Rep. Rangel Will Seek to Reinstate Draft

From WashPost:

WASHINGTON -- Americans would have to sign up for a new military draft after turning 18 if the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee has his way.

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., said Sunday he sees his idea as a way to deter politicians from launching wars and to bolster U.S. troop levels insufficient to cover potential future action in Iran, North Korea and Iraq.

"There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way," Rangel said.

Rangel is obviously floating this idea for purely political advantage.  I've gone back and forth on the concept of national servcie, and favored it for a long time.  But the ultimate argument was delivered by my friend Andrew Stuttaford, when he wrote: (paraphrasing here)

"Governments do not own the lives of their citizens."

Think about that for a moment.....I think it is the "killer argument" concerning this topic.

Today is the anniversary of Lincoln's delivery of the Gettysburg Address:

Four score and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Newt on Wallace show:  "I'd be happy to come back here next September and talk about that."

Seems Newt knows he has downsides...mainly in his personal life (go here to read about my dinner with average Republican voters and why this could be an issue: Weberlog dinner with R voters)...Newt obviously wants to see how the field is shaping up before he decides to jump in the race.

Chris Wallace is doing his best to permanently sink John Kerry's shot at running for President again.  Entire segment is on the joke.  Keery is coming off as just not that a bright a guy. 

When asked how badly the joke had damaged his hopes to be President, Kerry says "That's up for the voters to decide."  So my guess is Kerry's gonna make the run in any case.  That should be hgihly entertaining.

I first heard of this in an email from a fellow alum who lives in Willamsburg.

The forces of political correctness have struck at my alma mater again.  We have lost our traditional nickname, which was not even identifiable as a particular Indian tribe, but as a non-specific moniker, "The Tribe." 

Now the President of the College has decided to remove the cross from The Wren Chapel, which is part of the oldest academic building in the United States.  This is not a religious issue, it is a historical one.  Whether President Nichol wishes to acknowledge it or not, the College's history is religious.  I would never want anyone to feel excluded from anything based on their religious beliefs, and the Cross can be removed at the request of any group which uses the Chapel.  But tourists visit the Wren Building (I had them accidentally interrupt classes which I was taking in the building on more than one occasion,) and removing the Wren Cross removes a piece of history from the College.

(Side note:  I was a Sigma Chi at the College.   Our symbol is a white cross.  We had brothers from any number of faiths, and some of no faith at all.  The White Cross of Sigma Chi is a historical symbol, not a symbol representing a religious faith.  I believe the Wren Chapel Cross represents the same.)

(A further personal side note:  Although I believe that there are anti-religious bigots in our society whose ultimate goal is the destruction of organized religion, I do not favor either the funding, or placement, of religious symbols on public property.  I had been undecided on this issue until I had a discussion with a friend who is Jewish and on the Left. He was talking about seeing the Christmas crèche on courthouse lawns and how he had to explain this to his young daughter.  The anger and pain evident in his voice at having to explain to his daughter this situation, coupled with the fact that his taxes paid for these displays, settled the issue for me.  There is plenty of room in private spaces for these displays.  But again, the Wren Chapel Cross is a question of the history, not of religious faith.) 

And of course, as is usual when academics take action to destroy the traditions and history of institutions, this is done without notifying the people who pay for the expenses of the College…former students, alumni, and the taxpayers.  

For more go here on an excellent history: William and Mary's Wren Chapel

Go here to save the cross if you are an alum: Save the Wren Chapel Cross

Below is my letter to President Nichol. Following that is the standard leter that the group of students trying to save the Wren Cross has drafted.

Dear President Nichol:

I agree with the sentiments below, but am not surprised at your decision.  Every year the College seems to move farther from its history and tradition.  Congratulations on doing your part to further destroy the history and standing of our once great institution.  I can assure you that my (and other alumni's) failure to financially support the College is due to decisions of this type.

Sincerely,

Lawrence Lee Weber
Class of 1987

Dear Sir:

Sometime in October 2006 you ordered that the Wren Cross, which had been displayed on an ongoing basis on the altar in Wren Chapel since the 1930s, be removed and be used henceforth only for "appropriate religious services". You confirmed this order in an email to the College community on October 27, 2006.

We, the undersigned students and alumni of the College, and concerned citizens of the Commonwealth of Virginia, disagree with your order to remove the Wren Cross from display on the Wren Chapel altar.

The Wren Cross was given to Wren Chapel by Williamsburg neighbor Bruton Parish Episcopal Church in the 1930s and has been a fixture on the altar ever since that time. Before your order, the policy was that if a group or individual using the Wren Chapel desired to not have the Wren Cross on display during their use of the Wren Chapel, then the Wren Cross was removed during such event and then returned to the altar.

We petition you to rescind your October 2006 order and return to the policy that had governed the display of the Wren Cross prior to your inauguration as the 26th President of the College on April 7, 2006.

Sincerely,