Regarding the Move-On ad

[Evergreen Emerald]

It made me cry. Because I feel the same way. My daughter is older and of age to be drafted. It is terrifying to think that her very life could be used by the neo-cons to pursue their agenda.

The way the armed services are being depleted we know that the possiblity of a draft is around the corner. They cannot have my child.

[Occam Bandage]

1. There will not be a draft. The Democrats control Congress.

Voting to send more good money after bad in Iraq is one thing; an immediate defunding is not much more popular than indefinite continuation of the war.

Voting for a draft is another. The party that votes for a draft (especially for Iraq or Iran) will be the party that will spend the next two decades as the minority.

[Rhiannon12866]

3. My cousin said that he expected a draft, but that was a couple of years ago.

I tend to take his word for these things, since he's career military, is a graduate of West Point and knows guys in Iraq. I'm hoping that things have changed.:-(

[Catherina]

14. Democrats are NO guarantee. OB we seriously need to face something

The Democrats aren't that much better than the Republicans. The main difference is that they have to pretend to be because they can't cravenly represent business the way Republicans do, not if they want opposition votes. But when it comes to wars and intervention, it's not a party thing, the same capitalist economics drive both parties.

What saves us is that the Democratic Party has to pretend. They can't afford to alienate us like they did when they voted for the war. WE have to keep them on their toes.

I'm very afraid that after Obama is elected, millions of voters are going to go back to sleep thinking they had a revolution.

The political revolution is just beginning. Don't take your eyes off those suckers.

[Occam Bandage]

18. "What saves us is that the Democratic Party has to pretend."

Yes. Because of that, there is absolutely no way that they will vote for a draft. They are not stupid. They may be cowardly short-sighted political animals, but they are not stupid.

[Catherina]

19. We thought the same when it came to the Iraq war vote

when they betrayed us, we swore up and down a wall we'd never support them again. 5 years later, look at us. Some of the people democrats are fawning over today were mortal enemies a few years ago. I shouldn't have said that it saves us that they have to pretend because we fall for that pretence everytime. I hope things will be different under Obama but I'm relying on grassroots mobilization from a sense of ownership for that.


H.R.4752
Title: To provide for the common defense by requiring all persons in the United States, including women, between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Rangel, Charles B. (introduced 2/14/2006)

Brought to us by our very own Charlie Rangel.


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.393:">Universal National Service Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)

HR 393 IH


110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 393
To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the favorable treatment afforded combat pay under the earned income tax credit, and for other purposes.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 10, 2007


110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 393
To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the favorable treatment afforded combat pay under the earned income tax credit, and for other purposes.

Again, by our very own Charlie Rangel.

I don't trust them. Not as far as I can throw them. I'm trusting the Obama movement powered by angry grassroots activists and young people to FORCE them to STOP by threatening their careers and tossing the bums out on the street. Next time instead of just Lieberman in CT, it has to be all of them at once so they won't know where to concentrate their guns/money and won't be able to fight us.

I'm sorry if I sound so bitter but they're doing it again, right under our very noses:


Pelosi spiked Iran bill and very few even noticed.

[kentuck]

2. I think they could have made a better ad...

Any ad that talks 100 years in the future cannot be effective, in my opinion. It would have more effective if it had shown a high school senior playing basketball and studying his books and asking how long before he is in the war?

[annabanana]

4. NEVER underestimate the emotional wallop

of a beautiful baby...

[Rhiannon12866]

5. I agree. I particularly liked this pic...

The baby who was afraid of Bush*, since he expected to eventually end up in Iraq...:-(

[hisownpetard]

6. Love the pic. But why is that baby imitating Bush?

[blondeatlast]

7. It doesn't know any better and how did you know the baby's name was "Bush," too, poor thing... nt

[Rhiannon12866]

8. The original caption, when I first saw this, was that the baby was afraid of ending up in Iraq...

But you're right. Bush* can make funny faces like nobody else...:D

This one is also a classic!:rofl:

[Evergreen Emerald]

9. I think also there is a fine line that could be interpreted as

not supporting the troops if you use an older child of enlisting age. I think the ad was perfect. And every parent--no matter what the age of the child--can relate. Cause most of us have said it.

[flpoljunkie]

10. Read my post. MoveOn polled ad and found it their most persuasive, effective ever.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6374866

[Evergreen Emerald]

11. I kind of liked the ad about the general too.

I understand that politicians had to back off from it. But we the people agreed.

[flpoljunkie]

15. I have to disagree with you on that. It hurt us much more than it helped.

[Evergreen Emerald]

17. It did hurt, but only because of the media propaganda spin

And this may as well. But, the reality is that the PEOPLE are fed up. And see the ads as speaking for them. Even if the propaganda attempts to demean it.

[Catherina]

12. Do you have a link to the Ad? I haven't seen it.

I'll do everything in my power as a citizen to help you keep your daughter and millions of other children safe. I'm crying already over your mother's love and haven't even seen the ad. :hug:

[Evergreen Emerald]

13. Here you go...and thank you.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6374568

[Catherina]

16. Beautiful thank you. Now I'm really crying.

No! Hell no, they can not have our children.

Now that these elections are over for all intents and purposes, I think I'm going to go work with women's groups to save our kids. Thanks EE. I'll be fighting with you in solidarity.

Beautiful, simple, very effective ad.