X ` Man wrote:
On 11/11/11 9:16 AM, North Star wrote:
On Nov 11, 9:44 am, wrote:
In articlel8qdnT6WEeeeiyDTnZ2dnUVZ_uedn...@earthlink .com, dump-on-
says...







On 11/11/11 7:18 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 04:55:41 -0500,
wrote:

On 11/10/2011 11:14 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 10/11/2011 7:21 PM, X ` Man wrote:

A classmate and colleague of my wife, Lt. Col. David E.
Cabrera, was
killed recently in Afghanistan

RIP. Condolences to the family.

But if 0bama kept his promises he would still be alive.

I am just surprised Harry hasn't told us how worthless the guy
was for
joining up. I mean, we all know the disdain he has for enlisted
men and
women... Just ask John...

Nope. According to his comments, I was 'stupid', because I let
myself get drafted.

My disdain is for the military establishment generally, the
"corporation," so to speak, and not those who wear the uniform, with
certain exceptions to the latter, you being one of them.

Since the end of World War II, I believe the military establishment's
primary goal has been to perpetuate itself, to keep as many men and
women in uniform as possible.

Dr. Cabrera chose a soldier's life and took a soldier's chances.
According to my wife, he was a terrific psychotherapist, something the
military is in great need of these days.

That's odd, you've shown your disdain for every veteran that posts in
rec.boats.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

...and what are you a vereran of...the swamp wars?



Lil Snookums iLoogy just isn't very bright. My disdain for the
right-wing veterans who post here is based primarily upon their
right-wing and typically racist statements and positions. I have no
respect for Herring and Flajim because they're assholes, not because
they were in the military. My lack of respect for Bertiepoop Robbins
is not based upon his stateside stint in the marines but his "I've got
mine, so **** you" attitude. I doubt these turds learned their
anti-social ways in the military.

You are incorrect. It should be "I EARNED mine so **** you.".

-HB (As seen on TV)

On 11/11/2011 8:33 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:21:05 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

On 11/11/11 8:15 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"jps" wrote in message ...

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 19:06:18 -0500, wrote:



wrote in message ...

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out,
it's
BS.


It appears to me that the"Heritage Foundation" is the source of your
data. I would not consider them either "fair" or "balanced" or
accurate.

I would consider these statistics more reliable:
http://www.census.gov/population/www...ry-Service.pdf


---------------------------------------------------------

The Heritage Foundation is one of the web sites I read (because it
popped up
in the Google search) however knowing it's reputation among
some, I also searched for and read several others including the
Department
of Defense military personnel and demographics
statistics. The numbers vary only slightly.

Eisboch

The Heritage Foundation would rate up there with Michael Moore in
terms of using numbers and information to its best advantage.

-------------------------------------------------

I just went back and found the Heritage website again. The sources given
for the data they used is given as:

US Department of Defense. Defense Manpower Data Center, 2006-2007 and:

US Census Bureau, United States Census 2000

The numbers are consistent with those found directly from the cited
sources.

Eisboch


The data shows the military has become the employer of last resort.

I think (1) that is true and (2) that particular employer is now
laying off.

The net result is that the coming few years is NOT going to be pretty.

You mean Slowbama is laying them off, right?

--
1-20-13 The end of an error

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 21:07:49 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:52:18 -0500, JustWait
wrote:

On 11/11/2011 7:44 PM, jps wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 19:06:18 -0500, wrote:



wrote in message ...

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out,
it's
BS.


It appears to me that the"Heritage Foundation" is the source of your
data. I would not consider them either "fair" or "balanced" or
accurate.

I would consider these statistics more reliable:
http://www.census.gov/population/www...ry-Service.pdf

---------------------------------------------------------

The Heritage Foundation is one of the web sites I read (because it popped up
in the Google search) however knowing it's reputation among
some, I also searched for and read several others including the Department
of Defense military personnel and demographics
statistics. The numbers vary only slightly.

Eisboch

The Heritage Foundation would rate up there with Michael Moore in
terms of using numbers and information to its best advantage.


That's almost funny coming from a guy who admits he gets his news from
Jon Stewart!

That's almost funny coming from a guy who admits he gets his news from
Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and Sarah Palin!

Jon Stewart has more journalistic integrity in one of his pubic hairs
than all three of those buffoons combined.

On 11/12/2011 4:31 AM, jps wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 21:07:49 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:52:18 -0500, JustWait
wrote:

On 11/11/2011 7:44 PM, jps wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 19:06:18 -0500, wrote:



wrote in message ...

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out,
it's
BS.


It appears to me that the"Heritage Foundation" is the source of your
data. I would not consider them either "fair" or "balanced" or
accurate.

I would consider these statistics more reliable:
http://www.census.gov/population/www...ry-Service.pdf

---------------------------------------------------------

The Heritage Foundation is one of the web sites I read (because it popped up
in the Google search) however knowing it's reputation among
some, I also searched for and read several others including the Department
of Defense military personnel and demographics
statistics. The numbers vary only slightly.

Eisboch

The Heritage Foundation would rate up there with Michael Moore in
terms of using numbers and information to its best advantage.


That's almost funny coming from a guy who admits he gets his news from
Jon Stewart!

That's almost funny coming from a guy who admits he gets his news from
Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and Sarah Palin!

Jon Stewart has more journalistic integrity in one of his pubic hairs
than all three of those buffoons combined.

Another of your talents? Pubic hair inspector!!

--
1-20-13 The end of an error

In article , dump-on-
says...

On 11/11/11 6:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out, it's
BS.

Here's a few facts I discovered with very little Google effort:

Current active duty military personnel represent less than half of 1 percent
of the US population.
That's a very small number doing the dirty work for the rest of the
population.

Less than 9 percent of the current US population are either currently
serving in the military or are military veterans.
Most people guess around 25 to 30 percent.

Here's one that may surprise you:

Contrary to popular belief or myth, the average person in today?s US
military is better educated than their
civilian peers as a group. One (1) percent of active duty service members
lack a high school diploma.
Over 20 percent of civilians over the age of 25 lack a high school diploma.
BTW ... 95 percent of military officers
hold at least a Bachelor?s Degree; many hold advanced postgrad degrees.

and:

Contrary to popular belief or myth, enlistees in today?s military are not
predominately from low income
families or backgrounds. Eleven (11) percent of enlistees come from the
poorest US neighborhoods. 25 percent
come from the wealthiest US neighborhoods. The rest fall somewhere between.

Eisboch

They probably have better health care, too, since they have access to
free medical care. And that thing about education, that is free or
highly discounted, too, so I guess more people can afford it. Plus, if
you are in the military, you can get credit for "life experiences,"
that's pretty easy, too.

It appears to me that the"Heritage Foundation" is the source of your
data. I would not consider them either "fair" or "balanced" or
accurate.

I would consider these statistics more reliable:
http://www.census.gov/population/www...ry-Service.pdf


The Heritage Foundation? hehehe. If it said the sun were shining at high
noon, I'd look out the window to be sure.

Would you cite the statistics in that article that you think are false
and tell use why they are false? Didn't think so.

In article ,
says...

On 11/11/2011 7:44 PM, jps wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 19:06:18 -0500, wrote:



wrote in message ...

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out,
it's
BS.


It appears to me that the"Heritage Foundation" is the source of your
data. I would not consider them either "fair" or "balanced" or
accurate.

I would consider these statistics more reliable:
http://www.census.gov/population/www...ry-Service.pdf

---------------------------------------------------------

The Heritage Foundation is one of the web sites I read (because it popped up
in the Google search) however knowing it's reputation among
some, I also searched for and read several others including the Department
of Defense military personnel and demographics
statistics. The numbers vary only slightly.

Eisboch

The Heritage Foundation would rate up there with Michael Moore in
terms of using numbers and information to its best advantage.


That's almost funny coming from a guy who admits he gets his news from
Jon Stewart!

snerk

In article ,
says...

On 11/11/2011 7:44 PM, jps wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 19:06:18 -0500, wrote:



wrote in message ...

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out,
it's
BS.


It appears to me that the"Heritage Foundation" is the source of your
data. I would not consider them either "fair" or "balanced" or
accurate.

I would consider these statistics more reliable:
http://www.census.gov/population/www...ry-Service.pdf

---------------------------------------------------------

The Heritage Foundation is one of the web sites I read (because it popped up
in the Google search) however knowing it's reputation among
some, I also searched for and read several others including the Department
of Defense military personnel and demographics
statistics. The numbers vary only slightly.

Eisboch

The Heritage Foundation would rate up there with Michael Moore in
terms of using numbers and information to its best advantage.


That's almost funny coming from a guy who admits he gets his news from
Jon Stewart!

The funny part is that Harry can not fault the statistics, so he faults
the site they came from!!