i just think this shows that canadian geoff davis isn't able to be a sitting us congressman. throw the bum out.

Ron,

I completely agree with your assessment. I was an NCO in the Army/Army Reserve and see no reason why national service should not be mandatory. We have become a lazy, gluttonous, spoiled, cowardly lot in this country. How can we expect to have the world's best fighting force by lowering standards?

I especially agree that there is simply too much reliance on contractors on the battlefield. I spent a year in Kuwait as a DoD civilian employee - contract administrator. I have 20 years experience in DoD contracting and can say without a doubt that the almost complete lack of contracting oversight by the federal government has been devestating to this nation.

Contractors cost taxpayers up to 3 times more than federal employees and who knows how much more than troops. I believe this is why Rumsfeld is desperately trying to change our entire personnel system (despite the fact that large portions of it have been ruled to be illegal by the courts) so that he can more easily deploy civilians to the battlefield.

I have a friend who works in Baghdad in the budgeting office and she says that a contractor can make over $130K for just answering phones at a help desk. Why can't a PFC or SP4 do that job? She also says that there are many contractors just standing around collecting a check because there isn't enough security for them to the jobs for which they were awarded a contract. And, we wonder why we're spending $8 billion a month?

I'll keep you in my prayers.

Kathy

In response to KAS's question "Do you support reinstating the draft in order to accomplish this?" I submit the following:

I originally formulated the bulk of my "thoughts on national service" while stranded during dust storms at the Baghdad International Airport awaiting transportation back to Iraq approximately one year ago. In light of the continued deterioration of conditions on the ground in Iraq, the continued intransigence of the Taliban in Afghanistan, recent extension to combat tours and the announcement about three months ago of the Marine Corp's need to call up IRR soldiers to meet it's needs, - I revisited this issue.

Thoughts on a National Service Requirement-

Less than one-half of one percent of US population is in active military service

What is the number of US Congress and Senators with Service Experience?
How many of their children and grand children deployed in support of the war in Iraq?

How did President Bill Clinton's avoidance of military service effect his decisions and conduct as president?

How has President Bush's lack of service completion (AWOL for a year of his "service") and Vice President Cheney's successful complete avoidance of service during Vietnam affected this administration's judgment?

Thousands of American Servicemen and Women, who have honorably completed their service obligation are currently compelled to continue service under military "stop loss" which denies them the ability to exit the military upon their ETS (End of Term of Service) They are forced to put plans of education and careers and other life plans on hold.

I would propose that in a time of "Global War on Terrorism" that it would not be un-thinkable to institute some form of National Service. In times of peace, the concept of National Service - giving to one's nation - is valuable for development of a sense of citizenship and a common national experience. In the current environment, National Service may be vital to our national survival.

Proposed National Service Options:

Active Duty Military - 2 year commitment

National Guard or Reserve - 6 year commitment (Obligation adjusted for any Federalized/activated time served)

Teacher's Aid in over populated elementary and middle schools with pupil to teacher ratios of greater than 20:1 for elementary and 25:1 in middle school or schools identified as failing schools- 2 year Commitment. These individuals should be chosen based on aptitude, desire to pursue a career in education, and undergo appropriate interview and screening processes with the local school administration and board making final approval.

Border Patrol - 2 year commitment
These individuals would bring much needed manpower to our over stretched border enforcement.

Port Security - 2 year Commitment

Benefits of a National Service Program:

1.Immediate increase in force to fill current needs. Current rotation schedules are simply unsustainable. To meet minimum current sustained operations in Iraq and Afghanistan will require two new Army Divisions. To reestablish credibility in our Nation's ability to execute and sustain actions in two major theaters simultaneously will require an even greater standing force. It is unfortunate that the end to the cold war did not result in the much anticipated peace dividend. The emergence of non-nation terrorist organizations and rogue states as the aftermath of the superpower standoff has in many ways left our world more volatile and unpredictable. Currently the United States is demonstratively ill prepared for the multiple contingencies of emerging threats abroad, the demonstrated terror threat to our homeland and the need for effective/timely response to natural disasters.

2.Take pressure off Guard and Reserve Forces which are currently facing back to back deployments - allow our Guard and Reserve to be available for Home Land Defense and Response to terror attack and natural disasters. Pre-911 planning called for the Guard and Reserve Forces to face the possibility of one major deployment (generally of 6 months duration) per six years. Our Guardsmen and Reservist are now facing deployment rotation schedules and deployment durations equal to their Active Duty counterparts. While they have performed admirably, it is - again- not sustainable, has had a substantial detrimental effects on the soldier's families, careers, education plans, small businesses, force retention and small communities as a whole. These soldiers are often members of local police departments and EMS services. This, in turn, has greatly undermined many communities ability to respond to major emergencies or a potentially new terrorist attack on our homeland.

3.Reduce the increasingly expensive reliance on Non-Military contractors. With our uniformed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan are a historically unprecedented number of Civilian Contractors. These contractors are not held to the same standards enforceable by UCMJ, are compensated with outrageous sums of money - which undermines the motivation and morale of our soldiers who face greater danger for far less financial return. A civilian contractor charged to train our troops on close quarters combat and help units conduct convoy live fire exercises prior to unit movement north insisted on pointing out to soldiers that he was being paid in excess of $10,000 dollars per month - tax free from the relative safety of Kuwait. Meanwhile a PFC who may be tasked with daily convoy duties in Iraq - in constant threat of catastrophic injury and death - receives about $1,600 dollars monthly in base pay. I and many others have the skills and requisite prior training to conduct this unit level training. A cadre of US soldiers could have easily served this function. Additionally, Non-military contractors regularly place an undue burden on theater medical and evacuation assets - they are often poorly screened for chronic medical conditions that are exacerbated by service in theater.

4.Return a commonality of experience as Americans that has been a bond between generations and Social Classes of Americans in Past Generations. All Americans would have a connection and understanding of what service entails.

5.Trained ready reserve population. We would have a trained reserve population from which to draw in times of National Emergence from the majority who would choose not to continue service beyond the national Service obligation. (During WWII the United States stood up a 16 Million Man Military Force from a national population of only 160 million). We are currently unable to sustain a deployed force of 1.25% of our WWII standing Armed Force despite a nearly doubled national population.

6.A sense of National Service and Duty to Nation and a shared destiny would be re-instilled in our Youth- What Senator John McCain refers to as service beyond ones self.

7.Heightened level of Understanding across Ethnic Social and Economic Experiences. There would be a natural mixing of people and society from all regions of our nation. This represents a valuable exposure and in some cases enlightenment to many. The United States has a rapidly increasing underclass of citizens locked into environments of economic insecurity and violence. We are at risk of the eruptions of violence and radicalization that grow in the shadows of hopelessness and cultural isolation - i.e. the domestic unrest which has rocked France, the home grown terrorism of Great Briton, or a revisit of episodes from our own violent past - the '65 Watts riots.

8.Maintain the Worlds Most Competent, Capable and Professional Fighting Force. National Service would enable us to maintain the quality of our volunteer force because the NCOs, Senior Enlisted and Officers would be those identified with requisite qualities skills and commitment who volunteered for continued service beyond the National Service Obligation. Our current force is experiencing the loss of our most talented service members at unprecedented rate secondary to an operational tempo which is exhausting our under-sized force, straining families to the breaking point.

The new policy for initial entry training (IET) soldiers instructs us to look for reasons to retain basic training troops rather than enforce any semblance of medical, mental or physical standard. I have witnessed this first hand as a medical provider in a basic training environment between my Iraq and Afghanistan deployments. In our desperation to reach manning requirements the Army is pushing for an attrition target of 0-2% in basic and IET (traditionally attrition rates have been about 14 to18%).

I stood last February before a group at the end of the presentation of this new IET philosophy and expressed my concern for the damage I perceive done to the Army by this policy.

I mentioned the numerous patients I now saw in the basic training
clinic with obvious learning disabilities. I do not believe these
soldiers are equipped for a smarter, lighter, technologically savvy,
fast, agile and more responsive Army. I told the group of patients
who are bone scan confirmed to have bilateral tibia stress fractures
after only 3 days of training because they have entered basic training
so grossly physically unfit for service having experienced no stress
beyond an occasional blister to their thumbs from endless days of
Nintendo play. I pointed out that we had one confirmed case of low
grade cerebral palsy in a basic training soldier (not noticed by Military Entrance Processing Station's "medical evaluation").
I have since identified a second soldier with the same diagnosis. I have
now seen three soldiers given the old Vietnam era ultimatum of go to
the Army or go to jail! I questioned the moderate to severe asthma
found in many of our new initial entry soldiers - they are not discharged if we can manage it medically, despite the prospect of an exacerbation culminating in a medical emergency in the dust storm prone desert environments of Iraq and Afghanistan.

We have enlisted soldiers now in the WTC (Warrior Transition Course -
folks with long breaks in service - or coming from the Navy or Air
Force because they are being discharged for failing to make rank in
their prior service) entering the Army at as old as 64 years old with
multiple medical issues and severe difficulty passing the four
week intro to the Army course.

Murder 2 convictions are no longer a bar to enlistment in the US Army
and psych meds are not a problem in this new training
atmosphere for basic trainees fit for service. Initial entry soldiers
may now join at age 40 with multiple medical issues and poor physical
conditioning.

Needless to say - with the Department of the Army and TRADOC breathing down their throats and screaming for them to simply fill the ranks with anything with a pulse and respirations (and not necessarily both) - my points were not well received.

9.End "Stop Loss". Soldiers of today's "Volunteer Army" would not be caught in "STOP LOSS" status that has involuntarily held many thousands in service beyond their contracted end of service.

10.An experienced future leadership. A greater number of our future leaders would have practical military experience upon which to draw when making decisions that commit our men and women to harms way.

11.Retention of skilled talented military professionals. Millions of dollars spent on enlistment bonuses to attract non-skilled entry level soldiers into the service could be refocused on retaining our experienced Non-Commissioned Officers and Junior Officers.

12.Reverse National Health Trends. National Service would likely help reverse negative health trends related to obesity and sedentary life styles. I would suggest a greater emphasis be placed on cardio fitness and weight control in our primary and secondary schools as a matter of national necessity. Thirty Six Billion dollars are spent on obesity related illness in US annually. Physical Education should not be an elective.

13.Enhance homeland security. Port and Border Security duty would greatly enhance homeland security. I am not anti-immigrant - we are a nation of immigrants. However, no nation can consider it's self secure with open borders in an environment of non-nation terrorist elements demonstrated willing to indiscriminately murder thousands of our citizens.

14.Truly leave no child left behind. Teacher's Aid service would greatly enhance the quality of education in our under served schools - and truly leave no child left behind.

Additionally, a National Service commitment could be incorporated as a tool to assist in closing the education gap in America. All who successfully and honorably complete National Service should be eligible for assistance for post secondary school - a new GI bill. Many of our HS graduates are deficient in many areas requisite for transition to the college environment. Through service entrance exams, these short comings could be identified and assistance given through the Military Education Assistance offices could help reduce identified weaknesses and better prepare these young people for college success post National Service.

Few HS graduates are fully aware of what they intend to do, have been exposed to few options, and may lack the self-discipline for success at the college level. Two years of National service will serve to bring focus and discipline to our future college freshmen.

Who should be required to serve?
All Graduated Seniors. No deferment for College (which Vice President Richard Cheney used successfully 4 times), No Deferment for Expectant Parent (which VP Cheney used once). All who are found fit physically and mentally for one of the Service options - Military (Active, Guard or Reserve), Teacher's Aid, Border Security, or Port Security - should be obligated to service to their country. Failure to honorably complete service for which a person is deemed physically and mentally capable would result in failure to qualify for Guaranteed Student Loans, Any Federal Tuition/Education Assistance, and Federal Jobs.

Ron,

I was profoundly moved by your commentary. I wish we had answers to this tragedy but it seems there are none. Do you support reinstating the draft in order to accomplish this?

God Bless You.

Reference Congressman Davis' apparent disconnect with the realities of the war in Iraq - estimating only 17 US KIA over the last month as opposed to the greater than 80 and still rising count - Congressman Davis has a pattern of not being aware of the facts and or purposeful misrepresentation. This should not be a surprise, as it has been the standard operating procedure of his party and this administration.

As you noted in your recent article Congressman Davis refers to himself as an "Army Ranger". As mentioned in a recent Northern Kentucky news article Davis Taking Heat
by Patrick Crowlet | Enquirer staff writer for the Kentucky Enquirer, Congressman Davis rarely misses a chance on the stump to talk about his appointment to West Point, his tour in the Middle East as an Army Ranger and his seat on the House Armed Services Committee." From Congressman Davis' Official Web Site Bio: "During his Army career, Davis served as an Assault Helicopter Flight Commander in the 82nd Airborne Division, and later ran U.S. Army Aviation Operations for Peace Enforcement between Israel and Egypt. Davis is a former Army Ranger and Senior Parachutist."

Any actual combat tours? Desert Storm? Operation Just Cause in Panama?, the liberation of Grenada?, Somalia? Just what did he do? What have been his significant experiences which qualify him as the expert on military affair as he portends?

"Davis is a former Army Ranger and Senior Parachutist." As per his BIO and all news coverage?

Congressman Davis was not/ has never been an "Army Ranger" - This, I do know. He never served in one of our three distinguished Ranger Battalions or the 75th Ranger Regiment under the Special Operations Command. He went to the Army's Ranger School Training only. He was never actually assigned/ served as an Army Ranger with the 75th Ranger Regiment or one of the three Ranger Battalion as anyone in the US Army
would expect from the term "Army Ranger"? Can we get clarification on this? Is this another example of a manipulation of the facts? Please ask him. I already know the answer. This question has been raised before, but Congressman Davis refuses to
edit his Bio appropriately. HE NEVER SERVED AS AN ARMY RANGER. Please research the definition of "Army Ranger."

http://dictionary.laborlawtalk.com/U.S._Army_Rangers
"The 75th Ranger Regiment --also known as the United States Army Rangers-- is a special operations force of the United States Army Special Operations Command (USASOC); with headquarters in Fort Benning, Georgia. The Regiment is a flexible, highly-trained and rapidly deployable Light Infantry force with specialized skills that
enables it to be employed against a variety of conventional and special operations targets.
The force specialises in airborne, air assault, Light Infantry and direct action operations, raids, infiltration and exfiltration by air, land or sea, airfield seizure, recovery of personnel and special equipment, and support of general purpose forces (GPF) among others. Each Ranger battalion can deploy anywhere in the world within 18
hours' notice."

This is a fairly universal definition of the term "Army Ranger". I and all others in the service readily define "Army Ranger" as someone Ranger Qualified now or formerly serving in the 75th Ranger Regiment, 1st, 2nd or 3rd Ranger Battalions. There are a multitude of individuals within the US Armed Forces who are graduates of the US
Army Ranger training - it is a school. That is not confused by any of us with being an Army Ranger. Within the Ranger Regiment it is said "the Tab (referring to the ranger tab awarded for ranger school completion) is just a school, the scroll (referring to the Ranger Unit Insignia) is a way of life." - a way of life Congressman Davis has never experienced.

According to the Congressman's Bio: "Davis studied the Arabic language and the cultures of Southwest Asia and Eastern Europe, and focused his studies on national security and international affairs".

What exactly was his "focus"? Was it something other than a couple undergrad classes?

Studied the Arabic Language? What level of proficiency did he achieve? Did he barely pass with a 0+/0+ rating - was he ever tested on proficiency - or is he actually significantly accomplished having achieved a 2+/2+ or greater rating. Was all of his study within a class room, or has he been forces to expediently learn to communicate
while rapidly attempting to evaluate and treat an Arab language casualties. "Raja-an" please, "shukran" thank you, "shinu mushkila?" what is wrong?, "mu-Sab" injured, "Du-wa" Medicine, "nazeef"bleeding, "dam" blood, "sayyaraat is'aaf"Ambulance, "khatar"danger, "nefas" breath, " zim/mu-zim" good/not good.

Has he learned the language and the culture within the realities of a grieving family and a critically wounded Arabic local national in the midst of a war torn desperate nation. Has he delivered health care to remote Iraqi villages amidst desperate poverty and squalor? (i.e. terrorist breeding/recruiting grounds) Has he looked an Iraqi mother in the eyes and had to say "I am sorry, but there is nothing we can do"

Just a few questions and thoughts. Maybe, starting with Congressman Davis, we can begin to hold our political leadership accountable to the truth.

According to the Congressman's campaign, "Geoff Davis is the only candidate in this race who has laid out a plan for getting us out of Iraq,"

It would have been nice if a plan existed prior to the invasion, prior to the loss of nearly 3000 American lives, Prior to the creation of an absolute vacuum of security and authority, prior to the lawless destruction of the critical infrastructure, prior to the looting of many thousands of pounds of munitions now being used to maim and kill our soldiers and the Iraqi populace indiscriminately, and prior to a now spinning out of control civil war which beyond the 100 to 150 Iraqis dieing daily in sectarian violence is laying the ground work for the emergence of a radical Islamic theocracy modeled after Tehran- one which will produce an Al Qaeda and secular terrorist safe haven and a real and imminent threat to the region and the United States (which did not exist prior to our invasion. ) "A plan" should have been a prerequisite prior to trading a successful eighty million dollar annual containment strategy for a two billion dollar per month
occupation in the midst of a civil war with no end in sight. Had the Administration and the GOP controlled US House and Senate heeded the advice of those with actual knowledge and experience (rather than charged arrogantly and blindly forward on the assurances of NeoCon think tanks and intelligence custom fabricated specifically for
predetermined objectives) Iraq might not be a pivotal political issue at this time. Conservative prudence and an honest debate might likely have dictated that an invasion would not serve our nation's interest -or that the credible amassing of forces in the region which prompted Sadam's capitulation and the return of uninhibited inspections was a
credible victory prior to an actual invasion. If the determination was to go forward regardless (as was likely the decision prior to 911 while the administration awaited a justification), then due respect for the broad experienced opinions of those who advised the need of 300,000 troops on the ground as a minimum to secure civil order,infrastructure and critical munitions stock piles should have been given.

I will not offer my opinion on whether our initial invasion and subsequent occupation best served our national interests or the greater war on terror. This debate should have occurred during the months leading up to war, but objections were stifled in the post-September 11th atmosphere that disallowed any opposition with questions of patriotism or accusations of being soft on terrorism. The press, "America's fourth-of-state", may now regret its failure to ask questions. And, more significantly, our elected representatives abdicated their duties: they overwhelmingly failed in their responsibility to the citizenry to provide oversight, reasoned debate and due caution as they gave the Administration a blank check. They were more concerned with political expedience and near term elections than with legitimate debate. And NOW - three years into the war,Congressman Davis and his fellow derelict representatives have a plan?

And now, Three plus years post invasion, I am concerned about the eventual out come in Iraq regardless of which party controls the US House and Senate the morning of November 8th, 2006. Let me now voice my reservations and concerns for both political parties and our political leadership in general. One out come of the election appears to ensure a rapid withdraw - let the pieces fall were they may, and the other a prolonged continuation of a costly - in lives and national treasure - endeavor without the political will, admission of mistakes and expenditure of political clout needed to give us a chance for any semblance of success. Neither party - or any member within the parties - is willing or able to articulate the painful realities of our current situation or the hard
facts of a plan which would best extricate from this situation while serving our national interest (rather than short term political interests)

We are now there - in Iraq. This fact changes everything. Regardless of your position on whether we should be there - we are - and we are now responsible for the outcome. Millions of people in Iraq and throughout the region trust the United States as partners in this struggle for their future. Whether you believe that Iraq was a breeding ground for terror before our occupation - as claimed by the current administration - it will certainly be a breeding ground for terror if we abandon Iraq to extremist and neighboring threats before Iraq is able to face and to defeat them. Our quitting Iraq at this time would likely result in civil war between rival Islamic factions, a Kurdish separatist state - with likely future conflict with Turkey, and the rise of a radical Islamic theocracy in the image of Iran. We must not forget the results of our failure to commit for the long term in Afghanistan: the establishment of the Taliban, a safe haven for terrorists, nearly 3000 Americans killed on September 11th 2001, the bombing of the USS Cole and the embassy in Nairobi, and the loss of basic human rights for millions of Afghan women. (By-the way, I am in Southern Afghanistan currently. We are in a hold what you have with insufficient combat forces, insufficient close air support, and insufficient resources to effectively suppress the reemerging Taliban strength while simultaneously rebuilding this nation. I predict that this will not be addressed by this Congress or the Administration while the election is pending - and likely not beyond the election either. Our prospects of success here are in the short run much greater than in Iraq, but will be condemned to failure secondary to willful neglect and the unwillingness of our leadership to face the inconvenient truths in an unfriendly political environment.)

We can not accept arbitrary time lines - or worse - a cut and run mentality. Nor can we continue a policy of "stay the course rooted in blind optimism and denial as our military and the nations of SW Asia continue to bleed. We must recommit to accelerated training of Iraqi soldiers, policemen and National Guard. We must commit forces necessary to create the secure environment required for the continued reconstruction of this nation's broken infrastructure and must accelerate these efforts under the umbrella of this greater security. We must have sufficient presence to crush the rising organized and open insurgency as demonstrated once again in Al Ramadi and by the blatant challenges of Sadar and his Madi Army. We must not allow Iraq to become an Iranian proxy. In Iraq, THIS WILL REQUIRE 300,000 US and COALITION COMBAT FORCES, in addition to thousands of Civil Affairs, Engineer, and Embedded trainers and advisors forces. This will require an unconditional invitation to our European and Regional Allies to participate in the full reconstruction and to reap what benefits they may in the name of stability and speed of recovery as paramount over profits to the administrations friends. The orderly withdrawal of our troops corresponding with the orderly transition of the ground fighting to Iraqi soldiers requires this commitment. There is not now,
nor has there ever been the requisite security needed for success to follow our occupation. We must muster a national will to see this mission through to completion. Anything less - and certainly anything which disengages the United States prematurely - dishonors the
sacrifices of our soldiers and is abandonment of the Iraqi people and to a great extent all who live in SW Asia. Their fate remains in our hands until this emerging democracy's roots are set deeply enough to successfully withstand the ill intentions, influence, and violence of neighboring states with a vested interest in their failure - or - the Nation of Iraq is guided and protected by US force as it remodels itself into three separate stable autonomous regions.

I and other soldiers have had innumerable opportunities to work directly with our Iraqi and Afghan brothers - police, soldiers, medical providers, local governing councils and citizens. Daily they are attempting in the face of open civil war to bear an ever-increasing responsibility for their own security, governance, and national destiny. They will not succeed under to current environment. The people of Iraq consistently express their sincere thanks for our commitment to the new Iraq and their future. I pray that we do not prove unworthy of their faith and trust. I urge our representatives on both sides of the political spectrum to resist the urge to once again yield to the prevailing winds and the short term goal of the ever present next election. The national will requisite for our success in Iraq - and Afghanistan - will follow their lead.

Maybe I have too much invested in Iraq - 22 months of my life and close friends and fellow soldiers lost. Maybe despite the eyes on view I have had throughout the country of Iraq - from the Green zone, to the Western Al Anbar Province (Al Ramadi, Fallujah, Habbaniyah) and Baqlabah, Taji, Balad to the North - my judgment is clouded by my proximity and intimacy with the issue.

Many Americans - possibly a majority - now believe it is a loss and we need to walk away. Considering the mess we have created, I can understand this sentiment. However, to me it is also 30 million people who will have to live in the aftermath of our simply washing our hands of the matter and moving on. Furthermore, I wish it was a matter of just moving on for us - but it isn't that simple. The repercussions of our failure will be monumental and long lasting for the region and our own security.

I know that what I have suggested as a viable alternative to the two options as presented from opposite sides of the political isle of stay the course verses precipitous withdraw is not politically palatable, but it is reality if we choose to have an out come which does not increase Iranian radical Islamic theocratic designs on the region. " In Iraq, THIS WILL REQUIRE 300,000 US and COALITION COMBAT FORCES, in addition to thousands of Civil Affairs, Engineer, and Embedded trainers and advisors forces."

I know that this will not likely happen. I know that the national will no longer exists in the US to honestly commit fully to what must be done to rectify this mess. It would require a roll back of corporate welfare, reinstating the Estate tax, and repealing the grossly immoral tax cuts to the top ten percent in order to pay for this war. It would also require further service - more sustained deployments by Guard and Reserve, continued close timed rotations of our active duty forces, and probably some form of National Service. It would require the burden to be borne to some extent by all Americans. It would require the GOP and the Administration to admit egregious mistake and misinformation. It would require the Democrats to make politically unpopular and in the short-term less politically expedient choices - not simple take the easy mid-term win at the expense of 30 million Iraqis and our long term national interest.

Unfortunately such sacrifice and selflessness for the greater good is no longer a prominent feature in our National character or likely to emerge in a poisoned winner-take-all political environment. We are in a war against a radical dictatorial ideology which has demonstrated its capacity for indiscriminant slaughter in order to drag vast regions into poverty, ignorance and despair and we as a nation are told to shop more, that it is our god given right to have cheap gasoline, and any change or inconvenience or adjustment in our isolate America-centric existence is a victory for the terrorists.

Yes, Iraq is a mess. A needless mess at that - and those who got us to this point should be held accountable. But our failure to properly deal with this mess will far out weigh the current debacle. Personally, my conscience will not easily allow me to accept a simplistic "You can not put a broken a broken egg back together. All you can do is move on" approach.

We failed the Iraqi people during the post gulf war slaughter, as we stood by with the force necessary to save them, and did nothing. Let us not fail them and those of the greater SW Asia region again. Our commitment or lack of commitment to do what now needs to be done will define the moral character of our nation.

Thank you

GOP winds are not developing. A Full three plus weeks after the Foley scandal, Bob Woodwards Book, Bob Ney pleading guilty, and so on, Rove's tirades against Pelosi and DEMs have no appeal to those except the ultra right wings of the GOP....the same folks who are bilking taxpayers day by day.

15 days to go and absolutely no GOP momentum is detected. Stick a fork in, the GOP is done.

cum grano salis, very cute...

"The incumbant also wins about 96% of the time. coincidence?"

Not exactly. Most incumbants get nominal challengers, and have massive money advantages, in the sense that they might have $500,000 and the challenger has $1000. That is determinative; races where an incumbent has $500,000 and a challenger has $300,000 can be competitive and aren't really comparable. Also, there's the entire separate matter of redistricting.

Election Alarm!!!

For uncensored news please bookmark:

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/
www.wsws.org
www.takingaim.info
www.onlinejournal.com
otherside123.blogspot.com

Rove spin not succeeding. Although Karl Rove is attempting to transfer the Pagegate scandal involving the GOP to the Catholic Church (in the Mark Foley matter) and Democrats running in other states, particularly in Ohio, WMR can report the real child abuse/endangerment scandal in Ohio involves Rove's close friend and operative, Secretary of State and gubernatorial candidate Kenneth Blackwell. Our sources in Columbus report that a close ally of Rove and Blackwell, who happens to head up one of Ohio's largest "mega-churches," was caught receiving oral sex in the front seat of his car from a female member of his church. The incident took place in the parking lot of the preacher's Columbus mega-church. What makes the incident even more scandalous is that the female's two young children were in the back seat of the car during the incident. The scandal-ridden GOP administration in Ohio failed to investigate the matter.

BTW

I agree, realclearpolitics.com is an excellent source.

In FL

Rasmussen on 10/2 had Crist up 54%-38%. On 10/17 he was up only 46% to 41%.

Quinnipiac had the race 10/8 had Crist up 53% to 43%. Now, 10/22 its 46% to 44%.

Mason Dixon on 9/26 had Crist up 51% to 36%. On 10/17 it had Crist up 50% to 39%.

Zogby/WSJ late September battleground poll had Crist up 50% to 37%. The October battleground poll 50.2% to 41%.

There is a definate tightening trend, some more dramatic than others but polls across the board are showing movement in the same direction so it is no fluke. Whether it is actually that close is another matter. All these are post-Foley.

Survey USA actually had it swing in the other direction, with the 9/14 poll having Crist lead at 49%-41% and the 10/9 poll widening to 54% - 41%. Whether this takes into full account the "Foley factor" is hard to say. The poll started just as the story broke.

Foley probably does not help Crist and there will likely be some natural tightening of the races before the election.

IMO, fluke- NO, Foley-?

Davis isn't cracking 45% so there is not a lot of optimism here yet, from my persepective.

The people who still support the party that brought us Iraq care so little about wise use of our military that they will be little phased by a 17 instead of 71.

The numbers that matter to them are ExxonMobil and ChevronTexaco's P/E ratios. It doesn't matter how many soldiers have to die for their stock portfolios. The important thing is that they shut up and do their duty to the stockholders. Remember, Saddam got us good on 9/11, so keep fighting.

> Anyone who is so befuddled he says 17 when (to take him at his word) he meant 71 should not be in Congress.

Macaca, Mohawk, 17, 71, it's all in a day's work for the dissembling Republican.

corbett I have seen Rmill's argument laid out in a detailed manor during the primaries and I think his assesment is pretty good that Survey USA is as reliable as any poll (possibly more). That said I have become a huge fan of realclearpolitics.com that averages the polls togethor. It gives a lot clearer view of what is going on in my opinion.

Rmill is the FL governors race poll a fluke? I thought Crist was crushing him, or is this just run-off from the Foley scandal.

They admit it themselves in the article:

It's true that our formula isn't foolproof. In 1958, 1974 and 1994, the wave of anti-incumbent sentiment was so strong that money didn't trump voter outrage.

-from Barron's article

In some districts and states, enough money is all that is required:

John Aldrich, a professor of political science at Duke University who writes extensively about elections, says that a candidate really doesn't need the most money to win; he merely requires enough cash to get his message across. Aldrich believes Democrats will win this year with less money because they won't have to spend so much to persuade voters to switch horses.
-from Barron's article

corbett

I have been tracking poll accuracy for this years races since the discussion occured earler this year on this site.

According to my tracking of not only the actual call of the race but the margin of victory and final candidate totals, Survey USA has been more accurate overall through the primaries.

I devised a scale of scoring that included 1) the call (who wins) 2) margin of victory pts for exact and lower for within margin or poll error (usually 3 or 4%) and 3)actual candidate %, again with more pts for an exact predicition and less for those within margin of poll error.

Any poll garnering 4 pts gets designated as what I call a "quality pick". Missing the call of the race garners zero pts, regardless if the other numbers are accurate or within margin or error.

Out of 24 primary races polled, Survey USA has 2 misses and 9 quality picks and an average score of 3.25.

Rasmussen has 3.00 avg, Strategic Vision, a Republican firm, has a 2.6 avg. Quinnipiac has a 2.13 avg. and Mason Dixon has a 1.9 avg.

Out of a total of 82 primary races polled by all polling firms analyzed, the average was 2.46. The miss rate was 9.76% and quality pick rate was 19.51%.

Survey USA has a miss rate of 8.33% and a quality pick rate of 37.5%.

I intend on doing a similar study of the General election results.

thanks loudoun county. i doubt his explanation to begin with, but you took the words right out of my mouth that even if by 17 he MEANT 71, that is too huge a mistake to dismiss. in some ways, might have even looked better if he just admitted the mistake as now he looks at best not careful and at worst dishonest.

The incumbant also wins about 96% of the time. coincidence?

Including these new polls in my Oct. averages, shifts FL Gov to leans R from solid R and NJ Sen from Toss up to leans D for my tracking purposes.

Also puts IL-8 from toss up to leans D and IL 6 stays in toss up (unchanged but an avg +2.33 D down to D+0.33). FL-22 shifts from likely R (R+8) to leans R (R+6.5).

For the life of me, I just can't understand why anyone sites Survey USA polls. It doesn't take a brainiac to visit a site like pollster.com, go through several senate and governor races, and see that Survey USA is wildly off-the-mark when compared to every other polling firm. They are junk, plain and simple.

Other recent polls:

Florida
Quinnipiac 10/18
Davis (D) 44%
Crist (R) 46%

Research 2000
FL-22
Klein (D) 43%
Shaw (R)* 48%

Iowa
Rasmussen 10/20
Culver (D) 49%
Nussle (R) 45%

New Jersey
Monmouth Coll./Gannett 10/19
Menendez (D)* 48%
Kean Jr. (R) 39%

Illinois
Chicago Tribune 10/18
IL-6
Duckworth (D) 39%
Roskam (R) 43%

IL-8
Bean (D)* 50%
McSweeney (R) 31%

why the continued, unfounded beating on robopolling? SUSA and Rasmussen beat the pants of most other pollsters, with the possible exception of Pew, in 2004. I don't have any problem with saying that bias effects, either lessened or increased, are not fully known with robopolls. But it's a poor idea to discount them out of hand at this stage of the game.

I should also note for the record that I follow this blog but in a strictly "secular" manner.

"I read in intersting (and somewhat disgusting) article in Barron's about the effect of money on political campaigns. Barron's claims that their research shows that the candidate who spending the most money wins 94% of the time, NO MATTER WHAT. The article is here: http://online.barrons.com/public/article/SB116138396438799484-uMRQ4ejl3lonVnJ_TXy6k9fPXls_20061121.html?mod=9_0002_b_free_features

Based on this, then, money and the rich oligarthy represented by George Bush, will retain control of the Congress and Senate and will continue their run to recreating Feudal Europe of the 10th Century.

Posted by: MikeB | October 23, 2006 11:23 AM

"

I wouldn't pay any attention to that. According to that method, Francine Busby is favored over Brian Bilbray and Mark Kennedy is favored over Amy Klobuchar. Not to mention that John Hostettler would never have been reelected if this method was determinative. Even Bob Novak dismissed this report on Meet the Press.

Interesting note:

Cooper and Secrest also did a tracking poll in KY-3, showing the Dem challenger to incumbant Rep. Northup (R)* trailing 44%-45% on 10/11. RT Strategies had it tied 48%-48% on 10/10 and Survey USA came out 10/18 with Yarmuth (D) leading Northup 48%-47%.

cum grano salis?

Don't be so sure...

CC: Two citations in the week. I see a grudging trend of acceptance coming. (PS- I almost used CG Salis as my screen name).

RT Strategies 10/10 also had this race at 49%-46% in favor of Davis.
Independent polling has swung anywhere from D+2 to R+6 in the last month or two (not including D and R firms). October average is Davis +4% but has trended towards a tighter races in recent weeks.

Dear Chris,

I follow your blog religiously and would like you to know how grateful I am for your poll analyses. Between you and Charley Cook and Stu Rothenberger, I feel that I have a good picture of current developments. (Amy, of course, knows everything) Thanks again. Charles

Dear Chris,

I follow your blog religiously and would like you to know how grateful I am for your poll analyses. Between you and Charley Cook and Stu Rothenberger, I feel that I have a good picture of current developments. (Amy, of course, knows everything) Thanks again. Charles

Anyone who is so befuddled he says 17 when (to take him at his word) he meant 71 should not be in Congress.

I read in intersting (and somewhat disgusting) article in Barron's about the effect of money on political campaigns. Barron's claims that their research shows that the candidate who spending the most money wins 94% of the time, NO MATTER WHAT. The article is here: http://online.barrons.com/public/article/SB116138396438799484-uMRQ4ejl3lonVnJ_TXy6k9fPXls_20061121.html?mod=9_0002_b_free_features

Based on this, then, money and the rich oligarthy represented by George Bush, will retain control of the Congress and Senate and will continue their run to recreating Feudal Europe of the 10th Century.

Man that is up there with the Price of Milk question.
Although I beleive that the guy probably did get the number mixed up in his head, either way Lucas will use this to make up any ground he might be down. One more in the Dems column.