Three hits for the week...
I noticed in the recent news that Yale University finally lost their case for banning military recruiters from campus *WHILE* requiring the Government to continue providing Federal funding to Yale (not sure if it was just trying to ban them from the Law School, or from the entire campus, on the claim that the military is engaged in illegal discrimination -- "Don't ask, don't tell"). Now, I think the courts made the right decision-- as they've said from the beginning, Yale does have the "right" to bar recruiters from campus (it's a "right" I don' t think they should have ever tried to use in the first place, but Yale is a private university and private property). What was at stake-- and is now once again decided-- is that Yale does NOT have an inherent right to Federal funding (grants, etc-- $300 million+ of Federal funds). Yes, if Yale had continued to stick to their 'guns', they would have lost all that money....
Of course, Yale, with such great integrity and commitment to principles that they are known for, knuckled under and agreed to accept military recruiters rather than lose the cash. Personally, I think the absence of Ivy League elites from the military verges on the criminally irresponsible, and they've fostered an anti-military climate for a long long time.... perhaps the Government should just cut off funding to Yale and Harvard and etc altogether anyway, and spend the money on supporting research and education at the public schools (none of which are fool enough to try and cut off military access).
On another academic bit-- the Hoover Research Institution at Stanford U. has appointed Donald Rumsfeld as a distinguished visiting fellow (apparently to assist in research and study of terrorism and anti-terrorism). Given Rummy's record, and his well known (lack of) integrity, I think he's got no business being involved in any academic institution. So much for any consideration of the Hoover Institution's integrity.
And.... MoveOn made an advertisement targeting General David Petraeus.... including the infamous play on words, "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" The cowards in Washington now are screaming and crying on both sides of the aisle because someone actually dared to question whether the General, in his reports to Congress and the American people, was being honest and truthful with us. Personally, I think he needs to be questioned, and with all due respect to the General *I* don't trust him and *I* dont believe much of what he's saying. I found it particularly interesting that many "republicans", the President included, now seek to portray the *JUSTIFIED* attack on General Petraeus's character as an attack on the military as a whole and on the honor, integrity, etc, of everyone in it.
Personally, *I* don't feel that way. An attack on a General who is possibly betraying the soldiers who have to follow him just as much as he's betraying the rest of the American people is NOT an attack on the troops in the line. In fact, questioning any commissioned officer, IMO, doesn't feel to me like an attack on the enlisted soldiers who bear the brunt of the actual risks, work, and danger in carrying out the orders and plans that commissioned officers hand down to us to accomplish. NOT questioning officers when someone really should be questioning them is a far greater disservice to the men and women in the ranks than this 'attack' is.
Of course, Yale, with such great integrity and commitment to principles that they are known for, knuckled under and agreed to accept military recruiters rather than lose the cash. Personally, I think the absence of Ivy League elites from the military verges on the criminally irresponsible, and they've fostered an anti-military climate for a long long time.... perhaps the Government should just cut off funding to Yale and Harvard and etc altogether anyway, and spend the money on supporting research and education at the public schools (none of which are fool enough to try and cut off military access).
On another academic bit-- the Hoover Research Institution at Stanford U. has appointed Donald Rumsfeld as a distinguished visiting fellow (apparently to assist in research and study of terrorism and anti-terrorism). Given Rummy's record, and his well known (lack of) integrity, I think he's got no business being involved in any academic institution. So much for any consideration of the Hoover Institution's integrity.
And.... MoveOn made an advertisement targeting General David Petraeus.... including the infamous play on words, "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" The cowards in Washington now are screaming and crying on both sides of the aisle because someone actually dared to question whether the General, in his reports to Congress and the American people, was being honest and truthful with us. Personally, I think he needs to be questioned, and with all due respect to the General *I* don't trust him and *I* dont believe much of what he's saying. I found it particularly interesting that many "republicans", the President included, now seek to portray the *JUSTIFIED* attack on General Petraeus's character as an attack on the military as a whole and on the honor, integrity, etc, of everyone in it.
Personally, *I* don't feel that way. An attack on a General who is possibly betraying the soldiers who have to follow him just as much as he's betraying the rest of the American people is NOT an attack on the troops in the line. In fact, questioning any commissioned officer, IMO, doesn't feel to me like an attack on the enlisted soldiers who bear the brunt of the actual risks, work, and danger in carrying out the orders and plans that commissioned officers hand down to us to accomplish. NOT questioning officers when someone really should be questioning them is a far greater disservice to the men and women in the ranks than this 'attack' is.