FLEETWOOD MAC fans for KERRY

[HomerMcvie]

At one point Fleetwood Mac did a fundraiser for Birch Bayh in the late 70's.[/QUOTE]
Was this the Indianapolis Tusk Tour stop? That was my first FM show. I seem to recall the ticket (possibly) saying something about Birch Bayh. I've got the stub somewhere (would take hours to find). I remember that I was sick as a dog, but INSISTED to my Mom that I HAD to go.

[misterbug]

what is this, c-span?

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by diamondsnake
I agree, how did this whole drafted thing come up? I haven't heard anything about this...

Start with this article. I'd also advise getting your news from a variety of sources and see which candidates and parties appeal to you.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...20761,00.html#

Army chief planning large U.S. force in Iraq through 2006
By Robert Burns
The Associated Press


AP / Evan Vucci
Army Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker testifies today on Capitol Hill before the House Armed Services Committee hearing on military preparedness.





WASHINGTON - The Army's top general said today he is making plans based on the possibility that the Army will be required to keep tens of thousands of soldiers in Iraq through 2006.

Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff, told the House Armed Services Committee that "for planning purposes" he has ordered his staff to consider how the Army would replace the force that is now rotating into Iraq with another force of similar size in 2005 - and again in 2006.

Stretched by commitments in Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea and the Balkans, the Army has used emergency authority to go beyond the limit set by Congress on the number of soldiers who can be in uniform, Schoomaker said.

He said the Army now is about 11,000 soldiers above the 482,400 limit and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has authorized the service to temporarily exceed the limit by as much as 30,000.

The decision about when to end the U.S. military presence in Iraq will be made by President Bush and his national security aides, in consultation with American commanders in Iraq. As a service chief, Schoomaker's role is to ensure that soldiers are trained and equipped for any mission the president requires.

Of the 105,000 troops going to Iraq this winter and spring to replace the 130,000 who have been there since the start of the war, about 80,000 are Army soldiers. The replacement force, which includes 25,000 Marines, is scheduled to spend a full year in Iraq.

Army officials have said that planning for the 2005 rotation of forces into Iraq will begin in February.

Schoomaker said he was opposed to Congress passing legislation to permanently expand the size of the Army, mainly because it would be too costly.

"I'm adamant that that is not the way to go," the Army chief said.

Even while the Iraq war continues, the Pentagon is planning a new offensive in the two-year-old Afghanistan campaign to try to stop remnants of the Taliban regime and the al-Qaeda terrorist network, officials said today.

Orders have been issued to prepare equipment and supplies, though the operation will not necessarily require additional troops in the region, where about 11,000 Americans are still deployed, a defense official said on condition of anonymity.

Schoomaker said the Army is enjoying success in recruiting new soldiers.

"There are more people lining up to come in than we've ever had, and the quality of those people is higher than it's ever been, and there's no indication right now that that's not going to continue," he said.

Members of the House panel expressed surprise that Rumsfeld had agreed that the Army needed as many as 30,000 more soldiers, since he has publicly opposed a legislative move to expand the service.

Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher, D-Calif., said it sounded as if Rumsfeld was accomplishing through the use of his own executive powers the troop increase that he had resisted on Capitol Hill.

Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said he was concerned that the requirement for large numbers of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan may break the Army.

"This does not mean we should pull back from our commitments," Skelton said. "We can't unring the bell. We're there. We've got to win. We've got to stabilize that country," he said of Iraq. "We cannot afford that to evolve into a civil war."

[mhxx77]

Dontlookdown... maybe I talked too much in my last post, so I'll try and keep this one simple...

"Please join Lindsey Buckingham and Stevie Nicks and show your support for the Democrats on your state's primary day."

You're trying to tell me that you weren't insinuating that Lindsey and Stevie support Democrats, therefore supporting Kerry? Bull.

And I find it laugh out loud funny that from my post you somehow believe that I am "acting" like a republican. I hate to break it to you but politics are a bit more complicated than that. And a republican I am not. You should want your candidate to win because the majority elected him, not because people like you have wrangled votes.

Urge people to get educated, urge people to get out there and vote. But don't try and sway people.

I simply think that your attempt to gain votes for your candidate is sad and wrong. It's called an opinion, something that everyone should be able to formulate themselves...without your help. And I certainly don't think a FM message board is the place to discuss politics, so I'll end this conversation here.

[diamondsnake]

Originally posted by gldstwmn
Start with this article. I'd also advise getting your news from a variety of sources and see which candidates and parties appeal to you.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...20761,00.html#

Army chief planning large U.S. force in Iraq through 2006
By Robert Burns
The Associated Press


AP / Evan Vucci
Army Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker testifies today on Capitol Hill before the House Armed Services Committee hearing on military preparedness.





WASHINGTON - The Army's top general said today he is making plans based on the possibility that the Army will be required to keep tens of thousands of soldiers in Iraq through 2006.

Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff, told the House Armed Services Committee that "for planning purposes" he has ordered his staff to consider how the Army would replace the force that is now rotating into Iraq with another force of similar size in 2005 - and again in 2006.

Stretched by commitments in Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea and the Balkans, the Army has used emergency authority to go beyond the limit set by Congress on the number of soldiers who can be in uniform, Schoomaker said.

He said the Army now is about 11,000 soldiers above the 482,400 limit and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has authorized the service to temporarily exceed the limit by as much as 30,000.

The decision about when to end the U.S. military presence in Iraq will be made by President Bush and his national security aides, in consultation with American commanders in Iraq. As a service chief, Schoomaker's role is to ensure that soldiers are trained and equipped for any mission the president requires.

Of the 105,000 troops going to Iraq this winter and spring to replace the 130,000 who have been there since the start of the war, about 80,000 are Army soldiers. The replacement force, which includes 25,000 Marines, is scheduled to spend a full year in Iraq.

Army officials have said that planning for the 2005 rotation of forces into Iraq will begin in February.

Schoomaker said he was opposed to Congress passing legislation to permanently expand the size of the Army, mainly because it would be too costly.

"I'm adamant that that is not the way to go," the Army chief said.

Even while the Iraq war continues, the Pentagon is planning a new offensive in the two-year-old Afghanistan campaign to try to stop remnants of the Taliban regime and the al-Qaeda terrorist network, officials said today.

Orders have been issued to prepare equipment and supplies, though the operation will not necessarily require additional troops in the region, where about 11,000 Americans are still deployed, a defense official said on condition of anonymity.

Schoomaker said the Army is enjoying success in recruiting new soldiers.

"There are more people lining up to come in than we've ever had, and the quality of those people is higher than it's ever been, and there's no indication right now that that's not going to continue," he said.

Members of the House panel expressed surprise that Rumsfeld had agreed that the Army needed as many as 30,000 more soldiers, since he has publicly opposed a legislative move to expand the service.

Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher, D-Calif., said it sounded as if Rumsfeld was accomplishing through the use of his own executive powers the troop increase that he had resisted on Capitol Hill.

Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said he was concerned that the requirement for large numbers of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan may break the Army.

"This does not mean we should pull back from our commitments," Skelton said. "We can't unring the bell. We're there. We've got to win. We've got to stabilize that country," he said of Iraq. "We cannot afford that to evolve into a civil war."

How does this article relate to "being drafted"? I read the whole thing, but didn't see anything specificly saying they were going to draft people.

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by diamondsnake
How does this article relate to "being drafted"? I read the whole thing, but didn't see anything specificly saying they were going to draft people.

Sometimes you have to read between the lines. Here's one that's a little clearer and BTW, I have also posted others in the Chit Chat Forum.

http://www.ljworld.com/section/state...l/story/151198

Selective Service notice spurs worry about draft
By Scott Rothschild, Journal-World

Friday, November 7, 2003

Federal officials are trying to fill selective service boards across the country, but they denied Thursday that the effort was a prelude to reviving the draft.

advertisement

But with the nation at war and American forces spread thin, questions about the possibility of re-establishing the draft are increasing.

"I don't think you ever want to see the draft reinstated," said Bryan Young, a Wichita junior at Kansas University. "But if the draft was necessary to achieve what President Bush thought was needed, I would say it's my duty as a citizen to honor that commitment."

The draft ended in 1973 amid controversy during the Vietnam War. Critics said the poor and minorities were disproportionately conscripted, while young people from middle- and high-income families were granted college deferments or other excuses that kept them out of the armed services.

This week, rumors about reinstating the draft leaped to the forefront after a U.S. Department of Defense Web site sought applicants for local draft boards.

The headline on the posting read: "Serve Your Community and the Nation. Become a Selective Service System Local Board Member."

A spokesman for the Defense Department who declined to identify himself said the posting was taken down after several people called expressing concern.

Officials with the Selective Service System, a civilian agency that registers young men in case a draft were re-established, denied that the posting on the Defense Department Web site represented a new effort to reinstate the draft.

"This not even remotely resembles efforts to kick it up a notch," said Dan Amon, a public affairs specialist for the Selective Service System.

He said the Selective Service routinely sought applicants to fill 11,000 slots on local draft boards nationwide to be ready if the draft ever were reinstated. The terms on these voluntary boards are for 20 years, and many are now expiring, he said.

"We're just going through a cycle," he said. He said when the information was posted on the Defense Department Web site, it raised some alarms. "We're not even quite sure how it got there," he said.

A draft could only be authorized by the president and Congress. Under that scenario, the local draft boards would decide which draft-age men would receive deferments, postponements or exemptions from military service.

During most of the Vietnam War, if a college student could show progress in his studies, he was excused from military service. If a draft were instituted now, a college student's induction into the military could be delayed only until the end of the current semester.

Some have argued that the draft should be reinstated.

U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., has said that the all-volunteer force is largely made up of the nation's underclass. Others have said that the nation had an aggressive foreign policy because few in Congress or the Bush administration had military experience.

Young, the KU student, said he would be disappointed if the draft came because it would mean the nation faced an emergency.

"I would feel disappointed only to the extent that it was war, and war is unfortunate. I wouldn't feel disappointed to discontinue my college career," he said.

[DeeGeMe]

I do get to vote next week in the SC primary. But I'm not thrilled with Kerry. As someone said earlier, I'm very unhappy that he voted for the war in Iraq, the Patriot Act, and NCLB. If the repugs were so successful in painting Gore with the liberal Democratic brush, they'll have a field day with Kerry. All they'll have to do is mention his close friendship with Ted Kennedy down here in the South and Kerry is toast. And you can't win the White House without winning a few key Southern states. Don't get me wrong--I think Ted Kennedy has made some brilliant speeches and has done a fine job trying to hold the Republican feet to the fire. Not that any of it seems to be doing any good. Where is the media at these days? Oh, I know--too busy kissing Bush butt. If Bill Clinton would have done 1/100 of the crap that Bush has done, he would have been hung from the top of the Washington Monument. I'm still confused on the whole, "It's wrong to lie about sex thing, but it's okay to lie about WMD." Anyway, if Kerry ends up the nominee, I'll vote early and often--anything it takes to make sure that we give Mr. Bush a one-way ticket back Crawford, Texas.

[golden braid]

Originally posted by AgainLindsey
[B
la nicks is apolitical[/COLOR] [/B]

Stevie did do the Artists' Rights concert and I think she also went to Sacramento along with Don Henley and others to promote some bill about artists' record contracts or something like that. I can't remember. But anyway that was political.

[diamondsnake]

Originally posted by gldstwmn
Sometimes you have to read between the lines. Here's one that's a little clearer and BTW, I have also posted others in the Chit Chat Forum.

http://www.ljworld.com/section/state...l/story/151198

Selective Service notice spurs worry about draft
By Scott Rothschild, Journal-World

Friday, November 7, 2003

Federal officials are trying to fill selective service boards across the country, but they denied Thursday that the effort was a prelude to reviving the draft.

advertisement

But with the nation at war and American forces spread thin, questions about the possibility of re-establishing the draft are increasing.

"I don't think you ever want to see the draft reinstated," said Bryan Young, a Wichita junior at Kansas University. "But if the draft was necessary to achieve what President Bush thought was needed, I would say it's my duty as a citizen to honor that commitment."

The draft ended in 1973 amid controversy during the Vietnam War. Critics said the poor and minorities were disproportionately conscripted, while young people from middle- and high-income families were granted college deferments or other excuses that kept them out of the armed services.

This week, rumors about reinstating the draft leaped to the forefront after a U.S. Department of Defense Web site sought applicants for local draft boards.

The headline on the posting read: "Serve Your Community and the Nation. Become a Selective Service System Local Board Member."

A spokesman for the Defense Department who declined to identify himself said the posting was taken down after several people called expressing concern.

Officials with the Selective Service System, a civilian agency that registers young men in case a draft were re-established, denied that the posting on the Defense Department Web site represented a new effort to reinstate the draft.

"This not even remotely resembles efforts to kick it up a notch," said Dan Amon, a public affairs specialist for the Selective Service System.

He said the Selective Service routinely sought applicants to fill 11,000 slots on local draft boards nationwide to be ready if the draft ever were reinstated. The terms on these voluntary boards are for 20 years, and many are now expiring, he said.

"We're just going through a cycle," he said. He said when the information was posted on the Defense Department Web site, it raised some alarms. "We're not even quite sure how it got there," he said.

A draft could only be authorized by the president and Congress. Under that scenario, the local draft boards would decide which draft-age men would receive deferments, postponements or exemptions from military service.

During most of the Vietnam War, if a college student could show progress in his studies, he was excused from military service. If a draft were instituted now, a college student's induction into the military could be delayed only until the end of the current semester.

Some have argued that the draft should be reinstated.

U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., has said that the all-volunteer force is largely made up of the nation's underclass. Others have said that the nation had an aggressive foreign policy because few in Congress or the Bush administration had military experience.

Young, the KU student, said he would be disappointed if the draft came because it would mean the nation faced an emergency.

"I would feel disappointed only to the extent that it was war, and war is unfortunate. I wouldn't feel disappointed to discontinue my college career," he said.

Coming from a boy in his late teens, this is scary stuff. So what side supports this draft idea? The republicans? Also, is it true that the democrats don't beleive in war?

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by diamondsnake
Coming from a boy in his late teens, this is scary stuff. So what side supports this draft idea? The republicans? Also, is it true that the democrats don't beleive in war?

I would suggest checking out cnn.com and just reading about politics and what's going on. After doing that, you'll be able to form your own opinions. There are also links to all of the candidates web pages there and those have their postions on the war.

[jwd]

DeeGeMe:

"It's wrong to lie about sex thing, but it's okay to lie about WMD."

Or is that the other way around?

DeeGeMe:

Anyway, if Kerry ends up the nominee, I'll vote early and often

Now that's a sure way to get your candidate elected.


As for the original topic suggesting that Stevie and Lindsey, and well every member of FM being pro-Kerry/Democratic is definitely misleading. I do think John McVie is Republican and remember Christine doubting whether she would vote for Clinton(if she could), and Stevie saying she thought Clinton was too young to be president. Just because they play for the Clintons doesn't necessarily mean they agree with their political views. It's an honor to play at such events, plain and simple. Nothing more, nothing less. I do agree, that no matter what the members of FM believe, everyone should use their own minds and make their own decisons.


Joe

[dissention]

Originally posted by jwd
Or is that the other way around?

I'm really interested in hearing how lying about sex is just as atrocious as lying about war.

Proceed.

[dissention]

Originally posted by diamondsnake
Coming from a boy in his late teens, this is scary stuff. So what side supports this draft idea? The republicans? Also, is it true that the democrats don't beleive in war?

The Republicans support the draft and will reinstate it if Bush is re-elected. Of course, this hasn't been confirmed, but anyone who keeps up with politics knows it'll happen.

And, yes, most Democrats do not support this ridiculous war that was sold to the American people.

[CarneVaca]

Hawkeye, you had the most telling post so far. Really, it explains why people like Bush get elected:

Sorry Remasters of Tusk and rumours and the the upcoming Concert tour, Outwigh the stupid primarys and elections by a umm "Landslide" Anyways I'm with Stevie in being apolitical and not caring. I guess I'm leaning tords Bush only because he's our current President and why change leaders in the middle of trying to hunt down terrorists. And this should be in the CHOT CHAT forum.

See what I mean?

Furthermore, saying you'll vote for him because he's already the president flies in the face of what democracy is about. There's something terribly wrong with that kind of rationale.

[GypsySorcerer]

Originally posted by dissention


And, yes, most Democrats do not support this ridiculous war that was sold to the American people.

Except Kerry, right? And Clark, depending on what days you ask him.