HeloDude
-
Posts
3,336 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
52
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Everything posted by HeloDude
-
Yes, the recruiter is full of it. AOs are under no AFI/policy guidance to get AD members stationed at guard/reserve bases to be with a part-time reservist. That isn't to say it couldn't happen since the March assignment is always a possibility, just know that the AO doesn't have to answer for not doing it. AOs only have to station AF AD members married to AF AD members (or get AFPC CC approval to not do it). Yes, I am a join spouse...
-
Not a single person is forced to be a pilot. And as for the earlier question of if they will allow a stud in 38's who didn't want to be there to then flow to T-1's?...is this a serious question? The question is definitely no. Only possibility would be a medical issue arising for a stud in 38's where they couldn't complete the 38 program but could complete the T-1 program.
-
Much less than releasing him over 25 years early...
-
Ugh...and here I thought Liberty would be front and center. Where's Ron Paul when you need him?
-
Do you have information regarding a future bill to remove firearm supressors (aka 'silencers') off the NFA list? Thanks!
-
Fingers crossed...then again, I don't see too many proposed amendments that would get 3/4 state legislature support needed for ratification. This is why I call complete BS on progressives saying they want to change the EC/process for electing president--if progressives really wanted the change they speak of then they would do what is necessary on their end for the best chance possible of it becoming a ratified amendment. It always comes down to politics and making people feel like victims, so in the end progressives can have more control...populists and conservatives want the same thing.
-
I'm aware. Just pointing out that they didn't even try to pass a Constitutional Amendment the last time they controlled both houses of Congress and thus controlled the agenda. Besides, I'm not aware of a Constitutional Amendment ever being passed without bipartisan support, so if it wasn't worth progressives' efforts when they had super majorities then I don't know why they would bring it up now...because surely their current argument can't just be because of politics, right?
-
If Democrats are so disenfranchised by the EC then how were they able to win in 2008 and 2012? Try researching the EC vote (i.e. state by state races) since the late 1700's--you'll see that states, elections, etc change with time, and likewise this 'advantage/disadvantage' you speak of. As you mentioned, Democrats do this to themselves because progressives love living close to other progressives--well, enjoy your progressive states like California, New York, Massachusetts, et, and likewise, enjoy Trump being president. Besides, I don't recall Democrats in 2009 trying to pass a Constitutional Amendment in Congress when they had large majorities... And with regards to your assertion that "all votes are not equal"...this is completely false. Since we have 51 individual state elections for president, all votes in each respective state (or district for Nebraska and Maine) is equal.
-
He said "it sizes the counties according to population"...so this map already adjusted for differences in population. Unless I'm missing something?
-
All completely valid, but that wasn't my point. My point is that 2004 was similar to 2012 in popular vote and that 2016 wasn't too far from 2012 from an electoral college standpoint...yet Nsplayr didn't mention 2012 as being close but said 2004 and 2016 were both close. We have to compare apples to apples or oranges to oranges not apples to oranges...
-
It's almost as easy as if states could adopt this process on their own..wait a minute, two states already do! We are the United 'States' of America...each state decides how to divide/award their electoral votes as the states decide how they choose the presidents, not necessarily directly the individual people within those states. That being said, I always thought it was interesting how states like Michigan didn't take the same approach as Maine and Nebraska. In 2012 Michigan was ran by the GOP but hadn't gone for a Republican since 1988...and I don't think too many GOP state legislators who really thought Trump was going to win their state in Nov. My apologies if Michigan needs to be changed via a popular vote referendum vs state legislature--I'm too lazy to research.
-
This was your first mistake...
-
Interesting that you listed 2004 as a close election and not 2012, as the popular vote was nearly the same percentage-wise. Unless you're saying we should only look at the electoral college vote, in which case 2016 wasn't a close election... And the best way to fix Washington DC is for Washington DC to have/execercise less power. Fortunately (or unfortunately), progressives are going to learn the hard way how it's not a good thing for the president to 'have a phone and a pen'...
-
Only a moron would take credit for a disaster...
-
I totally understand and appreciate your reasons for wanting to get out early...I just don't see it happening in today's environment. But I do wish you the best of luck.
-
Why do you not want to get promoted to Major when you're just going to be offered continuation to 20 next year? Honest question...
-
Bump again...
-
A pardon is not an executive order, per se, as it is final, whereas an executive order can be changed the minute Trump assumes office. But yes, I agree that Obama will issue quite a few pardons from now until the last minute (all presidents do, though Obama is already beating them out). As for Hillary getting a pardon from Obama--who knows, but my guess is he will not as it doesn't help his legacy. I also don't see Trump's Justice Department going personally after Hillary any more than they already have--what does Trump have to gain from it?--he already beat her. Now investigating/going after the Clinton Foundation, most definitely this will continue to happen...
-
This is part of it, but here's the other part that people are missing: Relaxing obejctive standards (i.e. weight, PT standards, etc) gives AF management more subjective say on who gets retained, who gets separated, who does and does not get promoted, etc. The AF has publicly admitted that one of their main goals is increasing diversity in certain jobs and ranks...well, having to navigate through objective standards can get in the way, especially when the pool of these diversified members is much smaller.
-
In general, if you're passed over, you're done making rank...unless you're in that 3% category that gets a DP ABZ because your senior rater realizes that you should have never been passed over in the first place. So the fact that the boards are more closer together doesn't help much, but for the vast majority of those passed over it wouldn't have mattered either way.
-
I agree with a lot of what you're saying, except this notion that being an ADO (at whatever rank) is good for the career--at best you break even in that posistion. ADO is at best a holding pattern while you wait for a more legitimate job/better PCS to open up, and often the ADO office is just a place to put guys who aren't able to do much else career wise, regardless of the rank. Don't get me wrong, it's an awesome place to be if you just want to fly the line and help mentor the young guys (which is very important), but it's not some type of box that needs to be checked if you have higher career goals. I've heard this thought (i.e. I need to become an ADO because of reason X) among the younger guys in the squadron level over the past several years and this needs to be understood for those who are trying to get to the next level. But like I said, if someone just wants to fly and help out the squadron and the younger guys, then that's cool too. Either way, just know how you're playing the game. YMMV.
-
So here is (one of many) legitimate questions I have:. How am I as an officer/leader supposed to enforce the regs/standards if I don't know which standards to enforce? Example:. I'm at finance and I see an airman, which I clearly perceive to be a biological male, wearing earrings: Do I then tell them they are not allowed as males to wear earnings? What if the person just started identifying with the female gender that morning--is he/she immediately allowed to go with the female uniform regs? Am I even allowed to ask or try to enforce the uniform standard? Logically speaking, the easiest way for the AF/DoD to get around these questions is to truly only have one standard, which I am fine with as that is the way it should be if we are all truly 'equal' or the same. I guess I'm just looking forward to the circus...
-
Do you have any information on the current pricing for this program (if it comes back), as well as how many orders they need? Thanks!
-
Definitely leave...
