Reply #8: Absolutely not [View All]

[mobuto]

the problem with the lottery was that it allowed the rich and influential largely to avoid service. They could either exercise connections and get into the Guard or they could get university deferments, etc. A period of universal conscription would be different. You could have everybody, men and women, serve the country in some capacity for two years after they turn 18. I think that would make the politicians a lot less likely to send our troops into war - because they'd know who'd be doing the dying.

But during her recent sojourn there she praised what the US had accomplished in Afghanistan.

Of course. Because unlike Iraq, Afghanistan was a just war. The US needs vastly to step up efforts there, however, and is being impeded by the lack of available manpower. That needs to be changed.

The arms industry, meanwhile, has greased the wheels. It filled the Democratic Party coffers to the tune of nearly $2 million in the 1998 election cycle."

You're wrong. In 1998 they gave $3,240,654 to Democrats, according to the CRP. That same year they gave $6,505,563 to Republicans. Guess whose side their bread is buttered on? Every year for the past ten years, the Defense industry has given twice as much money to Republicans as Democrats.

She is one of the people who need to be voted out of office, if anyone expects to see any type of policy change.

Brilliant. And replaced with whom? You really think Senator Guiliani or Senator King or Senator Lazio would be less friendly to Lockheed Martin? Hillary Clinton is a committed liberal who runs one of the tightest ships of any member of Congress.