Bloggers are wincing over Rep. Rangel’s proposal to reinstate the draft, ogling TomKat’s wedding photos, and evaluating the return of silicone implants to the American market.
Back to the drafting board: On Sunday’s Face the Nation, Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., again called for the reintroduction of the draft. “If the country’s in danger, everyone should share in the sacrifice,” Rangel said during a speech at Baruch College. Rangel, a Korean War vet, will become the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee in January.
Hoffmania’s liberal blogger supports Rangel’s proposal: “As long as the perception of our military kids as low-income, disposable and recyclable prevails, the ‘safe’ war supporters will never value the lives they’re putting in harm’s way.”
Psychology prof James at the Left End of the Dial proposes a different solution: “The draft, like military interventionism, needs to be swept into the dustbin of history permanently. Heck, I have a novel idea: rather than continuing to invade other sovereign nations in order to raid their natural resources, how about we try living within our own means.”
Many conservatives were aghast. Republican Matt at Blogs for Bush dubs this a political stunt. “This is simply a political stunt meant to divide Americans and force a dead issue into an already controversial one. Rangel knows Congress will never reinstate the draft, yet he thinks it’s worth wasting time debating it. We have an all-volunteer military and that is what makes it so effective.”
Conservative überblogger Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs doubts Rangel’s sincerity. “Rangel says he’s ‘serious.’ Serious about shameless, cynical grandstanding, maybe.” Conservative Karol at Alarming News has déjà vu. “Am I on glue or have I heard this somewhere already? Like, say, back when he proposed that very thing back in October 2004 and then proceeded to vote against his own bill. Political opportunism isn’t unusual, it’s just I expect a little more originality in it,” she writes.
Emperor Misha I at the righty Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler is overjoyed by the idea of liberals being drafted: “[T]he mere thought of a bunch of unkempt, unwashed, latte-swilling trust fund kiddies dragged from their Starbucks, given a haircut and a hosing and forced into uniform fills my evil heart with all kinds of fuzzy feelings.”
At Reason’s Hit & Run, editor Nick Gillespie invokes a Heritage Foundation study that finds military recruits are drawn from a range of income levels, not just “sub-median” income brackets.
Read more about the call to reinstate the draft.
TomKat united: A host of celebrities and Scientologists gathered this weekend at an Italian castle in Bracciano, Italy, to celebrate the bizarre love of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. The wedding ceremony concluded with a “never-ending kiss.”
VH1’s Best Week Ever neatly sums up the couple’s history together: “It’s been a long road of couch-jumping, faux declarations of love, doing handstands on motorcycles, impregnation, child-birth, brokering of said child’s pictures, soccer practices and so on, and now, finally, Tom Cruise has married Katie Holmes.” Gossipmonger Trent at Pink is the New Blog critiques the outfits of the invited celebrity guests. “Victoria Beckham attempted to steal the spotlight by showing up at the wedding wearing a miniversion of the Xenu Mothership on her head,” he writes.
Steve Gillard at The News Blog remains unimpressed by the “noxious” Italian festivities: “As a media event, it seemed to come off poorly. It was as if they had been trapped in this act and they had to carry it to some kind of conclusion. Media events need an air of excitement to be worthy of attention.”
Over at TVNewser, Brian Stetler, the subject of an adoring piece in today’s New York Times, asks if MSNBC’s overzealous coverage of the wedding constitutes a new low for “breaking news,” offering 13 of the graphic banners the channel ran.
Read more about Cruise and Holmes saying their vows.
Silicone redux: After 14 years, the Food and Drug Administration has rescinded its ban on silicone breast implants, allowing anyone over 22 to receive them. Silicone implants have been long touted for their “more natural” feel and look, but some safety concerns linger. “Women [who get implants] will probably have to have additional breast implant surgery at least once,” an FDA official told the Los Angeles Times. (A story by the Daily News’ Julian Kesner offers up, “Silicone no longer distant mammary.”)
Device Talk, a blog “for the medical device industry,” declares science the winner here: “Part of the FDA’s job is to keep patently unsafe products off the market. But that does not extend to banning any product that might present some risks, as there is no such thing as a zero-risk medical device. As long as the science shows that silicone implants are not patently unsafe, and that research will continue to occur, it’s best to let consumers decide for themselves.”
Dean at Dean’s World is perturbed that the ban remained in effect so long: “But you know what really gets me? Those who want the ban kept in place simply because they disapprove of the whole idea of breast implants. What incredible arrogance.”
Read more about the return of silicone implants.
