Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
The One and Only... The One and Only... is offline
Mocker
The One and Only...'s Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Harlem
The One and Only... is probably a spambot
Old Jul 5th, 2005, 07:58 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by mburbank
Has anyone looked at how volunteer service plays out against CLASS as opposed to race?
Was that not what I just said, you overweight aging hippie?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The One and Only...
What's discriminatory about the military is not the fact that it is volunteer-based, but rather that it markets itself toward lower-income individuals.
You can use logical fallacies against me all you like, but damn, give me some credit.
__________________
I have seen all things that are done under the sun; all is vanity and a chase after wind.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
ziggytrix ziggytrix is offline
Mocker
ziggytrix's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: i come from the water
ziggytrix is probably a spambot
Old Jul 5th, 2005, 08:35 PM        Re: Just curious
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAsux
I believe there are far fewer military members who joined to avoid dire poverty than some of you seem to imply.
It's not about whether they target the poor more than the middle class or whatnot. It's rich people getting richer when we go to war, and poor and middle class people getting their kids sent back home with missing limbs or in a box that is revolting to me.
__________________
BOYCOTT SIGNATURES!
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Immortal Goat Immortal Goat is offline
Now with less sodium!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Immortal Goat is probably a spambot
Old Jul 6th, 2005, 02:06 AM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by The One and Only...
Was that not what I just said, you overweight aging hippie?
I don't know if anyone's ever told you this, but you are completely outrageous
__________________
I like snow. If winter's going to be cold anyway, at least have it be fun to look at. Probably why I was with my ex for so long...
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Emu Emu is offline
Level 29 ♂
Emu's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Peoria, IL
Emu is probably a real personEmu is probably a real person
Old Jul 6th, 2005, 02:33 AM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by The One and Only...
Was that not what I just said, you overweight aging hippie?
It's just that everyone ignores your posts, now.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
theapportioner theapportioner is offline
Mocker
theapportioner's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
theapportioner is probably a spambot
Old Jul 6th, 2005, 10:10 AM       
First, a clarification:

I never meant to convey that a volunteer army is necessarily or inherently discriminatory - the "(in the United States)" tag in the original post is meant to convey the notion that, here, it is discriminatory in practice.

Also, it's my understanding that you don't find too many military people whose families are from the top 25% income bracket. Is that correct? Why is that? I imagine that not all of them are flaming liberals.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
El Blanco El Blanco is offline
Mocker
El Blanco's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York, NY
El Blanco is probably a spambot
Old Jul 6th, 2005, 10:30 AM       
How many of the top 25% are police officers or firefighters or teachers or any other hard, underpaid, thankless job? Is there some big conspiracy there?

Quote:
It's not about whether they target the poor more than the middle class or whatnot.
Strange, that seems to be exactly what the conversation is about.
__________________
according to my mongoose, anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Jul 6th, 2005, 10:44 AM       
Aging absolutely, overweight, a bit (I am 43, after all) but a hippie? That word ceased to have any real context around the time I turned ten. It is outrageous of you to say so, though.

And if you are VERY hard to pay attention to, you have no one but yourself to blame, you infantile, naval gazing, bag of ever so much less than you imagine.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
GAsux GAsux is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
GAsux is probably a spambot
Old Jul 6th, 2005, 11:50 AM        Affluent families....
Apportioner,
My point earlier about asking how many people have actually been in the military here bears some relevance I think. Statistically I'm sure you're absolutely correct. Bill Gates is not dying to join the Army.

What I was getting at is that being an actual member of said occupation, I can tell you from first hand experience that the military is not choked full of impoverished, uneducated folks who had no other way out of destitution. As I also stated, I believe you'll find the majority of military folks to be relatively average middle class Americans.

AS for why the top 25% people aren't rushing to sign up, I'd imagine the fact that you aren't going to make a lot of money and therefore be able to maintain the lifestyle you're accustomed to may have something to do with it.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
ziggytrix ziggytrix is offline
Mocker
ziggytrix's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: i come from the water
ziggytrix is probably a spambot
Old Jul 6th, 2005, 01:59 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Blanco
Quote:
It's not about whether they target the poor more than the middle class or whatnot.
Strange, that seems to be exactly what the conversation is about.
I was expressing my personal opinion, which was quite obvious if you actually bothered to read the sentence immediately follwing the one you quoted. I hope it isn't too much to ask you to resopnd to the sentiment of a post, rather than just deconstructing little bits to reply to in order to make yourself feel witty.

edit: mad
__________________
BOYCOTT SIGNATURES!
Reply With Quote
  #35  
ItalianStereotype ItalianStereotype is offline
Legislacerator
ItalianStereotype's Avatar
Join Date: May 2002
Location: HELL, where all hot things are
ItalianStereotype is probably pretty okItalianStereotype is probably pretty okItalianStereotype is probably pretty okItalianStereotype is probably pretty okItalianStereotype is probably pretty ok
Old Jul 6th, 2005, 02:10 PM       
a draft is somewhat pointless, except as an employment opportunity.

it takes years to train a good soldier, years. when you come out of basic, you're not a good soldier yet. that's why it's basic. if a draft is reinstated, it most likely means that we're running out of troops and the front is already really hot. well, no enlisted man is going to want to run a midnight mission with some green nursing a conscript syndrome. it would be much better to focus on retention, in my opinion.
__________________
I could just scream
Reply With Quote
  #36  
El Blanco El Blanco is offline
Mocker
El Blanco's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York, NY
El Blanco is probably a spambot
Old Jul 6th, 2005, 03:18 PM        Re: Just curious
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggytrix

It's not about whether they target the poor more than the middle class or whatnot. It's rich people getting richer when we go to war, and poor and middle class people getting their kids sent back home with missing limbs or in a box that is revolting to me.
The second sentence expresses your opinion. The first however, is constructed in such a way that makes it seem as though you are referencing the rest of the conversation.

Now, if you want people to think you are simply stating your own opnion instead of expanding upon the conversation (and missing the point), you should make the statement in such a way that doesn't seem to be two different thoughts.
__________________
according to my mongoose, anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
ziggytrix ziggytrix is offline
Mocker
ziggytrix's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: i come from the water
ziggytrix is probably a spambot
Old Jul 6th, 2005, 03:36 PM       
Fuck you, asshole. Ha ha just kidding.

See how the second sentence references the first one to expand on the sentiment that you are a jerk? And how I started a new paragraph to convey a sperate thought? Does that blow your mind or what?

My point is that regardless whether they target lower class or middle class, it won't be upper class fighting the wars, even though it will be upper class starting the wars. Except in a draft scenario, the rich kids gotta go fight, too.

Do you still think I'm "missing the point"? I still think you're an asshole.
__________________
BOYCOTT SIGNATURES!
Reply With Quote
  #38  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Jul 23rd, 2005, 02:05 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by theapportioner
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore
If you're getting at some kind of compulsory service, not necessarily military in nature, well I'd be down with that.
Sounds like a good idea, although I'm not sure how one'd go about implementing it on a mass scale. Knowing our government, we'd probably end up "volunteering" for companies like Monsanto or Merck.
I'm not sure why I'm responding to this now, but I read the thread again, and became interested.

Anyway, regarding the infrastructure for national service, well it's already there. Like I said, AmeriCorps is already set up, as is the PeaceCorps and TFA. I served for a year with AmeriCorps, and I loved it. I learned a lot in that year.

The problem with AmeriCorps is that it is constantly under attack from the anti-govt. crowd. Sometimes with good reason, because some AmeriCorps programs are quite worthless. But usually they just hate it b/c "you shouldn't get paid to volunteer." And Clinton created it, so there ya go. There was a good book on the passage of the National Service Act called "The Bill."

So anyway, the ground work is potentially there, if we were so inclined.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Jul 24th, 2005, 08:28 PM       
Not entirely related, but still in line with the conversation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/24/po...gewanted=print

July 24, 2005
All Quiet on the Home Front, and Some Soldiers Are Asking Why
By THOM SHANKER
WASHINGTON, July 23 - The Bush administration's rallying call that America is a nation at war is increasingly ringing hollow to men and women in uniform, who argue in frustration that America is not a nation at war, but a nation with only its military at war.

From bases in Iraq and across the United States to the Pentagon and the military's war colleges, officers and enlisted personnel quietly raise a question for political leaders: if America is truly on a war footing, why is so little sacrifice asked of the nation at large?

There is no serious talk of a draft to share the burden of fighting across the broad citizenry, and neither Republicans nor Democrats are pressing for a tax increase to force Americans to cover the $5 billion a month in costs from Iraq, Afghanistan and new counterterrorism missions.

There are not even concerted efforts like the savings-bond drives or gasoline rationing that helped to unite the country behind its fighting forces in wars past.

"Nobody in America is asked to sacrifice, except us," said one officer just back from a yearlong tour in Iraq, voicing a frustration now drawing the attention of academic specialists in military sociology.

Members of the military who discussed their sense of frustration did so only when promised anonymity, as comments viewed as critical of the civilian leadership could end their careers. The sentiments were expressed in more than two dozen interviews and casual conversations with enlisted personnel, noncommissioned officers, midlevel officers, and general or flag officers in Iraq and in the United States.

Charles Moskos, a professor emeritus at Northwestern University specializing in military sociology, said: "My terminology for it is 'patriotism lite,' and that's what we're experiencing now in both political parties. The political leaders are afraid to ask the public for any real sacrifice, which doesn't speak too highly of the citizenry."

Senior administration officials say they are aware of the tension and have opened discussions on whether to mobilize brigades of Americans beyond those already signed up for active duty or in the Reserves and National Guard. At the Pentagon and the State Department, officials have held preliminary talks on creating a Civilian Reserve, a sort of Peace Corps for professionals.

In an interview, Douglas J. Feith, the under secretary of defense for policy, said that discussions had begun on a program to seek commitments from bankers, lawyers, doctors, engineers, electricians, plumbers and solid-waste disposal experts to deploy to conflict zones for months at a time on reconstruction assignments, to relieve pressure on the military.

When President Bush last addressed the issue of nationwide support for the war effort in a formal speech, he asked Americans to use the Fourth of July as a time to "find a way to thank the men and women defending our freedom by flying the flag, sending a letter to our troops in the field or helping the military family down the street."

In the speech, at Fort Bragg, N.C., on June 28, Mr. Bush mentioned a Defense Department Web site, Americasupportsyou.mil, where people can learn about private-sector efforts to bolster the morale of the troops. He also urged those considering a career in the military to enlist because "there is no higher calling than service in our armed forces."

While officers and enlisted personnel say they enjoy symbolic signs of support, and the high ratings the military now enjoys in public opinion polls, "that's just not enough," said a one-star officer who served in Iraq. "There has to be more," he added, saying that the absence of a call for broader national sacrifice in a time of war has become a near constant topic of discussion among officers and enlisted personnel.

"For most Americans," said an officer with a year's experience in Iraq, "their role in the war on terror is limited to the slight inconvenience of arriving at the airport a few hours early."

David C. Hendrickson, a scholar on foreign policy and the presidency at Colorado College, said, "Bush understands that the support of the public for war - especially the war in Iraq - is conditioned on demanding little of the public."

Mr. Hendrickson said that after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, just as after the recent London bombings, political leaders urged the population to continue life as normal, so as not to give terrorists a moral victory by giving in to the fear of violence.

But he said the stress of the commitment to the continuing mission in Iraq was viewed by the public in a different light than a terrorist attack on home soil.

"The public wants very much to support the troops" in Iraq, he said. "But it doesn't really believe in the mission. Most consider it a war of choice, and a majority - although a thin one - thinks it was the wrong choice."

Maj. Gen. Robert H. Scales Jr., who served as commandant of the Army War College and is now retired, said: "Despite the enormous impact of Sept. 11, it hasn't really translated into a national movement towards fighting the war on terrorism. It's almost as if the politicians want to be able to declare war and, at the same time, maintain a sense of normalcy."

General Scales said he had heard a heavy stream of concerns from current officers that "the military is increasingly isolated from the rest of the country."

"People associate being an officer with the priesthood," he added. "You know, there is an enormous amount of respect, but nobody wants to sign up for celibacy."

Private organizations like the Navy League of the United States that support the individual armed services have identified the tension and are using this theme to urge greater contributions from members now in the civilian world.

"We have recognized that and we have tried to sound the alarm," said Rear Adm. Stephen R. Pietropaoli, retired, the executive director of the Navy League.

"As an organization that is committed to supporting them by ensuring they have the weapons and tools and systems to fight and win, and also at the grass-roots level by providing assistance to families," Admiral Pietropaoli said, "we are aware that the burden has fallen almost solely on the shoulders of the uniformed military and security services and their families. We have used that in our calls to action by our members. We have said: 'We are at war. What have you done lately?' "

Morten G. Ender, who teaches sociology at West Point, has been interviewing soldiers, their spouses and cadets since the Iraq war started in 2003. Because the all-volunteer military is a self-selecting body and by definition is not drawn from a cross-section of America, he said, those with direct involvement constitute a far smaller percentage of the country than in past wars.

Mr. Ender said that the "rhetoric from the top" of the civilian leadership of the United States "doesn't move people towards actions."

Most Americans support the military, he said, and "feel like there is somebody out there taking care of the job."

"They say, 'I'm going to support those people, I believe in those people and God bless those people,' " he said. "By doing that, they can wash their hands of it."
Reply With Quote
  #40  
davinxtk davinxtk is offline
GO AWAY DONT POST HERE
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Up.
davinxtk is probably a spambot
Old Jul 25th, 2005, 03:03 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore
Pardon me for being crass, but you don't necessarily want the people to be overly involved. We have a civilian military, led by civilians, people to serve and protect the constitution and those civilians. Presidents, much like soldiers, often have to do unpleasnat and difficult things, such as sending someone's child to foreign soil to die. Regardless of the cause, that's a pretty tough thing to do, and it's perhaps a burden/responsibility that shouldn't be left to the masses.
If you ask me, Kevin, the masses don't really have enough burdens and responsibilities, globally speaking. In case you haven't noticed, Americans on the whole are spoiled brats, sociopolitically. I just ran a quick search (and amittedly did not research the figure much) but only 51.3% of voting-age Americans actually exercised that right in 2004. Americans don't have enough to answer to in today's world and it would probably do our population a shitload of good to look itself and the rest of the world in the eye, look past their SUVs, neatly trimmed lawns, high-paying office jobs, or better yet, their slums, drugs, and grunt work, and grow the fuck up a bit.

Compulsory service would force people to realize that there's life out there beyond their closed-minded little world.




Edit:
Kevin, that article runs paralell to my argument.
__________________
(1:02:34 AM): and i think i may have gone a little too far and let her know that i actually do hate her, on some level, just because she's female
(1:03:33 AM): and now she's being all kinds of sensitive about it
(1:03:53 AM): i hate women
Reply With Quote
  #41  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Jul 25th, 2005, 07:19 PM       
I think you get into dangerous territory when you use voting stats (which were actually up in 2004) to rate civic involvement.

"Americans don't have enough to answer to in today's world and it would probably do our population a shitload of good to look itself and the rest of the world in the eye, look past their SUVs, neatly trimmed lawns, high-paying office jobs, or better yet, their slums, drugs, and grunt work, and grow the fuck up a bit."

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you don't personally have the SUV, trimmed lawn, and the job.....wait, let's word that more appropriately: The three kids, the mortgage, the doctors visits, all the other bills, the mid-level job that probably doesn't pay you what your worth, etc.

People work very hard in this country, and they do so with the hope of having the family, raising the kids, and living the so-called American Dream. I don't think it's that people are voluntarily disconnected, I think it's often all they can do just to get by and stay up to pace.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
davinxtk davinxtk is offline
GO AWAY DONT POST HERE
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Up.
davinxtk is probably a spambot
Old Jul 25th, 2005, 10:51 PM       
My mom (note: not my parents) has the three kids, the mortgage, can't afford the doctor's visits (I personally haven't had as much as a physical since I was 12, which was free from the public school system at the time -- we make too much money for MassHealth and not enough for real health insurance) and barely keeps her own company afloat in a seasonal economy. I was the kid in school who wore the same clothes every day because mommy couldn't afford any more. The kid who got made fun of because he was on the laminated lunch ticket. I know very well how hard people work in this country, but that doesn't give them any excuse to be completely apathetic and ignorant to the world. Besides, those aren't even the people I'm talking about. I'm talking about the fucking yuppies with their summer homes and 72" plasma screen televisions on hydraulic lifts with stressed mahogany chests built around them (and yes, i've seen and operated such a device in more than one summer home). The people my mother is essentially a slave to to keep my sisters fed and clothed. The people who need to understand what the middle and lower classes in this country go through, because maybe then they'd vote a little more sensibly -- not for the president who gives their bracket the biggest tax cut and hates the homos.

I think compulsory military (or civil) service would do a whole lot of good for America. You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. But take a good look at where that opinion has gotten us thus far.
__________________
(1:02:34 AM): and i think i may have gone a little too far and let her know that i actually do hate her, on some level, just because she's female
(1:03:33 AM): and now she's being all kinds of sensitive about it
(1:03:53 AM): i hate women
Reply With Quote
  #43  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Jul 26th, 2005, 12:11 AM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by davinxtk
Besides, those aren't even the people I'm talking about. I'm talking about the fucking yuppies with their summer homes and 72" plasma screen televisions on hydraulic lifts with stressed mahogany chests built around them (and yes, i've seen and operated such a device in more than one summer home). The people my mother is essentially a slave to to keep my sisters fed and clothed. The people who need to understand what the middle and lower classes in this country go through, because maybe then they'd vote a little more sensibly -- not for the president who gives their bracket the biggest tax cut and hates the homos.
Ok, well, you started off saying that civic involvement was needed from these people. But statistically, the upper-class "yuppies" you're talking about do in fact vote more often than the lower-class folk.

But you changed it to "vote a little more sensibly," rather than simply voting. If voting "sensibly" means not voting for Republicans, then I think you're missing the boat on this argument. :/

Quote:
I think compulsory military (or civil) service would do a whole lot of good for America. You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. But take a good look at where that opinion has gotten us thus far.
Well, I guess I'm struggling to see what body of work we're comparing us to. Are you saying compulsory service would increase turnout in the voting booth, or are you saying increased turnout would put Democrats in the White House....?
Reply With Quote
  #44  
ziggytrix ziggytrix is offline
Mocker
ziggytrix's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: i come from the water
ziggytrix is probably a spambot
Old Jul 26th, 2005, 01:54 AM       
hell it might even get a 3rd party candidtate in the white house if the other 50% of the nation voted. who knows!

edit: heh, who the fuck do i think i'm kidding
__________________
BOYCOTT SIGNATURES!
Reply With Quote
  #45  
GAsux GAsux is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Las Vegas
GAsux is probably a spambot
Old Jul 26th, 2005, 12:33 PM        Just out of curiosity...
I know this is a bit off topic with regards to civic duty and some kind of mandatory service program (which I support by the way, just not in a military capacity), but at what point does a person cross into becoming a "yuppie"?

I suppose I'm guilty of it to as I make a lower middle class wage and live in a predominantly affluent, upper middle class neighborhood. I get a little touchy when I see "yuppies" driving around town in their Beamers and H2s towing their fancy ski boats, etc.

But at what point do those people transition from becoming "successful" to being dreaded "yuppies"? My only point here is that I'm not convinced that having money or being successful is necessarily cause to slander a person. Isn't that what we're all working towards anyway? To improve our financial situation?

If I could afford an H2 and a nice boat, to be honest I would. Not becuase I'm a dirty yuppie, but because I'd love to have one to drive and like boating. It's sort of like how when a band you love starts to gain popularity and suddenly becomes a "sell out" because their music became popular.

Again, my apologies for derailing the train of thought here, just seems interesting to me how we as a society seem to resent people with money until we become those people ourselves.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
ziggytrix ziggytrix is offline
Mocker
ziggytrix's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: i come from the water
ziggytrix is probably a spambot
Old Jul 26th, 2005, 01:00 PM       
You're talking about jealousy.

If I had enough money to buy a Hummer - I'd usue it to pay off my mortgage.
__________________
BOYCOTT SIGNATURES!
Reply With Quote
  #47  
davinxtk davinxtk is offline
GO AWAY DONT POST HERE
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Up.
davinxtk is probably a spambot
Old Jul 26th, 2005, 04:10 PM       
Kevin, it doesn't have anything to do with Democrats or Republicans. You're jumping to the partisan line too quickly. What I'm saying is that they'd vote on real issues and real problems, not the ones that the media kicks up to obstruct our view of the nation's real concerns and problems. I don't like the Democrats or the Republicans particularly, neither party rests enough control in its people.


And you're right, there were two seperate arguments there, but both are valid. If everyone in the country served in a civil or military capacity at some point in their lives, it would give them a damn good reason to want to control what the government was doing. The life experience would also put them more in touch with the reality of the nation.



And GA, I'm definitely not the right person to try and get class-based character judgements out of. If I had my way I'd have a newish reliable car, a decent sized home of my own and food for my family. So would you, and everyone else in the country. I'm not into this disparity, I don't believe that people should be in such different economic standing, provided they work. Of course different work deserves different and sometimes greater rewards, but this capitalist economy has gotten entirely out of control. It bugs the living shit out of me that one of my mom's clients owns three houses, right on the beach, two of which he only uses for three months out of the year and then lets sit while he lives in his mansion in Connecticut and yet my mother received a foreclosure notice in the mail because she can't afford to maintain our vehicles, our car insurance, our telephones, internet, and mortgage payments, even with myself and two of my friends helping her out by paying rent. Her client is actually a very nice man who helped us out of another sticky situation three years ago by loaning my mother money (which she paid back in full). He doesn't, however, work. He got to the top of a computer company and sold it in late 2000, right before the economy shit the bed. He hasn't worked since, and he's bought, remodeled, and/or refinished four houses since then. He has money becuase he was in the right position at the right time, not be cause he works. I don't necessarily begrudge him this as much as I do the system which allowed for it all to happen.
__________________
(1:02:34 AM): and i think i may have gone a little too far and let her know that i actually do hate her, on some level, just because she's female
(1:03:33 AM): and now she's being all kinds of sensitive about it
(1:03:53 AM): i hate women
Reply With Quote
  #48  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
KevinTheOmnivore is probably a spambot
Old Jul 26th, 2005, 11:26 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by davinxtk
Kevin, it doesn't have anything to do with Democrats or Republicans. You're jumping to the partisan line too quickly. What I'm saying is that they'd vote on real issues and real problems, not the ones that the media kicks up to obstruct our view of the nation's real concerns and problems.
The military tends to vote Republican. They're already involved in service, do they vote on media contrived issues, rather than "real" ones? Or was this in reference simply to those who don't vote?
Reply With Quote
  #49  
ziggytrix ziggytrix is offline
Mocker
ziggytrix's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: i come from the water
ziggytrix is probably a spambot
Old Jul 27th, 2005, 10:41 AM       
Military votes Republican because - and this is almost a direct quote from military friends/family - "it's voting for a pay raise".
__________________
BOYCOTT SIGNATURES!
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Emu Emu is offline
Level 29 ♂
Emu's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Peoria, IL
Emu is probably a real personEmu is probably a real person
Old Jul 27th, 2005, 12:01 PM       
There was an interesting post on a Google newsgroup a while back where someone said that the reason Republicans outnumber Democrats in the military is the same reason liberals outnumber conservatives in academia. I'll try to dig it up again.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:18 AM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.