HeloDude

No--my logic is that the AF did for decades and it worked out just fine. Or do you know something I don't?

Because this didn't happen before the early/mid 90s... And the AF also didn't bring in quite a few Army RW pilots in the 90s that ended up doing just fine.

They could have had that headline for 99.99999% of the schools that day.

Here's what we know: 1) The AF has publicly stated that they want more women/minorities in the officer/pilot corps, which mathematically equates to fewer white males. 2) The AF has publicly stated that they have been looking at ways to promote more women/minorities, which mathematically equates to wanting fewer whites males being promoted. 3) The Air Force has publicly stated that we have a "pilot crisis", yet they are not putting all their resources behind retention and/or recruiting people solely based off merit, as they are now focusing at least some recruitment efforts specifically on women/minorities. If there's a "crisis" why is the AF then focusing on anything but retention and recruiting the best people you can get, regardless of gender/skin color? 4) Systemstic racism/sexism does not exist in the AF when it comes to recruiting/training pilots and covert racism/sexism in the AF to keep women/minorities from becoming pilots is few and far between, and when alleged is taken very seriously and if proven is dealt with quickly and harshly. This goes for promotion as well. So again, if we're in a "pilot crisis", why is the Air Force focusing on anything but promoting/retaining our best (regardless of gender/skin color) and recruiting the best/most qualified (regardless of gender/skin color)? I suppose if one believes that having greater diversity of gender/skin color by itself is more important than just merit, then I suppose you'll support the initiatives started by SecAF James/Gen Welsh and continued now by SecAF Wilson/Gen Goldfien. I have flown/served with many outstanding women/non-white males, and I would hate to believe that they were selected by anything other than their merit...they would probably hate to believe it as well. They were able to figure out how to go to the Academy/join ROTC/apply to OTS and become pilots, so as I mentioned, I don't think there's a program to keep women/minorities from becoming pilots. So that's where I'm at with this issue--perhaps you can answer the question in the paragraph above and explain to me in a way I can understand where I am going wrong. Right now, all I understand is that the AF wants to recruit/promote more women/minorities...instead of solely basing it by merit. Which is a shame, because over the last 10-15 years we've recruited/trained some pretty damn good awesome people who were women, minorities, and yes of course, white males...

I'm honestly wondering why this stuff surprises any of you. In 2015 the SecAF said she wanted programs to recruit/promote more women and minorities. Goldfein was her Vice Chief of Staff at this time...did we just think things would change when he became Chief of Staff? Or perhaps you're surprised this is happening under Trump and SecAF Wilson? Not me...the upper level GOs/civilians have been picked and put in place years ago because they buy into this way of thinking. More people (i.e. pilots) getting out just means the AF/DoD can bring in more people they want to see (apparently women and minorities) as well as more easily promote the people they want to see at the higher ranks. The AF is willing to spend more money on these initiatives instead of using that money/begging Congress to pay current pilots (who are mostly white males) to stay in. It's hard to be a conspiracy theorist when you can read the words they're saying. Air Force secretary announces bold moves to boost women, minorities https://www.tampabaydefensealliance.com/news/air-force-secretary-announces-bold-moves-boost-women-minorities

Yet a cake company can't afford to not sell a cake to an extremely small segment of the population? Totally agree on your last sentence.

The same reason why Dick's doesn't want more business...it's not like they're approving of school shootings, they would just profit from gun sales.

Just more reason to purchase online/use an FFL. Same firearm, much better price...

Chief of Safety is designed to be a Sq CC/DO or a former Sq CC. The AF did this on purpose because they wanted someone who wouldn't go ROAD running the Safety program/have someone who is a peer with the flying Sq CCs. AFI91-202 2.1.1.1. Active duty military COS will be selected from a current or previous Squadron Commander/Director of Operations/Chief of Safety list; or be a former Squadron Commander. MAJCOM/CV or above has waiver authority for this requirement. (T-2)

^^Fair enough! Then again, that's what we were told in Oct 2016. We will definitely find out!

Would you like to provide your opinion as to why? You (like the rest of us) aren't shying away from providing an opinion on nearly everything else.

Don't ask...I have no doubt that they could.

They are placing a lanyard to the "duck call" to quickly disconnect it after you pull the green ring. Expect another change to the checklist/boldface (again)--ugh...

Then why does Senator Coons not want the report released this summer? Simple question yet no one can provide me a logical answer...

Negative--the plan is to pull the green ring.

I disagree. By your logic, the parade is a good idea..

More of a discussion on American culture, which is definitely affecting the AF.

Passing students who meet standards? That's horrible! Or did you mean to write something different?

Attended, sure--at private fields. Taken part in one, fortunately no. I don't believe that taxpayer dollars should be used to entertain people.

Government funded/sponsored? Hell no...

1) I agree--I'm fine with gay marriage and don't support criminalizing abortion. Liberty-minded people think this way and are not necessarily progressive. 2) Where did I say anything about a "party"? (I'm assuming you mean political party?) 3) Yes--progressives own the "safe-space" shit. I have yet to meet/hear of anyone who is overly PC who also isn't a progressive. Let me know if you disagree. 4) Progressives and statists (i.e. conservatives who are for government banning drugs, gay marriage, etc) are both dangerous to liberty and freedom.

Why would I? The reality of the situation is not what you posted.

Oh please--you know why I don't believe you? Because you know as well as I do that Democrats are going to 'continue' to bring up the Russia stuff about Trump all the way to the midterms. So acting as things shouldn't be a "political bombshell" is bullshit because Democrats are making this entirely political, unless you disagree? Casey is no better or worse than all the other Senators (whether D or R) and they all will use what political advantage they can take, so him not wanting this to come out even this summer shows me that he is either worried something 'might' not go their way with the investigation, or worse, actually knows it won't go their way. If what Dmeocrats allege is actually substantiated as true then it is political gold--so why works nt they want it come out this summer?

Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) says: "I don't think we'll know anywhere near the full story until [Mueller] issues his report," Casey said. "But once you get into the summer, and you get close to the election, I think it's a mistake for him to release it late. I think you should wait until after [the election]" Casey said." https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/374407-dem-senator-warns-mueller-against-issuing-russia-report-near-2018 So here are my questions: 1) If this investigation is non-partisan and Dems believe the American public deserves to know the outcome of the investigation, then why would a Democrat Senator want Mueller to wait until after the 2018 midterm elections to release the report? 2) If Democrats believe the Mueller report will be damning to the Trump administration/GOP, then from a partisan perspective, why wouldn't you want those results released before the election? The only reason that makes sense to me is that he believes this won't hurt Trump/the GOP. I just find his remarks quite interesting...

This. The trolling was strong with that one...