Gould,
Do you disagree that the party you support wants the draft reinstated?

I don't support any political party.
My choice for POTUS this year will be a Democrat. I am seriously debating
between the Demo and the Repub candidate in the Wash State Gov. election- she's
more liberal and more tuned in to some of my concerns, but he might be a better
administrator. Unlike the POTUS race, the Republican candidate hasn't already
proven to be inept.

I vote for the man, not the party. Next time you right wingers run a qualified
candidate, I will carefully compare with other choices and perhaps support him
or her for the office.

But you do agree that it when you were upset about Bush trying to reinstall
the draft you were mistaken, it was really the democrats, and one of them is
from your state.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Gould,
Do you disagree that the party you support wants the draft reinstated?

I don't support any political party.
My choice for POTUS this year will be a Democrat. I am seriously debating
between the Demo and the Repub candidate in the Wash State Gov. election-
she's
more liberal and more tuned in to some of my concerns, but he might be a
better
administrator. Unlike the POTUS race, the Republican candidate hasn't
already
proven to be inept.

I vote for the man, not the party. Next time you right wingers run a
qualified
candidate, I will carefully compare with other choices and perhaps support
him
or her for the office.

But you do agree that it when you were upset about Bush trying to reinstall
the draft you were mistaken, it was really the democrats, and one of them is
from your state.




See previous post. The draft has always been there. Got any grown sons?
Remember their 18th birthday? The bill would merely require that your daughters
register too, and that most non-medical exemptions would be eliminated.

Why not do an experiment? Check out the
selective service dot org web site. The first page you see will have a big
disclaimer "Relax! No draft has been ordered!". But keep going. Go to the
strategic goals for 2004. Happy reading.

If you want to place blame for the Selective Service and their objectives of
being prepared in case the US needs to reinstate the draft, you need to go
back to Jimmy Carter. "The registration requirement was suspended in April
1975. It was resumed again in 1980 by President Carter in response to the
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Registration continues today as a hedge
against underestimating the number of servicemen needed in a future crisis.
" http://www.sss.gov/backgr.htm






"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
But you do agree that it when you were upset about Bush trying to
reinstall
the draft you were mistaken, it was really the democrats, and one of them
is
from your state.




See previous post. The draft has always been there. Got any grown sons?
Remember their 18th birthday? The bill would merely require that your
daughters
register too, and that most non-medical exemptions would be eliminated.

Why not do an experiment? Check out the
selective service dot org web site. The first page you see will have a big
disclaimer "Relax! No draft has been ordered!". But keep going. Go to the
strategic goals for 2004. Happy reading.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
It's not my role to defend the site. Check it out and draw your own
conclusion,
but don't blindly accept Bush Limbaugh's spin on the matter.

Why do you think I listen to Rush or any talk radio? I don't and haven't
listen to Rush in over 5 years. When I did I listened to it to hear his
outrageous statements and his twisted logic.

I guess if someone disagrees with you, they must listen to Rush.

Gould,
I could not find a copy of the Annual Performance Plan for any year except
2004. Can you provide me a link to review the Annual Performance Plan for
1998 - 2003?

Can you also reference a few of the changes in the 2004 Annual Performance
Plan that is different than those from previous years?


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
This has not changed since 1980,

The strategic goals change each year.
Check the site, they list the strategic goals for several prior years.

It's not my role to defend the site. Check it out and draw your own
conclusion,
but don't blindly accept Bush Limbaugh's spin on the matter.

Taco Heaven wrote:
Why do you think I listen to Rush or any talk radio?

Because you talk the same line of **** almost word for word.

.... I don't and haven't
listen to Rush in over 5 years.

It's amazing how many of the fascist whackos who eagerly vent their
boneheaded rantings "don't listen to Rush" yet somehow manage to say
pretty much the same thing, often in the same words.

It's really an incredible coincidence, nyet?


... When I did I listened to it to hear his
outrageous statements and his twisted logic.

Actually, due to conditions in my workplace, I listen to him more often
than I'd wish... and occasionally enjoy the show... he can be very funny.

DSK

Gould,
I could not find a copy of the Annual Performance Plan for any year except
2004. Can you provide me a link to review the Annual Performance Plan for
1998 - 2003?

http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html

Read it carefully. Each category has subcategories reviewing any similar goals
from 1999-2003.

On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:17:01 +0000, Taco Heaven wrote:

Gould,
I could not find a copy of the Annual Performance Plan for any year except
2004. Can you provide me a link to review the Annual Performance Plan for
1998 - 2003?

Uh, I wouldn't be surprised. *Plans* are like that;-). The information
you are looking for, I would suspect to be in the Annual Reports to
Congress.

http://www.sss.gov/public.htm

DSK,

What can I say to you comment. You must know what I listen to better than I
do.

When I listened to him (over 5 yrs ago) I did find him amusing at times, but
I got very tired of hearing the same ole bull **** over and over again. He
is a grand self promoter who does not allow facts to get in the way of his
BS.

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
Taco Heaven wrote:
Why do you think I listen to Rush or any talk radio?

Because you talk the same line of **** almost word for word.

.... I don't and haven't listen to Rush in over 5 years.

It's amazing how many of the fascist whackos who eagerly vent their
boneheaded rantings "don't listen to Rush" yet somehow manage to say
pretty much the same thing, often in the same words.

It's really an incredible coincidence, nyet?


... When I did I listened to it to hear his outrageous statements and
his twisted logic.

Actually, due to conditions in my workplace, I listen to him more often
than I'd wish... and occasionally enjoy the show... he can be very funny.

DSK

Taco Heaven wrote:
....(Rush Limbaugh)... He
is a grand self promoter who does not allow facts to get in the way of his
BS.

Yep.

A role model for you?

BTW what do you think of the Republicans recent "get out the vote"
campaign" involving a claim that Kerry, if elected, would ban the Bible?
Doesn't that neatly support your contention that Republicans are better
educated & better informed?

DSK

"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:0Bh6d.64931$wV.53000@attbi_s54...
DSK,

What can I say to you comment. You must know what I listen to better than
I
do.

When I listened to him (over 5 yrs ago) I did find him amusing at times,
but
I got very tired of hearing the same ole bull **** over and over again.
He
is a grand self promoter who does not allow facts to get in the way of his
BS.

What is amazing is how all the 'mainstream' media outlets all use the same
verbage......stright out of the DNC 'talking points'

Remember 'gravitas' ?



"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
Taco Heaven wrote:
Why do you think I listen to Rush or any talk radio?

Because you talk the same line of **** almost word for word.

.... I don't and haven't listen to Rush in over 5 years.

It's amazing how many of the fascist whackos who eagerly vent their
boneheaded rantings "don't listen to Rush" yet somehow manage to say
pretty much the same thing, often in the same words.

It's really an incredible coincidence, nyet?


... When I did I listened to it to hear his outrageous statements and
his twisted logic.

Actually, due to conditions in my workplace, I listen to him more often
than I'd wish... and occasionally enjoy the show... he can be very
funny.

DSK

Gould,

While the 2004 Annual Performance Plan provides a brief overview of the
objectives and performance results for years past, it does not show the
details on prior years objectives and the actions the SSS were going to take
to help them achieve their goals.

By looking at the objectives and results from 1999 to present, it appears
that the SSS has followed conventional management objectives of trying to
set annual goals that would improve the performance of the organization each
year.

The 5 year objectives for the FY 2001 - 2006 were probably developed before
Bush was elected. The previous 5 year plan would have expired by FY 2000
( Sept. 2000) and a new plan would have been approved by the SSS
administration in the 5th year of the previous 5 yr plan. As someone who
has worked on 5 yr. agendas for a major company, the new 5 yr. plan would
probably be started at least a year before you the current plan expires.

Also the person who was responsible for the current 5 yr plan was appointed
by Bill Clinton in 1994.

Gil Coronado (9)
October 7, 1994 - May 23, 2001
Appointed by President Bill Clinton

It is interesting to note the 1999 Report to Congress highlighted the fact
that Gil Coronado felt the current budget was impacting on the ability to
perform their job.
http://www.sss.gov/PDFs/Anrep99lr.pdf






"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Gould,
I could not find a copy of the Annual Performance Plan for any year except
2004. Can you provide me a link to review the Annual Performance Plan for
1998 - 2003?

http://www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html

Read it carefully. Each category has subcategories reviewing any similar
goals
from 1999-2003.

Ahhhhhhh, very good. Now if you look at the Annual Reports from 1996 you
will see each year they have increased their objectives as a means of
correcting perceived problems and improving their performance.


"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:17:01 +0000, Taco Heaven wrote:

Gould,
I could not find a copy of the Annual Performance Plan for any year
except
2004. Can you provide me a link to review the Annual Performance Plan
for
1998 - 2003?

Uh, I wouldn't be surprised. *Plans* are like that;-). The information
you are looking for, I would suspect to be in the Annual Reports to
Congress.

http://www.sss.gov/public.htm

I think both parties have used fear as a means of getting out the vote. I
do not approve of the Republicans scare tactics anymore than I agree with
the Democrats scare tactics. Unfortunately, they both us scare tactics and
mud slinging because they are effective.

As Doug stated, both parties believe it is important to get their party
elected no matter what it takes.

As far as your comments concerning Rush, it is impossible for me respond,
since you have already made up your mind that I am repeating what I heard on
Rush.

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
Taco Heaven wrote:
....(Rush Limbaugh)... He
is a grand self promoter who does not allow facts to get in the way of
his BS.

Yep.

A role model for you?

BTW what do you think of the Republicans recent "get out the vote"
campaign" involving a claim that Kerry, if elected, would ban the Bible?
Doesn't that neatly support your contention that Republicans are better
educated & better informed?

DSK

Taco Heaven wrote:
I think both parties have used fear as a means of getting out the vote.

Name an example of Democrats using fear to get out the vote.

As far as your comments concerning Rush, it is impossible for me respond,
since you have already made up your mind that I am repeating what I heard on
Rush.

Actually, I haven't "made up my mind" at all. You use many of the same
statements and key phrases. It muct be an amazing coincidence.

DSK

On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 21:02:24 +0000, Taco Heaven wrote:


****Does any really believe that GWB is going to take away black's freedom
to vote? ****


Perhaps not GWB, but it looks like the Good Old Boys in Florida haven't
done much to improve the situation from 2000.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3693354.stm

thunder wrote:
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 21:02:24 +0000, Taco Heaven wrote:


****Does any really believe that GWB is going to take away black's freedom
to vote? ****


Perhaps not GWB, but it looks like the Good Old Boys in Florida haven't
done much to improve the situation from 2000.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3693354.stm


There's another GOP-related disenfranchisement problem in Ohio.

It's unlikely that Bush is directly involved in any of this crap, but
his forces certainly are. Today's Republicans will do anything they can
get away with to suppress voter turnout among those who are not Bush
supporters.





--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?