It seems to be ever since Michael Moore did "Farenheit 911" the left has attacked the right for what it feels is not sacrificing enough. As we remember from that movie Michael approached members of congress and asked if they wanted to sign up their sons and daughters. And the left also mentions Bush's daughters as well as any second cousins they can find.
At first I too was thinking they may have some valid points, but today I wanted to make 3 points why these arguments lack any substance.
The first is that the sons and daughters can not be conscripted because of the parents wishes. They are not chattel that the parents can sign their rights away. Even for children under 18, parents are required to sign a waiver but the ultimate decision is the person elisting.
The second point relates to the economic principle of public good. National defense of course being a public good that is non-excludable and non-rivalrous. Once national defense is in place it protects Bill Gates, Bill Clinton and Bill Rutherford (No relation but a friend from Middle School) equally. Since there is a problem of free riders, the government raises taxes based on income or sins to pay for these services. As in Cindy Sheehans does not want to pay her taxes or even her past tax liens since 1996. Since the military is an all volunteer army, there can also be a tendency for free riders in the sense that someone else can sacrifice and why should I and my family. Luckily patriotism and some monetary incentives overcome most enlistment problems. So what does this have to do with "101st Fighting Keyboardists"? I see that both sides are accusing the other side of free riding. The left feels that why should their young die for someone else's war, as Kos tries to imply. But looking at the map it really does not show the correlation they are trying to show. As pointed out by Burtonia Blogs by showing casualties by states and deaths per 100 thousand. But many posters asked if it could be broken down by counties. And in response to "101st Fighting Keyboardists" question, the Jawa Report polls the blogs. So in conclusion the left feels the right is gaining a free ride by not signing up more, but the left is free riding by not supporting the efforts of the military to make us safer for all US citizens. And hat tip to RedState.
This leads into my posit that Democrats are jealous little kids. First I found the But SHE got a 2nd Visit With Bush!?! which trackbacked to Widow Met With Bush Twice... that they pointed to this article. And what was so bad...It was the second time Dawn Rowe and her children had met the commander and chief. They first met him last December when he visited the Marine base at Twentynine Palms near her home in Yucca Valley, Calif.
Reid said it best in a telephone interview "You go where you feel like you're wanted." Do I go down the street with the mean dog or the dog that wags it tail? Do I help the customer more that waits in line and respects my opinion or to the customer that screams and shouts at me? It is only human nature to go toward things that make you feel better. Do I go to a dentist that hurts me or one that is gentle to me and treats me in the upmost respect?
Lastly, I want to go back to the scenario that Michael Moore sets up for a straw man argument in implying the people for war should enlist their children. But you will say he just wants them to talk to their children that this is a career choice and to discuss these possibilities with their children. Now let us say the President and members of congress follows this advice. What would we now expect? The President to come out and say why his daughters said no. Since the left has been talking about privacy recently (John Roberts) does this not fall into this realm? Would we expect private matters to be discussed openly and thus create an expose of what the most private of conversations are talked about inside the family.
I never wanted to know what Hillary said to her husband. It was not my business. Now some will argue that the Bush twins are open to the public scrutiny since they campaigned for their father. But only on issues dealing with what they do in public or relavent to the public domaine. For example, here and here and (I am sorry but this is funny?) here.