Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Members of the military are citizens too.
    • Churches can't be overtly political, and members of churches are citizens too. The point is that something as big as letting active-duty military people take part in the democratic process is a Big Deal, not something that should've been slid thru days just before the RNC. This reeks.
      • It turns out that most reports of this are wrong. I first heard about it on the site of Eric Alterman, who at least framed it in the form of a question, and then I saw him correct the record with Brian Lamb on CSPAN last week: these "active duty" delegates were reserves. His web site has the correction [msn.com].

        You can still have a problem with it, if you wish, but it was and is not a violation of the DODD. And it seems to me the changes in the DODD were clarifications, not substantive changes, and not anything that would allow active duty personnel to be delegates (although to me it is still unclear whether active duty personnel could be alternates, but that's beside the point here).