Military recruiters show up regularly in Glen Ridge High School. The Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) is actually offered at Bloomfield High School. But students at Montclair High have started an organization called OYE OYE (Open Your Eyes Open Your Eyes), encouraging parents to opt out of the No Child Left Behind Act provision that gives military recruiters access to student information. So far, according to a story in today’s Ledger, 1,628 of 1,937 students at the school have had their parents to block access to their records.

So, when you’re ready to stop arguing about Girl Scout cookies (lighten up, we just thought it was funny), come on over and start a brawl here.

(Clip and print the opt-out letter below)

Dear Administrator of __________________ High School, I, ______________________, am writing on behalf of my child to request that you do not make my child’s, ________________, name, address or telephone listing available for military recruitment purposes as is provided for under Paragraph 2, Subsection (a) of Section 9528 of Public Law 107-110. I believe that nations and peoples should settle disputes nonviolently though diplomacy and dialogue. I look forward to your prompt reply to this letter. Sincerely, _________________ Signature _________________ Name in Print _________________ Date

64 replies on “Take That, Uncle Sam”

  1. This is actually an apt segue.
    I’b bet that Montclair High opting out is about “effective” in their anti-war cause as a box of cookies. (maybe even less so).
    But I would imaging our Bluish friends will see this act of futility as noble.
    I’d say that both applications of action are admirable because the “plan of action” comes from the youngin’s themselves.

  2. Does she pay you to post these things?
    I do find that most of my parenting time is spent trying to suppress the “plans of action” devised by my tots. Recently these have involved the sofa cushions and the stairway landing. Good training, I suppose, for the First Airborne. If they manage to live that long.

  3. “Does she pay you to post these things?”
    “I do find that most of my parenting time is spent trying to suppress the “plans of action” ”
    mine too, but with the exception that if the plan involves cookies being donated or petitions being circulated. With plans like that I am rather obliging because it will keep them out of (bigger) trouble!
    I think my kids might be older than yours.

  4. > I’b bet that Montclair High opting out is about “effective” in their anti-war cause as a box of cookies.
    What kind of cookies?
    Could be a B R A W L-worthy topic.

  5. p.s.
    I only get paid if it goes over 50 posts or someone calls me something nasty, so, sadly, it seems all for naught in that cookie thread as of yet.

  6. Yoiks! I was joking about cookies and brawling, but now I see there are 47 posts in the thread about Girl Scout tsunami cookies.* It’s enough to make ya toss ’em.
    *Now going to see what the hubbub’s about.

  7. Please quit being so pathetic in Montclair. The reason we are here today is thanks largely to lots of help from selfless soldiers in the military. Maybe you can quit being so elitist and try to contribute someday to actually fixing the world’s problems. You band together as a group of wimps not willing to stand up for the freedom and liberty you abuse on a daily basis. Not everything in the world can be solved without conflict. It’s a fact of life.

  8. Hey! Don’t forget us Glen Ridge people! We pathetically dislike having recruiters hard sell a potentially life threatening career to the people we’re still legally responsible for too!

  9. Oh no, your boys and girls might have to sacrifice something for freedom and liberty. Surely you need to protect them as they are not smart enough to fend for themselves? This country is great thanks to people sticking their neck on the line to protect people at home. Play a part.

  10. It seems incredibly obvious to me, but maybe I should state it clearly. I am against conflict whenever possible. BUT, please don’t be so utterly naive to think that you can always solve issues that way. It would be great if we could sit down with Iran, North Korea, Syria and even our French friends and come to agreements. Afterwards, we could all drink milk and cookies (or lattes and biscotti for Montclair) and be happy. Unfortunately the world doesn’t work that way.

  11. My kids can fend for themselves? In high school? Well, then, gee, why am I fending for them?
    I’ve always been proud of our all-volunteer army. Not so proud of them using direct marketing techniques perfected by boiler shops and geegaw merchants. But, as the man said, recruitment is up; personally I would have said volunteering is up, but I guess that’s the difference in mindset.

  12. “I am against conflict whenever possible… It would be great if we could sit down with Iran, North Korea, Syria and even our French friends and come to agreements… Unfortunately the world doesn’t work that way.”
    Just to be clear, you’re advocating we go to war with Iran, Syria, North Korea and… France?!? Would you like to do that simultaneously or one at a time?

  13. “I believe that nations and peoples should settle disputes nonviolently though diplomacy and dialogue. I look forward to your prompt reply to this letter. ”
    To: Saddam, Osama, Mullah Omar, et. al.
    Re: World Peace and Crankiness.
    Hey Folks,
    We know you don’t like us much and wish to establish that Pan-Arab Theocratic Caliphate thingy. We know you would like to eliminate Jews and other infidels from the entire middle east, and you stone your adulterous babes to death when they ‘wander’. And we further understand that you see no problem with the purposeful targeting of innocent civilians in the furtherance of your goals.
    We’d like to request you stop that and maybe start acting a little better.
    No look, we MEAN it. You better stop! And if you don’t you’ll force us to get really mad and write a REALLY angry letter.
    So save us all a lot of time and knock it off!
    Thanks for you prompt attention to this matter.
    The Blue Moonbats of America.

  14. I don’t know, is it pacifism, self-righteousness, leftism, plain old fear or what have you that gets Baristaville folks so upset about the armed forces? Still, “you guys” really have to get over it. Military service (or law enforcement, to cite something else that requires uniforms and firearms) is at least as honorable a profession as medicine or teaching, and more of one than, say, practicing law or being an investment banker. They’re not recruiting for the Waffen SS, people, not by a long shot, and the hysteria evidenced by correspondents who apparently think they are is just appalling.

  15. Sacrifice? Freedom? Liberty?
    Funny, that. I don’t recall Republicans sacrificing much of anything lately. Tax cuts in wartime? Check. $40 million inauguration? Check. President who didn’t even fulfill his cushy duty to the Champagne Regiment during Vietnam? Check.
    Sacrifice something for Freedom and Liberty indeed. How ’bout if the President sacrifices his Liberty Ball and his Freedom Ball?
    Liberal elitist Montclairians, thwarting our national defense at every turn. Fifth Columnists, no doubt.
    And for the record, I do not support this withholding of records.

  16. Yes, unlike you Lex, I do think we have issues with Iran, North Korea, and Syria. No, I don’t think Iran will stop in their quest for a nuclear weapon through negotiations (see North Korea). Why should we care if Iran has nuclear weapons (we do of course)? Because we will not use them to attack other nations and because we do not support terrorist causes. I have no problem with France having nuclear weapons even if their current leadership is morally corrupt. Not sure but seems to me that Iran doesn’t really like Israel (or us) too too much and would love to do more about it than just support and train Hezbollah (you might not be familiar with global politics given you are only concerned about “the children”)… North Korea is the most repressive nation on the face of the earth. Why care about others though? Syria supports terrorism and is allowing (among other things) ex-Iraqi goons to set-up shop and kill innocent Iraqi civilians along with coaltion forces (but coalition forces are probably evil occupiers in your book anyway). So, without expanding further, yes I do think we have issues to settle with Iran, Syria, and North Korea. And no, these issues are more important than coffee prices in the 3rd world, exaggerated global warming claims, and wearing fur or eating meat. Hopefully this will not lead to all-out war or any war at all. Lybia wisened-up. Let’s hope pressure on these evil governments will do the trick.

  17. Red State Man:
    “care about” does not equal “invade”. No one says we should preemptively exclude war from our menu of options; however, there are ways to make the world a better place other than war. Why do Republicans love war so much anyway? Have they forgotten that war itself is often bad and it’s a very, very rare war that accomplishes its goals?
    More importantly, though, I don’t care one iota about international relations. I do care that a Republican President has severaly diminished our range of options in every respect: no way can we sustain a war at the moment, no way will various of our potential Muslim allies be seen on our side; no way can we engage our potential enemies as they drift to supporting terrorists.
    In all of these respects, Bush has made us less safe and less powerful.

  18. Marshall,
    I wonder what purpose it serves to keep debating the war. Hasn’t the nation ratified that decision?
    Do you think we have any obligation to support the efforts that majority of our countrymen approve?
    To what end do you oppose the war? To stop it? To feel good about yourself?

  19. What do you mean “the war”? Are you talking about the Iraq War? If you are, of course I oppose it, along with 56% of my countrymen, and of course I think it’s worthwhile to debate it–would you have us ignore the past?
    I opposed and oppose the Iraq War because it was and is a mistake; as I said, it has made us considerably less safe and hobbled the spread of our worldview.

  20. “Why do Republicans love war so much anyway?”
    With the exception of police actions like World War I under Woodrow Wilson (D), World War II under Franklin Roosevelt (D), Korea under Harry Truman (D), and Vietnam under Lyndon Johnson (D), and all that dabbling in the Balkans and Somalia under Bill Clinton (D), I guess you could say that the wars of the 20th Century typically happened under Republican Presidents.
    /sarcasm off

  21. Ah yes: Bob Dole and his “Democrat Wars”. What a great soundbite that was.
    As for what to do now, I refuse to engage that question because doing so legitimizes the choices that got us where we are. Answering the “what now” question is, as John Kerry found out, a recipe for disaster. Either I’m a surrender monkey, or I’m a flip-flopper if I opposed the war but now have a good idea to deal with the situation.
    You have obviously formed your own opinion about my opinion–you will continue to think that regardless of the extent to which I take your bait.

  22. Marshall,
    It wasn’t meant as bait. ( I realize you won’t belive that since I am evil and all) but no Democrat seems able to answer that question in any kind of convincing way. Or really in any way at all.
    You all are good at hindsight yet don’t seem to offer anything going forward except some kind of “we told you so” smugness or vague “internationalize the forces” platitudes.
    It is little wonder your party was not put into power and continues for the 3rd election in a row to lose representation in congress.
    Good luck with your ‘vision thing’. At that rate the GOP majority in congress will be filibuster proof in 06.

  23. Here’s my vision thing: Democrats will not make the mistakes that Republicans make, deny, and continue to make. Instead, we will pursue foreign policies that extend our range of options, both in our ability to pursuade and in our means to fight and to threaten to fight when necessary.
    George Bush has squandered all of those options; it really surprises me that so, so many Republican foreign policy experts don’t (or pretend not to) see that. They think he has strengthened us. That’s just ridiculous.
    Oh yes, and when did you stop beating your wife?
    And if you’re so cocksure, what’s your plan for Iraq?

  24. Maybe the Muslim extremists are just unhappy over the “digital-divide” and other worthless stories that occupy leftist America. I just don’t understand the complete self-righteous arrogance that comes from the Democrats. Can’t they see they are a party in massive decline. Each election gets worse. Bush can’t even string together a sentence yet he is still able to beat a pompous faux patriot like Kerry as he is willing to take a stand and not let this terrorism get out of hand. America has voted and it certainly wasn’t for the Michael Moore party (yes he was honored by the Dems with a box seat next to Carter!!). So, smugly sip away at your lattes thinking about how educated you are and dream your little dreams about world peace while the rest of us fix the problems. Look at Western Europe (who you yearn to become) and see how successful they have been in recent years. Their economies are in the tank due to over-regulation and unyielding Kerry-like socialism. That is where you would take us. I’m not going on that ride with you.

  25. Marshall,
    So basically “elect us because we won’t make mistakes becuase we are more moral. Oh and by the way we have no idea what to do.”
    Good luck.
    My Cocksure plan? You know the same old Neocon stuff. Slog through in Iraq. Have elections, keep at it. In a year or two begin to draw down. Build some bases in Iraq. Use them to threaten Iran. Sponser covert operations to weaken Iran and Syria.
    Perfect? No. But better that what you offer.

  26. Richard Armitage, on his regrets upon stepping down as Deputy Secretary of State:
    “I’m disappointed that Iraq hasn’t turned out better. And that we weren’t able to move forward more meaningfully in the Middle East peace process.”
    Then, after a minute’s pause, he adds a third regret:
    “The biggest regret is that we didn’t stop 9/11. And then in the wake of 9/11, instead of redoubling what is our traditional export of hope and optimism we exported our fear and our anger. And presented a very intense and angry face to the world. I regret that a lot.”

  27. I happened to catch Zell Miller on “Hannity and Colmes” the other night and even he, as a Democrat, could not come up with one anyone from his party who he thinks can lead the Dems out of the quagmire they’ve gotten themselves into. Not one name.

  28. Marshall is a good example of the modern democrat. When the talk turns forward he turns backward.
    The democratic party is nothing else but a bundle of hindsight, naysaying and attack.
    They only thing that seems to bind them is hatred of the President.
    They say they wish for Iraq to be a success yet offer nothing but opposition.
    It is all there in Marshall’s posts:
    “As for what to do now, I refuse to engage that question because doing so legitimizes the choices that got us where we are.”
    I think that is the Democratic Party Platform!!

  29. “They only thing that seems to bind them is hatred of the President.”
    I will be the first to admit that I am a bit disillusioned in this president for reasons not usually cited by the Dems, border patrol being one of them and his “courting” undocumented workers.
    But, I cannot understand the vitriol directed at this president. In my lifetime, we have had MUCH worse (Nixon comes to mind). Sure, people hated him but I don’t remember the attacks being quite as bitter. [Ironically, on the Nixon-McGovern ticket, most of the people who hated Nixon didn’t even bother to show up and vote against him!].

  30. Martta,
    Speaking as an ex-Liberal Democrat of decades the real problem is that the principles of Liberalism have been so twisted and debased by the politics of special interests and political correctness that the whole basis of the Democratic party is a tangled wreckage.
    The party which sees itself as the bastion of racial equality obsesses with racial quotas for delegates at its convention.
    I think Carter really killed the Democratic Party. Clinton was only a success because he rejected much of the leftist dogma! His success was based in part on his coopting of Conservative Ideas like welfare reform.
    So, intellectually there is not much left. When your own house is a shambles it is easier to try and tarnish the other guys house rather than clean your own.
    I think this explains the vitriol.
    I predict that within 10 years there won’t be a Democratic Party. There will be a Green-Leftish-Moonbat-EuroPosers party, a more moderate GOP which moves more center to puck more moderates (which is in progress now!) and somekind of fringe religious right.

  31. “The only thing that seems to bind them is hatred of the President.”
    Of course, you can easily say about the Republicans: “the only thing that seems to bind them is love of the President.” For instance, we have ROC, who says he supports gay marriage and not telling people how to raise their children, we have Miss Martta saying she objects to loosening border controls and then we have the official Republican line of “family values” and free trade.
    I can certainly understand not liking Kerry, I just can’t understand liking Bush.

  32. Lex,
    Or the GOP just has a bigger tent. You see unlike you guys we don’t expect our party leaders to move in lock step on all the issues. We have fewer universal litmus tests to belong to the party.
    See how far you get being a pro-life Democrat!
    The odd thing is that this is a turning of the tables. It used to be the Democrats that had the bigger tent ideologically, but no more.
    One cannot stray from the Leftie dogma and stay in the Democratic party. If you are against Gay Marriage you are a homophobe, If you are against Affirmative Action you are a bigot. If you are for drilling in ANWR your are a big business pasty hellbent of raping of Mother Gaia, and on and on and on.
    This is a Moderate Country. To the middle go the votes!
    You all have so convinced yourselves of the radicalism of the GOP you completely missed the fact that the GOP lead response to 911 has flanked you on the middle.
    This is why Democrats are so baffled by this result. They imagine themselves planted firmly in the middle and don’t recognize the changed landscape.
    Since they cannot now see the forest for the trees they are left to surmise that the only possible cause is that Republicans are “meaner” or the poor hapless voter is not significantly “nuanced” to understand the issues, etc.
    Welcome to the fringe.
    All hope is not lost, but time to move center and quick!

  33. Having a volunteer army that does force our children to serve in the military means the military has to recruit guess what? Volunteers. If we had a draft the very same people bitching about miltary recruiters in our schools would be bitching because our children have no choice. Key word here folks, recruitment. Seondcy key word – volunteer. If every school in the nation banned military recruiters maybe gov would decide that the army might be better served with conscripts.

  34. Stupid typo on my part. Last post first sentence should read, “Having a volunteer arm that does not force….” Sorry I am a bit jet lagged

  35. “We have fewer universal litmus tests to belong to the party.”
    So, true, I hate the fact that because I am a conservative, I am painted with a broad brush by liberal Dems. “You must be a gun-toting, slack-jawed, gay-hating, pro-life, right-wing fundie (or other such drivel) if you voted for Bush!”
    I don’t assume that all Dems are “tree-hugging, dope-smoking, hippies that belong to”
    The political arena is not black and white.

  36. “I hate the fact that because I am a conservative, I am painted with a broad brush by liberal Dems.”
    Hmmm. I hate the fact that because I am a Democrat I am painted with a broad brush by ROC. He assumes I am pro-life, pro Gay marriage, pro affirmative action, etc. This stereotype of the Democratic voter is obviously not accurate, as he could see if he looked around him.
    Most of the liberals I know also realize that not all Republicans are gun-toting Texans. In fact I know quite a few rich bankers that wouldn’t know a rifle from a shotgun that are Republicans too.
    But ROCs latest response seems to contradict to his earlier one. First Democrats are united only by their hatred of Bush. Now they are unanimous in their endorsement of a single platform. Well, which is it? No principles or too principled?
    In any case, the history of political parties shows that both parties change their tents every few years to attempt to include more voters. That’s how a two party system works and why both parties have such strange bedfellows.
    “It only takes 20 years for a liberal to become a conservative without changing a single idea.”–Robert Anton Wilson
    And, I’d like to add, vice-versa.

  37. “I hate the fact that because I am a Democrat I am painted with a broad brush by ROC. He assumes I am pro-life, pro Gay marriage, pro affirmative action, etc. ”
    Well, which one of those things are you against? hmmmmmm?

  38. p.s.
    Lex, BTW as much as I like you, I am not always speaking of you.
    My point is that you cannot rise to prominence in the Democratic Party unless you tow the party line.
    While the GOP has pro gay, pro choice, pro gun control Republicans speaking at the convention. Many of them!!

  39. Some protesters are shouting during Bush’s address and getting some good camera time.

  40. I am pro-gun rights, pro-equal rights (meaning anti- quotas, like most democrats I know), pro-life (but not willing to impose my belief on others by law) and anti marriage in general (meaning I don’t understand why the government needs to sanction a marriage in the first place. Let the churches do it and get the government out of the business entirely.)
    The fact that the GOP gives lip service to people whose policies they would never enact and who they would never elect as candidates is not very persuasive. Can you imagine a pro-choice or anti-gun candidate being considered for national office? If that’s not a litmus test, I don’t know what is.

  41. “Can you imagine a pro-choice or anti-gun candidate being considered for national office?”
    Rudy Giuliani! (you know he is considering a run)
    Your turn.

  42. The crass, arrogant statements here that demean the positions of others is really appalling. Lose a child or a loved one in Iraq, or stay awake at night worrying to death over their welfare in a mission that is overwhelmed, poorly run and under resourced—then you might get some perspective on the ‘mission’ in Iraq. This administration has put the military in its weakest position in decades. We are terribly vulnerable to other threats. But then it is sure easy to jump on the war bandwagon when you have time all day to post again and again to blogs. Go to Iraq yourself if you are so gung ho.

  43. John, don’t you think that if the military was in its weakest state in decades that the men and women of the military wouldn’t have overwhlemingly voted for Bush? Or do their votes not count (as Gore didn’t want military votes to count in FL). In terms of underspending on this shelter of yours, if you actually know of one (and I’m sure they’re out there but probably not in Montclair), it’s not because money is wasted not by the military ensuring our freedom but by Dems (and sadly many Reps) in Congress. Misallocation is the issue. If you look at what we spend in schools these days, it dwarfs spending from earlier eras (inflation adjusted). Money is misallocated to the wrong areas as many believe you can throw money at an issue and make it go away. I personally have donated much money to the tsunami efforts yet I know at best those people will be stuck in the same position they were previously in. Giving money to a homeless person in the US will not get them off the streets. Look at NYC. The whole teach a man to fish analogy. Many of the homeless should not be in these shelters at all as they have mental problems. They should not be on the streets as the “homeless advocates” desire, they should be in hospitals/clinics getting proper help for their problems. If you are a normal functioning human being in the US, you have absolutely no excuse for not being able to find some sort of job. Anyway, I digress massively from Iraq. My main problem with Democrats is they can say what’s wrong with a situation but never offer any solutions. We need solutions to problems, not griping about them. Not everything W does will be correct, but I give him massive credit for sticking his neck on the line and trying to fix things. Now, in terms of Republicans being having the bigger tent, you just need to have watched the conventions. Different views are accepted in the party. As many problems as I have with many Reps in Congress, I still accept them as part of my party. I might be wrong, but I can’t think of any well-known Dem who is anti-abortion in the Senate. Are there any?

  44. Whoops, for some reason I thought you were talking about a homeless shelter and not a mission. Apologies. Must be because I am reading at the same level that W speaks. In regards to the mission, I think you are shortchanging our military leaders who happen to possess the greatest military minds on earth. They don’t send troops into battle unless they are properly equipped (everything they ask for, W gives) and properly trained.

  45. Red State Man – Which red state are you from? Don’t they have newspapers there?
    Just an example: the republicans have controlled both houses of congress and the white house for the entire period of the recent massive runup in the spending and the deficit. Thought you should know that so you can blame the right party. When Clinton was president there was a surplus.
    If you want Democratic solutions, vote them into office. Without reading a newspaper you may not have known that during the Clinton years many solutions were offered. Some of them were criticized by the Republicans, who offered no alternative proposals but instead insisted there was no problem to be fixed (healthcare comes to mind.) That, of course, is the luxury of being in the opposition.
    As to your second post, it is so laughably uninformed as to recent events that I have to admit that perhaps I’ve just been feeding a troll.

  46. Lex, do you call being informed reading the New York Times? Or do you just plop down in front of the couch smugly sipping your gourmet coffee drink watching Dan Rather? The reason Clinton had surpluses is thanks to Ronald Reagan. He put a proper economy into place. Study economics and learn that. Also, the Republicans forced him to sign welfare reform. Also, he trimmed the military down so far it started to waste away. Wouldn’t call that a success. Clinton should have stopped playing with Monica and his cigars and should have been out there confronting this terrorism in the 90’s. Cutting intelligence budgets doesn’t to that. Nor does fleeing Somalia at first sign of trouble, avoidinga fight post-Khobar, African embassies, the Cole, etc….
    I will grant you that Bush doesn’t veto spending bills (drug bill is outrageous) enough but this Clinton surplus stuff makes me sick.

  47. Ah, yes. Clinton bad, Reagan good. It is amazing the coincidence between Clinton’s years in office and the good economy. What luck he had! I suppose then that the current economic growth is due to Clinton’s economic policy? It’s funny because Bush seemed to be taking credit for it during his campaign.
    But enough dilly-dallying. Can you tell me what it was that Reagan did that made the economy so good ten years later? Was it the 1981 tax cut? Maybe it was the 1982 and 1983 tax increases? (The ’82 tax increase was substantially larger than the Clinton tax increase in ’93, BTW.) Was it the incredible rise in government spending (well, I might even agree with you there, but it would be funny hearing that explanation coming from a Republican, so go for it.) Perhaps it was the ginormous expansion in government debt. The Bush “Borrow Your Way to Prosperity” school of thought.
    As to informedness, you mock the New York Times but gave me no response as to where you get your lack of information.

  48. Lex, I get my info from all news channels, magazines, I read various newspapers, blogs throughout the course of the day. I don’t want to overwhelm you as you seem to treat NYT as the gospel. In terms of Clinton and the economy: unfortunately economies don’t react immediately to tax cuts. They are slow deliberate machines. Yes, I do credit Reagan today with our growth. He cut tax rates and empowered people to make their own decisions on where to spend their own money. This creates economic growth as individuals are much more efficient than governemnt bureaucracy.

  49. It’s all so convenient when you don’t have to offer any evidence. That way you can believe whatever you want! I thought that since you studied economics you might have a more convincing answer.

  50. Lex, honestly. Do you really think I will be able to teach you Econ 101 in 2 minutes? If your university decided to Backwards Politics 101 instead of Econ, don’t think it is worth any more time…

  51. Although neither of my Masters’ is in economics, one is in finance, so I could probably follow your sophisticated jargon. Or maybe you could just point to an authoritative source? A journal article perhaps? Anything other than an op/ed piece or a PAC screed would do just fine.

  52. Just trying to shame an actual intelligent response out of your fellow traveller ROC, not trying to puff myself up.

  53. Lex,
    Safe to say I have had more than adequate schooling. I will not compare to you as I don’t want to belittle schools you attended or attack you personally. I stick to the argument that you have no comprehension of how the economy works. Proof you ask? You are a Democrat.

  54. Why, if the current administration is so economically literate, like you, are they being attacked by fiscally conservative sources like the Economist (who endorsed Kerry) and the Cato Institute (“On Spending Bush is no Reagan”: )
    It isn’t that I’m a Democrat that’s a problem, it’s that the Republicans are no longer the party of fiscal sanity. Given the choice between tax and spend and don’t tax and spend, I would choose the former. Unfortuneately, those are the only choices we seem to have.

  55. This thread is incredibly distressing—and pitiful. If we can;’t look at the same information and agree on those facts, we’re never going to face reality. This administration is spending the US into a ditch. You only need to read some of the coverage about the Pentagon and force levels to see that our troops are burned out, under resourced and consuming the readiness of the National Guard. Last week James Baker called for a gradual withdrawl of troops (no liberal he…) and key generals have also raised warning flags that by the Summer, we’ll be in a very serious point with troop rotations. Don’t you think N. Korea and China are watching what is happening to our commitment in Iraq? I just had another acquaintence get deployed to Iraq. It hits close to home.

  56. Hi, I am from Montclair and would like to comment about the analogy of a “box of cookies”.
    This is flat out ridiculous.
    Allow me to elaborate: in the year 2002 a group of Montclair students began to research the NCLB Act, at this point no information was being given to the parents by either the school or the district regarding section 9528 of this bill. Around March of the year 2003, numerous Montclair seniors–along with the seniors of many neighboring towns–began to be victims of a rather violent recruitment campaign. The recruiters were so agressive that the story was picked up by several NJ newspapers.
    The policy in Montclair was finalized at the beginning of the 2004/2005 school year. Since then, not only has over 90% of the high school returned their forms, but over 80% decided to Opt-Out. This achievement was followed by an immediate interest by other high schools, towns and organizations who are now working to implement this same policy in other schools within the state. This is a BIG deal.
    Furthermore, even if the policy does not go nation-wide–any difference, any effort towards positive change is always good and always productive.

Comments are closed.