RTFA: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery?&Db=d110&que…

2. H.CON.RES.221 : Honoring all Americans serving in the Armed Forces of the United States and condemning the attack by broadcaster Rush Limbaugh on the integrity and professionalism of some of those
Americans.

Sponsor: Rep Udall, Mark [CO-2]
(introduced 10/1/2007) Cosponsors (19)
Committees: House Armed Services
Latest Major Action: 10/1/2007

Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.

Seems the National Review article is a joke of a joke. If Lopez is really taking Think Progress’ “resolution” seriously, then there’s absolutely no evidence of it.

On the other hand, a separate resolution really was proposed… And lo, it can be fact-checked!

Sadly, it’s been referred to a committee. It clearly bombed, compared to the moveon.org ad.

RTFA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFzs_qCEGxY

Bill Clinton exposes the hypocrisy behind the Republican attacks on MoveOn.org

I am happy to see this sort of reaction to the moveon.org Petraeus ad. However, it disappoints me that Bill Clinton would be forced to respond, at all. In this video, Clinton lists several egregious examples of personal smears against military figures, committed by the very same Republican Senators who voted to condemn moveon.org.

RTFA: http://www.yalerotc.org/Solomon.html

The 1996 Solomon Amendment provides for the Secretary of Defense to deny federal funding to institutions of higher learning if they prohibit or prevent ROTC or military recruitment on campus.

This law has been codified in 10 USC Sec. 983. Version in effect as of Jan 2000 shown here.

Apparently there have been some suggestions to deny federal funding for Columbia University based on this law.

RTFA: http://pbgiltner.blogspot.com/2007/09/opinionjourn…

As Columbia welcomes Ahmadinejad to campus, Columbia students who want to serve their country cannot enroll in the Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC) at Columbia. Columbia students who want to enroll in ROTC must travel to other universities to fulfill their obligations. ROTC has been banned from the Columbia campus since 1969. In 2003, a majority of polled Columbia students supported reinstating ROTC on campus. But in 2005, when the Columbia faculty senate debated the issue, President Bollinger joined the opponents in defeating the effort to invite ROTC back on campus.

I actually agree with Freedom Watch’s Ad that it’s wrong to ban the ROTC on campus. If you don’t want to join the ROTC you can always say no. But this policy discourages joining the military and I believe it’s an honorable profession. It’s the politicians who dishonor the military. Should we discourage students from becoming doctors because of stem cell policy?

It does seem hypocritical that Ahmadinejad is allowed to speak and the ROTC cannot. I understand they are two different situations and cannot be equally compared. However, I would like to point out that the reason the ROTC is not allowed on campus is because of their homosexuality policy… what about Iran’s homosexuality policy?

The above commentary is completely unrelated to the complaint about unfair pricing, which is bullshit, as Farking A pointed out.

A recent New York Times column by “Public Editor” Clark Hoyt criticizes the NYT for running the now-famous moveon.org Petraeus ad, apparently in violation of NYT’s own policy. Hoyt quotes from the New York Times’ internal advertising manual, which states, “We do not accept opinion advertisements that are attacks of a personal nature.”

Furthermore, Hoyt states: “Bradley A. Blakeman, former deputy assistant to President Bush for appointments and scheduling and the head of FreedomsWatch.org, said his group wanted to run its own reply ad last Monday and was quoted the $64,575 rate on a standby basis. The ad wasn’t placed, he said, because the newspaper wouldn’t guarantee him the day or a position in the first section.”

Although Hoyt published his editorial September 23, Freedom’s Watch announced on September 21st that it WOULD run an ad criticizing Iranian President Ahmadinejad. It was later revealed by Blakeman, himself, that Freedom’s Watch paid the same discounted rate moveon.org paid for the Ahmadinejad space. Hoyt had at least a day to correct his column before it published.

In the uproar over the moveon.org ad, and particularly since the NYT advertising policy has been made public, you would expect the NYT staff to be vigilant about such advertising matters. It appears the NYT has violated its advertising policy yet again by publishing another opinion attack of a personal nature, and, according to Hoyt and the Associated Press, for offering to do so at the same reduced rate as the moveon.org ad.

Ironically the ad was placed by Freedom’s Watch, who were so vocal in criticizing the original moveon.org ad.

For what it’s worth, I join Freedom’s Watch in condemning Columbia University’s President, but I do so on the grounds that the introduction was intellectually dishonest, and a far cry from the grace of former Columbia University President Ike Eisenhower.

Freedom’s Watch should be ashamed for suggesting that political forums are an inappropriate place for working out political problems. It doesn’t require any stretch of the imagination to understand the preferred techniques of Freedom’s Watch.