Charlie Rangel Thinks Troops are Poor and Stupid
- Posted by Beth on November 27th, 2006 filed in General, Iraq, Moonbats, Politics, Stupid, The War, Video, WTF
Congressional genius Charlie Rangel (D-NY)
“If a young fellow has an option of having a decent career, or joining the Army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq,” Mr. Rangel, a Democrat representing Manhattan and Queens, said on “Fox News Sunday.”
“If there’s anyone who believes these youngsters want to fight, as the Pentagon and some generals have said, you can just forget about it. No bright young individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits. And most all of them come from communities of very, very high unemployment,” the congressman said.
From Powerline:
Charlie Rangel is an idiot. Years ago, I’d get annoyed that he was always on the news flapping his jaw, but I decided he’s a gift. His idiocy speaks for itself. I’m guessing he thinks a draft would bring in more “educated” people (LOL), so all those dumb brainwashed buffoons over in Iraq won’t keep screwing up and “losing” the war?
“F–ktard” doesn’t even begin to cover it.
Mr. Rangel has said that his draft proposal has little chance of becoming law. However, he rejected the Heritage findings and insisted yesterday that a formal Congressional examination of the military’s demographics will prove him right.
Yeah, that’s what this country needs–a congressional study on military demographics. ‘Cause of course, all the data that’s out there must be lies if Charlie Rangel doesn’t like what it says. Maybe there needs to be a Congressional examination of his head.
“Once we are able to get hearings on this, everyone will see what they already know, and that is that those who have the least opportunities at this age find themselves in the military, as I did when I was 18 years old,” the congressman said.
Um, fifty years ago? Please. Maybe it was true then, at least in his neighborhood. Apparently Rangel doesn’t realize there’s a whole world outside New York City–except for Mississippi, of course (and you know his opinion of Mississippi).
Keep talkin, Charlie. Like John F’n Kerry, you’re a gift that keeps on giving.
(Sorry about the player being sorta cropped; you can see the full size at Powerline. It’s too big to fit in all the themes here, but you won’t miss anything.)
Carrie says:
Damnit!! I have 6 more days until I can bitch again..
Oh wait…that WAS bitching…
Larry says:
I saw the report that Chris Wallace is talking about. Rangel wants the draft for one simple reason; he is looking to scare high school and college students into protesting.
William Teach says:
Imagine if he managed to get his little draft bill through. Now, because it came from a liberal, that means it would have to be gender neutral, meaning women would be just as eligible as men.
Now, Bush starts the draft because of possible war with Iran.
Most liberals leave the country for, well, who cares, as long as they leave.
The rest end up in jail.
Problem solved.
Meanwhile, back in reality land, doesn’t the military have a higher rate of graduation then the general population?
JG says:
“Most liberals leave the country for, well, who cares, as long as they leave.
The rest end up in jail.”
Unless the draft-dodgers come from rich, politically connected families. Then they get sent to a cushy stateside post or receive an undeserved deferment and then grow up to get elected to the White House and appoint other rich, connected draft-dodgers to start wars that people in their social strata will never see up close.
Maybe the idea behind the draft is that if this war is necessary to preserving our country and our way of life, we should all be contributing to the cause, not just sitting comfortably at a computer insulting those who disagree with our opinions.
Of course it’ll never pass. The war is only worth fighting if it’s not my kid who has to go…right?
raz0r says:
Hmmm. Rangel - leftover turkey. Just sayin’.
And if this is what the Dems are givin’ us for November surprise, I can’t wait for Christmas.
Beth (Blue Star Chronicles) says:
he is looking to scare high school and college students into protesting.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That’s what I said!!!!!!
Then I thought I might be giving him too much credit to be that conniving!
I keep going back and forth on that.
Beth (Blue Star Chronicles) says:
hahaha William :)
You put a good spin on the whole thing! That’s proof there’s a positive side to everything.
Yes - statistically, the military has a higher educational level and come from a higher socio-economic level than their peers in the general population.
It doesn’t matter though as far as ’sound bite politics’ goes. Why would facts get in their way?
Blue Star Chronicles says:
Charles Rangel Says Soldiers Enlist Because of Lac
According to Representative Charlie Rangel the U.S.A. is the Land of Lack of Opportunity.
He’s declaring that it is a lack of options in America that induces young men to enlist in the Armed Services. Nevermind that we currently have a record low …
Beth says:
JG: I suggest you know something about the people to whom you are flinging feces, before you make yourself look even stupider than you already do with that ignorant, tired slogan.
Typical. :roll:
William Teach says:
Were you talking about Bill Clinton, JG? I believe you have your facts wrong, since he never served in any post at all, having left the USA for Canada.
Woops!!!!!!
JG says:
You mean because he was a poor kid who studied hard and got a Rhodes Scholarship to attend one of the best universities in the world rather than a fight a war he disagreed with?
JG says:
And, actually, I was refering to our current president whose daddy got him into college, who agreed with the war in Vietnam, but still let his Congressman daddy get him a post stateside keeping Montgomery area strip clubs free of the Viet Cong.
Just in case you were still confused.
JG says:
And Teach, it was England not Canada, dumbass.
Beth says:
JG: If you can’t recognize a simple error (obviously, everyone knows he didn’t go to Canada), then YOU are the dumbass. You’ve got a lot of nerve coming around here for the first time and attacking my readers! Again, typical. Get a life.
Furthermore, if you want to talk about Clinton, please explain how, by your (il)logic, a draft-dodger such as he had the moral “right” to take military action as he did during his term. Keep in mind I was in the military then, as were other contributors to this blog (including one who is still on active duty in the Marine Corps and served in Iraq). Also keep in mind none of us cried about military missions during the Clinton administration, despite the fact that none of us could farking stand him. See, we aren’t knee-jerk partisans before we are Americans, unlike you.
BACK ON TOPIC: The draft shouldn’t be used to make an antiwar statement, and you farking know it. So does Rangel, who didn’t even vote for it when it was put to a vote already.
Or maybe you don’t know it; maybe you’re just yet another “ends justify the means” kinda guy.
Since you can’t argue your position without tired, ridiculous cliches that were worn out decades ago and ignorant ASSumptions about those of us who support the mission in this war, why don’t you go fuck off now?
William Teach says:
Forgive me, JC, I made a mistake, however, the substance still stands.
Does it really matter if one is a Rhodes scholar? Not in Charlie Rangle’s world, where EVERYONE, regardless of race, creed, religion, sex, or economic status would be eligible for the draft.
It doesn’t matter if Clinton disagreed with the Vietnam War. There were probably a lot of people who disagreed with fighting in Europe during WWII. Germany did not attack us, Japan did.
Don’t forget that Vietnam was started by Democrats, Sparky!
And, God forbid that a person’s Father actually help their child out. I know family bonds aren’t real important in liberal circles, but, you know, Ted Kennedy’s father and grandfather sure did a lot for him, trust funds, keeping him out of prison after leaving a woman to drown, those kinds of things.