NYT indirect support for draft rumor


Today's New York Times has an above—the—fold front—page article stating that the Army may reduce length of tours in combat zones in Iraq because, purportedly, this was having a negative effect on recruiting levels. We know that the Times has been against the war for 18 months and its pages are replete with reports disparaging our efforts there.

However, this article is an oblique way of supporting the scurrilous rumor that a second Bush Presidency would lead to a resumption of the draft. The spread of the rumor has been particularly virulent, given the upcoming debates, and John Kerry has also been touting this prospect in order to scare people (particularly women, who are not supporting Kerry in the numbers hoped) into backing him.
This is a ridiculous anti—Bush rumor that has been thoroughly exposed as false and absurd (this last one is subscription—only).

Yet another example of the free advertising the New York Times provides for John Kerry. However, whereas the Times devotes its considerable collective intelligence to deviously planting this fear in people's minds, the Wall Street Journal upholds journalistic standards by refuting this noxious rumor (something the Times does not yet see fit to do). Getting rid of Howell Raines didn't solve all their problems, obviously.

Ed Lasky  9 27 04