HeloDude

I like this post—and I agree with you on the two major parties. Where we often differ is on the actual issues themselves. One more point about the parties: They have both gone further left/right, respectively compared to years past, but if you compare the Dems of the 80s and 90s to today vs the GOP of the 80s and 90s to today, I think it’s safe to say one has definitely moved further than the other. Elon Musk pointed out the same issue not too long ago, and though the meme isn’t entirely accurate, it does make the point.

True of False: Covid restrictions led to a decrease in voting integrity in some states.

Just curious if you think Bitcoin is on this trajectory (honest question)? Given the inflation, I’m surprised it’s currently this low.

Wait…so let me get this straight. This is what the left wants: - Abortion up until the moment of delivery - Taxpayer funded abortions up until the moment of delivery - Taxpayer funded healthcare, whether or not the woman decides to terminate the pregnancy or have the delivery - Taxpayer funded welfare payments for women whether or not she gets pregnant, and if she does get pregnant it’s irrelevant whether or not she wants to terminate the pregnancy, and then she still gets welfare payments after the abortion or the delivery, regardless if she chooses to keep the baby or puts it up for adoption - Taxpayer funded birth control options - Businesses being forced by the government to pay a woman for work after she’s delivered a baby, even for her not doing any work during that time …and I’m sure there are others that I missed. Oh and the left believes now this all applies to men since supposedly science now says that men can also get pregnant. But yes…it’s only the anti-abortion crowd that’s the problem. Full disclosure: As I’ve mentioned in previous posts on this issue, if the argument for being pro-abortion is because one truly believes in maximum individual liberty then I’ll support their opinion (ie the Libertarian Party)…but since they don’t, they (the left, just like the right), are just picking and choosing what individual “liberties” they want and believe others should have. So let me know if you want to discuss how the Libertarian Party platform is the way to go and I’ll be right there with you. Until then, regardless of my personal opinions on abortions, it’s best to leave it up the states. And if it’s so popular as the left tells us, then I guess the Dems will win just about every federal and state election this November…though I have my doubts. This is probably a good time to remind those that Prozac thinks the government should be able to arrest/prosecute/put you in prison if you have a firearm magazine that holds more than 10 rounds. But yes, those who disagree with him are the hypocritical assholes.

Wait…so the ACA doesn’t ensure/provide healthcare to the majority of these working women? I thought that’s what we were told when it was passed? As for being “forced” to work through their pregnancy—who is being forced to work? And if someone doesn’t work, is there not unemployment/welfare benefits available? But thanks for also for your comment wrt to not being pro-adoption vs just being pro-abortion…you helped me make my point!

Thanks for the post. My response to SocialD was wrt adoption. For some reason there are people (most on the left…not sure of SocialD’s philosophy) who actually think that there are massive amount of babies, that if given up for adoption, would not be able to find homes. I think it’s great that parents are willing to foster children…though more foster care isn’t the solution as it’s still part of the broken system. Adoption, preferably at birth, fixes many of those problems. For some reason those on the left never publicly voice support for mothers with unwanted pregnancies to have their babies and give them up for adoption.

Why would many of these kids be “unwanted”? Are you suggesting that there is a shortage of families wanting to adopt babies given up for adoption?

Really good 15 min video on the recent SCOTUS ruling and Thomas’ opinion regarding the 2A. BL: This could be huge in striking down many gun control laws in the future.

Just curious, if you think it’s silly for someone to stay on AD, why do you believe so? Reason I ask you specifically is that on other threads you’re very pro-big government and seem to trust the feds wrt environmental, health, economic policies, and in general being pro-regulation vs not. . So why not extend that same faith/enthusiasm to serving in the active duty military?

I’ll just judge the climate alarmists by their actions…so yeah, I’m not too worried.

Biden’s “climate czar” John Kerry said we absolutely do not need more oil drilling. This is the message of the left… If the GOP was smart (they often aren’t), they would run ads of a few soundbites of Biden/his administration and Dem politicians saying how they’re against oil, more oil exploitation, etc and then show the price of gas.

And when there’s no one else to blame, and your party runs both the House and the Senate, then blame the GOP lol…it’s not going well for old Joe. “Biden Blames Republicans in Congress for Soaring Inflation” https://www.nationalreview.com/news/biden-blames-republicans-in-congress-for-soaring-inflation/?fbclid=IwAR1Y_5GZV8YiTGjtv8AJqvtjZcML3UBQNSppsFBR5NxaC-Bhy-bwpSKMIDA

Sadly it’s all political. The left over the years have been on record for saying how bad they think fossil fuels are, how they want them to go away…even if it costs the average American citizen more money. Biden signs EOs to make it harder/more expensive to harness the energy of fossil fuels, he has advisors who are openly against fossil fuels, and the Dems have not produced any legislation that reduces regulations on fossil fuels. But the rising gas prices are now the fault of…wait for it…Putin’s war in Ukraine and those evil greedy oil executives. Biden doesn’t deserve 100% of the blame for the rising costs, but he does deserve 100% for not trying to lower the costs.

That’s why I asked based on what you know right now? You can always change your mind since it’s not the real election lol. You voted for Biden and he hadn’t ran anything…so I would say that running Florida is just a little more than running nothing.

Just curious, if the 2024 election was held next week and the Dem nominee was Biden and the GOP nominee was DeSantis, assuming their platform was exactly based off of what you know of both of them today, who would you vote for?

Well, we’re below when Trump was last president… Is Biden to blame, partially. Is Trump to blame, partially. But here’s the problem—Biden is president and the Dems have full control over the federal legislation process. So what is their plan?

The ad says all phases of T-6 raining.

Wait…are you referring to the “mostly peaceful protests”?

Just curious if you think things are still going well?

What squadron?

This If they’re going to be “just as good” as FAIPs because they’re doing the exact same training, then why not make more FAIPs? Oh wait…they already did that a few years ago. And good luck training a civilian to the same standard as a FAIP when the civilian can only work 40 hours a week. Oh, and who is going to train these civilians?—it’s not like UPT has open seats not being filled and that PIT isn’t running 2+ months behind.

I wouldn’t call close formation and ET3 “fundamental flying skills”…and I’m pretty sure they don’t teach this in IFT. A civilian IP can definitely learn/be able to teach it, but it will take much more training since they’ve never seen it in UPT. Oh, and here’s a data point: Some T-1 trained FAIPs have gone through CRs at T-6 PIT (and some have even washed out) for lack of formation flying abilities due to the cuts in UPT. As far as being a military officer, UPT is centered around flight instruction based on the foundation of military bearing, integrity, etc. If this wasn’t necessary, then mil cap wouldn’t be a thing. It’s not to say that 23 year old civilian pilots can’t also have these qualities, but there’s no training program to weed those people out who aren’t a good fit. Just think about people you’ve met who said they’ve wanted to be a military pilot but just didn’t have the qualities we seek in a military officer…there’s a reason why we’re different. Also, unless they rewrite the rules, you can’t work a civilian more than 40 hours a week without permission, compensation, etc. This changes the ball game quite a bit. Rucker, Kirtland, and other programs have had civilian/contractor flight instructors, but I’m pretty sure the vast majority have been very experienced military pilots in the past, and their instruction has been more/less limited to contact/instrument flying…they leave the formation and other stuff to the mil IPs. That all being said, my biggest concern is with the comments on this page who think this will make a better IP than those graduating from PIT…and across the board, I just don’t see it. Do you agree with Jice that these young civilian CFIs with 50 hours of C172 IP time will be better than a UPT graduate going to PIT to be a FAIP?

So a 23 year old, 50 hour CFI, who has never gone through any military training (flight or otherwise) will be better than a 25 year old officer who has gone through a commissioning source, graduated UPT (they still wash people out btw), and has successfully gone through the current PIT syllabus (which also still washed people out)?

I might be misunderstanding you…but are you suggesting that this program will make instruction at UPT better by making white jets more selective for AD pilots due to sending less qualified low time CFI’s through some sort of PIT (I’d be willing to bet their syllabus will not be the same as it is right now)?

The ad says they’ll be teaching in all phases of T-6 training…