Rove Reversal

If the Democrats want to win in 2008 they must pull a "Reverse Rove." If the Democrats want to beat the Republicans, and I mean really beat them, not just by a few hundred votes in Florida, Ohio, or Pennsylvania, they've got to start thinking like the Turd Blossom. In the 2004 presidential race Karl Rove mobilized Republican voters by getting initiatives banning gay marriage on the ballots in 11 states. If the Democrats really want to mobilize their base they must push for swing state ballot initiatives that call for reinstating the draft. Even if it's a local draft, calling up young men and women to serve in their state's depleted National Guard units. That would really get the Democratic base to turn out en mass: young people, reasonable mothers and fathers, the anti-war crowd -- America's true silent majority.

Comments

[GenXLiberal]

Why don't we get the lists of all Registered Republicons and make those bastards serve. It's only fair that you reap what you sow. Unless the Repulicons no longer go by the motto of personal accountability.

[heretical_eggs]

I'm not quite sure about some of the logic in this post, Bill. However, I just watched your Friday show, and I still think you're right on in most of your comedy and political opinion.

Also, one other question. When is ARIANNA going to be on your show?

[TruthIsAll]

Bill,
Rather than institute a draft, how about the democrats just make sure that ALL the votes are counted - and publicly SHOUT OUT the fact that the 2004 election was STOLEN. The vote-switching (thank Diebold & ESS) and massive voter disenfranchisement was much more extensive than the 2000 theft. In a FAIR election, any Democrat would win in a landslide!

[malfunctioningeddy]

I see a far more effective way for the dems to trounce the GOP

I consider myself at the very least a fiscal conservative, however I find it very hard to identify with the brand of conservatism sold by the GOP.
The reason is that the GOP's brand of conservatism is a very narrow one - they seemingly drop any kind of fiscal conservatism any time it suits them to do so, likewise the ideas of a small non-intrusive federal government can all go fuck themsevles if its convenient for them - and they feel that they should get a free ride on the cost to taxpayers of the war in iraq and war on terror in general - hardly the behaviour of what I understand a conservative to be.

The GOP's brand of conservatism is strictly limited to social conservatism - and these days very specifically limited to religious conservatism.

GWB didn't say that he didn't beleive in evolution or that god told him to invade Iraq because he is a dumb rube (perhaps he is one but that's not the point) he said it because although he knew that he would alienate a whole bunch of rational intelligent potential voters, their numbers as far as he was concerned were insignificant in comparison to his core voters -socially conservative religious nutjobs - he was preaching to what he sees as his choir.

Ok - so far there isn't really any earth shattering news here, but it seems like its news to the Dems - there is a huge opportunity for the dems to win votes from sensible rational conservatives who are concerned about a party that will for example hand out blank cheques to policies, or will countenance all manner of "big government" interference in peoples daily lives, or imprudently spend taxpayers money, provided that legislation has the word god attached to it.
I don't see the dems making any attempt to reach out to these people at all, and I know for a fact that I'm not the only person who feels this way

[Collielady]

The American people aren't directly affected by this war because it's being fought, for the most part, by underprivileged kids who sign up for the bonus money, and by mercenary armies. Most Americans don't feel the effects of the war because they don't have "a dog in the fight", so to speak.

When the Viet Nam draft pulled everyone's kids into the conflict, from every economic class, that was when the American people rose up in protest.

[thepopoman]

Instead of reinstating the draft. Demand a war tax (individuals and large corporations) to responsibly pay for the war. No loop holes for Bush or any selfish Government official to escape out of. No escape for powerful corporations or individuals either. It must be a relative percentage so the sacrifice is closer to equal. Preferably tax wealth more then earnings. It will show fiscal responsibility and it will shut up the selfish Republicans that pretend they support the troops. Watch the exuses they give for now wanting to bring the troops back!

Also we also need a wealth tax to get us out of hock.

[Merg]

Special surtax on Defense & Oil related businesses. (It's only fair)

[speak2ar]

Bill, When I heard Charlie Rangel first propose a draft law, I thought, somehow, it would backfire. Voters need to recognize that the neo-cons, with their "new world order" operate outside the law. To them, the Constitution is irrelevant, Congress is irrelevant, our allies in France and Germany are irrelevant. What with corporate ownership of former government functions, I believe, to them, the U.S. Army is irrelevant. They are clearly building a strong, well-paid militia to do their bidding. I don't know what strategy would rally Americans to see the light and save our democaracy.

[Collielady]

Perhaps Americans will rally to re-instate the draft when they see Blackwater marching down Mainstreet America. Maybe then Americans will connect the dots between the lack of a draft, Bush suspending Posse comitatus, and mercenary armies.

[KenArnold]

Forget the draft. How about putting on state ballots bills for real heath care for all, like CA's SB840. And bills for real public campaign financing. How about a statement/bill/demand that states can and will revoke the charter of corporations not functioning for the public good - a corporation after all is a government creation supposedly for that purpose. And so many other needed progressive reforms that are needed to start to reverse the last 27 years of conservative rule. Let get people to the polls with things really worth voting for.

[cactusJohn]

But what if "they" find out it was a Democratic move to reinstate the draft? Wouldn't that back-fire in favor of the GOPers? I'm going to have to stay up on my politics. If it were that simple --how did we wind up with Nancy Pelosi, and tons of money continually appropriated for the war/occupation/fear-of-terrorists thing Hillary and all them voted for. Yeah, I'm going to have to stay up on my politics . . .

[der_Alte]

this time 'illegal immigrants' will be the Willie Horton that will win the necessary margin.

[DoctorDoctor]

yeah -- i never thought i'd hear me saying it BUT: we should re-institute the draft. It would do away with mercenaries obligated to and overseen by the executive branch alone AND it would get the public involved in such things as the "adventures in arms" this nutty administration has initiated. maybe if they had something to lose, they'd be a little more critical when some dumbass thinks an unprovoked invasion is a "good thing". jees. as for rove --- who cares. he's done a lot of damage, driven many good people from public service and shown that lying, cheating and stealing are an admirable way to get ahead. bravo, you jerk.

[OckhamsElectricRazor]

Funny how most of the proponents of the draft are too old to participate in one.

[wrabbitt]

i'm a vet bring back the draft. you don't want to do time in the service? go to canada and get pardoned in twenty years. our young adults need a direction, two years mandatory military service would go well to giving them a direction

[Graywolf48]

I am a Viet Nam vet. I enlisted at age 17 (minority enlistment) and went off to boot camp right after high school graduation. I volunteered for Viet Nam because I thought it was the right thing to do for my family and country. I opposed Nixon's "all voluntary military" because I knew it would probably lead to a professional mercenary force with greater loyalty to the C in C than the Constitution, or would make it easier for unscrupulous politicians to wage war when America's youth were not threatened with being drafted to fight illegal or unpopular wars.

In addition, we have become a very selfish population who want all the benefits of liberty without any of the obligations or sacrifices liberty requires. A minimum of two years active military service should be a national requirement, and the requirement should include females. No exemptions, or excuses. Don't want to or can't serve in a military unit, you can do your time in public service, otherwise try Canada or Europe. Draft dodgers should forfeit their citizenship. That will eventually put an end to a cowardly gaggle of chicken hawks and keyboard commandos who support this illegal excursion into Iraq and perhaps soon into Iran.

[voter4change]

you're right.

[zedog]

the problem with talk of 3rd party is that actaul third party candidates come from the fringe (right or left) they are unelectable and only end up hurting the causes they support.

If a 3rd party could rise up out of the middle, say on immigration and a flat tax for starters, somebody might get somewhere.

And, can someone tell me why the Dems appear to want open borders, which will lead to the downfall of America as we in the middle class understand it today?

It's "Everyone wants to close the borders." Stupid

[yellowdogdemocratic]

zedog,

Not all dems want open borders. After having my job outsourced to India I would never support any action that takes American jobs away from Americans. Other dems feel this way. Listen to Lou Dobbs.

[ger]

A War Surtax is the only initiative that makes sense to me.

[Xysea]

Yes, but why should people who are against this war and have been be forced to pay it? lol

(It's a bit of a rhetorical question: I already know the answer! STT - Shh!)

I wouldn't mind paying *some* of it, but people who WANTED this war should have to pay double.

(/snark)