The Childrens Crusade

Sort of makes you wonder if the elitist class is simply prepping for the next big “liberation” in the next few years. “Turning out” these people at a young age works, with anything, and now the United States will truly have a solid base, a “pool” per-se, for the giant claw to pick out those and place them on the military conveyor belt, slave-labour belt, or simply, into a prison. Sad, sad, sad.

No. What’s sad is the lack of outrage.

We’ll just sit in front of our T.Vs and watch Michael Jackson and Fear Factor and think the world ends at our front door.

As long as I behave, the police won’t come for me. I’m happy. Civil Rights? Hey, I can go to work. No problem. We need to protect ourselves from all those terrorists that keep driving down my street.

We’re Americans in name only. We no longer know the MEANING of the word.

These kinds of programs would not be in schools if there weren’t kids who wanted it, parents who supported it and administrators who facilitated it,”

If this ever was made mandatory, I’d be outraged too.

My son has been in the Army for 20 years.  I am a veteran and his father is retired Army.  He was in high school JROTC.  He and his fellow cadets learned very little about the military.  The only ones who could march were those on the drill team.  He did learn to wash windows and mop floors in class.  Nothing that I saw in the 3-1/2 years he was in JROTC showed me that the class was of any value.  Any military knowledge he had he learned from his parents. 

He dropped it in his senior year after being harassed for not accepting a ROTC scholarship.  He graduated in the bottom 1/3 of his class after almost failing all classes because of the pressure he received to go to college instead of enlisting.  I later learned that bonuses were paid to the officers in charge of the program for each scholarship accepted regardless of qualification for college.

Former military personnel who run these programs are guaranteed a wage equal to their military pay and even receive raises and bonuses on top of that.  Where else can a Lt. Colonel with a degree in music and no experience find a job that pays so well?

Hmm, President Bush is obviously planning on spending a very long time in his conquest of the Middle East if he is needing to prepare pre-teens for the military.

The Chicago program just further illustrates the depths of deception to which our government will go to develop the next round of “cannon fodder”.  I had been aware for quite some time that one of the main perks of the NCLB Act for the government was access to the personal information of their future soldiers.

While I understand that our nation must have a military (it would certainly be beyond naive to imagine otherwise, especially in today’s world), I am tired of meeting high school students who have recently enlisted because they were told that if they signed up, they were guaranteed not to serve in Iraq.  Several boys I know personally were told this, I and their teacher warned them, but they signed up anyway and now will go to Iraq at the end of bootcamp.

Also, do you notice that such programs are aimed almost exclusively at “minority” schools?  In a documentary I saw about a year ago, an Hispanic boy transferred (because of fighting) to a mostly white school in a higher economic level area nearby.  The first question he asked as he walked out of the building after his first day at the new school was, “Where are the recruiters?” Very telling.  Yes, the GOP is interested in serving the african-american and latino communities, like the Twilight Zone’s “To Serve Man”, is how.

“If this ever was made mandatory, I’d be outraged too.”

Yeah, and I suppose that if you’re ever mistakenly thrown in jail or Guantanamo because of the Patriot Act you’ll be outraged then too.  Problem is, it’ll be TOO FUCKING LATE.

I didn’t sign up with JROTC in my high school to join the military...no it’s far from that, I did because I wanted to have fun and meet new people....ever since I started JROTC I’ve made a lot more friends.....I don’t get pressured into joining the military at all.

“If this ever was made mandatory, I’d be outraged too.”

Yeah, and I suppose that if you’re ever mistakenly thrown in jail or Guantanamo because of the Patriot Act you’ll be outraged then too.  Problem is, it’ll be TOO FUCKING LATE.

Posted by Matt H. on June 3, 2005 at 10:00 PM

Straight-line logical connection there.

Completely voluntary JROTC programs have been in high schools all over the country for 50 years or so.  I had friends in high school 40 years ago that took it.  Reading this article you would never know that.  Wedekind makes this sound like a recently hatched government plot to militarize the youth of America. Now Matt H. tries to link it to the Patriot Act.

If high school kids want to stay after school to dress up and play soldier with no service committment, let them.  How’s that any worse than open gym basketball to keep kids off the street and out of trouble?  Isn’t there enough real bad stuff out there to work on without wasting time on trivia like this?  Especially based on a poorly written article that leaves out all historical context to try to score rhetorical points.

Maybe you all come from a different part of the country than I do, but when I was in Junior High/Middle School in the 70’s, there was no ROTC until High School.  Does anyone know when it became available to 12-14 year olds?

Campesino, your point really is disengenuous.  To become any profession, you usually start a loose affiliation with the skills needed for it in your youth.  While certainly the majority of soldiers serving today were not ROTC, I would think it logical that the majority of ROTC participants would go on for some sort of military involvement.

I would assume that the author, like myself, is very against the war in Iraq.  It is frightening to see Rumsfeld and Bush lie day after day about our involvement and progress.  while you may not agree, I think it’s pretty obvious that the best way to fill declining enlistment quotas is to build a culture in which military is “cool”.  Lots of non-rich kids find it a place to feel good about themselves, since they have so little at home.  I think to not be able to see the MO of the Bush Admin. at work here is really willful blindness.

Just so ya’ll know, where I live, ROTC kids are considered to be the social equivalent of booger-eaters.

Jennifer in my opinion is operating from a false premise.  She evidently thinks that there is something wrong with trying to get kids to consider a career in the military, and taking a long term approach to keeping it strong.

I doubt she would support a draft.  Why is that she and so many like her have such disdain for doing what needs to be done to maintain a voluntary force?  Does she think it’s something that’s going to just magically happen?  Would she start a business and expect customers to come flocking to her door without doing any advertising, promotion, or enticement?

Just like in business, the military obviously shouldn’t make false or misleading claims.  I’m sure that happens, but I’m also sure that when it does, anti-military types blow it out of all reasonable proportion.

It’s understandable that enlistment rates may be down somewhat.  I couldn’t blame anyone watching the media’s negative coverage of Iraq for being apprehensive about joining up.  But the best indicators of the feelings of the people who are actually in the military and involved in the conflict are better than expected re-enlistment rates, and overwhelming support and enthusiasm for their commander-in-chief.

“What is perhaps most significant is that they continue to volunteer. In a normal year, the Army National Guard expects 18 percent of its soldiers to leave because of retirement, injury, and death, or because they do not reenlist. This year, the attrition rate is only 18.9 percent. Meanwhile, reenlistment rates for the Army and Marines are either exceeding goals or are within a few percentage points of them. Some data even show that reenlistment rates are higher for units deployed overseas than for those that have remained at home.”

http://abcnews.go.com/International/print?id=722366

Nobody’s forcing anybody to do anything here.  The vast majority of people who join the military are proud of and happy with their decision.  The only problem is when people try to project their own IMHO misguided opinions on them, and refer to them not as people wanting to learn about discipline, loyalty and teamwork.  Not as people who love their country and are interested in defending it.  But as manipulated fools or “booger-eaters”.

I’m sorry you thought I was being disingenuous but as always Margaret, you are entitled to your opinion.

I think if there is any disingenuousness going on here it is on the part of Wedekind.  I admit, this is an opinion piece in an opinion journal, but you must admit she is quite selective in what she tells and doesn’t tell and how she frames her piece.  And you also must admit, the whole tone of the article assumes there is something “wrong” about the military.

If I was a Martian with no experience of this planet in for a visit, and was reading this article using my magic decoder ring, I would be left with the impression:

- That JROTC was an invention of this administration in its desperation to get manpower for the military

- That JROTC is targeted only at schools with large minority enrollments

- That it was developed in conjunction with the NCLB provision that provides mailing lists and access for recruiters to lie and pressure poor kids into enlisting

- That there is something basically unseemly and evil in serving in the military

Those of us who have been here on Earth a while know that:

- JROTC has been on school campuses nation-wide for something like 3 generations - during administrations of both political parties, in time of war and time of peace

- JROTC is targeted at schools that want to have it.  Where I grew up it was in all the public high schools and some of the parochial

- The NCLB provision is a response to school administrations with a political agenda that is anti-military, hampering recruiters.  Parents can opt out of having their kids contacted (I was sent the form for my son)and they can just say no to recruiters

- Do you think there is something unseemly or evil about military service?  I don’t

Again, why all this concern about a totally voluntary after school program with no service committment?  Isn’t there someting seriously wrong she could have written about?  What a waste.

Margaret, I am glad that you and yours hang out with the “cool kids” and stay away from the “booger-eaters”. I just hope you appreciate it if one of those “booger-eaters” gets hurt in service trying to protect you.

“I just hope you appreciate it if one of those “booger-eaters” gets hurt in service trying to protect you.

#1 It was a joke,

#2 NOBODY IS PROTECTING ME IN IRAQ, IDIOT!  IN FACT, THEY’RE MAKING US ALL LESS SAFE!  THIS IS YOUR WAKE-UP CALL!  GO FORTH AND try to understand this side of the iraq war.  I understand you think that Saddam was going to come over here and kill us.  I can understand that.  But really, this is kind of NOT GONNA HAPPEN NOW!  can we p. bring the troops home now?  why do i write this…

Maybe the recruitment of young children is best understood as a sign of desperation. 

That’s what I argue on my blog: http://www.documentedlife.com/log/?p=52

TW, you are absolutely correct.  Natalie and Campesino, pay attention to this line of thought.

I have no disrespect for the military.  They are soldiers under the command of a Commander-in-Chief.  Unfortunately, this CIC is a crook and a liar.  We now have rock solid proof that he commited a “high crime” and lied to Congress.  He also continues to attempt to perpetuate those lies, but the public is beginning to wake up.  At a festival near me this weekend, over 80,000 signatures demanding an investigation were achieved.  110,000 signatures have been collected and verified by Rep. Conyers. 

Our soldiers are being lied to and misused in Iraq.  Natalie and Campesino, they are NOT keeping us safer, they are inadvertently drawing a bullseye on the good ol’ USA. Our freedom was NEVER threatened by Iraq.  That is BS GOP propaganda. You can’t defend my freedom if it was never under threat. 

I employ two Iraq/Gulf War vets.  They said the attitude this time around is disgusting.  They’ve told me of soldiers whacking civilians in the head (kids, women, old people) with bottles as they drive by in their Humvees.  Tapes were released that Seymour Hersch listened to before he wrote his article about Abu Graib and they will be released to the public shortly in which you can hear the sounds of our soldiers raping children.  I guess that’s what we want to teach middle schoolers, right?

The reason enlistment is down so far and, by the way, you are wrong on the enlistment figures, Natalie.  I will have to dig it up, but I read two weeks ago that all the branches were below recruitment goals.

If a kid wants to go into the military, fine.  But a 12 year old kid does not have a good idea what that means.  I agree with Miles that corraling young, naive kids seems like a real act of desperation.  If they do not fit in well, have them get together with kids who do tutoring for littler kids, help coach little league teams, help with Meals on Wheels, etc.  Leave ROTC for college and high school, when kids begin to have a real idea of the world around them and can make an informed decision.

I thank God that we have brave soldiers to defend us against very real threats in this world, but it angers me to rage that they have been lied to and misused--sent without body armor, without enough munitions, without tank armor on Humvees, just to mention a few gifts from GWB.  That’s the GOP idea of “supporting the troops”.  It takes more than a stinkin little yellow ribbon on the back of your car to really support the troops.

Margaret wrote:

“The Chicago program just further illustrates the depths of deception to which our government will go to develop the next round of “cannon fodder”. 

I just want to point out what I think is a ubiquitous and regretable practice liberals constantly engage in - assigning blame to the government, or worse Americans for the crimes of republicans. 

When you say “the government” you impliedly agree with the republican lie that all things “government” are bad.  Worse, is when liberals take the blame for the crimes of republicans by referring to their actions as “America” or “we.” It is not American or we or the government, it is republicans who are the criminals.  It is republicans who are hated, not Americans and certainly not we.

For Pete’s sake, cut out all the conspiracy baloney.  JROTC has been a valued program for generations. I joined it as a high school sophomore (the soonest possible in 1954) because after WW2 and the Korean War I was sure I would one day be in a war and wanted to know as much as possible to survive. We had real .30 cal. rifles, minus firing pins, (today they would be called “assault weapons") for drill and familiarization and gov. provided .22s for marksmanship training. The rifle team could BRING THEIR OWN to and from school each day.  It is the deterioration of moral values which make this impossible today.  The ROTC program was taught by the active duty military personnel who secured our freedoms on the battle fields in Europe and Asia, including your right to voice your suspicions and fears.

From its inception the USA government has been a racist oligarchy, never a true democracy.  As the iron-clad grip of the arrogant ruling class tightens over the political economy, more citizens are being forced to realize why the top elite can run circles around the middle class and the underclass while simultaneously violating both the U.S. Consitution and international law.
As America falls politically, economically and spiritually, the top one percent (which owns 46% of all private wealth) intensifies its exploitation of the classes beneath it, especially the long-suffering slave descendants upon whom the government has long imposed ethnocide and forced assimilation.
As long as the USA imposes these vile practices upon Afrodescendants, and rejects our just demands for Human Rights and Reparations, we as a people should be exempt both from taxation and military service.
Sincerely,
Malik Al-Arkam
www.AllForReparations.org

With respect, Malik, victims and the descendants of victims are everywhere, there’s no paying us all back. Maybe there’s a bare hope of a departure from our brutal history, if people could ever get alert to that possibility.

War is about killing as many people and wrecking as many towns as necessary, until their leaders submit to ours. Anyone can admire heroes, in uniform or not, but when it all gets done that’s what war is.

The issue here is autonomy and choice.  Middle school and high school ROTC is a specific kind of militarist indoctrination of minors.  It is a kind of religion, and it has no place in the neutral forum that schools should be (but obviously are very far from being.)

Schools should foster growth, intellectual and moral autonomy, the capacity to be a human being - ROTC values are the very opposite of everything an education should be in a free society.

Children do not have the capacity to make an autonomous choice about their participation as soldiers in service of a violent empire, and the earlier they join the militarist system the higher the likelihood that they will not gain that capacity by the time they do have the legal and moral capacity to choose.

Dean, there is no doubt that it is sometimes necessary to take up the gun, that the war against Germany and Japan was more justified than not and served many positive ends.  The question is not about 1941 however.  The question involves the empire we have become in 2005. 

You have to consider the balance.  To what extent is the empire engagd in legitimate self defense and to what extent is it simply an agressive imperial project? 

The balance is pretty clear, nothwithstanding the legitimatcy of going after Bin Laden in Afghanistan.  To recruit underage adults who really do not have the ability to judge the project that they are participating in is simply immoral.  We’re not talking about involuntary participation in a church group or the boy scouts… we’re talking about indoctrinating 11 year olds to be imperial soldiers in project of world domination.

Don’t wave the flag at me about the great and noble project of the second world war.  That was a long time ago, and frankly a grand exception in the sorry imperialist history of the United States.

TODAY, there is nothing honorable about service in the military.  TODAY the military has been utterly abused and removed from legitimate defensive purposes.  Recruting children for this enterprise, “grooming” them is a word that has the right insidious connotations I think, is obscene , a kind of predation that there should be laws against.

I retain my faith that this attack on children will backfire.

“I thank God that we have brave soldiers to defend us against very real threats in this world”

So maybe you should refrain from calling kids interested in the military booger eaters

Again, other than Mr. Munson, no one addresses the facts of how deceptive this article is.  Wedekind wants to leave the impression that JROTC is a Bush administration sinister plot.  You swallowed it hook, line and sinker.  The fact is JROTC has been in existence since 1916 and will be with us long after Iraq is over and Mr. Bush is gone.

Can’t you think for yourselves for once.

“If a kid wants to go into the military, fine.  But a 12 year old kid does not have a good idea what that means.  I agree with Miles that corraling young, naive kids seems like a real act of desperation.”

A 12 year old kid can’t go into the military, so it really doesn’t matter if he has a good idea or not.  He’s got six years or more to figure it out.

So was it a sign of desperation for every administration since Wilson’s to support JROTC?  That’s 16 desperate presidents all right!

Campensino,

The JROTC will not prepare children to critically evaluate their participation in the US military from an independent point of view.

With Middle School Cadet Corps (MSCC) the child now has got a full six years during which he has virtually no chance to develop such a perspective.

It puts the child inside the military world view from a young age, and teaches all the values of obedience to authority that should be anathema to “freedom loving Americans.”

---

I think the article is saying that the Middle School Cadet Corps (MSCC) program at the K-8 level is new, not JROTC.

But the case against the JROTC doesn’t get weaker just because it’s been around for a long time.  After all so has US imperialism, by which I mean the illegitimate use of military force not for defense but to build an economic and military empire.

Antiquity is no guarantor of wisdom.

Campesino,

The point you repeatedly miss here is that pre-teen kids do not have the perspective to understand what a military life is, especially in war time.  My complaint is with the drive to force kids who cannot blend well socially with other kids into a camp that will form them into tomorrow’s bodies in Bush’s war on the world.

Those kids, I knew plenty of them in high school, were socially awkward and didn’t have a sense of inclusion.  My point is that there are many other ways of building self-esteem and social inclusion that do not foster future “Terminators” for the government. 

In fact, the kids that did join up with ROTC were some of the most “out of it” kids at my school.  That is why I made that comment and it is still true in my experience of ROTC’ers.

I tell veterans of any war that I am glad that they “defended our freedom”.  This war has nothing, ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with defending our freedom.  My employees (2 ex-Marines) are very aware of my feeling that they have been lied to and misused, though I still thank them for their hard work and sacrifice. But they understand my anger at Bush’s lies.  They also, now, feel that this war was a lie and they are pissed.

So, sorry if the truth upsets you, but you really should stop backing an unjust and illegal war.  And more than that, middle school aged children should not have programs like that.  They are too young, and it should be saved for high school and college.  When there is a real war that is justified and that we didn’t start out of political and economic reasons, I will be the first one to say “Hoorah for our soldiers and their brave mission”.  Just not for this one.

Actually, I haven’t said anything about the war - you are making assumptions. 

The truth is, which none of you want to address, is this article deals in half-truths to paint a picture that insinuates that the current administration in desperation has come up with JROTC programs to dragoon kids into fighting this war.  When in actuality the program was started in 1916 and has had bi-partisan support by 16 presidents during war and peace for 89 years.

It was intended to provoke a reaction of condemnation for this administration for something it didn’t do.

Dr. Pavlov rang the bell and you all started barking. So predictable.

Look at facts and think for yourself.

I’m just wondering why we don’t start the program earlier.  See, here’s my idea.  Ya know how funding has been cut for lots of preschool programs because of the huge deficits we’re running.  Well, what about we start up BROTC (b is baby) training programs at 6 weeks of age.  Solve 2 problems at once.

Think about it.  Kids will grow up wanting to be military heros instead of doctors, teachers, and engineers.  Just think how much ass we (the US)could kick when these kids hit 18.  Hell with that early start we might have these kids ready to go when they are 14 or 15.  Well, at least for the non-driving jobs.  Ya know like artillery, prison guards, stuff like that.

I tell ya, it’s a seller.  Label the program something like “No Child Left Behind”. You know kind of a play on the military slogan “No soldier left behind”.

And we need it.  Have you seen the Military Recruiting number lately?  They suck.  For some reason the kids (well, the 18 year-olds, not really kids now are they) aren’t rushing off to fight to defend our nation from imminent threat of WMDs, err um terrorists, I mean Freedom (isn’t that a kind of fries now).  Well, whatever reason that we’re selling this week (hey, what about OIL), they just aren’t rushing off to fight for it.

Part of the reason for that though, is that the Iraq war plan has also been at times non-existant and at all other times delusional.  Alas, BROTC will fix that too.  Kids brought up in this program will have been there for 59.75 years of their 60 year life when they become Secretary of the Defense.  They will have some kind of a plan complete with exit strategy before any and all pre-emptive wars, you better believe it.

I’m dead satirically, serious, the time for BROTC is now.

Campesino,

The article is very clearly about both MSSC for K through 8 and JROTC for older kids.

All the arguments against JROTC apply that much more strongly to MSSC.

The relationship between the military’s recruitment problem and the expansion of MSSC is an inference, a very reasonable one.

The article presents a fact… the new reach of JROTC type programs to coopt younger and younger children in MSSC. 

The explanations for that fact?  Well that’s for you to decide.

Nothing in the article suggests that JROTC is a specific policy response to this war.  Show me where it even remotely suggests it!

The article does join the criique of MSSC to a broader critique of JROTC, as well it should.

Do some reading for yourself first.

You’ve set up a straw man and burned it to the ground.  Nice work, but your straw man was irrelevant to the argument.

Upon re-reading the article by Ms. Wedekind, I find it to actually be somewhat more fair and balanced, to borrow a slogan, than at first glance.  It’s actually more a praising of, than it is an indictment against, these youth programs.  However, she does try to make associations where none exist, and leaves out key information in order to fit her agenda.  But don’t we all?

“Staring straight ahead, she yells out an order to a squad of peers lined up in three perfect columns next to her. Having been in the military program for six years, Tarsha has earned the rank of captain and is in charge of the 28 boys and girls in her squad. This is Lavizzo Elementary School. Tarsha is 14.”

What an incredible accomplishment for a 14 year old.  While most of her classmates are probably wasting their precious formative years worrying about what to watch on “Teen Disney”, this girl is learning about leadership and self-esteem.  She’ll be light years ahead of the pack when she gets her first job at Burger King or baby-sitting.  I know I’d be much more likely to trust her to look after my child than one of her ditzy friends, knowing that she’s learned a few things about leadership and responsibility.  If she decides to go into the military, so what?  It’s her choice.  It’s not a bad choice, like Wedekind and so many here quite wrongly and bitterly imply.

“Tarsha, however, has already signed up. While she wants to be a lawyer and is not planning on joining the armed forces when she graduates, the 14-year-old says, “If I were to join the military, I would be ready for it.”

So Tarsha is apparently pleased with what she’s gained from the program, but doesn’t feel roped in by it.  Hardly an indictment of the MSCC or the JROTC.  She seems perfectly cognizant that she has a choice of whether or not to join the military.  She comes across to me as someone empowered, not victimized.  Take notice, N.O.W.

BTW, she doesn’t look like a “booger-eater” or “out of it” to me.  But that’s subjective, I guess.  The next guy in line, well, never mind. 

O.K., so there’s some voluntary programs offered in middle schools that have a military component.  As if there’s something wrong with the military, that awful organization that is without question the greatest force for democracy and freedom the planet has ever known.  (No, sorry Sy Hersch, you and other “journalists” of like mind don’t hold a candle.  You’re not doing us any favors, but you are doing our enimies plenty)

“But they use guns in school, don’t you see?  That’s just not allowed, someone could get the wrong idea.  That damn 2nd amendment is so unconstitutional”.  My god, I’m sure glad we had a chance to defeat the nazis and the fascists and the communists before this mindset started to creep into our society.  Unfortunately, we still have a few shall we say “rationally challenged” ideologies that may only respond to the use of or the credible threat of the use of these politically incorrect instruments.

Next we make a quantum leap to the NCLB act.  Wedekind leaves out a key portion:

(2) CONSENT- The local educational agency or private school SHALL NOTIFY parents of the option to make a request and SHALL COMPLY with any request.

Hard to believe, as Wedekind states, that so few are aware of the ability to opt out.  Unless the schools are violating a provision of the act.  And even IF the recruiters called you, are you REQUIRED to join?  Are you unable at this time to discuss the subject with parents?  It’s voluntary, and as better-than-expected RE-enlistment rates suggest, soldiers are not clamoring to escape the military or Iraq, as much as our liberal friends wish they were. 

All these attacks on the motives and methods of the military are quite nonsensical.  People who did, or people who would have burned their draft cards in the 60’s are now doing everything possible to insure that we are forced to reinstitute a non-voluntary force.

What kind of fool would volunteer to offer themselves up to today’s US military - to be a battery in the matrix whose only purpose is to be consumed for the benefit of the enrichment of the Bush family?  Only a poor, hungry, desperate one.

Natalie, You are an inveterate liar.  Virtually every word that comes out of your stinking pie hole is a lie.  You are so full of s**t your eyes are brown.

“People who did, or people who would have burned their draft cards in the 60’s are now doing everything possible to insure that we are forced to reinstitute a non-voluntary force.”

Natalie,

You are so off-track it’s laughable.  The people who protested Vietnam are now, by and large, mostly Republicans in my life’s experience.  They “sold out” long ago.

Also, they have no power to make the non-volunteer army anything other than what it is.  Who has the power is that jerkwad of a president you, for some unknown reason, seem to admire.  He and his cronies are the ones setting us up to reinstate the draft.  When Army and Marine recruitment goals are significantly below acceptable levels, to invade Iran (as he signed off on last October, or didn’t you know that?) will force our country back into the draft.  Now there is a buzz about us taking on Syria as well, maybe N. Korea?  Who knows.  It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to figure out that if we are currently using stop-loss tactics to keep military personnel, we are going to have to do something to shore up our personnel.

I don’t disagree that the military does give good training for life beyond the active service period.  You all just keep missing the point that junior high is too young to make such decisions.  When you still can’t differentiate between the threat levels of Darth Vader and
Kim Il Jong, you are not ready to start preparing for a military career.

So tell me, Natalie, do you have your children enrolled in this program?  Are you going to join up soon and serve in Iraq? 

What about you, Campesino?  Ready to re-enlist or send your kids or grandkids over to die for Bush and Halliburton?  Maybe Bush didn’t design this program, but he and his admin. certainly have set up the fascist-nationalistic fervor that has even caused most of the nation’s Christians to give over to the idea that God is America and to do right by America/God is to do Bush’s will.  Wake up.

Years ago,I watched a Pee-Wee Herman special.On that special,he read letters,supposedly sent to him from children all over the world.One letter went like this:

“Dear Pee-Wee,
My name is Shalom.I live in Israel.I am seven years old and have been in the army for two years now.”

Big laugh from the audience. 

With Bush’s never-ending war on"terror"that could soon be us.

Big laugh from the audience.

Margaret,
No need to get upset.Just sit back and wait for the draft.When that happens,it will be sheer ambrosia to watch Republicans flip-flop and try to redefine patriotism to suit their self-interest.

Natalie,
What does the Second Amendment have to do with attempting to impose militarism in our schools?

Nothing.

Might I suggest that you peddle your red herrings at the fish market instead of here.

why anyone would want to put their life on the line for an elite group of people who would readily deny them health care, education, and a decent living is beyond me.  death to american plutocracy!

wbysea,

It just irritates me greatly that some people are so sucked in by the power vacuum that they will sacrifice their own country to be on the “side that’s winning”.

Though I despise Ann Coulter and I use the term in regard to the neocons, her phrase is correct, they are “traitors”.

What relevance does the Middle School Cadet Corp have to do with education?  Is there any evidence that the MSCC program improves a child’s ability to calculate, read, or write? 
Why are the majority of the MSCC programs located in impoverished schools?
How many High School recruits actually graduate from College as compared to non-recruits?
What is the educational benefit from enlisting in the military as compared to other methods of receiving student grants or loans?

“MSCC and JROTC are paid for by the military..”
This statement is only partially correct. The instructors salaries, which run up into the $80,000 range are split 50-50 between the military and your city taxes. City taxpayers also cover all the benefits including health care etc.
All the programs field trips are paid for by city tax payers including buses, gas, drivers, insurance etc. If a school does any work like
creating a safe place to store weapons, you are correct, paid for by you and me. Chicago’s tax payers are up into the $3M range.

“Natalie, You are an inveterate liar.  Virtually every word that comes out of your stinking pie hole is a lie.  You are so full of s**t your eyes are brown.”

This response would be funnier if it was something I hadn’t heard on the playground in fourth grade.  (well except for the inveterate part) Try to adjust the maturity level so I might get more chuckles, won’t you?

“What kind of fool would volunteer to offer themselves up to today’s US military - to be a battery in the matrix whose only purpose is to be consumed for the benefit of the enrichment of the Bush family?  Only a poor, hungry, desperate one.”

That’s what I’m talking about...LOL!  Battery in the matrix.  That’s adult stuff!  You can be so preciously funny when you come in off the playground!  But you know, there should be some element of truth in your joke for it to be even more funny.  Bush is still coming in a distant fourth in net worth to John Kerry (richest man in the senate), John Edwards and Dick Cheney.  And he doesn’t really show much interest in mansions, 6000 dollar bicycles, Gulfstream V private jets and ski chalets.  So you see, it doesn’t really....work...ya know?

Margaret wrote:

“You are so off-track it’s laughable.  The people who protested Vietnam are now, by and large, mostly Republicans in my life’s experience.  They “sold out” long ago.”

I guess they followed in the footsteps of all those Dixiecrats who strangely decided to join the party furthest from supporting their point of view.  All the undesirables joined up with the GOP.  That’s just so convenient in explaining just about everything.  Almost sounds like some kind of article of faith that comforts, soothes, and explains the reason for all the evil in this world.  Pardon me if I disagree, and conclude that you are the one who is off-track, anecdotal experiences aside.

Here’s some alternate anecdotal evidence....  Last time I checked, Jane Fonda, John Kerry (mother of all war protesters) and Bill Clinton (mother of all draft dodgers) were all still Democrats.  Bobby Byrd and virtually every other former rascist in congress are still Democrats, or were till their dying day.  Strictly anecdotal, though.

“to invade Iran (as he signed off on last October, or didn’t you know that?) will force our country back into the draft.  Now there is a buzz about us taking on Syria as well, maybe N. Korea?  Who knows.  It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to figure out that if we are currently using stop-loss tactics to keep military personnel, we are going to have to do something to shore up our personnel.”

Actually, this is all a ruse to distract from his real plan.  Invade and annex Canada.  Not really much of a challenge militarily, and boy do they have fossil fuel!  Clever, huh?  So no need for a draft and therefore no danger of repeating that “read my lips” fiasco.  And you thought he was dumb.

I understand that you think these kids are too young to learn about anything military.  But at the same time, it would seem that it’s perfectly fine for them to be brainwashed by kook left environmental activists (their teachers) to hate the company their mom or dad work for, and taught that any sexual lifestyle they choose is fine and good, perfectly healthy and normal.  This just might be considered by large numbers of reasonable Americans to be an unwarranted attempt at confusing and manipulating kids to serve a political and financial agenda.  But Unlike JROTC, there doesn’t seem to be much of a CHOICE of whether or not one is to be subjected to this particular world-view.

My kid’s only seven, but like most boys he’s quite interested in guns, missiles, and fighting.  If he was provided an opportunity in a few years to participate in a program that would teach him about the responsible use of guns and the true history and motives of the American soldier, and he CHOSE to join, I wouldn’t be at all opposed.  I would consider it a much superior alternative to the scores of other much more negative ways to channel natural male aggression. 

He even picks his nose, so he’d be perfect!

Natalie’s just a regular “Lying Limbaugh” isn’t she!  The lies just poor out of her mouth like lava out of Mt. Vesuvius. Natalie, your teeth must be rotten from all the effluent flowing over them.

The mother of all draft dodgers, Nat, is Dick “chickenhawk” Cheney.  5 DRAFT DEFERMENTS.  WHAT A PUSSY.  I think Jane Fonda would kick his fat flabby ass.  The rest of the top 100 draft dodging chickenhawk brigade are all yellow bellied, sap sucking, hypocritical, conservative cowards.

You know, famous hypocritical conservative cowards like:

George W. Bush
John Ellis “Jeb” Bush
Karl Rove
Saxby Chambliss
Tom DeLay
Chester Trent Lott
Dennis Hastert
Donald Rumsfeld
Paul Wolfowitz
William “Bill” Bennett
William “Bill” Kristol
John Ashcroft
Antonin Scalia
Clarence Thomas
Newton Leroy “Newt” Gingrich
J. Danforth “Dan” Quayle
Sean Hannity
David Limbaugh
Rush Limbaugh
Ken Adelman
Roger Ailes
Neal Boortz
Lee Greenwood
Sean Hannity
Ann Coulter
Brit Hume
William “Bill” O’Reilly
Michael Reagan
Michael Savage
Joseph “Joe” Scarborough
Ted Nugent
Spencer Abraham
Eliot Abrams
Gary Bauer
John Bolton
Andrew “Andy” Card
Asa Hutchinson
Lewis “Scooter” Libby
Richard Perle
Spencer Abraham
Eliot Abrams
Don Evans
Frank Gaffney
I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby
Jerry Falwell
Marion “Pat” Robertson
etc.
etc.
etc.

“A conservative is a man who is too cowardly to fight and too fat to run.” - Elbert Hubbard

Natalie,

Yes,yes,John Kerry did protest the war.Unlike most Republicans,he went and fought.I think that gives him a right to protest.Regarding Bill Clinton dodging the draft,please.we’ve heard so often it’s beyond cliche.Dodging the draft is also claiming to have bad knees to avoid service(Buchanan,Saxby Chambliss)a pilonidal cyst(Limbaugh),a problem which can be treated on an out-patient basis,or claiming you have more important things to do(Darth,I mean,Dick Cheney).

It’s funny that Republicans talk on and on about patriotism,yet very few of their politicians have actually served in the military.One of the reasons,I suspect,is those politicians feel military service to be beneath them.Why should they put off law school plans for a few years to fight in some country their party is trying to exploit when there is the"hoi polloi"(as they view their constituents)to do it for them.If Bush is so committed to bringing democracy to the Middle-East why doesn’t he tell his daughters to drop out of school and enlist?At the very least,they could go to O.C.S.and obtain commissions when they graduate.Yeah,right.

Isn’t interesting how people on the right think that “acceptance” of multiple points of view, concern that “all living things” be recognized as valuable to our ecosystem, respect for people with different sexualities and different perspectives, concern that children be empowered to make choices, are all somehow part of a narrow “agenda”? 

The reason they say this is of course that if those values are just some narrow left wing commie agenda, then it is perfectly acceptable to oppose them with another narrow right wing agenda.

But they are not part of a narrow left wing agenda.  They are the very opposite of an agenda driven value set.  They are part of a value set that empowers people to formulate their own agendas for their own lives. 

Public education is about creating a common meeting ground for all Americans, and about valuing diversity and difference, and this drives the right nuts.  They want to fit the left into a narrow little ideological box, no different and no better than their narrow ideological box.  But of course it doesn’t work because in fact many of us on the left are working to create a very different kind of world from the one that the far right imagines, a world of choice and human freedom.

Natalie, how could you learn anything useful about the military from within the military (or a military academy), given that the military is an institution with a narrow promilitary ideology?  Wouldn’t you want an objective external evaluation of the military, for better and for worse?  Surely you are not one of those far-out lefty believers in the idea that subjective experience is the path to truth? 

I’ve never met a teacher who “hates” the company a child’s parents work for.  In my experience children’s teachers are well aware of how important parental employment and income are to good educational outcomes.

I’ve never encountered a teacher who sought to teach that “any sexual lifestyle” is fine and good.  Responsible teachers would of course emphasize the importance of not hurting other human beings, the importance of respect and the importance of responsibility.  That would rule out many imaginable sexual “lifestyles” (ie. behaviors) but not homosexuality or heterosexuality as such. 

Sigh. Why does it always come back to gays?  The right is just obsessed with gays.  I think they are afraid of what lurks within their own hearts and passions.  The scariest homosexual is the one we fear lurks within our own heterosexual selves and our pre-sexual children.

Getting your child to hold a gun won’t keep him safe from this demon Natalie. The odds are about 1 in 20 and the military academy won’t make the slightest difference.

Natalie,

Obviously, you didn’t know Bush had signed off on Iran.  Well, your son should be just about the right age to start training.  You’d better buy his plot now.

My son will continue studying the arts, in which he is extremely talented.  He knows that violence as the first solution is for bullies and losers, like you Republicans.

“What about you, Campesino?  Ready to re-enlist”

I got my Honorable Discharge from the Army in 1981.  I doubt they’d have me back

Lucky you!

Campo, you obviously didn’t read the stop loss provision on your discharge papers.  You’re goin’ tah ‘Raq babeeeeeee!

Wbysea,

I think you missed the list of “chickenhawk” brigade I posted earlier:

You know, famous hypocritical conservative cowards like:

George W. Bush
John Ellis “Jeb” Bush
Karl Rove
Saxby Chambliss
Tom DeLay
Chester Trent Lott
Dennis Hastert
Donald Rumsfeld
Paul Wolfowitz
William “Bill” Bennett
William “Bill” Kristol
John Ashcroft
Antonin Scalia
Clarence Thomas
Newton Leroy “Newt” Gingrich
J. Danforth “Dan” Quayle
Sean Hannity
David Limbaugh
Rush Limbaugh
Ken Adelman
Roger Ailes
Neal Boortz
Lee Greenwood
Sean Hannity
Ann Coulter
Brit Hume
William “Bill” O’Reilly
Michael Reagan
Michael Savage
Joseph “Joe” Scarborough
Ted Nugent
Spencer Abraham
Eliot Abrams
Gary Bauer
John Bolton
Andrew “Andy” Card
Asa Hutchinson
Lewis “Scooter” Libby
Richard Perle
Spencer Abraham
Eliot Abrams
Don Evans
Frank Gaffney
I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby
Jerry Falwell
Marion “Pat” Robertson
etc.
etc.
etc.

“A conservative is a man who is too cowardly to fight and too fat to run.” - Elbert Hubbard

Lefty,
Yeah.I probably did.I skimmed through this one in a bit of hurry.BTW,wbysea is not a name,it’s a joke involving anagrams and another poster WHOSE PRESENCE I’M WAITING TO HEAR FROM.

Good list,though.Amazing how patriotic these people claim to be without having put their money where their mouth is.At least the militaristic twelve-year old has made the gesture.

Why is Rumsfeld on your list?

That’s a very impressive list, Lefty.  An admirable job of pasting and of course let’s not forget that for one to be able to paste, one also has to cut.

However, I find your methodology and conclusions a little confusing when I consider the following:

Number of Democrats in 108th Senate with military service:  16
Number of Republicans:  19

Total years service of Senate Democrats:  101
Total years service of Senate Republicans:  149

Number of Democrats in 109th House w/ service:  40
Number of Republicans:  70

Of course there’s also the assumption that of current military personnel, some 60-70 percent would probably identify themselves as Republican and by large more conservative than liberal.  (speculation, I admit, but informed)

And also the assumption that these proportions would likely be reflected in the population at large, since they are elected representatives of that population.  I’m still researching the service records of conservative vs. liberal talk show hosts, but I think I’ll probably find that their strengths as a group are more related to ranting and raving, than they are to military service.

Average conservative rating of Senate Democrats w/ service:  15
Average conservative rating of Senate Republicans w/ service:  80

I don’t know who Elbert Hubbard is, but I would guess that he might have some pretty rotten teeth and perhaps even brown eyes.  Friend of yours?

I guess those numbers would explain why the Republicans are so in love with death, lies and destruction.

Oh, by the way, Natalie, the German were proud of their Wehrmacht, too.  Sieg Heil, baby.

Natalie,

You are a pathological liar.  You just can’t help yourself can you!

As for “average conservative rating,” since there are only 2 kinds of conservatives: 1)idiots and 2) crooks, I’d say that your made up rating is probably pretty close to accurate with the exception that the rating for republicans should be a perfect 100% liars and crooks. 

It remains only to purge the entire democratic party of idiots and crooks (you know, like Zell Miller).

I agree, Lefty.  Natalie’s numbers were a bunch of inconsequential hodgepodge. 

On the current recruitment shortage, an elderly gentleman told me that only the patriots were signing up.  I politely told him that, while I was grateful for what he’d done in WWII, only the political naive were the ones signing up today.  At that, the two tables of gray-haired vets sitting with him at the donut shop all started hollering about locking Bush away in a cage, hang the bastards, etc.  That really surprised me, them being veterans and all.  I guess the people who actually went through it are a bit more wise than those who would rather just believe the lies/rhetoric.

Margaret,

I’m not surprised.  Bush is a world class chickenhawk and everyone knows it.  My understanding is that about 2,000 officers were murdered by enlisted men in the decade the U.S. was in Vietnam.  I wouldn’t be surprised if something similar occurs in Iraq if our troups are still there in another year.

This is really very sad.  Lefty makes a “chickenhawk” list and Natalie replies with facts that show, on balance, Republicans in Congress have spent more time in the military than Democrats.  And she does this in an objective and fairly polite manner.

Your response is to call her a liar, a Nazi, say that is why Republicans “love death” (do you think most in our military love death?), use profanity, and to call her facts an “inconsequential hodgepodge”.

I really don’t think that she has done anything to deserve the abuse you have given her.  Don’t you think you should answer her facts with objective arguments rather than ad hominem attacks.

guess those numbers would explain why the Republicans are so in love with death, lies and destruction.

Posted by Margaret on June 8, 2005 at 12:04 PM

Earlier you were thanking veterans (prior to this war)for their service in defending our country.  Now you are saying that members of Congress that have performed this service for you are in love with death, lies, and destruction because of it.

Your stance here is quite confusing.

Miles,

I’m not sure if you’re still hanging around this deteriorating thread, but I wanted to respond to your thoughtful post for which I thank you for keeping well within the bounds of vigorous, yet civil debate.

I couldn’t help but snicker at your first sentence regarding multiple points of view and acceptance thereof.  I along with too few others have thought it prudent to present another point of view in response to some of the consistently far left point of view articles that appear here.  I probably wouldn’t use the word tolerance to describe the reaction we get.  Of course ITT is a liberal lair, and I wouldn’t expect any articles to conflict with that worldview, but I would expect more from our public schools.

Yes, schools are about diversity and difference, but different points of view are not meaningfully included in that formula, unless they involve color, ethnicity, or sexual preference.  If a child wants to express a different point of view that wanders outside of these strict parameters, tolerance is suddenly forgotten.

Imagine on Earth Day, a child making a poster illustrating an oil rig with a directional drill reaching down and across to reach a big pool of oil from its small perch surrounded by frolicking wildlife, green foliage, and colorful flowers.  I can see all the teachers now, standing around it with concerned faces wondering if this is a message we should allow to be displayed.  It would totally conflict with the template they’ve been presenting, that oil companies are bad and solar and wind power are good.  It would show oil companies extracting energy in an environmentally friendly way. 

http://capmag.com/articlePrint.asp?ID=958

Or how about something as innocent and innocuous as a child bringing a bible to read during recess or free reading time?  We all know how long it takes for some “tolerant” teacher or administrator to politely proclaim that his book is not allowed at school because of the first amendment, don’t you see.  The real problem is that it presents a point of view quite conflicting to the one schools prefer.

You’ve really go me all wrong when you assume that I match some characterization of a bible thumping red faced bigot intolerant of anything or anybody that conflicts with my fundamentalist formula.  I consider myself to be an average somewhat lower middle class parent who is who does not feel that there is too much diversity taught in schools, but too little.  I want diversity to exceed the shallow definitions given by our current system and include much more meaningful, valuable diversity in thinking, and more tolerance of views that, if given a chance, might just prove themselves to be superior to, or at least on par with others.

I’m not afraid of or intolerant of gay people.  I’ve got many friends at work and elsewhere who are gay.  Teaching tolerance for homosexuality is fine, but in my opinion it often goes too far and reaches a point of being just plain inappropriate:

http://www.newswithviews.com/public_schools/public_schools1.htm

I would hope that people could be at least as tolerant of the JROTC point of view as they would want others to be of theirs.

I’ve got an idea, Natalie.  Since we’er both born-again Christians, why don’t you let your son join my middle school club to show how far off Jesus’ teachings the Bush Administration is?  We’ll march everyday, “One, two, three, four, let’s kill innocent people for Bush’s war!” We’ll have good citizenship classes teaching the kids how to write to their Congressperson to demand an investigation into the high crimes committed by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Wolfowitz.  Then we’ll march around the Federal Court Building with “Choose Life” signs with pictures of US military personnel killed in Iraq with $ signs drawn over their faces.  Then we can go to North Carolina where the “Healthy Forest Initiative” has opened up 100’s of thousands of acres of virgin forest to logging, which we taxpayers can pay for road to be built in and then sell the lumber at under cost to GOP supporters.

Now that’s what I call good Christian stewardship!  When shall I expect your boy?

Campesino,

Let me outline this for you so it is clear:

1.  A just war, such as WWII--Hooray!  Go USA!  Go Brave Soldiers! 

2.  Unjust and illegal war--Vietnam, Iraq--Stop lying to Congress and the American people and the world.  Quit lying to our soldiers and using them as sacraficial lambs for your corporate buddies’ bank accounts.

4.  For soldiers of any way--I have no problem with you or your commitment, just with your lying Commander-in-Chief.

One other question.  How many of those Republican Service years are like the years Bush “spent in” the Texas Guard?

3.  ROTC - Not what I’d choose for my child, but for those in High School and College, head on if that’s what you want.

4.  JROTC - shouldn’t exist.  Conditions children to accept violence and not question authority at an age they should be building critical analytical thinking skills.  Leave it for high school and college.

I hope this clarifies my view.

Sorry that got screwed up, but I think you are smart enough to get my point.  Hard to run and business and blog at the same time, at times.

“We’ll march, we’ll march”..... (see above)

“Now that’s what I call good Christian stewardship!  When shall I expect your boy?”

Now that’s what I call an “inconsequential hodgepodge”!  I see that you’re thoroughly indoctrinated with Jim Wallis’s politics, Margaret.  Ever have an original thought?  (kidding) You do realize, of course, that you’re only furthering my argument that there exists an intolerance for thinking out of the extreme left environmental/political box in public schools.

I maintain that it’s at least as reasonable for the military to support a VOLUNTARY program for young people interested in such things as it is for the environmental and homosexual left to advance their agenda under the cover of “mainstream” thinking, rarely even stopping to think there might be a NEED to offer an opportunity for kids to opt out.

Reasonable people can disagree on the appropriate age for introducing certain ideas and concepts to kids.  I would not be overly opposed to restricting ROTC activities to youth above the age of 14, as has been the custom since 1916.  However, at the same time, it’s common knowledge that kids are maturing earlier, and that many other equally as controversial concepts are being introduced at earlier and earlier ages.  I only argue that introducing the concept of the military as a force for good, which is inarguable except to the obtuse, should be LESS controversial than are laws saying that a 12 or 13 year old girl can leave campus to have an abortion and her parents cannot be notified.

There’s certainly more than one definition of and approach to environmental “stewardship”, and the methods or lack thereof promoted by the environmental left are often counter-productive.  In fact, I’m starting to think that the greater clear and present danger—if you believe in such hype—comes not from the religious right as Wallis would have you believe, but from the Earth worshipping environmental left.

This from one of their heros:

“Opposition to nuclear energy is based on irrational fear fed by Hollywood-style fiction, the Green lobbies and the media. These fears are unjustified, and nuclear energy from its start in 1952 has proved to be the safest of all energy sources. We must stop fretting over the minute statistical risks of cancer from chemicals or radiation. Nearly one third of us will die of cancer anyway, mainly because we breathe air laden with that all pervasive carcinogen, oxygen. If we fail to concentrate our minds on the real danger, which is global warming, we may die even sooner, as did more than 20,000 unfortunates from overheating in Europe last summer.”

http://www.climateark.org/articles/reader.asp?linkid=31936

BTW, since you were wondering, the numbers of Senators in the 108th congress with military service minus those who served exclusively in the guard and reserve are:

Democrat:  12
Republican:  14

The total number of years service minus guard and reserve years:

Democrat:  43
Republican:  59

One can maintain that Republicans are war mongers, but one cannot at the same time claim that they’re chickenhawks....and remain intellectually honest.

-------------

“As somebody who is a Christian myself, I don’t like it when people use religion to divide, whether that is Republican or Democrat.  I think in terms of his role as party spokesman, [Dean] probably needs to be a little more careful and I suspect that is a message he is going to be getting from a number of us.”

“We are at a time in our country’s history that inclusive language is better than exclusive language” — Barack Obama

‘I really don’t think that she has done anything to deserve the abuse you have given her.  Don’t you think you should answer her facts with objective arguments rather than ad hominem attacks.”

Posted by Campesino on June 8, 2005 at 9:25 PM

I have Campo, Natalie’s “facts” ARE CALLED LIES.  She’s pulling these BS statistics out of her ass (or off of some wingnut website).  Natalie is a pathological liar, a Lyin’ Limbaugh and she’s not going to post her BS without being called what she is.

And her pathetic “conservative rating” . . . as if being an idiot or a crook was something to stive for. 

HEY NATALIE, WHEN YOU HAD YOUR BRAIN WASHED, DID YOU HAVE IT WAXED TOO?

So, Natalie, what would Jesus do?

Would he encourage teaching children war?  Would he encourage the rape and pillage of our planet?  The Republicans are the only ones on the planet who don’t realize that global warming theory has really been proven beyond the “theory” status.

And, thank you so much.  I would agree that Jim Wallis is the finest example of Christianity out there today, aside from Billy Graham and a few others.  What the Republicans have forgotten is that Jesus did not come to earth to judge, but to save through his love.  We were given the same commission.  Not to go beat the crap out of people who don’t believe in him.

With the advent of the Downing Street Memo and the other corroborating evidence, it looks like we won’t have to argue much more about Bush.  He, and his groupies, are now sliding down that same slippery slope as did Richard Nixon.  I’d give him till maybe 2007 before he’s impeached.  Hopefully, we’ll send him, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Wolfowitz to the Hague for war crimes. 

You may want to book your flight now, as I am sure you’ll want to go cheerlead for them.  Till then, I will continue my work with the Christian missions with which I’m involved, all of which push the fact the Jesus loves you whether you are gay, straight, stoned, Communist or aetheist.  It is not for us to judge, only to show the way to God with Jesus’ love.  This is something the Republican party has totally lost in their bloodlust.

And, frankly, I didn’t call anyone a chickenhawk.  That was Lefty.  To boot, I really don’t care who had more service.  It is totally inconsequential to the tattered state of our nation that the GOP has brought us to singlehandedly.

“So, Natalie, what would Jesus do?”

Jesus was a liberal.

Margaret presumes to know what Jesus would do.  She and scientists of like mind presume to have mastered the intricate complexities of global climate thermodynamics, coincidentally just as the bloom has started to fall from the rose of the fear mongering environmental left.

Not long ago we were all in angst about the soon to explode population bomb, global famine and global cooling.  Now we’re warming again.  Whatever keeps those checks rolling in.  That’s my “theory”.  But if I’m wrong, if man’s use of fossil fuel is causing imminent catastrophic warming, it’s not the far right that refuses to realize that we can’t significantly change the track we’re on without the use of nuclear power.  (except for Nick and few others)

NY Times April 9, 2005 NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

“If there was one thing that used to be crystal clear to any environmentalist, it was that nuclear energy was the deadliest threat this planet faced. That’s why Dick Gregory pledged at a huge anti-nuke demonstration in 1979 that he would eat no solid food until all nuclear plants in the U.S. were shut down.

Mr. Gregory may be getting hungry.

But it’s time for the rest of us to drop that hostility to nuclear power. It’s increasingly clear that the biggest environmental threat we face is actually global warming, and that leads to a corollary: nuclear energy is green.

Nuclear power, in contrast with other sources, produces no greenhouse gases. So President Bush’s overall environmental policy gives me the shivers, but he’s right to push ahead for nuclear energy. There haven’t been any successful orders for new nuclear plants since 1973, but several proposals for new plants are now moving ahead - and that’s good for the world we live in.

Global energy demand will rise 60 percent over the next 25 years, according to the International Energy Agency, and nuclear power is the cleanest and best bet to fill that gap.”

(rest of editorial available for a small fee @ the NY Times)

I’m afraid your boy Jim has confused passivity with suicide.  He’s stood fast against any use of American military force or intervention.  Against lifting a finger to prevent communism from engulfing our hemispheric neighbors to the south and elsewhere, and even against attacking Afghanistan.  I’m quite certain he’s against the JROTC or any organization that might work contrary to his misguided doctrine.  Billy Graham I believe is a supporter of the war in Iraq; his son Franklin certainly is.

I wouldn’t pin your hopes too high on the Downing Street memo.  It’s much ado about not much of anything.  But PLEASE continue to pursue it.  I can’t think of a better way to demonstrate to the general public how uninterested the left is in American sovereignty, than to demand that its leaders be shipped overseas to stand trial.  Careful now, that memo might even be fake.  Better call in Dan Rather for confirmation.

I’m glad you’ve realized that Republicans can’t be portrayed as Chickenhawks, except by highly selective lists.  But you did wonder about Guard and reserve service above, did you not?  Lefty might be interested to know that I didn’t pull my numbers from the orifice he is so obsessed with, but from the same place or similar that he probably got his list. The geniuses there linked to a PDF file that undermines their own murky theses.

http://www.awolbush.com/108thsenate.asp

What would Jesus do?  I’m neither arrogant nor presumptuous enough to claim to know.  What I do feel I have the authority to point out is that the overwhelming majority of people expressing no belief in and even hostility toward Him and His word are very comfortable in the Democratic Party.

I wonder, but do not pretend to know what Jesus would think about that.

I’ve never heard a conservative make an argument without the aid of a false premise, and Natalie is no exception.

Well, thank you for your uninformed, unfounded and erroneous opinions on the issues of global warming, fossil fules, nuclear energy, draft dodgers, underlying sources, international justice, and Jesus.

The Downing Street Memo?  Oh, you mean that pesky little document that proves Bush and Cheney falsified evidence to manufacture a case for war - squandering American and Iraqi lives and over a quarter trillion dollars of taxpayer’s money, for their personal financial benefit.  Yeah, my only hope for that document is that it is crammed down Bush’s throat in his impeachment hearing when, hopefully, the Democratic congress regains the majority in the house of representatives.

And now for something completely different, the topic at hand.  (Deja vu?).

Of this, we may be sure:

There is no great need for them to censor the press or the people when we consistently prove that we have neither the discipline nor the manners to DISCUSS issues in search of solutions, without turning upon ourselves.

We are better than this, everyone. 

Can we please agree:

--that a well-trained military is necessary.

--that many people still believe and act upon the philosophy that it is RIGHT to contibute their service to their nation, and are not primarily motivated by their economic situations.

--that lack of discipline and focus is what ails us as individuals AND a society, and that any venue for nurturing these benefits us all.

--that a president is beholden to the people, and that perhaps we might do well to FOCUS on legal, respectful, and constitional ways ways to enforce this tenet.

--that every time we initially wish to jump down someone’s throat because they don’t “get our point” quickly enough, it might be more constructive to see what WE missed first.

--that ANY military operation, regardless of motivation and characteristics, is NEVER as cut and dry as we might wish it to be.

We all want to think of ourselves as the only person in America who sees the danger. Wouldn’t it be a relief and a source of hope to admit that WE ALL see many dangers, so that we may join together to address them? 

Alternatively, we could accept the blue vs. red paradigm, continue accusing others of being fools, and save the administration the trouble and cost of censoring us.

Thank you all for reading, thinking, and acting.

Any bets on what happens once so-called Christian magnet schools and JROTC get together?

Can we say Hitler Youth?

Natalie writes:

I wouldn’t pin your hopes too high on the Downing Street memo.  It’s much ado about not much of anything.  But PLEASE continue to pursue it.  I can’t think of a better way to demonstrate to the general public how uninterested the left is in American sovereignty, than to demand that its leaders be shipped overseas to stand trial.  Careful now, that memo might even be fake.  Better call in Dan Rather for confirmation.

The Downing Street memo story has been in the press for a few weeks now. If indeed it is a fake, then why no denial from the White House or 10 Downing Street of its authenticity? Here’s why, Natalie: Because the Bush administration is already up to its chin in lies - and it can’t afford to get caught in another blatant lie. If Bush has cooked intelligence to peddle a phony rationale for committing troops to Iraq - and it appears he has - then this is grounds for impeachment. The fact that right wingers like yourself are unwilling or incapable of acknowledging the gravity of this situation only underscores the perception that the political right will disavow the truth and trample the Constitution for whatever self-serving cause it deems justified.

Tell us, Natalie, do you really believe the the right can fall back on the usual tactics of demonizing the opposition and mud-slinging to get itself out of this mess? In fact, the more baiting the right engages in, the bigger the spotlight they throw on the Bush administration’s bright, shining lie. So what next? Hauling out the big brass band of patriotism to orchestrate a campaign of lies and demagoguery?

Natalie,

You are incorrect about Jim Wallis.  In his latest book, he specifically states that there are just and unjust wars.  A just war calls for military action, and that is fine.  You are completely incorrect on that one.  By the way,the last time you brought him up you smeared his reputation and never gave me any of the documentation for your slanderous comments. Do you really think I believe you?  You are just a parrot sqwaking on in the FAR Right lingo I’ve come to expect from your side of the aisle.

The Pope was dead-set against the war, as are many ministers in America, not to mention the Achbishop of Canterbury in England.  Let’s not get into a there’s more on this side than another. 

Also, I do not presume to know Jesus’ mind.  But I do know 100% what he did in the Bible, and lying and waging war wasn’t one of them.  I am basing my statements on his actions and statements, and it is presumptuous of you to assume otherwise.

Nicole,

You are incorrect about this president being beholden to the people.  Almost every act he has done since taking office has raped the people.  Look at what legislation has been passed in the last 5 years, you will see a pattern of the dismantling of the middle class and the consolidation of power in the hands of corporations/government/military.  He is not at all concerned about anyone but his financial backers and voting base.

Yes, war is sometimes necessary.  But not when the reasons for it were fabricated, and the thrust of the war is to line the pockets of corporations.

Sometimes it just boggles my mind how naive and gullible the women of the Right are.

Margaret,

Check back in a day or two, and I’ll provide you with some history on Wallis and Sojourners, since apparently he hasn’t seen fit to share it in his latest book.

I doubt however, that you’ll consider the past activities and stances of these members of the “radical religious left” to be at variance with your belief system.  I can’t see how I’ve “smeared” Wallis simply by pointing out his past and present political activities/beliefs and disagreeing with their validity and practicality.

I don’t recall calling him anything close to some of the things you’ve called me, frankly, Margaret.  :-).

I think you’re wrong to categorize Nicole as necessarily a woman of the right.  She may well be, but one would hope that there still exists on the left a small portion of the boatload of common sense she articulated.

Natalie,

If you would be half as interested in following Jesus’ example as you are in training children to be mindless purveyors of war, you would put half the energy you put into this ridiculous argument into lifting the crushing burden placed on the poor, the widow, the orphans by the Federal Budget of 2006.  Here’s how a few noteworthy Christians feel about that:

http://www.ncccusa.org/news/15.03.05budgetrally.html

Non-GOP’s know the real reason you all want to eliminate Social Security is that a Democrat founded it and it has been the most effective program in US history, and you can’t stand it.  If the GOP wouldn’t have pilfered millions from it for the war, there would be no crisis for at least another century.  Here’s a link talking about why FDR created it in the first place:

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0506-33.htm

We are admonished more times in the New Testament to care for the poor, the widows and the orphans than any other order given.  And, yet, this is the group the GOP attacks mercilessly.  How do you call yourself a Christian when you condone such assaults?  Who are you to decide who is shown mercy?  When the masses followed Jesus and he said, they only want food and miracles, did he say, send them away?  No, he feed them again.  And he performed more miracles on other days. 

And, frankly, I don’t care a bit if Wallis opposed some past wars.  I did as well.  The whole Nicaragua/El Salvador thing, where Negroponte allowed death squards to do their covert work killing innocent people.  Of course, he’s now been rewarded by our “spiritual leader” for his crimes. We are very good at supporting fascist dictators like Noriega and Hussein, only to turn on them when they don’t continue to create a friendly business environments for our corporations.

Also, Iran Contra.  Yeah, your party is really good at deceit, murder, destruction and then the ever-necessary cover-up.  Here’s another example:

http://oldamericancentury.org/bushco/bushcontra.htm

Just like the lie didn’t work for Nixon (I’m no crook or there was no coverup), it’s not going to work for Bonzo either.  Counting the days till the impeachment hearings begin.

Lincoln said:

“The fact that right wingers like yourself are unwilling or incapable of acknowledging the gravity of this situation only underscores the perception that the political right will disavow the truth and trample the Constitution for whatever self-serving cause it deems justified.”

Lincoln, the mystery becomes, what interest Natalie could have in perpetuating such lies.  Did Natalie pay kickbacks to Neil or Jeb Bush in exchange for a no-bid contract in Iraq?

I think this is terrible… And VERY imperialistic.

“These kinds of programs would not be in schools if there weren’t kids who wanted it, parents who supported it and administrators who facilitated it,”

The above line in this article caught my eye. 
I live in Jacksonville, AR, which is also a poor community.  There are two middle schools here, one for boys and one for girls.  It didn’t always used to be that way and most of the parents don’t like it.  But, since most are
poor, they are conditioned to the concept that there is nothing that they can do.  If they complain, they are either ignored or their children are singled out to be hounded by the administration.  The parents have no say
in who the administrators are or what rules they pass, either.  I belonged to the PTA for awhile, thinking I could make a difference, but to no avail.  The PTA meetings were where the administrators went to tell parents what decisions they had already made.  They at no time asked for input from parents except for prearranged testimonials from those who enthusiastically supported the change.  The meetings were also attended by local businessmen, too old to have children in the schools, who were pushing the agenda due to a “lack of respect” from the local children.

The process began with making the children wear uniforms to school.  The children who grumbled, were told to “shut up and get used to it as they were apt to spend most of their life in a uniform.” I pulled my daughter out of
the local school district when they started talking about “boot camps for children.” I thought it was an Arkansas phenomenon, but obviously not. 

Bonnie Hayes

No Margaret, I don’t think I’m very incorrect about Jim Wallis.  Help me out if I’m wrong, but I don’t think he’s ever been of the opinion that any war during his lifetime has been just.  Maybe there was one or two, but it sure couldn’t have been many.  I shudder to think how long we’d have to wait until we finally got the go ahead from JW to project force anywhere for any reason.

I know he was disapproving of our involvement in Afghanistan, Grenada, and Kosovo.  I know he was all for a nuclear freeze, against deploying Pershings in Europe, all for the Communist Sandinistas in Nicaragua, on and on and on.  Actually not much different from the average liberal Democrat in congress, but I don’t hear John Kerry bragging much about his support of Ortega and the nuclear freeze.  I’m just curious if Wallis stands by his past, or has he acknowledged he might have been wrong about what is the most effective way to deal with lying communist murderers and lying brain-washed Islamic extremist murderers, or has he just swept it under the rug? 

It’s admirable to be a pacifist, to a point, but in my opinion history teaches us that there needs to be a limit to such an attitude, and strong united resolve after that limit is reached.  Jesus said blessed are the peacemakers, not the peacesayers.  Unfortunately in this world there are still instances when force is necessary to achieve any kind of permanent peace.  HItlers, Tojos, Husseins, Bin Ladens etc. are simply not reliable negotiating partners and are not reachable on any kind of what we would consider sane level.  I think the vast majority of Christians understand and accept that, or at least it would seem so by the way they vote.  Wallis has demonstrated by his past actions that he does not, regardless of whatever statement he makes today in his book.

I and I think probably most conservatives simply disagree not with his desired ends, which are apparently peace and prosperity for all, but with his time and time again proven ineffective and pie in the sky methods of achieving them. 

Histoy:

http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/printindividualProfile.asp?indid=1833

http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=7018

Critique:

http://www.cmpage.org/betrayal/index.html

http://www.democracy-project.com/archives/001615.html

http://tinyurl.com/ac2jp

Perhaps the best way to study Wallis’s past is by reading his early articles written for Sojourners or others.  These are not easy to come by online, although there is an archive section at Sojourners where you may be able to order them.  Perhaps you’re already familiar with them.  If you are aware of any internet links to them, I would be very interested.

I think YOU’RE incorrect, Margaret, in believing reasons for war were fabricated, and that they had anything to do with lining corporate pockets.  Plenty of pockets, corporate and otherwise, have been lined as a by-product of every war since its invention and it’s nonsensical to single out this one as the first and foremost.  I somehow doubt you were all that concerned about defense contractor profits and no-bid Haliburton contracts entered into by the Clinton administration for it’s little war, which by the way seems to have been fought under some false pretenses of its own.

The Bush administration is hardly the first to call attention to the potential danger posed by a budding alliance between Saddam and Islamic radicals, and the subsequent fear about the sharing of WMD’s which practically EVERYONE, even Saddam’s own generals, thought existed in Iraq.  These past investigations have been strangely forgotten by the very people that conducted them originally:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,314700,00.html

ABC News in 1999:

http://www.radioamerica.org/audio/MR_ABC-Osama-Hussein-connections.mp3

After skimming two pages of comments, and slogging through all of the “I know you are, but what am I?” juvenilia, the BS about faggots, Jesus, booger-eaters, the environment, the “tradition” of JROTC and the like, every one of you have missed the real point here. That point is, what authority does Congress have to write legislation that requires schools to give ANY information about their students to the military, whether they are magnanimous enough to include a clause about “opting out” or not? The same traitorous scum that would vote for the PATRIOT Act without reading one page of it, pass the Real ID Act 100-0 in the Senate, and refuse to impeach a known liar and war criminal, believes that they can get away with whatever they want—and why not, since the Supreme Court has been in the business of rubber-stamping every illegal act of Congress, while trampling on states’ rights, since the days of FDR?

Why would ANY school knuckle under to this? Just for the federal money? And why aren’t the lot of you ripping your crooked congress critters a bunch of new a**holes over their treason? Are we living in Nazi Germany? Or will enough people wake up at some point and initiate the Second American Revolution, before the completely out-of-control federal government finally squashes the few civil liberties left to you in the wake of this phony “War on Terror?”

Natalie,

You peg me incorrectly as a pacifist.  I think wars are sometimes necessary, and those must be fought.

Secondly, you are incorrect in your assessment of Jim Wallis’ view on war.  Once again, read his new book in which he repeatedly states that some wars are necessary, and he felt WWII was absolutely justified.  He even states that he felt it was right to go into Afghanistan in order to capture Osama bin Laden.  So, on both those counts, he completely contradicts your beliefs in print.

On the validity of the claims for this war, I will include some links, but I know you are a doubting Thomas, so you will just have to wait until it comes out more in the press, as it currently doing.  The Downing Street Memo made the front page of the New York Times last Sunday.  Tomorrow, h