This is seriously creepy.

A memo sent to MTV's Rock the Vote by Ed Gillespie, chairman of the Republican National Committee (emphasis added):

It has been brought to the attention of the Republican National Committee - and was confirmed in the Los Angeles Times yesterday - that your organization is sponsoring and promoting a false and misleading Internet campaign designed to scare America's youth into believing that they may be drafted to serve in the military.

Int he Times article your Political Director said, "I don't see why candidates get to talk about war all day long and we can't talk about a draft." Yet, as you must be aware, this urban myth regarding a draft has been thoroughly debunked by no less than the President of the United States, who explicitly stated, "We don't need the draft. Look, the all-volunteer Army is working...," as well as the Vice President, who explained, "And the notion that somebody's peddling out there that there is a secret plan to reinstitute the draft, hogwash, not true." Additionally, the Secretary of Defense, "heatedly, denied yesterday that the military plans to bring back the draft and boost reserves and National Guard callups after the November election.'That is aboslute nonsense,' Rumsfeld told the Senate Armed Services Committee. 'It's absolutely false that anyone in this administration is considering reinstituting the draft."

In light of the above statements, the only conclusion to be drawn is that your Rock the Vote "Draft Your Friends" campaign is being conducting [sic] with malicious intent and a reckless disregard for the truth. As a "non-partisan" organization that enjoys the benefits of being formed under §501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, you have an obligation to immediately cease and desist from promoting or conducting your "Draft" campaign.

The Republican National Committee shares the goal of your organization to encourage voter registration and "empower young people to change the world." ...We've found younger votes care about the same issues that older Americans care about; winning the War on Terror, creating jobs, improving our public schools, making health care more affordable, etc.

It is unfortunate that you feel the need to engage in a misinformation campaign regarding an alleged draft to energize young voters. This is the sort of malicious political deception that is likely to increase voter cynicism and in fact decrease the youth vote, as well as raising serious legal issues regarding the political motivations of your efforts.

It's hard to find a way to comment on this letter without sounding... uh... "shrill." I'd like to think that it's just universally obvious to Americans why we don't think it's kosher for politicians to intimidate private organizations and accuse them of near treason for merely discussing issues. I find it particularly galling that the memo's logic rests upon the "thorough debunk[ing]" of our President - as if skepticism towards Bush should be an actionable offense.

But hey, I strive to be fair. So, let's go visit Rock the Vote and see what they're saying that's so "malicious":

A NEW MILITARY DRAFT?

It's on everyone's lips. And it directly affects YOU.

There's no question about it: the United States military is being stretched thin. Our Armed Forces are not only on active duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also in some areas of the former Soviet Union, South Korea and Europe.

At a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week about post-occupation Iraq, Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) thrust the issue of reinstituting a military draft right into the public debate. "There's not an American ... that doesn't understand what we are engaged in today and what the prospects are for the future. Why shouldn't we ask all of our citizens to bear some responsibility and pay some price?" The Senator went further and argued that restoring compulsory military service would force "our citizens to understand the intensity and depth of challenges we face."

The Nebraska Republican added, "those who are serving today and dying today are the middle class and lower middle class." The draft, he argues, would spread the responsibility of military service in Iraq equally among all Americans.

Senator Hagel's remarks come on the heels of statements by both the U.S. General in charge of American forces in Iraq, General John Abizaid, as well as Senator John McCain (R-AZ), who are insisting that the United States needs more soldiers to help with the situation in Iraq.

These leaders are not the only ones talking about the looming personnel crisis in our military. Options that don't include a draft have also been presented by other members of Congress, including a proposal by Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) to move forces that are currently stationed in Europe to Iraq.

The push to reinstate the draft is not a one party issue. It has support from both Republicans and Democrats alike. Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY), a prominent African American leader, has been a long time supporter of reinstating a draft. "As a veteran, I strongly believe that fighting for our country must be fairly shared by all racial and economic groups. Nobody wants to go to war, but the burden of service cannot fall only on volunteers who, no matter how patriotic, are attracted to the military for financial reasons."

Why all of the sudden is there interest by politicians in the draft?

These recent statements stem from a growing belief that the U.S. government's original plan to scale back our military presence in Iraq by this summer will be stalled by the continuing difficulties there. Despite the President's promised June 30 th deadline to give back control of Iraq's government to the Iraqis under the United Nations, it's not clear under the current state of affairs when our military role there will begin to wind down even if we hand over power on time.

Why all of the sudden, should YOU be interested in the draft?

You are the generation of Americans that would be drafted into military duty, not the politicians talking about it. And so we ask you. Do you think the draft is FAIR? Our country was a different place in the 1970's, when the last draft occurred. We have new factors to consider in 2004:

• In 2004, women serve in the military--many have died in Iraq. Back in the day, women were not drafted. Should women be drafted today?
  
• In 2004, its "don't ask, don't tell." The military's policy towards homosexuals in the military prevents them from serving openly. Should the military discharge draftees who indicate their sexual orientation when asked to serve?
  
• In 2004, nearly two-thirds of high school graduates are enrolling in college. During the last draft, this number was lower and college students could defer the draft in order to finish school. With more draft eligible people attending college, should the United States continue that policy?

Some things to think about.

Now, let's leave aside questions of whether this is somehow less extreme than something to which Gillespie is responding to. After all, he's allegedly responding to an LA Times Article (at the time of this posting, the LA Times website was down) in which the offensive comment was, to quote Gillespie "I don't see why candidates get to talk about war all day long and we can't talk about a draft."

His response? You can't talk about the draft, because the President says it won't happen. Never mind that the campaign is about voter registration... which last I checked had the potential to impact more races than just the President's... and despite the very real record of public debate by elected officials on the merits of the draft, including even a floor vote on the issue.

What Gillespie seems to be saying is, "don't talk about this issue, because young people don't care about it, and the President rules it out. And you may face legal consequences if you continue to discuss it."

What I don't hear Gillespie saying, which would seem to give him a point I could at least respect is - "your campaign is misrepresenting the President's position and creating a false impression that he supports instituting a draft." If that were the case, I could see how Gillespie's concern and threat were warranted. But he's simply saying don't talk about this. It could hurt the President.

I find that despicable.