Thanks Bill.

Discussion in 'The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr' started by ysacres, Mar 6, 2003.

  1. ysacres

    ysacres Well-Known Member Supporting Member

    Nov 10, 2001
    Pullman WA
    Posts: 3
    (6/29/02 12:11:38 am)
    Reply Thanks Bill.
    ....and the legacy continues.

    More Clinton Legacy: Draft Evasion Now Acceptable

    Since Bill Clinton successfully redefined the meaning of "sex" to beat a Monicagate perjury rap, an epidemic of oral sex has swept through the nation's teenage population.

    Now America's young men seem ready to emulate Clinton in another regard, with more than a third of college age students saying they'd evade the draft if called to fight the war on terrorism.

    According to a new poll commissioned by Bill Bennett's Americans for Victory over Terrorism, a full 37 percent of college students surveyed nationwide said they would "be likely to evade the draft if it was reinstituted."

    One fifth of students surveyed (21 percent) said they would be willing to serve in the military, but only if they were stationed in the U.S.

    Only 35 percent of students would be willing to serve and fight anywhere in the world.

    The results contradict two assumptions that have long characterized American attitudes towards military service:

    1) The belief that if the U.S. ever suffered a second Pearl Harbor (as it did on 9-11), its youth would revert to the attitudes prevalent during the "just war" that followed, rejecting the anti-war sentiments that were popular during America's so-called "unjust" war in Vietnam.

    2) That "dodging the draft" carries a heavy price tag of ostracism and other penalties, as it did even during Vietnam, when evaders often left the country certain they would never be allowed to return.

    President Carter's 1978 decision to grant amnesty to Vietnam-era draft dodgers who had fled the country began the erosion of the stigma attached to evasion.

    But far more significant was the decision by the American electorate 14 years later (or at least 43 percent of it) to reward certifiable draft dodger Bill Clinton with the job of Commander-in-Chief.

    Clinton's victory came despite the amply documented revelations that he had evaded three separate draft notices and lied his way out of a commitment to Arkansas ROTC Commander, Col. Eugene Holmes, to whom he admitted "loathing the military."

    With a draft dodger's ascendancy to the highest office in the land, the signal to America's youth was clear: Not only was military service no longer a prerequisite for the presidency, but Americans would even accept a Commander-in-Chief who showed a blatant contempt for the military.

    Still, the concept of a draft dodging president doesn't necessarily pose insurmountable problems - as long as the nation remains at peace.

    But once war clouds gather, it becomes a good deal more difficult to tell America's mothers and fathers that it's time for their boys to fight and die when the man giving the orders did just the opposite - and was rewarded with the White House anyway.

    Col. Holmes made one last desperate attempt to warn America of the consequences of such a decision in a Sept. 1992 pre-election open letter, which the media completely ignored:

    "The tremendous implications of the possibility of (Clinton) becoming Commander-in-Chief of the United States Armed Forces compels me now to comment on the facts concerning Mr. Clinton's evasion of the draft," the Bataan Death March survivor began.

    With the U.S. planning to launch a 250,000 troop invasion of Iraq, Col. Holmes words were never more relevant than they are today - now that 37 percent of America's potential fighting force is considering following Bill Clinton's example.

    Edited by: mrpest at: 6/29/02 1:13:16 am

    Posts: 5102
    (6/29/02 3:37:10 pm)
    Re: Thanks Bill.
    I sure hope they don't follow in his foot steps!

    Good post mrpest!
    TFF VMBB Email Tac

    V.I.P. Member
    Posts: 82
    (6/29/02 6:22:33 pm)
    Reply Re: Thanks Bill.
    IMO, our present leaders don't have a whole lot more going for them in the "military service" aspects.

    Dubya had his daddy get him a slot with the Air Guard, and even then he chose not to attend most of the training ,,

    And Cheney took a student deferment and is quoted as saying: "I was not interested in the military."

    Now, both are fine, legal reasons, but neither should pretend they were great supporters of the military when they were of an age to serve.

    just another opinion,,

    also, it is apperent, at least up until 9/11, that military service was not an issue with voters as it was back in the 50's
    Stan H ,, nighthawk

    "A Country Boy Can Survive"

    Edited by: nighthawksh at: 6/29/02 7:25:08 pm

    Posts: 4
    (6/30/02 10:28:23 am)
    Reply Re: Thanks Bill.
    I think the real issue here is character.Bill Clinton is one, yet has none.

    Jungle Jim
    Posts: 25
    (10/6/02 9:33:05 pm)
    Reply Thanks, Bill

    Bush is the most respected President in years by our military. If he's what you say he is, why do they respect him? The National Guard service he pulled was 100% more than Clinton did. He's done more for our military by accident than Clinton ever did on purpose. I see your MACV patch, and know you're a veteran like me, so you should understand these statements.

    When Clinton was in office, the active duty motor pools had to cannibalize vehicles just to keep some of them operational. There wasn't enough ammo for the troops to practice on the range, and some soldiers were buying ammo out of their own pockets so they could practice!

    These days, they have it a little easier, because of Bush.
    I support him as my Commander in Chief.

    "De Oppresso Liber"

    Posts: 19
    (10/7/02 1:17:15 am)
    Reply Re: Thanks, Bill
    mrpest, i think you give today's youth far too much credit. i doubt many even realize that clinton was a draft dodger.

    since entering my 30s, i've spent some time thinking about kids and grownups. i guess i'm really a grown up now. gen x slackers call me sir and straighten up when i glower at them while speeding on my street. i rather doubt today's "slackers" are any worse than those in the 70s. i think one big difference in polls in modern times -- there are too many of them now. when i was in college a few years ago, i brushed off any poll takers. i didn't have time for it. had the next class to get to or studies, etc. today, i think people are busier... that or more serious minded folks don't have time for personal interruptions. 20 years ago, when someone asked your opinion, you felt honored that they cared for your opinion and you shared it. today, when someone asks me questions about my opinions, i'm thinking about how some large company is trying to make money for marketing purposes.


    =) chris in sandy eggo, p.r.k