San Francisco, shame on you.

[Adjuster]

Alright, here it is:

Predictably, the voters of SanFrancisco passed a law that does not allow the military to recruit in any schools in the city. (High school, or universities.)

So, the military has been told to leave, and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

The Liberal pundits love it. I see this spreading in other bastions of the far(t) left.

Here is the problem.
If you don't participate, how can you expect to be protected by that same military?
If you don't participate, why should the rest of the country spend money on your safety? (Or state.)
If you say "No way" I say that's fine, it's your choice, but I hope when the dam breaks, an earthquake happens, or some towel head Terrorist blows up your city, I say "No way" is my money or time going to help you out of your problems.

They say the law will protect their children from going to Iraq. They say we should get out of Iraq, and come home. This is the wrong way to voice their opinion.

You don't bite the hand that feeds you, and I hope the Bay Area learns quickly that you don't also bite the hand that defends your freedoms. If I was the military, I'd put everyone within a 500 mile range of San Francisco on orders they are NOT to spend one penny in that area. No travel there. Cancel any and all orders from any goods or services from that area. Find other sources of anything being bought from there. Close the gates, and send all the civilians home with pink slips who work on the local bases. Your FIRED would be the order of the day. No troops would be allowed out on leave in the city. I also think they should start the process of closing down every base in the bay area right now. Don't give the land to the local government, just close down the bases, weld the gates shut, and let the locals really know how you feel about this law. IF we need the bases later, they still have them, but no local money should be spent untill this law is repealled.

Even better? RE INSTATE THE DRAFT, but only do it in SanFrancisco. Yippie, your a Hippie, now your a grunt, so get to it soldier, and get you ass over to Iraq doubletime!!

I have to say, I'm ashamed to even say I've lived in that area before. It's been a few decades, but I don't think I'll ever go back now. They don't get my tourist dollars. Ever.

What do you guys think?

 

[SupraMario]

I think they are doing this all over the USA soon, I think its not too smart, it prolly will have more dropouts. lot of people go to the military for that reason they see it as a good stable way to continue, and in all fairness it is. only thing that i think they didnt like was the military having all the info on students, so they could send you mail, but whats the harm in that, least its not a damn CC company, i get called all the damn time about CCs and it pisses me off, id rather have some guy from the military that i can understand call me or send me mail.
so my $0.02 its bullshit them kicking the military out.

 

[SnowMongoose]

I think thats their call.
Young people these days get more than enough exposure to recruiting without including what we get at school
<Im 22, college student, for the record>

The vast majority of recruiting efforts take place outside of schools, and I would assume that their results are simliar... most people are not nabbed from schools.
so, no huge loss for the military.

thats aboot it for now.

 

[aye mate]

Thats stupid. No offense to any CA people here but I'm tired of CA and all their liberal BS. They can break off the continent and either sink into the sea or declare war on the US and have blow them out of the water. I can't believe that SanFran can be so nearsighted. This is just like Adjuster said, they are biting the hand that protects them. IMO it kind of hints of communism a little bit. In the end whose choice is it to join the military?

 

[lagged]

there are different people with different values spread across the entire country. they have the right to vote for whatever they want, and they did just that. they exercised their rights. good for them. whether i think its a good idea or not? im not sure.

 

[kwnate]

The enemy within... Liberals:cry:

 

[Dirgle]

It's a government institution and the government got kicked out. :thumbdown

 

[modnar]

I'd just like to point out that most people in the bay area think that San Francisco is full of a bunch of idiots. The thoughts and sentiments of this town don't really leave the city limits. IMO, if you dont want your kids to join the military, teach them your values and how to ignore recruiters. If you dont want a gun to defend yourself, don't buy one; But don't make your neighbor defenseless as well.


modnar

 

[csr ma71]

San Francisco is the most stuck up town in California. That and Berkeley. They're both too good to hang out with drug dealers but want to party with the drug dealers.

 

[cwapface]

Predictably, the voters of SanFrancisco passed a law that does not allow the military to recruit in any schools in the city. (High school, or universities.)

!=

So, the military has been told to leave, and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

Although if it did then your argument would be a lot stronger

 

[lagged]

my 2cents is this, why do we need recruiters in the schools?

if someone wants to join the service then they will go to a local office and sign up there. why do they have to come and try to brainwash us while we are trying to get an education and land a job in some field? joining the military would only prolong and possible be a detriment to that process.

 

[GrimJack]

Speaking from the outside... it looks like a system that is trying to protect the educated class. I'm not entirely sure what the average level of education is for people who enlist in the USA, but maybe someone has decided that getting the uneducated class killed isn't a bad thing? Sounds harsh to me.

On the other hand, does this really affect the recruiters? How many college / university kids sign up in the first place? If they weren't having much success there in the first place, then it's just like telling your 7 year old daughter that she can't have any boiled spinach - pointless.

 

[Greg55_99]

Hi Adjuster,
Before you get bent out of shape, let's look at the actual proposition as it appeared on the ballot:

"PROPOSITION I

Shall it be City policy to oppose military recruiting in public schools and consider funding scholarships for education and training that could provide an alternative to military service?

Digest

by the Ballot Simplification Committee

THE WAY IT IS NOW: The San Francisco Unified School District operates the City's public schools. The District receives federal money to pay part of its operating costs. By accepting federal money, the District must permit U.S. military recruiters access to its schools. Colleges and universities that receive federal funds are subject to similar requirements.

THE PROPOSAL: Proposition I is a declaration of policy that the people of San Francisco oppose the federal government's use of public schools to recruit students for service in the military.

Proposition I is also a declaration that San Francisco should consider funding scholarships for higher education and job training that could provide an alternative to military service.

A “YES” VOTE MEANS: If you vote “yes,” you want it to be City policy to oppose military recruiters’ access to public schools and to consider funding scholarships for education and training that could provide an alternative to military service.

A “NO” VOTE MEANS: If you vote “no,” you do not want this to be City policy."

Yes, the propostion did pass by a majority of San Francisco voters. This is democracy in action. HOWEVER, the propositon is totally symbolic. It does exactly NOTHING. No laws have changed. And... it was only for Public Schools. Universities were not in this at all.

"Groups against recruiters

LARGELY SYMBOLIC PROP. I OPPOSES MILITARY OFFICIALS' PRESENCE AT CITY SCHOOLS

By Dana Hull

Mercury News


A coalition of San Francisco peace and social justice groups is rallying behind efforts to pass Proposition I, a largely symbolic measure stating that the people of San Francisco oppose the presence of U.S. military recruiters in the city's schools.

If city voters pass the non-binding resolution Tuesday, it is believed it would be the first of its kind in the country.

But in practical terms, it would not end the ability of military recruiters to spend time on high school and college campuses. Because the San Francisco Unified School District accepts federal funds, the district must provide military recruiters the same access to high school students as colleges or prospective employers.

Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke, a Pentagon spokeswoman, confirmed that the resolution would not stop the military from recruiting in the city. She declined to comment further.

Supporters view Proposition I as the first step in their protracted effort to get recruiters from the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines off of San Francisco campuses. Large counter-recruiting protests -- particularly at San Francisco State -- have become common in recent months.

``We see this as a starting point,'' said Bob Matthews, a spokesman for College Not Combat, the coalition behind Proposition I. ``It gives activists the moral weight of the city, to say that the people of San Francisco don't want military recruiting in the schools.''

A variety of anti-war groups, including Code Pink, the American Friends Service Committee and the Campus Antiwar Network make up the College Not Combat coalition. United Educators of San Francisco -- the union that represents the city's 6,000 teachers -- has also endorsed Proposition I.

A spokesman for the San Francisco Unified School District could not be reached for comment.

But other city residents oppose Proposition I.

``I'm hoping it doesn't pass,'' said Howard Epstein of the San Francisco Republican Party, who said that military service is a good opportunity for some young people. ``Reasonable people can disagree about the war in Iraq, but military recruiting is something else.

``None of the students have to talk to military recruiters,'' Epstein said. ``If a recruiter approaches a kid or sets up a table, all they have to say is `I don't want to talk to you' and walk away.''

As the war in Iraq continues for a third year and more than 2,000 American soldiers have died, military recruiting has become a growing issue for parents, principals and school boards across the country.

In 2004, more than 16,000 people were recruited to serve in the military from California, according to data released this week by the National Priorities Project. County-level recruitment rates were highest in rural counties like Modoc, Shasta, Inyo and Yuba. San Francisco was among the lowest, with 197 people joining the armed forces in 2004.

Much of the recruiting controversy centers on how the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines gain access to students. Under the No Child Left Behind Act approved by Congress in 2001, school districts are required to provide the Pentagon with students' names, addresses and phone numbers so students may be contacted and recruited for military service.

Recruiting practices vary widely from school to school. At some Bay Area high schools, recruiters can walk around campus or into the cafeteria whenever they want. Other principals are far more strict, requiring recruiters to make appointments or limit visits to once a month.

San Francisco Unified had banned military recruiters from its high schools for a decade, but had to abandon the ban after the No Child Left Behind law was passed."-----------------------------------------------------------------

My own opinon: If they have a vote to ban recruiters access, OK with me. The voice of the people have spoken.

Greg

 

[lagged]

its nice to see some facts. thanks!

heres something that will probably insult many:

i personally believe that the majority of t his country is made up of small minded and easily manipulated people. many of you, will agree. ironically, out of the many that will agree with that statement, a number of those people will be the easily manipulated people that i am reffering too.

IMO! MOST people who align themselves with either the "left" or "right" side of the political spectrum, fall into this catagory. those of you who jumped on the republican oriented position that opposed the apparent removal of recruiters from the schools, and labeled the VOTERS who made this decision (symbolically?) liberals, well im sorry to say that you people seem very easily swayed, and well, normally refuse to seriously analyze the situation.

greg55_99 put it best i believe: "My own opinon: If they have a vote to ban recruiters access, OK with me. The voice of the people have spoken."

its the system working as intended.

 

[cwapface]

^^^ no no no, it's the liberals. definitely the liberals :icon_razz

 

[modnar]

I don't really blame the people of San Fransico for this one. IMO, the military has left the people of northern California high and dry recently. name one military base in Northern California. The only one I can think of Travis airforce base. They're all either closed or in the process of closing. As far as large cities go, San Francisco is the furthest away from full military protection. Do the people of San Fransico have the right to vote the recruiters out? Yes!! But if recruiters are kept out then they should lose they're federal funding. And I personally think that funding should go to the military.

Do I agree with the decision? No!! I think the military recruiters should have the same access as college recruiters. I'm curious to see what happens. California (and San Francisco specifically) seem to like to make resolutions that make objections to laws, yet they are the first people to claim freedoms that they have been given.


modnar

 

[Greg55_99]

Hi Modnar,
Please let me point something out. Let's take this quote from the article I posted:

"Much of the recruiting controversy centers on how the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines gain access to students. Under the No Child Left Behind Act approved by Congress in 2001, school districts are required to provide the Pentagon with students' names, addresses and phone numbers so students may be contacted and recruited for military service."

Umm.... when a male US citizen turns 18, he is required by Federal Law to register for the Selective Service. That means the government ALREADY has your name and address. Let's face it... if they want to get to you... they know how to as it is! :biglaugh:

Greg

 

[modnar]

Umm.... when a male US citizen turns 18, he is required by Federal Law to register for the Selective Service. That means the government ALREADY has your name and address. Let's face it... if they want to get to you... they know how to as it is! :biglaugh:

Greg

And they do mail you stuff. My parents are still getting info from the military and I was turned down for service (bad knee). I see recruiting as a form of advertising. I think the military should be allowed to advertise their oppertunities just as much as a college can. It is another path of life. The military has its ups and downs. College has it's ups and downs. Each individual deserves to have each oppertunity laid out to them equally.

The fact of them already having your info does them no good until they're gonna force you to join.


modnar

 

[Furball]

Thats stupid. No offense to any CA people here but I'm tired of CA and all their liberal BS. They can break off the continent and either sink into the sea or declare war on the US and have blow them out of the water. I can't believe that SanFran can be so nearsighted. This is just like Adjuster said, they are biting the hand that protects them. IMO it kind of hints of communism a little bit. In the end whose choice is it to join the military?

Dude, I'm with you, and I live in California. WAY to many freakin laws. I love the beaches here and the weather is nice, but everything else is pretty lame. We have the strictest smog laws (not so hot for modding the Supra), our gun laws are rather tight (I personally like guns, especially the AR-10, but there is no way I am going to be able to get one while in CA), there are a lot of really fake and stupid people here, so many people are sue happy that restrictions are everywhere so everything is idiot proof...etc...man I want to leave CA.

 

[Greg55_99]

Dude, I'm with you, and I live in California. WAY to many freakin laws. I love the beaches here and the weather is nice, but everything else is pretty lame. We have the strictest smog laws (not so hot for modding the Supra), our gun laws are rather tight (I personally like guns, especially the AR-10, but there is no way I am going to be able to get one while in CA), there are a lot of really fake and stupid people here, so many people are sue happy that restrictions are everywhere so everything is idiot proof...etc...man I want to leave CA.

Son, you want to get away from restrictions, shoot guns and get out of California? You need to see a RECRUITER!!!!! :biglaugh:

Greg