What Caught My Eye Today

U.S. Military - Soldiers strained by six years at war are deserting their posts at the highest rate since 1980, with the number of Army deserters this year showing an 80 percent increase since the United States invaded Iraq in 2003. The Army defines a deserter as someone who has been absent without leave for longer than 30 days. The soldier is then discharged as a deserter. According to the Army, about nine in every 1,000 soldiers deserted in fiscal year 2007, which ended Sept. 30, compared to nearly seven per 1,000 a year earlier. Overall, 4,698 soldiers deserted this year, compared to 3,301 last year. The increase comes as the Army continues to bear the brunt of the war demands with many soldiers serving repeated, lengthy tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. Military leaders have acknowledged that the Army has been stretched nearly to the breaking point by the combat. Efforts are under way to increase the size of the Army and Marine Corps to lessen the burden and give troops more time off between deployments. In military jargon, I'm guessing that 'discharged' pretty much means the same thing as 'fired.' Call me crazy but if I went to work every day and got shot at, getting fired wouldn't seem so bad. Talk about a hostile work environment. I'm kind of surprised the desertion rate isn't higher.

In a related story, we have that juggernaut of efficiency, otherwise known as Congress, trying to solve the nation's problems...

Congress - Senate Republicans blocked a $50 billion bill by Democrats that would have paid for several months of combat but also would have ordered troop withdrawals from Iraq to begin within 30 days. The measure, narrowly passed this week by the House, also would have set a goal of ending combat in December 2008. The 53-45 vote was seven votes short of the 60 needed to advance. It came minutes after the Senate rejected a Republican proposal to pay for the Iraq war with no strings attached. Nearly a year after anti-war voters put them in power, congressional Democrats remain unable to pass legislation ordering troops home from Iraq. Frustrated by Republican roadblocks, Democrats now plan to sit on President Bush's $196 billion request for war spending until next year — pushing the Pentagon toward an accounting nightmare and deepening their conflict with the White House on the war. "We're going to continue to do the right thing for the American people by having limited accountability for the president and not a blank check," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Here's how the Democratic Leadership came up with this latest strategy...

Harry Reid (HR): It's just not fair. We have the majority, but those puss wads [Republicans] won't let us do anything.
Nancy Pelosi (NP): There, there, little man...I mean, Harry. It's not as bad as you make it sound.
HR: Yes it is (whimper-whimper). I'm the majority leader but I don't get to do anything because of those stupid fart heads.
NP: Oh dear. So here's what you're going to do. We all know that the war mongers...I mean Republicans, cannot carry out their little ware without money. We just won't give it to them.
HR: (sniff-sniff) But we tried that. Bush has vetoed every bill that we sent him. He's a poo-poo face.
NP: Harry, listen to me (you little twit), he cannot veto a bill if we don't send him one.
HR: I don't get it.
NP: Harry, dear. If we don't send the President a bill, then no money goes to the Pentagon. No more money, no more war. Get it?
HR: (long pause)
HR: Oh, I get it. If we take the money away, they can't play war anymore.
NP: Something like that, yes.

Pakistan - President Gen. Pervez Musharraf faces a stern warning from Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte: end emergency rule or wreck landmark elections and risk undermining vital U.S. support. Musharraf made concessions ahead of Negroponte's visit allowing independent TV news back on the air and freeing opposition leaders and a respected U.N. rights expert. But he also pushed ahead with plans for parliamentary elections in January. Under domestic pressure for relying too heavily on Musharraf, Washington appears increasingly exasperated with a man that President Bush has long defended as a stalwart ally against international terrorism. U.S. officials are keen to avoid the embarrassment of dropping a man whose authoritarian rule they have long defended because of his help in Afghanistan and against al-Qaida, but also had to be seen to stand up for democracy. Yes sir, Mr. President, way to pick a head of state that stands for the same values that we do. If I get this straight, we've been supporting Musharraf because he is a valued ally in the war on terror. Just out of curiosity, any sign of Osama bin Laden?

Baseball - Even in the off-season, baseball is in the news. Though nothing new, really. Let's see here. The Yankees are getting ready to sign A-Rod to another obscene contract--$275 million over 10 years. And Barry Bonds, still indicted...still looking guilt as hell...still not caring what anyone thinks.