From: "Mark" 


"Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
news:44cae767$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> Millions of us give our money and labor - it's called taxes.

Please. I'm talking way above and beyond that. I recall some low-life dweeb
at the UN accusing the US of being "stingy" (I think it was right
after the tsunami, when we had already spent 100s of millions just on
logistics of moving our ships into place) but you go ahead and look up how
much more money flows directly into charity causes from us (little)
citizens than does from US (big).

> It's not Democrats ( I'm not one )  that have embraced bureaucracy lately.
> Bush appears to love big government and it's scope in affecting and
> intruding on our lives

I can't argue against the fact that Bush hasn't been a good steward of
smaller government, but as bad as he is in that regard, I shudder to think
where we'd be by now if the alternative(s) had won.


>
> "Mark"  wrote in message
news:44cae4e0$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>I don't think that citizens should be forced into any service (military or
>>not), I think good citizens take care of the service aspect to their
>>country in a variety of ways (volunteering here and there for this and
>>that) with no need for coercion. I think the predication of service as
>>administered by a government is reflective of a socialist point-of-view,
>>i.e. if it's not "official and government
induced/controlled/coerced" it
>>doesn't really count, seems to be the mind-set.
>>
>> Well, hell, millions of us give of our time, our money, our labor, and
>> our thoughts both domestically and abroad with no such coercion, with no
>> prodding needed, and the efforts are much more efficient than running
>> them through a government mill. Why is it that unless it's measured
>> through the Federal government it doesn't count? Why do liberals so
>> embrace the bureaucracy?
>>
>> That the usual suspects here in the US, and without intent to lump you in
>> with them unfairly, are so upset with Bush (not to mention the various
>> foreign powers) strikes me as good news and reminiscent of how bent out
>> of shape so many were about Reagan. In other words, Bush ain't going for
>> the usual BS and status quo -- if he were, people would be more at ease
>> and thus content in their complacency.
>>
>> This is not a time for complacency, he understands that. > and how ironic that "many Ambassadors" are unhappy with
John Bolton --
>> well hell yea, they don't want to upset the status quo either, how sad
>> too, that the Dems are more concerned with looking good with those same
>> Ambassadors than they are with promoting our interests at the UN>
>>
>>
>> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
>> news:44cadd6a$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>I was just stating my views on the draft. I'm sure some just want it
>>>reinstated for political purposes. I have more of a Heinlein ( starship
>>>troopers ) viewpoint on service in that citizenship and it's subsequent
>>>rights should be predicated on service ( not necessarily military )
>>>
>>> Sorry Mark - Many who grasp the severity of the current conflict are
>>> also quite worried that this administration has no clue on what to do.
>>> Iraq is a mess. Rumsfeld is still debating the civil war question with
>>> himself. The current Israel/Lebanon conflict appears to be swelling the
>>> ranks of Hezbollah and Bush is under some delusion that 'democracy'
>>> there will make everything right.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Mark"  wrote in message
>>> news:44cad988$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>> Eh, I disagree. My take on the efforts of the Dems to get a draft
>>>> reinstated is fairly dark. I'm quite sure their underlying
motives are
>>>> to undermine any military action any where at any time by
>>>> reinvigorating and motivating those of a sheep-like
protester mind-set
>>>> who don't have any regard for reality on the ground.
>>>>
>>>> I feel that they, the Dems, don't grasp the severity of the current
>>>> conflict(s) and that if they are successful in their
efforts to stop us
>>>> from taking action as necessary, that those efforts would
be extremely
>>>> dangerous to the very existence of our nation. >>> I'm absolutely sure of it>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote
in message
>>>> news:44cad197$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>I always thought ending the draft was a bad idea.  I
feel that having a
>>>>>no deferment draft lottery would really make people
think about any
>>>>>proposed conflict. Right now it just appears too easy
to go to war when
>>>>>most don't have to worry about any consequence
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Mark"  wrote in message
>>>>> news:44cacba2$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>> That's true too, as one aspect anyway. Which is
why so many Dems are
>>>>>> pining for reinstating the draft, although their
"ooh we're gonna
>>>>>> have a draft" scare ploy prior to the '04
elections went over like a
>>>>>> lead balloon. >>>>> they are most certainly looking with interest at
Israel calling up
>>>>>> 30K reservists and trying to figure how to scare
people here with
>>>>>> more success this time -- they'll fail if they do>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Rich Gauszka"
 wrote in message
>>>>>> news:44caca0b$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Mark" 
wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:44cac981$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "John Cuccia"
 wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:keflc21vmstll8fhuub7nh5a0ohpq9bjlp{at}4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 20:52:40 -0400,
"Mark" 
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> IIRC, the anti-war protestors
of the Vietnam era didn't show up
>>>>>>>>>>> for a
>>>>>>>>>>> single march and then spend
the next few years bragging about
>>>>>>>>>>> how many
>>>>>>>>>>> of marched and whining that
they weren't listened to.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>number of
>>>>>>>>>>them
>>>>>>>>>>stayed on the mall permanently
after the first protest>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> People protested for years, all over
America.  Some of them even
>>>>>>>>> blew
>>>>>>>>> things up.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which goes to show you, despite the
postulations 'round these
>>>>>>>> parts, that
>>>>>>>> people are not really, in any substantial
numbers, against our
>>>>>>>> taking out
>>>>>>>> the islamo-fascists in the current
conflicts. It's probably a
>>>>>>>> function of
>>>>>>>> both this being a required war on multiple
fronts, and people
>>>>>>>> knowing it is
>>>>>>>> because of free flowing information, as
opposed to those in the 60s
>>>>>>>> eating
>>>>>>>> up whatever old Uncle Walter (and his two
cohorts on the other two
>>>>>>>> networks)
>>>>>>>> fed them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There was a draft back then. People are now
semi-divorced from the
>>>>>>> conflict
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5