I didn’t get to hear the debates yesterday as I was busy doing other things — maybe I can find an mp3 recording of it somewhere — but I did read the write-up in the Journal Star this morning. Sounds like it was pretty boring for the most part; Schock is no longer pushing the nukes to Taiwan argument, and everyone has settled into the usual party camps.

Except this statement caught my eye:

…one distinction did emerge when Callahan said she would champion re-instituting the draft.

Callahan said the military, stressed from fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, needed the draft to be rebuilt.

“You can gasp if you want. But I believe it is the fairest way for us to rebuild our military,” Callahan said. “I know from all of those who are currently serving, proud as they are of their service, many of them are coming from the National Guard and it leaves us open, at risk, here at home where we have needs from disasters.”

Callahan did add a caveat, though, saying time spent in the military could be swapped for another form of service.

Not that this is necessarily a bad policy idea, but why would you bring it up during the campaign? Is this supposed to win her votes? While other candidates generally use the election to promise they’ll bring home money, jobs, even the troops, Callahan is saying she wants to bring home… the draft? Not the brightest political move, and a sure way to lose votes from young men of drafting age — and their parents.

On the other hand, the odds of her winning this election are about 100 to 1 anyway, so what does she have to lose? It does give her a little more publicity.