Sunday, October 09, 2005

Non-partisan Nonsense from California (of course)

To Chris Pagenkopf
Third-year Political Science major
University of California at Santa Barbara

While Operation Yellow Elephant certainly appreciates your support of our troops, under our Constitution, our military recruiting crisis simply isn't "completely nonpartisan." Our Army just missed its annual recruiting quota for the first time since 1999, with (or, I should say, without) the largest shortfall since 1979.

The best way for UCSB students to support our troops is to volunteer to serve in our military. As long as you are under 39, healthy and heterosexual, Our Country Needs You! And since the American people elected one party to govern all of us, our governing party's current and future leaders have a special responsibility to set a worthy example for everyone.

Once the College Republicans and the Young Republicans sign up in noticeable numbers, other Americans will follow. If they don't, and won't, why should anyone else?


At 10 October, 2005 05:28, Blogger Karl said...

This is from Chris Pagenkopf himself-

Hey Karl.

You stated that our "military recruiting crisis simply isn't 'completely nonpartisan.' Our Army just missed its annual recruiting quota for the first time since 1999, with (or, I should say, without) the largest shortfall since 1979."

I said nothing in the article about our military recruiting crisis being nonpartisan, I said that supporting the troops is.

Are zou so desperate to criticize me that you needed to take my quotes out of context?

You seem pretty desperate to throw negativity at me since you are indeed doing this.

You suggested that a better way for UCSB to support our troops would have been for us to enlist.

If you have any suggestions on how I can convince 19,000 UCSB students to join the U.S. military, please let me know.

You apparently believe this is a possibility and that I should have been able to pull off such a simple task rather than my worthless effort to show a guy in Iraq (and his comrades) that his school appreciates his service with the banner, that included many personal notes to 2LT Feitt from people who knew him.

All of this, mind you, is in an atmosphere at UCSB where the Academic Senate has a pending proposal with high support from the faculty to kick recruiters and the Army ROTC unit off campus.

Don't you think that THIS might hurt recruiting?

Maybe you should do your homework about the climate regarding military recruiting at my school before making such comments.

All of the military veterans and ROTC guya (and there are several that have served in Iraq at my school) that I talked to were very appreciative.

And with regards to your nonsensical statement that our military recruiting crisis isn't nonpartisan, what are you talking about?

From what I have seen at my school, conservative students make up the majority of those planning a military career.

And the majority (perhaps the entirety) of those supporting kicking ROTC and military recruiting off campus have been liberal.

Judging from your website, however, this is not likely to be the conclusion that you would be referring to with your comment about recruiting partisanship.

The Vice Chair of College Republicans at my school is in Army ROTC.

There are several members of College Republicans at my school planning to join the military, and I can be certain that they will because several are in Army ROTC.

You need to recognize that many College Republicans do plan on joining the military, and that you are doing them a disservice.

With regards to your comments about UCSB students joining the military and me on a personal level, I am planning to join the Navy after college.

You see, to become an officer, and get to do certain jobs like "fighter pilot," you have to go to college.

So quit ragging on kids for going to college, many are planning to join after their education.

Also, my Dad has served in the U.S. Navy for 25 years and I am very proud of his service.

Your site is very unimpressive and built upon partisanship, division and unrealistic expectations.

Quit whining.

You made the decision to join the military and take orders from the chain of command right up to the President of the United States.

It's your job, it was your choice.

I still find it hard to believe that you were able to criticize my event . . . oh I guess you had to take one of my quotes out of context to do it.

No objections to "They need to know that we support them even if we don't support the current administration."???


Chris Pagenkopf

At 10 October, 2005 10:01, Blogger Karl said...


Thanks for your e-mail, and sorry for the typos above. If you're going to become a fighter pilot in the U.S. Navy, pal, you'd better thicken your skin. A lot.

I'm certain that 2LT Feitt and his comrades will appreciate your banner, as it is indeed important to our troops to know that the American people are behind them, regardless of their political opinions of the current Administration. Care packages are also most welcome, by the way, especially homemade cookies or brownies, which they pass around. There's nothing partisan about that.

But if you think that a banner and perhaps a care package - alone - really "support our troops," well, I'm afraid you are gravely mistaken.

The Army missing its annual recruiting quota is a symptom of a serious national leadership crisis: the loss of confidence of American people that we are going to succeed in Iraq. That's what the last two paragraphs of my post mean.

So, in answer to your question, to help recruit more troops, start with the leaders: our governing party's presence on the UCSB campus. After all, leaders are supposed to lead!

Just ask them if they are eligible to serve (healthy heterosexuals under 39) and whether they have considered volunteering to enlist. Then check off their responses on Operation Yellow Elephant Bingo. [Your e-mail covered up to eight squares, but not in one line.]

While a significant proportion of servicemembers have made individual personal choices to prefer one major party (our governing party) rather than the other, the opposite is not true. There are many prominent members of our governing party who are eligible to serve but have not considered it. Why not?

The military will need new college graduates in the next few years; thus, those in ROTC now (with or without scholarships) have already begun to serve. I'm talking about those "planning to join" who have not acted upon their intentions. Now is the time.

Re the movement to kick military recruiters and ROTC off campus, that's as narrow-minded as the excuses in OYE Bingo. But please consider the following:

Military recruiters wouldn't have to be so assertive if the College Republicans and Young Republicans were lining up to enlist at the off-campus recruiting station. [See the Unconfirmed Sources item e-mailed separately] As leaders of our governing party, they would likely inspire others to follow, if only to enhance their own political resumes.

So, although I do thank you for supporting the troops, you are the one who should quit whining. If you can't even take a blog posting as a point for discussion (rather than "desperate criticism" and "negativity"), then I'm quite worried about the future success of the U.S. Navy and its contribution to our national defense.

At 15 October, 2005 21:59, Blogger M1five said...

I actually had a neocon say his cousin was serving as a reply to why he wasn't in Iraq.

Any excuse to allow others to fight and die for your lifestyle.

At 11 September, 2006 14:43, Anonymous Karl is a douchebag said...

As if you know anything about what it takes to become a Navy fighter pilot, pal. Are you a Navy fighter pilot? Obviously not, you're just a worthless piece of shit Karl. The End.

At 09 November, 2006 02:04, Anonymous Chris Pagenkopf (not the republican guy) said...

Hey there Chris Pagenkopf, I googled your (my name) and this came up. I also go to a UC. Davis though. Weird.


Post a Comment

<< Home