Others have weighed in on Rep. Rangel's idiotic statements from many angles, but I think they missed one point. Rangel said:
But I want to make it abundantly clear, if there's anyone who believes that these youngsters want to fight, as the Pentagon and some generals have said, you can just forget about it. No young, bright individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits. And most all of them come from communities of very, very high unemployment.
If a young fellow has an option of having a decent career or joining the Army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq.
I'm going to set aside the insult that is to every soldier serving in Iraq ("If they had decent prospects, they wouldn't be in Iraq," etc) and look at this from another angle. Let me see if I get this straight... Accoding to you, Rep. Rangel:
1. Young + bright = not sucked in by bonuses and educational benefits
Therefore: young + bright = not enlistees in the army.
2. Members of communities with high unemployment = enlistees in the army
Therefore: members of communities with high employment = sucked in by bonuses and benefits
Did I get that right? Mr. Rangel, somehow I think the poor you claim to represent wouldn't like where this train of logic ends up. Because with the above in mind, I keep coming to the conlusion that:
Members of communities with high employment = not young and bright
Insulting the U.S. military? That's entirely understandable, being the fashion among thinkers like you. But surely you didn't mean to say that people struggling with unemployment/poverty are simply dumb...?
Well, maybe so. I mean, you were smart enough to escape your upbringing, dip your hand in the government till and ensconse yourself among the powerful elite. Maybe that explains your belief that the rest of us are so in need of your wisdom and guidance...
Nobody signs up with the idea of fighting when and where his/her country calls (which these days happens to be Iraq)? You don't have a clue.
Clarification: Just so there's no confusion, I don't think poor/unemployed = not bright. I'm just (rather feebly) attempting to point out the idiocy of Rangel's statements. Frankly, I don't think he really believes what he's saying; he just thinks it's politically expedient for purposes of class warfare--which just demonstrates his idiocy all the more.]
Update: Of course, this tired canard from Rep. Rangel is nothing new.
