Posted by
rycK on Tuesday, November 21, 2006 2:26:00 PM
Goodtime CharlieRangel and the Draft
We can appreciate the fine work of Representative Charles Rangel, Democrat from Harlem. He has managed to submit a bill to reinstate the draft, which got only two votes, neither of which was his, but that does not matter. It is the intent that is important.
Charles Bernard Rangel ( with racist comments like "George Bush is our Bull Connor." ) is from the Fifteenth Congressional District of New York which includes encompasses Upper Manhattan and includes such neighborhoods as Harlem, Spanish Harlem, Washington Heights, Inwood, and part of the Upper West Side. He is the new charmian elect of the House Ways and Means Committee. He is a low-level criminal as he was arrested on trespassing on charges, for protesting at the Sudanese Embassy in Washington.
Charlie argues for the reinstitution of the military draft so as to share the responsibility and whatnot from all economic strata of society. That is interesting. What Charlie really means is that many of his constituents are missing an opportunity to settle down and milk yet one more government program. He sponsored the infamous Universal National Service Act of 2003, 108th Cong., 1st session., H.R. 163, that was a bill to reinstitute the military draft in the United States in 2003. The House roll call vote on the bill was only 2 in favor, 402 against. The only two yea votes were Jack Murtha (the hero of ABSCAM) and Pete Stark with Charlie voting against his own phony bill. Charlie was too cowardly to vote on his own bill.
Harlem and surrounding districts in NYC are famous for crime, drug addiction, sloth, sodomy, educational failure and social economic perversions. As such, Charlie wants a piece of this pie for his constituents and others in inner cities of the US, strong Democratic arenas with a 90% Democrat voting record.
There are several problems: Firstly, the Army does not want druggies, criminals, slothful recruits from the inner cities or any other location as they had to put up with in the 60s. I was a ‘brig chaser’ in the US Navy at Treasure Island in the 60s and escorted many of these criminals to courts martial for sentence. Most got off very light with a ‘convenience’ discharge and were kicked out. Few got a BCD (bad conduct discharge) or a DD (dishonorable discharge). The military just doesn’t want such social baggage. Boot camps such as Fort Ord were swamped with the low class, ignorant, social misfits and losers who were offered the choice of joining the military or going to jail by some liberal judge. These were the ones who wound up ‘fragging’ their officers in Viet Nam, much to the applause of the liberals in San Francisco and Harlem. They hate the military. Charlie wants to milk it.
Next, any of his constituents that wish to joint the military, and there are fine soldiers from his district serving now, can simply apply to join. If they are crime and drug free and high-school educated this would give Charlie the chance to offer a military career to his voting base on a competitive basis. Those who did not want to serve would not be bothered. That doesn’t work for Charlie. He wants to put losers in the military so they can complain and howl and attack our soldiers.
But, no. Charlie sees the 100,000$ per soldier money gig here and notes that much of his criminal constituency is not eligible for this reward for military service. Charlie sees this as a loss for the criminal elements, and justly so. His most loyal voters are disenfranchised as they cannot qualify for military service.
Having been a salesperson in NYC in the 70s with many accounts in Harlem and Uptown Manhattan, one is first struck by the ugly crime statistics. At one of my accounts near 125 and Amsterdam Ave, my car was bombarded with several flower pots dropped from a high floor in one of the many high-rise slums which nearly destroyed the car. Pots went through the windshield. The police ignored the crime report (they could have looked for dirt on the window sills above the car) and I had to contact a local business to haul the wreck out of the city into New Jersey. Many taxis would flatly refuse to take passengers into Charlie’s districts. There used to be a sign in the taxi front cab next to the license and picture of the driver to the effect that the driver MUST take you anywhere in the city. What a joke. They just said “Get out, I will not go there.” The subway (A Local) was a holocaust of dirt, grime, bums, hookers and druggies shooting up in the cars. The D train was almost as bad. The cars were dirty, debris ridden and worse. But, they have the vote! So, the existence of Charlie Rangel.
There are a lot of political articles on the Internet that purport to show that ‘crime is down in NYC.’ The ugly facts are that crime in Charlie’s districts has not abated. The political considerations are that crimes are ignored or not reported for the most part and levels are assessed by the murder and mugging rates, having nothing to do with non violent social crimes such as theft, drugs, kiddy porn, gambling, peddling of knockoffs and more. It is understandable that Charlie would like to cover this up. Mayor Rudolf Giuliani set out to fight crime in the Big Apple and searched thousands and thousands of people in search of guns and more. Crime, in that format, declined. It just moved to the other boroughs. Crime stats are a political football with moving goal posts in the big cities.
Here is an example from Wikipedia about skewed statistics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States
“For example, the responding communities in San Mateo County, California had a population of approximately 624,000 and 17 homicides in 2001. 6 of these 17 homicides took place in relatively poor, largely African and Hispanic American East Palo Alto, which had a population of roughly 30,000. So, while East Palo Alto only accounted for 4.8% of the population, 35.3% of all homicides took place there.[10] Thus it becomes very clear that the distribution of crime among different demographical groups and locales varies significantly.”
Why not just report crime stats by precinct in the major cities so we can see where the high crime areas are? Politics is the answer. The politicians in NYC want to show ‘progress’ in addressing their crime and other social issues. Such a joke!
Crime is rampant in the inner cities in African and Hispanic sectors and the Democrats try to suppress this information with political fluff. Charlie has made his career off of inner city crime. The current FBI records, politically inflammatory to many, show that about one third of all black males (nation wide) will serve time in prison. That statistic affects Charlie’s districts. There are similar disproportioned statistics for Spanish Harlem as well. When minorities have a disproportional presentation in prison, the Democrats have to put up phony and silly political arguments and give excuses for the facts. If 1/3 will serve time and there is a high population of blacks in Charlie’s district then how many of his constituents will spend time in prison? 35%? More? No wonder Charlie needs some new laws.
Education is another factor that prevents many from entering military service. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0779196.html High School Dropout Rates by Race/Ethnicity, 1960–2004 show the following:
High School Dropout Rates by Race/Ethnicity, 1960–2004
Year White Black Hispanic
1960 — — —
1970 13.2% 27.9% —
1980 11.4 19.1 35.2%
1985 10.4 15.2 27.6
1990 9.0 13.2 32.4
1992 7.7 13.7 29.4
1993 7.9 13.6 27.5
1994 7.7 12.6 30.0
1995 8.6 12.1 30.0
1996 7.3 13.0 29.4
1997 7.6 13.4 25.3
1998 7.7 13.8 29.5
1999 7.3 12.6 28.6
2000 6.9 13.1 27.8
2001 7.3 10.9 27.0
2002 6.5 11.3 25.7
2003 6.3 10.9 23.5
2004 6.8 11.8 23.8
Perhaps Charlie can tell us how many of his constituents can pass military entrance exams, highly weighted in cognitive skill questions. The point here is that Charlie needs a way to circumvent the testing system. He has no other choice. A ‘compulsatory’ draft is the most convenient way of offering employment to the unemployable. Nancy Pelosi cannot accept this as she ‘loathes the military’ as do the Clintons. Charlie loses this round. Charlie ought to stick with welfare and phony rehab programs. That works for him and his constituents.
Our modern all-volunteer military does not need criminals and the willfully and uneducated. Maybe Charlie needs Ebonics translators in all military units to improve communications. Those who can pass the physical and educational hurdles are welcome in the military and those who cannot are not.
Just another liberal Democrat with his snout in the public trough.
Sorry Charlie, we want tuna with good taste!