And who says that Democrats don't have contempt for the military?

Having been shown stats that indicate that members of the armed forces are less likely to be black, poor, or high school dropouts than the American population at large, Rangel was asked a very simple question.

Isn't the volunteer Army better educated and more well to do than the general population?

His response shows the degree of contempt for the US military that exists in his shriveled, anti-American, left-wing heart.

Of course not. I want to make it abundantly clear: if thereÂ’s anyone who believes that these youngsters want to fight, as the Pentagon and some generals have said, you can just forget about it. No young, bright individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits. And most all of them come from communities of very, very high unemployment. If a young fella has an option of having a decent career or joining the army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq.

Got that -- even though the FACTS show that the members of today's military are more educated and from more affluent backgrounds than at any point in our nation's history, Rangel argues that they are simply poor, dumb screw-ups with no options in civilian life. Given his own contempt for America, I guess that Rangel cannot fathom patriotism and service to one's country, rather than the partisanship and service to himself that Rangel has engaged in for decades in Congress.

So let's remember that Charlie Rangel is the "new" face of the Democrat Party -- despite being a hack politician who has served (himself) in Congress for decades.

And if you wonder why this angers me so, it is because I heard the same sort of crap about Vietnam vets growing up -- raised by a father whose career was serving this country in the United States Navy, including multiple tours in Vietnam. And I remember watching him struggle to serve our country by day and complete both a masters Degree and a Doctorate by night -- so that upon retirement he could spend the next two decades running a Job Corps Center, overseeing a group of Job Corps Centers in the Northwest, and finally end his second career (in education) as a college professor. My father did not serve because he had no choices or no brains -- he served because of a great love for this country that he still manifests to this day, a half century after he joined the Navy straight out of college.

And I know that the men and women of the US military serving today in Iraq are every bit the equal in intelligence, ability, and love of country as he was back then, when he joined and when he continued to serve with pride during Vietnam and the dark years for the military that followed.

H/T Hot Air & Jawa Report

Others blogging on this topic include The Political Pit Bull, Biga, Macsmind - Conservative Commentary and Common Sense » Blog Archive » More Rangel hoof in mouth disease, Y.A.C.R.W.B - Yet Another Conservative, Right Wing Blog » Rangel Pulls a Kerry, Sister Toldjah » Rep. Charlie Rangel disrespects our military - again, Post : Military Matters, Growing Old Disgracefully » Tonight’s surf-bored, Right Voices » Blog Archive » Rangel Does His Best John Kerry Imitation, Stop The ACLU, Curiouser and Curiouser, RAINGULL: US MILITARY STUPID LOSERS « Texas Hold ‘Em Blogger, Ace of Spades HQ, Charles Rangel on What the Left Really Thinks « Woodiah’s BlogThe LLama Butchers, SlublogDumbass IV: Can’t let it go at Imperium ZorlociHang Right Politics - Archives » First, Mississippi. Now, This., BizzyBlog: The Business End of the Blogosphere » Let’s See: There’s Kerry, Strickland, and Now Rangel …..Texas Rainmaker » Rangel’s Alternate Punchline to Kerry’s “Botched Joke”, Dawnsblood, “7.62mm Justice” » Rangel, Sit Down & Shut Up, Bill's Bites, Media Lies, Say Anything, » Democrats and the Profession of ArmsIvory Dome, Sgt Hook - This We'll Defend, Blue Crab Boulevard » Rangel Continues To Insult The Troops, Andrew Olmsted dot com, Church and State, The Moderate Voice, Sam Wilkinson is…Taking It Eaaaaaasy. » Blog Archive » Rangel Hates America, Rangel Hates America…Wait, What?!?, Hoystory » Blog Archive » Keep talking…, The Dread Pundit Bluto, Cop The Truth, Blog-o-Fascists, Bruised Orange » Rangel: I’m With Stoopid, » Blog Archive » Is it Kerry?, Leaning Straight Up, third world county, NW Bloggers

Posted by: Greg at 11:49 PM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 765 words, total size 9 kb.

This past summer, I wrote about the discovery of the USS Legarto. Now, though, an even more legendary American submarine has been found -- the ">USS Wahoo.

The discovery of her last resting place has been confirmed by the United States Navy.

ommander, U.S. Pacific Fleet declared Oct. 31 that the sunken submarine recently discovered by divers in the Western Pacific is, indeed, the World War II submarine USS Wahoo (SS 23 .

"After reviewing the records and information, we are certain USS Wahoo has been located," said Adm. Gary Roughead, the U.S. Pacific Fleet commander. “We are grateful for the support of the USS Bowfin Submarine Museum and Park, and appreciate greatly the underwater video footage of the submarine provided by our Russian navy colleagues, which allowed us to make this determination. This brings closure to the families of the men of Wahoo - one of the greatest fighting submarines in the history of the U.S. Navy."

In July, the Russian dive team “Iskra” photographed wreckage lying in about 213 feet (65 meters) of water in the La Perouse (Soya) Strait between the Japanese island of Hokkaido and the Russian island of Sakhalin. The divers were working with The Wahoo Project Group, an international team of experts coordinated by Bryan MacKinnon, a relative of Wahoo’s famed skipper, Cmdr. Dudley W. “Mush” Morton.

“I am very pleased to be part of an effort where old adversaries have joined together as friends to find the Wahoo,” said MacKinnon.

Wahoo was lost with all hands on her seventh patrol in October, 1943. She and her skipper, Cdr. Dudley W. "Mush" Morton, had compiled a phenomenal record of success during the sub's time in service. Morton's success as a captain was such that he was still a legend among navy men when I was a boy growing up on navy bases, more than a quarter century after the last patrol.

The following is a list of the brave men of the USS Wahoo, lost when she was sunk on October 11, 1943.

Anders, F. MM3
Andrews, J. S. EM1
Bailey, R. E. SC3
Bair, A. I. TM3
Berg, J. C. MM3
Browning, C. E. MOMM2
Brown, D. R. LTJG
Bruce, C. L. MOMM1
Buckley, J. P. RM1
Burgan, W. W. LT
Campbell, J. S. ENS
Carr, W. J. CGMA
Carter, J. E. RM2
Davison, W. E. MOMM1
Deaton, L. N. TM1
Erdey, J. S. EM3
Fielder, E. F. LTJG
Finkelstein, O. TM3
Galli, W. O. TM3
Garmon, C. E. MOMM2
Garrett, G. C., Jr. MOMM2
Gerlacher, W. L. S2
Goss, R. P. MOMM1
Greene, H. M. LT
Hand, W. R. EM2
Hartman, L. M. MM3
Hayes, D. M. EM2
Henderson, R. N. LT
Holmes, W. H. EM1
House, V. A. S1
Howe, H. J. EM2
Jacobs, O. MOMM1
Jasa, R. L. MM3
Jayson, J. O. CK3
Johnson, K. B. TM1
Keeter, D. C. CMOMMA
Kemp, W. W. GM1
Kessock, P. F1
Krebs, P. H. S1
Kirk, E. T. S1
Lape, A. D. F1
Lindemann, C. A. S1
Logue, R. B. FC1
Lynch, W. L. F1
MacAlman, S. E. PHM1
MacGowen, T. J. MOMM1
Magyar, A. J. MM3
Manalisay, J. C. ST3
Mandjiak, P. A. MM3
Massa, E. E. S1
Maulding, E. C. SM3
Maulding, G. E. TM3
McGill, T. J. CMOMMA
McGilton, H. E. TM3
McSpadden, D. J. TM1
Mills, M. L. RT1
Misch, G. A. LTJG
Morton, D. W. CDR
Neel, P. TM2
O'Brien, F. L. EM1
O'Neal, R. L. EM3
Ostrander, E. E. MM3
Phillips, P. D. SC1
Rennels, J. L. SC2
Renno, H. S1
Seal, E. H. Jr. TM2
Simonetti, A. R. SM2
Skjonsby, V. L. LCDR
Smith, D. O. BM1
Stevens, G. V. MOMM2
Terrell, W. C. QM3
Thomas, W. S1
Tyler, R. O. TM3
Vidick, J. EM2
Wach, L. J. COX
Waldron, W. E. RM3
Ware, N. C. CEM
White, W. T. Y2
Whipp, K. L. MM2
Witting, R. L. MM3

It seems that this unofficial alternate verse to the Navy Hymn is appropriate.

Lord God, our power evermore,
Who arm doth reach the ocean floor,
Dive with our men beneath the sea;
Traverse the depths protectively.
O hear us when we pray, and keep
them safe from peril in the deep.

May God grant the men of USS Wahoo eternal and peaceful rest -- and may our country never forget their sacrifice.

Posted by: Greg at 03:34 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 736 words, total size 5 kb.

An excellent piece appears over at OpinionJournal that explains that a draft would water down the military -- and do very little to "spread the burden" of military service from the lower classes to more affluent members of our society.

In this mythology, the military is overly reliant on uneducated dupes from poor communities because those from more affluent backgrounds don't want to serve. But the truth is closer to the opposite, according to a recent Heritage Foundation report on the demographic characteristics of the military. It's titled "Who Are the Recruits?" and Mr. Rangel, a Korean War veteran, might want to read it before implying that the military doesn't look like America.

According to the report, which analyzed the most recent Pentagon enlistee data, "the only group that is lowering its participation in the military is the poor. The percentage of recruits from the poorest American neighborhoods (with one-fifth of the U.S. population) declined from 18 percent in 1999 to 14.6 percent in 2003, 14.1 percent in 2004, and 13.7 percent in 2005." Put another way, if military burdens aren't spread more evenly among socio-economic groups in the U.S., it's because the poor are underrepresented.

Or consider education levels. In the general U.S. population, the high school graduation rate is a little under 80%. But among military recruits from 2003-2005, nearly 97% had high school diplomas. The academic quality of recruits has also been rising this decade. According to Heritage, the military defines a "high quality" recruit as someone who scores above the 50th percentile on the Armed Forces Qualifying Test and has a high school degree. The percentage of high quality recruits had climbed to 67% in 2004 and 64% in 2005, up from 57% in 2001.

And what about race? In 2004, about 76% of the U.S. population was white, which was only slightly above the 73% of military recruits (and 72% of Army recruits) who were white. Blacks made up 12.17% of the population in 2004, and made up 14.54% of recruits in 2004 and 13% in 2005. Hispanic Americans are also slightly overrepresented in the military compared to their share of the population, but also not to a degree that suggests some worrisome cultural chasm among the races.

The overall truth is that today's recruits come primarily from the middle class, and, more importantly, they come willingly.

And, of course, there is the more key issue -- the nature of those who would be drafted and the impact of the draft on military resources.

An Army of draftees would so expand the number of recruits that training resources would inevitably be stretched and standards watered down. Meanwhile, scarce resources would be devoted to tens of thousands of temporary soldiers who planned to leave as soon as their year or two of forced service was up.

It's true that such training would help to shape up more young Americans who could use a few weeks of Marine discipline at Parris Island, and if this is what Mr. Rangel has in mind he should say so. But the price would be a less effective fighting force, and precisely at a time when experience and technological mastery are more important than ever in a fighting force.

"The military doesn't want a draft," says Tim Kane, an Air Force veteran and author of the Heritage study. "What the military wants is the most effective fighting force they can field. They want to win wars and minimize casualties. And you don't do that when you're forced to take less-educated, unmotivated people."

But then again, a buffoon like Charlie Rangel really wants a less-educated, less motivated, less-effective military force, so that the US will be perpetually under-prepared for military action. That way the military won't be used aggressively to fight for freedom around the world -- but that also means that in time of crisis we will be less able to defend this nation from attacks from abroad (you do remember 9/11, Charlie, don't you -- I hear it happened near your district).

Personally, I oppose a draft for a different reason. My father spent over a quarter century in the US Navy. The last part of it was in positions overseeing basic training and the more advanced service schools . Based upon my conversations with him and with officers and senior enlisted personnel at the time that Jimmy Carter re-instituted draft registration, I learned of the benefits of an all-volunteer military -- and that military professionals do not want draftees, barring a conflagration of the scale of WWII. Unless Congressman Rangel and other supporters of a draft envision widening the Crusade Against Jihadi Terror to wipe that scourge from the face of the planet for the benefit of all humanity (as was done with Nazism), there is no military need for a draft.

Posted by: Greg at 01:44 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 811 words, total size 5 kb.

The United States military has functioned effectively as an all-volunteer force for three decades. Statistics show that our soldiers today are better educated, and broadly representative of the American population -- and that if anything, whites from the middle class are OVER-REPRESENTED in the armed forces.

But that doesn't stop a certain senior Democrat from claiming that the military is not representative enough -- and from proposing a solution that will make it non-volunteer and filled with less-educated, less qualified, less-motivated soldiers and sailors.

Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) has long advocated returning to the draft, but his efforts drew little attention during the 12 years that House Democrats were in the minority. Starting in January, however, he will chair the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee. Yesterday he said "you bet your life" he will renew his drive for a draft.

"I will be introducing that bill as soon as we start the new session," Rangel said on CBS's "Face the Nation." He portrayed the draft, suspended since 1973, as a means of spreading military obligations more equitably and prompting political leaders to think twice before starting wars.

"There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way," said Rangel, a Korean War veteran. "If we're going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can't do that without a draft."

And while we are at it, Charlie, how about a proposed amendment to repeal the provision in the Constitution banning involuntary servitude -- because that is what you seek to propose on every single American young person.

UPDATE: Not only does the Dem Leadership oppose the Rangel Draft, but so does the New york Times. The latter shouldn't come as a surprise, though, since they have opposed the draft in most circumstances all the way back to when Lincoln implemented one back during the Civil War. Come to think of it, the Democrat Party opposed that draft as well -- and if they had succeeded in undermining that war effort like they did in Vietnam and are doing in Iraq, Charlie Rangel wouldn't be a Congressman today!

MORE AT Michelle Malkin, Gina Cobb, Blogmeister USA, 7.62 mm Justice, Babalu Blog, Public Figures. . . Beware, Hot Air, Not Ready For My Burqa, Nasty Brutish & Short, The Waterglass, Pajamas Media, Conservative Outpost, Stop the ACLU, Urban Grounds, World According To Nick, Tammy Bruce, It Shines For All, StikNStein, Broken Chair, Bill's Bites, Valletta Papers, Captain's Quarters, Church & State, Y.A.C.R.W.B., Blogmeister USA

Posted by: Greg at 02:23 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 480 words, total size 5 kb.

Michelle Malkin brings us this photo by Mike Fumento, taken in Iraq at Camp Ramadi. It delivers a profound message about the importance of military might to preserve peace, and the need to stand firm in the face of aggression by our enemies.

And note the quote from George Orwell, whose observation about the nature of security in a free society is spot on. And while I've not been able to find that quote confirmed from any other source, its message is clearly conveyed in this one.

Those who abjure violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.

And let us not forget his observation on pacifism, which applies as well to the "Peace Movement today as it did to those who objected to war with Hitler.

Pacifism. Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, ‘he that is not with me is against me’.

America must combat the forces of jihadi terror abroad, or we will surely combat it on American shores. May God bless the men and women of the United States military who have volunteered to fight that battle on our behalf, and may He frustrate the plans of those who would do harm to them or their mission.

Posted by: Greg at 08:29 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 250 words, total size 2 kb.

Abazid or Mutha? Come on, I'm serious -- which one should we be listening to, the commanding general on the ground who believes we can win or an old corrupt congressman who wants to surrender?

The top American military commander for the Middle East said Wednesday that to begin a significant troop withdrawal from Iraq over the next six months would lead to an increase in sectarian killings and hamper efforts to persuade the Iraqi government to make the difficult decisions needed to secure the country.

The commander, Gen. John P. Abizaid, made it clear that he did not endorse the phased troop withdrawals being proposed by Democratic lawmakers. Instead, he said the number of troops in Iraq might be increased by a small amount as part of new plans by American commanders to improve the training of the Iraqi Army.

And yes, I recognize that he criticized the Bush Administration for not sending more troops earlier. I agree with him. But the solution isn't to cut and run now.

More from Captain Ed.

Posted by: Greg at 11:48 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 184 words, total size 1 kb.

Today is Veteran's Day.

We owe so much to those who defend us -- men and women who ask so little in return.

Project Valour-IT is a program to supply voice-controlled laptop computers to wounded Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines recovering from hand and arm injuries or amputations at home or in military hospitals. Operating laptops by speaking into a microphone, our wounded heroes are able to send and receive messages from friends and loved ones, surf the 'Net, and communicate with buddies still in the field without having to press a key or move a mouse.

In honor of my father, a retired US Navy officer, I have affiliated myself with Team Navy in this fundraising effort. Please give generously.

Posted by: Greg at 05:59 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 131 words, total size 1 kb.