Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why aren't Bush twins in Army? (Hightower)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-16-04 01:03 PM
Original message
Why aren't Bush twins in Army? (Hightower)
Wednesday 15 September @ 15:06:41
by JIM HIGHTOWER

Jenna and Barbara, the 22-year-old twins, have long been kept away from the political glare, but they’re now adults who have just graduated from college, and both have been brought into the limelight by the Bush political campaign. Their first outing was for a photo spread and puff piece that ran in Vogue, the fashion magazine. Indeed, they looked splendiferous, beautifully made up and swathed in glamorous designer gowns––one by Oscar de la Renta, the other by Calvin Klein. No telling how many silk worms toiled to make this photo spread possible. <snip>

Jenna and Barbara announced that they would be joining their daddy’s election campaign, but I had to ask myself: Why aren’t they joining their daddy’s war?

After all, he says that his war in Iraq is absolutely essential to our national security. And he insists that his policies over there are absolutely worth all the troops who have been killed, worth the mutilations of thousands of other soldiers, worth the beheadings, worth the untold illnesses and poisonings being contracted by the men and women he has sent there, and worth the illegal conscription of tens of thousands of Americans forced to stay in this disastrous war beyond their legitimate tour of duty. <snip>

Maybe it’s genetic. After all, George himself was a “ferocious war hawk” who used family connections to keep himself 8,000 miles from Vietnam. And now that he’s president, he can start his own war that leaves his loved ones safely swathed in silk ... while our families see our loved ones come home in shrouds.

http://www.pulsetc.com/article.php?sid=1338
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-16-04 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. That's the way it works
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
momisold Donating Member (148 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-16-04 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
2. Choice
Because it is their choice, just like it is your choice and my choice to be in the military. Every person in the military today is there because they signed up. No one held a gun to their head, no one drafted them, no one indentured them. They walked into a recruiting office, signed the papers, and joined. If the Kerry girls, the Bush girls, or any other girls choose not to join, that is their right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lindacooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-16-04 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. What a stupid statement.
You are so unbelievably wrong! Most kids go into the military because there aren't any decent-paying jobs out there, or they do it for money for college. National Guard members are in it for the money, because it's impossible to support a family with just one job in Bush's economy.

You just show me ONE wealthy person who volunteered to go into combat (besides Senator Kerry :) ). It's called an involuntary draft because it's usually poor kid's one way out of poverty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-16-04 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-16-04 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. "Uemployment" ceased to be a meaningful statistic during ...
... the Reagan era, when it was changed to eliminate the long-term unemployed; this change makes administrations look better in times of crisis because in prolonged recessions the labor statistics automatically begin to improve eventually, even if there are no new hires. (BLS definitions: "Marginally attached workers are persons who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the recent past. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for a job. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule.")

A better statistic of labor underutilization IMHO is U-6 (which BLS describes as "total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers").

For the last year U-6 has fluctuated between about 9.5% and 10%. This means that about one in every ten people who wants a full time job either has no job or has a part time gig.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.toc.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-16-04 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Yeah, it's better to let others die for daddy's war

After all, how could they enjoy the spoils of war if they're layin' in the desert with their guts blown out. We got po' folks that do that kinda shit.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-16-04 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. I second that. What a stupid statement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-18-04 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
18. "Why are they not in fatigue?" was Hightower question
a few weeks ago at a rally.

His point then was not so much that they need to enlist, but the kind of message that they would send if they were dressed in fatigue, and the kind of message when they are not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-16-04 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
6. Yeah, Jim Hightower! Of all the persons in Congress, only one has a child
...in the armed forces. Only one.

The Armed Services are made of minorities and lower to middle class whites. The Armed Services are pitched as a way to better yourself, which, in the past they have been. That was before wars of pride and vanity. No matter how you shake it or bake it, humans are one of the raw materials for the military/industrial complex.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-16-04 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-16-04 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Supply links for your assertions, please.
Moore's statement is F9/11 was: "Out of the 535 members of Congress, only one had an enlisted son in Iraq."

He cites: “Only four of the 535 members of Congress have children in the military; only one, Sen. Tim Johnson, D-S.D., has a child who fought in Iraq.” Kevin Horrigan, “Hired Guns,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 11, 2003.

viz. http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/f911notes/index.php?id=21

I won't claim to know with certainty that Moore is correct and would be happy to see any evidence otherwise that you might cite. On the other hand, I think you're distracted by tangential issues.

And welcome to DU ... :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kskiska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-16-04 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
8. George P. isn't signing up either
There was an article on how proud his dad was when he graduated from law school, and now he's married and planning a life in politics. Not one word about why he's not out fighting for his country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-17-04 06:02 AM
Response to Original message
12. If there is a draft, they better damn well be the first to go! n/t
Not to mention the various other Bush Larvae.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yelladawg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-17-04 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Secret Service
The secret service would follow them everywhere and would a real mess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-17-04 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. I thought about that too..
If Barbara or Jenna served, then would Secret Service have to go with them? And then I thought, why? Because they might get...shot at...or something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kskiska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-17-04 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Lyndon Johnson's son-in-law (Chuck Robb) had to sign up
to go to Vietnam. Would Lynda Bird's husband be covered by SS?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HawkerHurricane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-17-04 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. FDR's son...
served in WW2. Volunteered, too. Flew a P-38 Lighting in combat over North Africa.
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Elliot-Roosevelt
In a single seat fighter, where would the Secret Service Agent sit?

No excuse for the Bush twins.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-18-04 07:46 AM
Response to Original message
17. Do You WANT to Arm These Girls?
The army doesn't need that kind of grief. A convent in the Inner City, or a rehab facility, would be much more suitable placements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fovea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-18-04 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
19. Don't you follow the tabloids?
The twins have other priorities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC