomes
clearer why his poll numbers have been so low (low to mid forties) in
the run up to the election. No president with those kinds of poll
numbers in the spring before the election has ever won.

Bush's basic characteristic is not steadfastness, as the convention
attempted to argue, but rashness. He is a gambler who goes for the big
bang. He loses his temper easily, and makes hasty and uninformed
decisions about important matters. No corporation would keep on a CEO
that took risks the way Bush has, if the gambles so often resulted in
huge losses.

Let us imagine you had a corporation with annual gross revenues of
about $2 trillion. And let's say that in 2000, it had profits of $150
billion. So you bring in a new CEO, and within four years, the profit
falls to zero and then the company goes into the red to the tune of
over $400 billion per year. You're on the Board of Directors and the
CEO's term is up for renewal. Do you vote to keep him in? That's what
Bush did to the US government. He took it from surpluses to deep in
the red. We are all paying interest on the unprecedented $400 billion
per year in deficits (a deficit is just a loan), and our grandchildren
will be paying the interest in all likelihood.

And what if you had been working for America, Inc. all your life, and
were vested in its pension plan (i.e. social security)? And you heard
that the company is now hemorrhaging money and that the losses are
going to be paid for out of your pension? What if you thought you were
going to get $1000 a month to retire on, and it is only going to be
$500? Or maybe nothing at all? Because of the new CEO whose management
turned a profit-making enterprise into an economic loser? Would you
vote to keep him on?

What if the CEO convinced himself that the Mesopotamia Corp. was
planning a hostile takeover? What if he had appointed a lot of senior
vice-presidents who were either incompetent boobs or had some kind of
backroom deal going with crooked brokers, and fed him false
information that Mesopotamia Corp. was making a move and had amassed a
big war chest for the purpose? And what if, to avoid this imaginary
threat, he launched a preemptive hostile takeover of his own, spending
at least $200 billion to accomplish it (on top of the more than $400
billion he is already losing every year)? Remember, it was a useless
expenditure.

It turns out that Mesopotamia Corp. was a creaky old dinosaur with no
cash reserves, and couldn't have launched a hostile takeover of the
neighborhood mom and pop store. And, moreover, its arena of operations
is extremely dangerous, and nearly a thousand America, Inc. workers
get killed taking it over. And it turns out that the managers that the
CEO put into Mesopotamia Corp. were bunglers. They adopted policies
that made the taken-over employees bitter and sullen and
uncooperative. Instead of standing on its own, the wholly owned
subsidiary of Mesopotamia, Inc., requires continued infusion of
capital from America, Inc. It looks increasingly as though
Mesopotamia, Inc., will have to be let loose, and that its new
managers will opt for interest-free Islamic banking as soon as they
can.

Meanwhile, the real threat of a hostile takeover comes from al-Qaeda,
Inc. Because 138,000 employees had to be assigned to Mesopotamia,
Inc., there are few left to meet that challenge.

So given this kind of record, do you vote this CEO back in? It is
often said that a lot of Americans want to stick with Bush to "see
Iraq through." But if you think about him as a CEO, and look at how
well he has run things, you can see the idiocy of this argument. The
real question is, do you throw good money after bad?

juancole.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10