I didn’t get to hear the debates yesterday as I was busy doing other things — maybe I can find an mp3 recording of it somewhere — but I did read the write-up in the Journal Star this morning. Sounds like it was pretty boring for the most part; Schock is no longer pushing the nukes to Taiwan argument, and everyone has settled into the usual party camps.
Except this statement caught my eye:
…one distinction did emerge when Callahan said she would champion re-instituting the draft.
Callahan said the military, stressed from fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, needed the draft to be rebuilt.
“You can gasp if you want. But I believe it is the fairest way for us to rebuild our military,” Callahan said. “I know from all of those who are currently serving, proud as they are of their service, many of them are coming from the National Guard and it leaves us open, at risk, here at home where we have needs from disasters.”
Callahan did add a caveat, though, saying time spent in the military could be swapped for another form of service.
Not that this is necessarily a bad policy idea, but why would you bring it up during the campaign? Is this supposed to win her votes? While other candidates generally use the election to promise they’ll bring home money, jobs, even the troops, Callahan is saying she wants to bring home… the draft? Not the brightest political move, and a sure way to lose votes from young men of drafting age — and their parents.
On the other hand, the odds of her winning this election are about 100 to 1 anyway, so what does she have to lose? It does give her a little more publicity.
What CJ says is true.
As far-out as Callahans comment[s] sound, I seem to recall a certain Republican candidate, in an ill-fitting suit, calling for some fairly strange ‘dialogue’ between the U.S. and other foreign powers.
‘Nuke-em-all Schock’ takes a pretty outlandish stand on gun control issues as well. I am still worried that the 18th Dist is in big trouble no matter who wins the election!
The most notable element of the debate as it relates to news coverage is that the position by Callahan was buried on the inner pages of the article and towards the very end. If Schock had made that statement, GUARANTEED it would have been headlines, and Peoriapundit would have written at least 4 posts about it by now. Problem is, just as it goes for the old media, this biased reporting damages readership and credibility…and I would further say the credibility of the very campaign they are trying to protect.
Oops sorry…In my post above I was referring to the PJStar article in this mornings paper.
When a candidate prefaces a statement with, “My staff is probably going to kill me for this…”, the candidate should probably not say it! I was also surprised it didn’t receive more coverage – we were pretty shocked.
Diane, if it makes you feel any better – it was on the scroll at the bottom during WEEK’s morning show and the Today Show. It was the first on the list of one key point each per candidate. Damn near made me choke on my oatmeal.
Start the draft soon enough and Callahan will be down to one opponent!
Giselle – Lol! 😉
OK, Paul, I just GOT that. Took me awhile. heh heh.
That was stupid. Her base doesn’t support the war at all…telling them she wants to draft kids to send over there wasn’t the smartest idea.
Can you say Congressman Schock?
First of all, it won’t just apply to young men, but to women as well.
Secondly,Callahan noted military service was a great experience for her family members. GREAT!!!
But government in a democracy is not for anyone to decide what they feel is a good experience should be forced on everyone else.
What if someone in power said going to church every Sunday was good for the soul, strengthened character, made you a better person and by golly since attending church every Sunday was good for them that it should be mandatory for everyone. Or that working out at a gym made society healthier so everyone would be required to work out 4 times a week.
That is a classic fascist tendency.
The problem with our overstretched military is that our leaders downsized our military significantly in the 1990s. Active duty forces were cut substantially. Whole divisions were eliminated. Now our nation needs to rely too much on Reserves and the National Guard.
If the Generals say they do not want a draft, who is Callhan to say we should have it? The military doesn’t want to manage people who don’t want to be there. If we need a rebuilt, larger military, raise the pay and expand active duty forces to a level close to what this nation had in 1990.
Finally, when Callahan politically adds that she would allow compulsory national service as an alternative, then how will that increase the military? Becuase everyone not wanting to be in the military would opt for non-military service. Which is basically anyone not volunteering for the military now.
And when millions of 19-year-olds just flat out refuse even domestic national service as an infringement on their liberty,what is the government going to do, put them in jail? If they are not put in jail, the whole undertaking will end up being a joke with gargantuan non-compliance.
Military leaders at the Pentagon have said repeatedly for 35 years that the all volunteer army is working. They need Congress to authorize expanding active duty forces but they want them all-volunteer.
For the benefit of this country, not everyone’s best use of two years of their lives is in the military or in government mandated service. In fact, for many people and the goverment it would be a colossal waste.
Also, who would pay the salary of every 19 year old for two full years? Would those 19 year olds with children still be forced into service-men and women? Who would care for the kids? If those who are parents could opt out, wouldn’t that be a huge incentive to become a teen parent?
If our nation was under direct attack and our survival depended on a temporary draft that would be different. But if an expanded all volunteer army would do the job that needs to be done, then why vote to force all young people into national service? Just because Callahan knows what is best for everyone??
Here is what the Springfield paper quotes Colleen as saying:
“I think this is the kind of opportunity that helps us feel better about ourselves and on behalf of our country,” Callahan said. “Sometimes we give our patriotism lip service. This is an opportunity for us to step up and actually be patriotic by giving back to our country.”
So she wants to compel EVERYONE to do it. WOW. Forced service for two years or you are unpatriotic.
She is able-bodied. If she thinks it is so great to serve the country, and since she wasn’t in the military or Peace Corps yet, she can go teach the Afghans how to plant corn for two years and keep a gun in one hand to shoot Taliban as they approach her for not wearing a burka. Then she would be a patriot by her definition.
rex: Where were you 38 years ago? Every 18 yr old carried a draft card and yes we were drafted, unless you were smart enough to get into a college (took cash), knew someone who could get you into the National Guard (long waiting lists and reserved for politicians sons i.e. Bush)or left the country. (Canada)
It worked for years only because of Viet Nam (another unpopular war) did some skip the country. Trouble was, the military had people in it that didn’t really want to be there.
My point is, if you leave it voluntary, then you get a better crop of people who want to be in the military but because of Bush and his policies, very few are enlisting and those that are, are in need of money and benefits it provides to escape this crap economy. I’m willing to bet that before Iraq, 90% in the Reserves never expected to go to war and simply joined the Guard to collect an extra check and bennies. oops.
Other than it would both be more just and cheaper, I can’t think of a reason to reinstate the draft.
It certainly is more useful than sending everyone to junior college for free…
In January 1865, Congress passed the 13th Amendment, abolishing slavery. Let’s leave it that way.
Military service = slavery!?!?!?!?
Being a patriot and doing one’s duty for freedom = slavery!?!?!?!
Learning a skill and being paid to learn it = slavery!?!?!?!?!
Slavery?!?!?!?! You need to do some research on slavery, Ms. Vespa. Soldiers are paid well (pause for laughter), have full retirement after 20 years, housing and health care, education and training paid for.
Just another glowing example of the notion that Colleen shoulda stayed on the farm.
It’s not that big of an intellectual leap kcDad.
Slavery= being forced to do something against your will.
Oh gosh, I was a slave in the service! I had no idea. I was told it was out of duty to country but I guess that was wrong which explains why there were no parades when I can home from Nam. (actually south China sea, Navy) I joined the Navy to avoid being drafted, had a low number and didn’t like jungles. Figured I could bypass the jungle part in the Navy but it didn’t work out that way.
By the way Diane, slaves were bought and sold too.
Oh, like pay taxes? Like take a job and obey the laws?
I also hate being forced to get a drivers license or ID.
You sure have an entirely different definition then I do about slavery. How could you possibly compare the draft to slavery. Not everyone that gets a draft card went to the service. Everyone that was brought here from Africa was bought and sold and made to work for nothing. Had no choices about their life or that of their children and family.
Lets not compare the military to the horrors of slavery. That is one of the reasons everyone should know the history of slavery so that these kinds of comments will not be made. I believe you are taking the issue of slavery much too lightly.
Ok, I should have given that a little more thought before making that statement. Consider it retracted. My apologies.