OK, I Think I Can Explain One Female Blogger’s Lack Of Attention

Well, so much for throttling back, at least for the moment. Reading more seems to inspire posting. Feministe is complaining about the under-representation of women among top bloggers (she apparently doesn’t know Michele) and the first time I read her blog, on the first page, is an idiotic rant about the draft and she blames “Rethugnicans” without even bothering to research the issue. Of course she uses the worn out, and unsubstantiated, notion that America is an imperialist power. Red meat to the jackals.

I’m not one of the “top bloggers” either, but I can give you one reason why she isn’t: accuracy. HR 163, a bill to reintroduce the draft, is something that Charles Rangel (D-NY) has been bleating about since, well, ever since he introduced this bill and before in early 2003. I’ve seen him at least three times in the last two years pushing this idea. Why? He’s not concerned about OPTEMPO or anything like that. He’s bothered that our volunteer military contains too few rich people. Based on his reasoning it’s unfair for people to seize opportunities that the military provides – or simply choose it as a career – when people of means don’t have to make similar choices. His solution to this problem is to reinstate the draft.

I don’t agree with Rangel’s reasoning and doubt conscription is necessary unless we can’t recruit enough people. If anyone should be attacked it’s Rangel, not the “Rethugnicans”. She makes a passing mention of telling Kerry that he should oppose the draft but he said during the primaries (in a debate, no less) that he opposes the draft, so unless he’s waffling again it’s been ruled out. She’s being dishonest by using the possibility for a draft as a reason to rant against Bush. If you’re going to rant like that, at least do a bit of homework.

Via Dan via The Professor.

No comments yet.

Leave a Comment