Reply #54: We're just getting started, Sir.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

(Before I merrily stroll down the path of casting Nixon AS to the left of the DLC, let me reiterate that my statement was "a case could be made." Being to the "left" is, of course, the judgment of the individual. But I feel confident that we will find chilling similarities of policy accord. Onward!)

First, we must separate the wheat from the chaff, Sir.

Further, there are sound reasons for viewing an all-volunteer structure for the armed forces of a country with a jaundiced eye. All-Volunteer forces have, throughout history, shown a certain inclination to political seperation from the mass of a country's populace, that has made them a ready tool for the government against political dissent, and that dissent generally from the left. The majority of military coups have been executed by volunteer forces so estranged from the populace, and in several instances, where these were only a portion of the armed forces, and the remainder of them consisted of conscripts, the latter acted in opposition to the coup, in reflection of the people's will. There are excellent arguments to be made from the perspective of securing liberty, and even of the advancement and security of leftist political actions, for insisting that the armed forces of a nation be filled by levy among the youth of that country, applied as broadly as possible.

Is this your opinion or the opinion of the DLC? Please don't do me the disservice of battling on two fronts, Sir. I'm not laying claim that "a case could be made" that Nixon/Goldwater were to the left of the entity known as The Magistrate. Ergo, my request for you to lay a preliminary structure for what the DLC stands for. It would be fair to agree that all references to the DLC should be referenced from www.ndol.org, the Mothership, as it were, would it not? Nowhere were coups or dissent mentioned in the referenced piece, Sir. I would also add, to support your position, that nowhere were ideas grappling with selective service mentioned in mine.

Ground rules are in order, Sir. Engaging on the battlefield of historical fact vs. editorial opinion is a dicey proposition, Sir. I'll bow to your limitless knowledge of the rules of procedure to propel us forward.