Unpopular to whom? We keep hearing how unpopular the war is and yet, it seems, that even with a military that is all volunteer, five years into a two-front shooting war, we can still meet the recruiting goals for the service that is the pointy end of the spear.
The Army will meet its goal of recruiting 80,000 new active-duty soldiers this fiscal year...
The Army's apparent success in meeting the U.S. military's biggest recruiting mission marks a significant rebound from last year, when the Iraq war, low unemployment and a shortage of recruiters contributed to the service's failure to make its active-duty target for the first time since 1999.
And despite the implication, we have lower unemployment than we did last year. And there is no doubt that people volunteering in today's news climate know for a fact that it is likely they will see combat before their enlistment is completed.
Winning elections by litigation. Representative Bernie Sanders, who is looking to switch chambers this election cycle, is calling the lawyers in on his Senate opponent Republican Rich Tarrant. What's his beef?
In a letter sent to Vermont television stations, Washington lawyers for the Sanders campaign said that Tarrant's campaign failed to abide by an FCC rule that requires an image of Tarrant and an acknowledgement that he paid for and approved the ad appear at the conclusion of the ad.
"Tarrant's advertisement does not comply with this requirement," the letter said. As a result, the Tarrant campaign no longer qualifies for the cheaper ad rate given political candidates who abide by the FCC rules, the letter alleged.
Gee, what rule did Tarrant violate?
Tarrant's face and the disclaimer about his approving of the ad appear at the start of the commercial, rather than at the end.
Now you don't think that the real thing sticking in Rep Sander's craw is the fact that the Ad calls attention to Bernie's Congressional voting record, do you?
Well, at least Tarrant is not making ads focusing on the fact that Rep Sanders is the least influential member of congress as I have.
Rules of engagement It seems that a bunch of bad guys were at a funeral (stop me if you've heard this one) and they were all in a cluster. One shot from a Predator hovering overhead would have declined the terrorist population by a couple hundred give or take. The gun-sites were trained on the group. But we didn't pull the trigger.
"During the observation of the group over a significant period of time, it was determined that the group was located on the grounds of (the) cemetery and were likely conducting a funeral for Taliban insurgents killed in a coalition operation nearby earlier in the day," the statement said. "A decision was made not to strike this group of insurgents at that specific location and time."
Too bad to because it's an appropriate final resting place. My guess is a lawyer was involved.
Democrats for Pork When a vote came up in the House yesterday to reform the House rules with regards to earmarks, making them more transparent, most Democrats voted against more transparency while most Republicans voted for transparency. Among those voting to keep pork hidden from prying eyes were House Minority leader Pelosi and the usual suspects of the far Left: Conyers, Dingell, McDermott, Kucinich, Jackson-Lee, Rangel, Waxman, and Woolsey.
I don't understand how it is these "fighter's for the people" justify keeping the people in the dark with regards to how our money is spent? And why would they want to?
Maybe it's because in the culture of their ideology, they know best and us "little people" might be confused with too much information.
