shill of the week award for week 4-11-4

[corplinx]

This thread is meant to be a easy going look at those who contribute least to the political process yet somehow stay involved. Now, obviously someone like Sean Hannity could win the award every week. However, I think that I can dig up someone each week who goes above and beyond what even the radio shills come up with.

With great distinction and honor, it is my duty to present Charles Rangel for this brilliant observation which will no doubt get him airtime on all the news opinion shows to explain/defend his remarks. (http://www.boston.com/dailynews/106/region/Rangel_calls_Iraq_war_a_death_:.shtml)

Congratulations Mr. Rangel for elevating the political debate down to the sub-basement level.

[Zep]

Who and what the HECK are you talking about??? :confused:

[Charlie Monoxide]

There should be a Democrat and Republican nominee, just to keep it "fair and balanced".

Also the occasional booby prize for the non-Democrats/Republicans as well.

Charlie (political shill spotter) Monoxide

[NightG1]

Originally posted by Zep
Who and what the HECK are you talking about??? :confused:

Corp obviously thinks rich people are dying in Iraq too and wants to address this worrisome issue by making fun of Rep Charlie Rangle.

[shemp]

Ooooh please pick me!!! Pick me please please please please please!!!

[corplinx]

Originally posted by Zep
Who and what the HECK are you talking about??? :confused:

Im sorry there Kangaroo Zep, but this thread is based on US politics. Grab your Foster's, pop a yahoo series film in your vcr, and kindly ignore this thread.

[crackmonkey]

... and this is the guy who's introduced a bill to reinstate the draft. He's apparently not against war, per se, only an allegedly disproportionate amount of non-whites dying.

[Jocko]

Originally posted by crackmonkey
... and this is the guy who's introduced a bill to reinstate the draft. He's apparently not against war, per se, only an allegedly disproportionate amount of non-whites dying.

Which is made only slightly funnier by his strong resemblance to the vocal stylings of Harvey Fierstein. Ever get a good look at him when he gets all worked up on the Sunday morning political talk shows? He sounds like a bullfrog being frapped in a bean grinder. And that's just the content, not the voice.

[Jocko]

Originally posted by NightG1


Corp obviously thinks rich people are dying in Iraq too and wants to address this worrisome issue by making fun of Rep Charlie Rangle.

Please. Charlie Rangel is Sharpton without the pulpit, Malcom X without the charisma and Jesse Jackson without the gift of rhyme. He's a long-time grandstanding self-publicist hiding his vanity behind the figleaf of racial advocacy. Read up on the guy, willya?

[corplinx]

Originally posted by Jocko


Please. Charlie Rangel is Sharpton without the pulpit, Malcom X without the charisma and Jesse Jackson without the gift of rhyme. He's a long-time grandstanding self-publicist hiding his vanity behind the figleaf of racial advocacy. Read up on the guy, willya?

In the past few months in particular, Rangel has become a bigtime media whore.

Pattern:
Rangel makes bombastic or provocative allegation
Print media prints the comments because of their spicy nature
News shows invite Rangel on to discuss his allegation
Rangel shows up and barely defends his comments acts all nonchallant just criticizing Bush in general.


I'm sorry, but whether your are leftist, conservative, socialist, or libertarain, Rangel should still be a shill in your view.

[peptoabysmal]

Different war, same B.S.


86% of the men who died in Vietnam were Caucasians, 12.5% were black, 1.2% were other races.

Sociologists Charles C. Moskos and John Sibley Butler, in their recently published book "All That We Can Be," said they analyzed the claim that blacks were used like cannon fodder during Vietnam "and can report definitely that this charge is untrue.
Black fatalities amounted to 12 percent of all Americans killed in Southeast Asia - a figure proportional to the number of blacks in the U.S. population at the time and slightly lower than the proportion of blacks in the Army at the close of the war."

Common belief is that the war was fought largely by the poor and uneducated.


http://www.masher.org/truth.html

[a_unique_person]

In fact, you appear to be agreeing with him. Vietnam had the draft, Iraq is volunteer.

[Jude]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
In fact, you appear to be agreeing with him. Vietnam had the draft, Iraq is volunteer.
http://www.vhfcn.org/stat.html
2/3 of the men who served in Vietnam were volunteers. 2/3 of the men who served in World War II were drafted. [Westmoreland] Approximately 70% of those killed were volunteers.
I think it's fair to say Vietnam was fought predominantly by volunteers, a_unique_person.

[a_unique_person]

The draft was specifically designed to trigger volunteer enlistments before age 18 1/2 had been reached. Volunteers were allowed to enlist as early as age 17 (with parental consent) & were required to serve for 3 years on active duty followed by 3 years as inactive reservists.

But the volunteer prog looked promising to the potential draftee because it allowed him to select his branch of service & receive specialized training if he qualified. He was able to fulfill his mili obligation immediately & he would be required to serve only another 3 years in the inactive reserves.

It becomes clear then why almost 65% of enlisted casualties were volunteers & 1/3d of these were 17-19 years of age & over 2/3ds were 17 to 21.



http://members.aol.com/WarLibrary/vwc8.htm

[DaChew]

''Too few people are paying this high penalty of a death tax,''

Is he actually saying that not enough people are dying in Iraq? Also, isn't 25% a low number if you are considering blacks and hispanics together?

[Rob Lister]

Originally posted by DaChew
''Too few people are paying this high penalty of a death tax,''

Is he actually saying that not enough people are dying in Iraq? Also, isn't 25% a low number if you are considering blacks and hispanics together?

25% is almost perfect, at least according to this source

http://www.eagleton.rutgers.edu/News-Research/NewVoters/Ethnicity.html

White = 75.1%

Black = 12.3%

Hispanic = 12.5%

[DaChew]

Ok. But that 75.1% is whites and others right? That would leave only 0.1% for asians, native Americans etc... otherwise.

Then Rangel is actually complaining about equality.

[Dancing David]

A politiciam making sense that would be a novelty!

I thought I heard that there was a scewed statistic for the Iraq War deaths and that they were predominantly from rural and low income areas?

[Snide]

From the article:
A day after he appeared at a rally for Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry, the Harlem congressman ratcheted up his rhetoric against the Iraq war, which he has long opposed.

"Ratcheted up his rhetoric?" Odd choice of words from such a "liberal" media.

Anyway, the logic in what this guy is saying is indeed laughable. Air pollution is an attack on minorities too, I guess, because it's more prevalant in urban areas.

(edited typo)

[zultr]

I think a more important stat would be economic background regardless of race. I'm guessing there aren't too many children of the affluent who turn down a legacy admission to the Ivy Leauge to volunteer to get shot at in Iraq.

[Rob Lister]

Originally posted by DaChew
Ok. But that 75.1% is whites and others right? That would leave only 0.1% for asians, native Americans etc... otherwise.

Then Rangel is actually complaining about equality.

I think I see what your saying. If you add all the numbers up you get 106.8% I think that's because some, not all, Hispanics are double-counted as either white or black. Any ideas? Presumbably this data is from the U.S. Census.

[Tony]

Charles Rangel is a racist. His advocating of the draft is based on his racist opinion that more white people need to die in Iraq. I assume that if 25% of the soldiers killed were white, he would be ok with that?

[Ladewig]

I'll agree that the statement is kooky enough to deserve a weekly award, but I don't see this particular claim as shilling for someone else. I think this is original kookiness.

[Beerina]

Originally posted by DaChew
Ok. But that 75.1% is whites and others right? That would leave only 0.1% for asians, native Americans etc... otherwise.

Then Rangel is actually complaining about equality.

What a racist assumption! How do you know "other" isn't bundled in with black or hispanic? Aren't they good enough for that? Huh? Huh?

[DaChew]

Originally posted by Beerina


What a racist assumption! How do you know "other" isn't bundled in with black or hispanic? Aren't they good enough for that? Huh? Huh?

OH? You're implying that the populations of blacks and hispanics are actually lower than those numbers? You're trying to marginalize them even further aren't you? If you had you're way the reported populations of blacks and hispanics would fall within the plus/minus margin of error so you could say they probably didn't exist all! Well, you take your statistical genocide somewhere else.

[varwoche]

Over the top rhetoric aside, it's 100% valid imo to bring to light the issue of primarily non-affluent soldiers dying while primarily affluent citizens receive large tax reduction.

[DaChew]

Originally posted by varwoche
Over the top rhetoric aside, it's 100% valid imo to bring to light the issue of primarily non-affluent soldiers dying while primarily affluent citizens receive large tax reduction.

Sure, it's valid but we're dealing with an all volunteer military here. Rangel's solution is to reinstate the draft so that, rich people can be drafted and sent to die. I suggest that's not a good reason to draft people. Besides, what's he going to do, subcategorize everybody in the military to the nth degree to ensure that people die in what he thinks is the right mix? So I guess before every operation, Rangel and the generals will get together to decide which subgroup doesn't have a representative body count (Say, left-handed middle class asians) and they'll choose assault teams based on that and then hope the proper number are killed to bring the percentages in line.

[varwoche]

Originally posted by DaChew
Sure, it's valid but we're dealing with an all volunteer military here.
The non-voluntary extensions of tour of duty is akin to being drafted.

[zultr]

Originally posted by DaChew


[w]e're dealing with an all volunteer military here. Rangel's solution is to reinstate the draft so that, rich people can be drafted and sent to die. I suggest that's not a good reason to draft people.

I think it's an excellent reason. How many poor and middle class kids join the military because it's their only chance at an education? Congress voted to allow the action in Iraq; how many of their children volunteered and are now serving in the military? Since almost every member of Congress is a millionaire, I'm guessing none. How many in the current administration served (or rather, actively tried not to serve)? I suspect many wouldn't have been quite so gung ho for action if junior was going to be on the first plane to Baghdad. The poor have many disadvantages; joing the army because there are no other options then dying because the unaccountable rich decide they should fight for their interests shouldn't be another one.

[Tony]

Originally posted by zultr


I think it's an excellent reason.

So you support the draft so sons and daughters of rich people could get killed?

[Nyarlathotep]

Originally posted by zultr


I think it's an excellent reason. How many poor and middle class kids join the military because it's their only chance at an education? Congress voted to allow the action in Iraq; how many of their children volunteered and are now serving in the military? Since almost every member of Congress is a millionaire, I'm guessing none. How many in the current administration served (or rather, actively tried not to serve)? I suspect many wouldn't have been quite so gung ho for action if junior was going to be on the first plane to Baghdad. The poor have many disadvantages; joing the army because there are no other options then dying because the unaccountable rich decide they should fight for their interests shouldn't be another one.

You actually think that if a draft wre re-instated that the rich and powerful would not find means of keeping their kids out of harms way? That they won't pull strings to get their kids exempted or placed in less dangerous duties?

At least with the military being all volunteer no one is FORCING the poor to sign up. Re-instating the draft would simply result in poor kids being forced into the military (even those who otherwise would not have gone) yet would likely have little impact on the children of more affluent families.

[zultr]

Originally posted by Tony

So you support the draft so sons and daughters of rich people could get killed?

Yes. The rich reap the benefits of living in this country but bear little of the sacrifice. Do you support a volunteer military so that the sons and daughters of everyone but the rich could get killed?


Originally posted by Nyarlathotep

You actually think that if a draft wre re-instated that the rich and powerful would not find means of keeping their kids out of harms way?

At least with the military being all volunteer no one is FORCING the poor to sign up. Re-instating the draft would simply result in poor kids being forced into the military…

I agree that reality is trickier than theory. I also think that it would be a bit harder for the privileged to pull it off so blatantly after Vietnam, and the affluent would be under greater scrutiny.

The issue comes down to fairness: the rich make the decisions to go to war without bearing the consequences.

[Tony]

Originally posted by zultr


Yes. The rich reap the benefits of living in this country but bear little of the sacrifice.


How long have you been a fascist?

Do you support a volunteer military so that the sons and daughters of everyone but the rich could get killed?

No.

[Tony]

Originally posted by zultr

The issue comes down to fairness: the rich make the decisions to go to war without bearing the consequences.

Why don't you address the root cause of why the "rich" have the power to make those kinds of decisions?

[Tmy]

Originally posted by Tony


Why don't you address the root cause of why the "rich" have the power to make those kinds of decisions?

Cause a poor/regular guy could never afford a proper campaine in order to get elected in big politics.

Poor guys cant afford to get into fundraisers where they would have access to politicians.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Tmy


Cause a poor/regular guy could never afford a proper campaine in order to get elected in big politics.

Poor guys cant afford to get into fundraisers where they would have access to politicians.


You obviously don't understand the question.

[Tmy]

maybe you dont understand the answer:p

[Nyarlathotep]

Originally posted by zultr

I agree that reality is trickier than theory. I also think that it would be a bit harder for the privileged to pull it off so blatantly after Vietnam, and the affluent would be under greater scrutiny.

I doubt it. Money talks just as loudly today as in the 60's

The issue comes down to fairness: the rich make the decisions to go to war without bearing the consequences.

Half true. I'll agree with the last half of your statement, but a draft would be no solution to the problem. It would, if anything, make the problem worse, not better.

[Rob Lister]

Not to point out the obvious but reinstituting the draft WILL NOT result in more 'rich kids' being drafted. The military is currently meeting its billeting requirements with volunteers. The draft is only used to fill empty billets. In short, even with a draft, nobody would actually get drafted.

Besides, if you're a 'rich kid', you can afford to buy the service and duty station most to your liking. That ain't pretty but its always been true.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Rob Lister
Not to point out the obvious but reinstituting the draft WILL NOT result in more 'rich kids' being drafted. The military is currently meeting its billeting requirements with volunteers. The draft is only used to fill empty billets. In short, even with a draft, nobody would actually get drafted.

Besides, if you're a 'rich kid', you can afford to buy the service and duty station most to your liking. That ain't pretty but its always been true.

Except that tens of thousands of troops are being forced to extend their tour. The numbers that were expected to be needed are not enough, therefore there is a shortage of troops in Iraq.

[zultr]

Originally posted by Tony

How long have you been a fascist?



Good one. Why bother discussion when you can jump to the fascist/Nazi/socialist/liberal/whatever labels? I'm just confused about one thing: how does my statement represent an endorsement of fascism?

[Rob Lister]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Except that tens of thousands of troops are being forced to extend their tour. The numbers that were expected to be needed are not enough, therefore there is a shortage of troops in Iraq.



1) Troops, being troops, are positioned as necessary. Are you suggesting that they are extending the date of expiration of active obligated service?

2) If the troops were extended to fill additional billets in Iraq, how then is there a shortage of troops?

[a_unique_person]

The sad story of one kidnapped American



Picture the American convoy driver Thomas Hamill in captivity, probably hooded and most likely constantly on the move through alien villages and towns west of Baghdad.

His is a morality tale of near biblical proportion. Forced by a mountain of debt to sell the family's Mississippi dairy farm and then hit with huge bills for emergency treatment of his ill wife, Kellie, he figured a tax-free $100,000-a-year for hauling food, fuel and clothing for the US military in Iraq might finally get their heads above water.

Last Friday, his convoy was ambushed and he became the first of almost a dozen American hostages in Iraq, although so far the only one explicitly threatened with death.

Echoing the religious fervour of his captors, 43-year-old Hamill's grandmother remains hopeful: "I got God, and I just trust in God." And his wife thinks herself lucky because she received a mysterious message that he was "doing fine".

[Rob Lister]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The sad story of one kidnapped American



Does this post answer the questions I posed to you in the post immediately prior?

I'm not suggesting that you have an obligation to answer. I know that you do not. Rather, I'm just reminding you that the questions are out there. I don't even care that you (successfully) changed the original subject. I assume you have good reason to do so.