This entry is about a group called the Project for the New American Century, whose members include Dick Cheney, Vice President of the United States, former CEO of Halliburton;Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense; Elliot Abrams, National Security Council; John Bolton, Undersecretary for Arms Control and International Security; I. Lewis Libby, Cheney's top National Security assistant. For those who have missed this important group and the story behind them, this essay will fill in the gaps.

The strength and influence of this group, therefore, makes the letter they released on January 28 all the more disturbing. It is titled 'Letter to Congress on Increasing U.S. Ground Forces,' and basically calls for a draft without using the word:

"The United States military is too small for the responsibilities we are asking it to assume. Those responsibilities are real and important. They are not going away. The United States will not and should not become less engaged in the world in the years to come. But our national security, global peace and stability, and the defense and promotion of freedom in the post-9/11 world require a larger military force than we have today. The administration has unfortunately resisted increasing our ground forces to the size needed to meet today's (and tomorrow's) missions and challenges.

So we write to ask you and your colleagues in the legislative branch to take the steps necessary to increase substantially the size of the active duty Army and Marine Corps. While estimates vary about just how large an increase is required, and Congress will make its own determination as to size and structure, it is our judgment that we should aim for an increase in the active duty Army and Marine Corps, together, of at least 25,000 troops each year over the next several years.

The men and women of our military have performed magnificently over the last few years. We are more proud of them than we can say. But many of them would be the first to say that the armed forces are too small. And we would say that surely we should be doing more to honor the contract between America and those who serve her in war. Reserves were meant to be reserves, not regulars. Our regulars and reserves are not only proving themselves as warriors, but as humanitarians and builders of emerging democracies. Our armed forces, active and reserve, are once again proving their value to the nation. We can honor their sacrifices by giving them the manpower and the materiel they need.

Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution places the power and the duty to raise and support the military forces of the United States in the hands of the Congress. That is why we, the undersigned, a bipartisan group with diverse policy views, have come together to call upon you to act. You will be serving your country well if you insist on providing the military manpower we need to meet America's obligations, and to help ensure success in carrying out our foreign policy objectives in a dangerous, but also hopeful, world."

Disturbing.

PNAC has gotten everything it has wanted in the last three years. Parents of draft-age children should fear this new call.

This is a long one but I saw it and thought I'd pass it along as an example of what the religious right is doing in this country.

PURITAN PAST, PURITAN FUTURE?
Originally published in What We Now Know
http://server.publishers-mgmt.com/wwnk/index.php?ppref=crww , a free
weekly e-letter by Casey Research, LLC. Used by permission.
 
 If 1968 is commonly known as the year of the sexual revolution, the wee hours of the 21st century may enter American annals as the time of Dour Power and the Puritan take-over, when the clock of liberty and scientific progress was wound back to the Stone Age.
 
 Consider, for example, the case of Julee Lacey, a North Richland Hills, TX resident who filed a complaint with the Texas Board of Pharmacy. The reason: A CVS pharmacist had refused to fill Lacey's prescription for birth-control pills because of her religious convictions.
 
 Lacey's case is no exception. In more and more states, fundamentalist Christian pharmacists deny women contraceptives that have been prescribed by their doctors, in particular the so-called "morning-after pills". Increasingly, the law protects them in doing so: Arkansas, Mississippi and North Dakota explicitly protect health care providers who decline to perform acts that disagree with their beliefs and values; and another ten states-Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin-are contemplating similar bills.
 
 By law, pharmacists who say no to 'the pill' are required to refer the customer to another druggist in town; yet there have been several incidents where the pharmacist not only failed to provide a referral but also refused to hand the prescription back to the customer, as happened in Madison, WI. Another controversial case in Denton, TX reportedly involved a rape victim whose request for the morning-after pill was denied.
 
 "We have always understood that the battles about abortion were just the tip of a larger iceberg, and that it's really birth control that they're after also," said Gloria Feldt, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, in an interview with USA Today. "The explosion in the number of legislative initiatives and the number of individuals who are just saying, 'We're not going to fill that prescription for you because we don't believe in it' is astonishing."
 
 And contraceptives are not the only target. A 2001 article on Alternet.org reports that in seven states it is harder to buy an "adult toy" than a gun. According to the article, if an adult wants to purchase an intimate toy in Texas she must first sign a release form that says she understands that the item is strictly for "educational and/or scientific purposes."
 
 In 1998, Alabama passed an obscenity law that forbids the sale of "any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs". Selling even so much as a ribbed condom can mean fines up to $10,000 and up to a year hard labor. In 1999, a U.S. District Judge repealed the law as unconstitutional, but his decision was overturned a year later in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
 
 Throw into the mix the abstinence-only education in American schools that has been heavily funded with $900 million in our tax dollars in the last five years. Despite all the purported outrage over out-of-control deficits, for 2005 the program's budget clocks in at a whopping $170 million.
 
 Yet there is reason to believe that 'abstinence only' has led to more, not fewer unwanted teen pregnancies. For instance, a recent study from Columbia University found that the programs don't prevent kids from having sex (88% still do), but they do prevent them from using contraception. In contrast, the teen pregnancy rate in California, a state that stubbornly refuses to accept federal funding for abstinence-only programs, has dropped by 40% over the last ten years. Experts say that a well-balanced sex education that includes advice on abstinence as well as on the use of contraceptives has been proven to be the most effective.
 
 Aside from the fact that the chastity belt approach doesn't work, a new study, dubbed the "Waxman Report" found that abstinence-only programs actively promote and spread junk science, myths about sexuality and STDs. Some of the most blatant examples of, as the report deemed it, "false, misleading, or distorted information":
Women who have an abortion are "more prone to suicide" and up to 10% of them become sterile.
 
50% of the gay male teenagers in the U.S. are HIV-positive.
 
AIDS can be spread through sweat and tears.
 
Touching a person's genitals can result in pregnancy.
 
During heterosexual intercourse, condoms fail to prevent HIV transmission in 31% of the cases.
 
 Asked about the findings of the Waxman report on CNN's "Crossfire", Genevieve Wood, VP of communications for the conservative Family Research Council, refused five times the host's request to openly admit that masturbation wouldn't lead to pregnancy.
 
 According to a Washington Post review on the Waxman Report, 11 out of 13 abstinence-only curricula used in 25 states "contain unproven claims, subjective conclusions or outright falsehoods." Several million children between 9 and 18 years of age have already participated in those programs since they began in 1999.
 
 The so-called "liberal" media presents no help, either. Gagged by an FCC that threatens to impose million dollar fines for any trespassing of decency regulations, we wouldn't be surprised if intimidated TV stations soon ordered their employees to spell 'dirty words' on air.
 
 A December 12 article in the New York Times states that New York's WNET refused to run TV spots for the movie "Kinsey", a biography of America's famous sex researcher. North Carolina's WUNC-FM prohibited an international women's right organization from using the term "reproductive rights" on air. Five TV channels in the L.A. area refused to "broadcast a public service spot created by Los Angeles county's own public health agency to counteract a rising tide of syphilis." And the big three, CBS, NBC and ABC, all wanted nothing to do with the United Church of Christ's commercials welcoming gay couples.
 
 We firmly believe in the constitutional Freedom of Religion-but that includes that no one has the right to shove their personal beliefs, tastes and distastes down our throat. And it certainly includes not to use our tax money to teach our children falsehoods in the name of piety. For those of you who disagree (or agree), feel free to drop us a note at feedback@caseyresearch.com.

I'll make it easy for you, Jerry, I wasn't born in Wyoming I was born and raised in Illinois, I used to come here for summer vacations. My mother was born in Deitz and died in Sheridan. Some member of my FAMILY has been here in Sheridan County continuously since 1898. My father was a good union man, IBEW, and because Jesus said “Love your neighbor as yourself” I can believe in “Socialist ideas”. You have a lot in common with a friend of mine named Joe.

Let me intorduce you to Joe Conservative:

Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of water, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to ensure their safety and that they work as advertised.

All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now Joe gets it too.

He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for the laws to stop industries from polluting our air.

He walks on the government-provided sidewalk to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union.

If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It is noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FDIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime. Joe also forgets that his in addition to his federally subsidized student loans, he attended a state funded university.

Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards to go along with the tax-payer funded roads.

He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans.

The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification..

He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.

Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved conservatives have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."

You say my liberal ideas “takes self responsibility, individualism and the freedom to make choices and chucks them right out the window.” I disagree, you (and everyone else reading this) have the freedom to choose to take advantage of the things that liberals have fought for . . . or not.

There was a time when Sheridan was a really nice place to live, but, since the arrival of the Religious Right, Sheridan has turned into an ugly place to live.  A place where “conserva­tive moral values” are shown by people telling Matthew Sheppard jokes in public restaurants and other people laughing at the joke.  A place where I'm told I can ride a train with a “special box car” (shades of Adolf Hitler) out of town because I believe that access to health care is a right of every man, woman, and child in this country and not a privilege for the monied few, and a living wage should be paid to everyone who has a job.

I am a proud liberal, progressive, democrat who won't apologize for what I believe.  I'm also a Christian who has read, and daily reads, the words of Christ and wonders: When did Christ become anti-feminist?
When did Christ become anti-gay?
When did Christ become pro-wealthy?
When did Christianity become supportive of capital punishment? Pro-war?
When did it become so negative towards other religious groups?

My family has been in Sheridan County continuously since 1898, we fought in WWII, Korea, and Viet Nam. and, a distant cousin has his name on the monument at the couthouse because he went down with his ship in WWII. 

My wife and I have tried to instill moral values into our daughter. Not the “moral values” of the Religious Right, hatred, racism and homophobia, but the moral values
of Christ, love, peace, compassion, kindness, and caring.  It is only when these values achieve dominance in Sheridan, will our little town once again become a nice place to live and our country regain its preeminence on the world stage.

It's Sept. 6th and my daughter has been in school for two weeks. She is a Senior in High School and that got me to thinking about the differences between when I was in High School and now. This entry is for all of the kids who will graduate next spring. In the 60's if you were 18 and about to graduate from High School there was a better than 50% chance, because of the draft, that within 6 months you would be in the Army after graduation, and that within 6 months of being inducted there was a better than 50% chance of going to Viet Nam and a 50% chance that you would be dead within 6 months of arriving. To summarize in 1968 when I graduated from High School the average 18 year old had a less than 50% chance of being alive a year and a half later. So we in the 60's at the tender age of 18 HAD to take an interest in the politics of the time, our lives literally depended on it. We worked to convince the Congress that if we were old enough at 18 to die for our country we should be able to vote, Congress listened and the voting age was lowered to 18. Since there is no draft in effect now when you graduate in the spring you won't have to worry about being sent off to fight and possibly die in a war predicated solely on lies and greed. That doesn't mean that politics doesn't affect you, it does. If you don't think so make a list of everything in your life that doesn't involve politics and share it with me. There is no draft now but we are in a war, just ask "W". I'm not talking about that little scrap in Iraq, although that's part of it. I'm talking about the never-ending war on terrorism that "W" announced after Sept. 11th. If that starts going bad enough, like Iraq then "W" might have to re-instate the draft and your little brother/sister might have to go off to fight and possibly die for our glorious leader. In 2000 100 Million Americans didn't go to the polls and vote. A large percentage of them were 18 - 34. The little shrub from Texas was illegally given the Presidency by the supreme court. Three years later the WTC is gone, 3000 innocent lives were snuffed out, the economy has tanked, a three TRILLION dollar budget SURPLUS has become a defecit, were are at war with the Muslim world, and the rich just keep getting richer because of tax cuts, the poor get poorer because the tax cuts don't benefit them, the elderly will see cuts in their Medicare, my generation will probably be the last to get social security, the administration wants to cut the amount that soldiers get for combat pay while sending more into combat, and they want to reduce their Veteran's Benefits when the get out of the army. Politics are important, if 100 million people had believed that in 2000 the U.S. wouldn't be in the position it's in now. I'm asking you all that are reading this, if you are 18 or over and you are not registered to vote to go to you local election office and register. When the primaries in your state come around exercise your right to vote. When the General Election comes around in November '04, even if your candidate isn't on the ballot, GO VOTE! You were given that right 216 years ago. It is your responsibility as a citizen of this country to vote every 4 years. If the administration keeps on the way they are you may not have that right much longer. Do it for the kids in grade school who might have to fight and die for their country. Give them a Commander-in-Chief worth fighting and dying for. Peace, sooner than later The Old Hippy

I've been accused, both during Nam and now, of not supporting our troops because I was/am against the war. Believe me, I support the men and women that serve our country in uniform. I was one myself and I would gladly go back into uniform if it meant protecting my country from real danger. I took an oath when I enlisted to protect the U.S. from all enemies, foreign AND domestic. The biggest threat I see today to this country is not from Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden but from the court-appointed pylon in the Oval Office and his neocon handlers. "w" told lie after lie after lie to put our young men and women in harm's way to get Saddam Hussein. While back at the ranch, his neocon buddies work to cut veteran benefits, combat pay, and family separation allowances. He even had the gall to swagger out of a Navy jet on an aircraft carrier deck looking for all the world like Tom Cruise in "Top Gun", trying to be the real war hero his father was, but that his cowardice will never allow him to be. "w" couldn't even support his own National Guard unit in Texas, how can we trust him to support the whole friggin' military!

I know, I know, Bill Clinton wasn't in the military either but then he never invaded a country just because it was, as Asst. Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz has stated publicly, "setting on a sea of oil."

What a long strange trip is about my experiences as an old hippy in postmodern America. About me: I was born in the First week of the third month of the first quarter 1950 I came of age in the 60's, survived the disco 70's, the big hair 80's, and the dot.com 90's. I made it into not only a new century but a new millenium. I made it this far with a vision "planted in my head" by Jack, Bobby, and Martin that the world could be a better place. I had to do my time in Vietnam to realize that the world was in need of repair and that war wasn't at all what John Wayne made it look like in the movies. Now I find myself once again in opposition to a war that like Nam was predicated on lies. What goes around comes around.