Get the current crop of clowns out of there, admin, Congress, everyone. Find 10 people through a random drawing of driver license or voter registration or even a group of volunteers for each position. Hold debates for ech seat among the candidates for that seat then the people elect the one they feel will do the best job. After the first term, the incumbent can elect to run for one more term and the random selections become 9.

Once some one has 2 terms in a position, they're gone.

Sure would be a change, heck, something might even get done. Special interest money would be forbidden. Anyone found taking illegal dough would be fired and sent to jail for abusing a position of trust.

Ah, only to live in such an idyllic world.

Have a good day,

Chip

It's always amusing that people from such an innocuous country like yours attempts to chide and weigh-in on US politics.

You said, "He tore into Iraq for no reason whatsoever unless you call his supposition that Sadam had WMD'S (Unproven) a reason to destroy a country. He bombed them to (*&&^%) and left them as homeless and hungry "

PLEASE do your homework before making false statements. You'll want to read unanimously passed UN Resolutions 1441, 660, 661, 678, 686, 687, 688, 707, 715, 986, and 1284. Saddam over 10 years defied compliance, toyed with inspectors, gassed hundreds of thousands of his own people, etc.

But you would rather the US didnt remove Saddam. No, you would happier seeing him in power today.

And I'm sure it pains you little girls NOW can attend school in Afghanistan and Iraq, Al Qaeda was removed, Bin Laden – if alive – lives in a cave or a hole, and the AMERICAN troops are doing a hell of a job killing insurgents and protecting/helping the Iraqi people.

Tricia, you're nothing more than Nancy Pelosi – lite, which insult and undermine the efforts of our troops. No doubt you’re proud of the fact terrorists and OBL couldn't agree with your statements more!

Maybe the Bush Looney/Tooney mode of Leadership has been around so long they actually think these qualities are actually what a would be President should posess to lead a Nation!

And on the War, Bush led us into it with no strategic plan or a way out. He jumped in blind and is still blind. He put your country, our country, the rest of the world, your military, and ally military in severe peril on a whim! And is willing to put more military and nations in peril. He knows there is no tactical way out, and all he can do is buy time until he leaves office and can blame the mess on someone else in an effort to save face!

He tore into Iraq for no reason whatsoever unless you call his supposition that Sadam had WMD'S (Unproven) a reason to destroy a country. He bombed them to (*&&^%) and left them as homeless and hungry as his tax payers in New Orleans are today. Not to mention the number of brave military from the US and Nato Forces who lost their lives for a mere Bush Thank You. And not to mention that Iraq had a higher level of peace and stability before Bush than after!

Meanwhile the terrorists are hiding in Pakistan and Bush has thousands of troops in Iraq! And this keeps our shores and borders safe how? Bush can't even secure the borders in Mexico to keep the illegals out!

The Terrorists will attack us on our homeland when they decide to do so. They've proven that already! And what is a better set up for terrorists then to know our troops are all in Iraq and Afghanistan and the homefront is clear from counter attacks! Terrorism is here to stay until we find a way to change Terrorists' perceptions and mindset. No one can annilate Terrorism. It can't be bombed out of existence. Not even by Bush.

Sadly, this administration is the stuff that that good books and fairytales were made from! Only the heroes in books and fairytales didn't really die!

Ever hear of an executive order? In the dozen years from 1948 to 1970, U.S. presidents issued ten different executive orders altering eligibility standards for potential draftees. (Source: U.S. Selective Service System website, http://www.sss.gov/FSeffects.htm.)

It's not that difficult to imagine President Bush issuing an executive order that simply reinstates the draft. Given his track record of abusing executive privilege, issuing signing statements that in effect amount to line-item vetoes of congressional mandates, and the various secret domestic spying programs, I wouldn't find an executive order to be a surprise at all.

And what incentive would the president issue an executive order to reinstate the draft? He no longer has to win any elections, at least five Supreme Court justices would back him up if the order were ever challenged in court, and his daughters will turn 26 in November, so even if such an executive order included women, it could "conveniently" be written to only include those up to 25 years of age.

Yes, this does sound like conspiracy-mongering. But tragically, the Bush administration has given us ample cause for being overly suspicious.

And to everyone on this thread accusing Hillary Clinton of political grandstanding: I trust you were just as outraged with President Bush after "Dead or alive," "Mission Accomplished" and the flight suit, "Bring 'em on," "Heckuva job Brownie," "I'm the decider" . . .

We have seen six and a half years of the Grandstander in Chief.

Well, Charles Rangel(D-NY) has certainly always considered it an option.

Nuking the moon was always an option too.

Posted By Lady J : August 14, 2007 12:39 pm

While I respect your question, and applaud your clever edit of my comment, the answer was in my original comment. How do you propose we build troop levels, IF NEEDED, without a draft? We have a volunteer armed force, but what should happen if 80% were killed in a massive attack, god forbid (purely hypothetical)? Where would we get troops? Are we to hope that we could fill the needs soley by volunteers? I would like to think there are enough patriotic individuals such as myself to fill the needs, but I dont really see that happening, and I respect the choice to not join the armed services. But when the need is great, so will be the sacrifice.

If you want to drive a big car / suv then send "your" kid to war to fight for the fuel.

If you really care then stop wasting fuel.

When i got out i opened a recycling center in 76. I started building energy efficient homes and ever since i have driven only when needed. I hate people who go on senic tours while others are dying for them to waste and abuse fuel.

I hate nascar. I hate boat enthusiast. I hate 4 wheelers. I hate all those who waste fuel and don't think about where the fuel comes from.

Today i don't even own a car. I share a hybrid with an elder friend. We only use it to go shopping for food and even then we buy bulk.

Americans are abusers of energy. It would take 3 earths if the rest of the world used and abused fuel like we do.

Either support a draft for those who want to waste fuel (send their kids to war) or support a system that controls how much fuel everyone can use.

This statement below is the only one that i agree makes any sense.

>>>>if you want to stop the war, stop buying so much gas.

The draft should be implemented, a good amount of the EU has compulsory service and so should we, might help with some of the other problems (obesity being a big one).

Complainging that you don't agree with the war, that you oppose the draft because "it's not my war" then driving your 12 mi/gal suv home solo to your air conditioned house is the height of hypocrisy…

as far as what clinton has said, I think it would have been more acceptable if she had requested this information in a more private manner then published a statement/report regarding all information, seems she has kinda put the cart before the horse.

It all ends up being economics, thats how our system runs imo, strictly economical, we are at war over economics, our foreign policy(borders etc) revolve around economics and there will be a draft if it is what is economically correct. I believe it would benefit the United States as a whole if Mrs. Clinton could show what the economic impact etc would be of starting the draft system. Because as cold as it sounds, people dying violently is not something that this country considers a big deal anymore, thousands of killings annually…whatever

Posted By brendan fremont, ca : August 13, 2007 7:02 pm <<<<

1) The draft would make the war in Iraq worse. I cite the following evidence: Since the war began, this administration has lost about 30% of the weapons intended for "coalition forces". The man in charge of distributing those weapons? David Petraus. Since he did such a good job, Bush promoted him. If the draft is instituted and more soliers are sent over, theoretically that means more weapons. And we know now that about 30% of those will go to insurgents. Not a good idea.

2.) This thing with Clinton questioning Bush is clearly political grandstanding. Don't you think she could ask him without sending a letter to the media? She just wants political points for asking a question that she already has an answer to. And she did this because about 90% of Americans will only hear about her question and not about Lute's full statement, which is crystal clear.

Would you support Hillary if she was a conservative or is your decision to support her based completely on gender?

Keep one more thing in mind. It will be mostly MEN that will fight and die protecting America (and Europe) from islamic fascists that want to oppress western women and put them all in burkas.

Posted By Mstessyrue, Seattle, Washington : August 13, 2007 7:21 pm

Are you kidding me? Look at the billions upon billions that this nation spends on its OWN citizens, and we still have 37.0 million living in poverty. You can't get rid of poverty by paying people to not be poor. You offer incentives and opportunities, not food stamps and welfare. $19 billion. lol.

Posted By KLHA, Kansas City : August 13, 2007 3:16 pm

One question, if the draft is reinstated, doesn't that mean more "draft troops" going to fill in for our current deployed troops? If you aren't on of those "kool-aid" drinkers who can't think, then respond to that.
Futher more, Bush didn't think that we needed more troops at the beginning. ...He was wrong. He thought that he had "quota" and that he was going to pass a lot of things. Once again, wrong. The only thing is that this president has going for him is that he can make a lot of wrong choices. He does need to restate the fact that he will not start up the draft or come and say that the military is streached out way to thin and we need more troops. All of the nomimiees need to think about that question and then stick to that same answer.

1. She has strong beliefs (in herself)
2. Strong convictions (that she is smarter than everyone else)
3.Resolve (that she will win at any cost)
4. Faith (that she is going to be the next President)
5. Confidence (that she can fool the public)
6. Pro Military (as long as they are safe "redeployed" back in the USA)

I think you just described Hillary's campaign strategy better than anyone, including myself, could ever hope to.

Every time an issue comes up, big or small, she puts together a statement geared 100% towards hitting what she believes to be the most popular slant.

We have also seen the perils associated with this type of strategy, because it often leads to contradictions (nukes, etc.).

I think a psychologist would describe her behavior as pathological.

As for those saying that Bill Clinton stripped down the military as if that was a bad thing [and then demonizing Hillary for it], you protest too much! First, Cold War was over. Second, we weren't at war. Third, he modernized the military to make it leaner and meaner! And, lest we not forget, he wouldn't have been able to do it without the approval of the then Republican controlled congress!

What could she be hiding?

I imagine, Erika, to someone with such narrow vision as yourself that sees things in male v. female – it might appear this way. Men and women get to choose which candidate they want or do not wish to support (GASP).

You wish to castigate all men who oppose Hillary as though we're afraid of a "strong" woman (Does "strong" mean sticking with an abusive husband?). Perhaps, Erika, the men you see here posting are SMARTER than allowing a candidate win us over just because she has cleavage – as you have done."

I despise all the Clintons–does that make me afraid of females only Erika?
Jon, you took the words right out of my mouth..

Aside from a) drafting people who do not WANT to be there who'll hate everything and drag their feet, and b) massive public opposition that will arise to it, the US cannot afford it. The nation is in debt above its eyeballs; where in the world would we get the money for it? Learning to kill does not make you a better person or more..."disciplined."

Until someone can provide 100% evidence terrorism is not made up and we are not there for economic gain, then what is there to die for?

This Administration is responsible for over-stretching our military and abandoning our men and women when they return home from war. John Edwards isn't interested in Bush's "clarifications" but in bringing this war to an end, truly honoring our returning soldiers, and restoring America's position in the world.

From the perspective of someone currently in the U.S. Armed Forces, I personally believe that military service (in most cases) is beneficial for those who serve. It enhances a person's personal pride and dignity, teaches respect, discipline, duty, leadership, and prepares a person to have a positive influence in society, even if he/she only stays in the military for a short period, like 3-4 years.

If you even bothered to read anything regarding the proposal made by Rangel, you would have known that while he was semi-serious, it was a known fact that it would not get passed. He wanted those who were in such favor of the war, increase in troops, etc. to realize that this war touches everyone–no matter what your status, sex, or race (even age: 18-26).

"There the politicians go, making noise about issues Americans aren't to concerned with. I'm 17, and aware of what a draft could mean, but if we focus on pulling out of Iraq, then we won't have to worry about a draft."

Joshua Davis–you are six years younger than me and it clearly shows. The American people DO care about this issue (have you ever even asked any?). You obviously don't know what a draft could mean if you aren't worried about it, and pulling out of Iraq is great, but to be naive enough to think that it can happen with the snap of a finger is ridiculous. Even after pulling out we won't be through in Iraq.

I have often wondered if the draft will be reinstated. My biggest fear is that this isn't WWII–not many actually support this war. What will the morale be like? How can you fight in a war you didn't support from the onset? Will Canada become flooded with runners? Will Mexico? This is a serious issue that will be with us for a long time and will effect other countries as well. Clinton was right to ask for clarification.

I am female who currently has 26 years in the military. My family can trace military service through the Civil War and the Revolution. My father raised us to be patriotic and serve our country – proudly.

Let me give an update on what President Bush has done ... if you are not "a fighter" ready to go to Iraq – your job has been closed, no longer exists or is being phased out - all replaced with civilian contractors! So, a two year service committment wouldn't work right now. On stateside USAF bases, the contractors fix the meals, handle the transportation vehicles, the unit vans (GSA contract), cleaning services, civil engineering, services (housekeeping, lodging, base recreation), etc. Many of the secretarial and "vice" commander positions are also civilians.

I realize some guard and reserve units are meeting quotas but overall are not. Yet, with FY07 & 08 President Bush eliminated approximately 15,000 USAF reserve positions, plus many others. Then this week I received a brochure from the USAF reserve asking me to contact them .... "I can still join up to age 48." Is there anyone in charge with a an overall master plan?

As a military member, I honor my oath to support my Commander-in-Chief. I always support the troops! They also are honoring their oaths and performing their duties to the best of their abilities. However, as a citizen and mother of two – 18 and 14 years old, I don't support this war and am updating my children's passports. While I honor my committment, I don't want my children fighting in a war that I don't believe in and where the military members are underpaid, over worked and don't always have the proper equipment. Yet, these men and women continue to make me proud, honoring their committments and fighing to the best of their ablities.

Does President Bush have a clue what he has done to this country and it's military? Once Bush has his people start hinting at a draft he will be sure to make it look like we just have to have it - "his military advisors say so." That way it will appear that it is someone else's idea and it will be implemented. I wonder how soon after the draft would be implemented that the Bush twins would be in full gear and over in Iraq? I tend to think Hell would freeze over first.

At least Hillary is trying to provide adult supervision and raising the question.

Today, if you consider sales, income, property taxes we are all being taxed nearly 50% of our income. Not only that, but all national polls regarding Congressional and Presidential approcal have NOT been over 50% for a long time. It seems to me that we are yet again being taxed but not being represented. We elected politicians... That is why they aren't doing what needs to be done. They are following their own agendas.

It's getting rediculous, our government needs an overhaul. The amount of taxes imposed on us citizens is unconstitutional.

I will admit President Bush has not been a great President, but voting in Clinton or Obama would just be more of the same. Just on the other side of the line. Vote for a true American! Vote Ron Paul.