Military Times vs Rumsfeld

I was duly unimpressed to learn that the Military Times had published an editorial calling for the scalp of Donald Rumsfeld - but I see the issue has gotten some attention, mostly from those who would like to believe (or have you believe) that the Gannett publications aimed at the military are somehow actual military publications.

For the record, I've already responded here and here.

The DoD has responded here. And this is worth reading too.

Update: Heh, I think Tony Snow reads Instapundit.

Vote in Peace, Just Vote

Republicans are getting ready for some election battles...

The Republican National Committee is shipping out 150 lawyers on Monday to help hundreds of local lawyers in Florida, Michigan, Missouri, Tennessee and other states answering phones and working at polling stations policing against voter fraud.

Although 150 lawyers may sound like a lot, I expect they're going to learn how Custer felt at Little Big Horn:

On Saturday and Sunday, hundreds of the 7,000 lawyers who are working on the election for the Democratic National Committee will board planes for Arizona, Florida, Maryland, Missouri, Ohio and 13 other states.

And those Democrat Party lawyers will have allies:

The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the N.A.A.C.P. and the People for the American Way Foundation will jointly have 2,000 lawyers fanning out across 20 states.

I sincerely hope the 9,000 Democrat and 150 Republican lawyers don't block your way to the polls.

Wait, did I say 9,000? More, actually, because they'll just be reinforcing the locals...

Maryland:

“Unfortunately, the Maryland Democratic Party wants to have this election decided in the courts, with their 400 roving attorneys,” said Audra Miller, spokeswoman for the Republican Party.
<...>
This week, Democratic lawyers have been combing through a Republican manual for poll workers acquired by a Democratic operative that gives instructions on aggressively challenging voters’ credentials. Aside from looking for illegalities in the document, Democrats have been writing a manual to counter the Republican booklet, instructing their poll workers how to watch for overzealous Republican poll watchers.

Michigan Republicans:

Fifty of the party’s 200 volunteer lawyers will staff a phone bank at party headquarters in Lansing to take complaints before calling the teams of 10 to 15 lawyers to respond from one of 10 regional centers.

Michigan Democrats:

Mary Ellen Gurewitz, a lawyer in Detroit for the Michigan Democratic Party, which is dispatching 800 lawyers statewide, said she hoped to catch the problem in advance.

“Many more votes are lost from incompetent election administration than voter suppression,” Ms. Gurewitz said. “So we’re going to minority neighborhoods in Detroit, Lansing and Flint, because that’s where we know the Republican challengers will try to contest voters’ qualifications.”

And various city campaigners are scrambling too...

In St. Louis, a lawyer directing the Democrats’ legal efforts, Shonagh Clements, said she was prodding officials to obtain credentials for 300 lawyers, many of whom she plans to train on Sunday to work as poll challengers.

“We’re doing a lot of sprinting just to get through the weekend,” Ms. Clements said.

Whichever side you're on - don't let them frighten you away from the voting booth.

A Real "Back Door" Draft?

Nobody's talking about it this election year, but discussion of the draft issue has never been "off the table"...

Back about this time of year in '04 there was considerable talk about President Bush reviving the draft. In fact, much was made about House and Senate Bills designed to do just that. The argument was that a vote for President Bush would be a vote for a return to the draft.

Much of that talk faded when it was revealed that the "pending draft" legislation was actually separate Democrat-sponsored Bills.

In the Senate, Senator Ernest "Fritz" Hollings (D-SC) introduced Senate Bill S. 89 ("requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security") on 7 January, 2003.

Meanwhile, over in the House, Representative Charles B. ("Charlie") Rangel (D-NY) submitted H.R.163 ("requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security") . Rangel's Bill had 14 co-sponsors.

In an effort to kill the "Bush is bringing back the draft" talk from his opposition during election 2004, the Republican-controlled House brought the measure to a vote and destroyed it in October 2004.

But away from the election limelight, Rangel introduced H.R.2723 ("requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security") in May, 2005. It was ignored by the Republican-controlled House.

Undaunted, Rangel submitted H.R. 4752 ("requiring all persons in the United States, including women, between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security") in February 2006. It too appears fated to die, ignored, in committee.

But next year's version might be taken a bit more seriously. If you believe the pre-election polls, the Democrats are about to break the Republican control of the House and Senate. If so, Rangel is slated to chair the Ways and Means Committee, while Representative Isaac Newton "Ike" Skelton IV is tabbed for Armed Srvices and Representative John "Jack" Murtha might lead the Defense Appropriations panel (barring a successful run for House majority leader). In spite of much talk (see links), they won't be able to eliminate funding for the Iraq war (it would be characterized as 'not supporting the troops'), and will need to find another way to turn more Americans against the cause. Re-instituting the draft might just do the trick.

But draft talk is just silly, right? Surely no one in their right mind would advocate that...