nsplayr

You are describing taxation. Taxation is not socialism. Let’s allow words to still have meaning.

Yea dude, I’d love to loose a ton of money...make it rain!! 💰☔️😂💰 🙄

Lol, yea, I noticed that. Then again that also describes every squadron I've ever been in, so it's NBD. Like I said, good dudes are still good even if we disagree on politics. Hell, I'd even think about voting for Beasley to be the Mayor of Camden if I lived out there! We've had a lot of time to talk about politics recently, and you'd be surprised on the level of agreement on certain things.

Can I frame this and send it to you if Beto beats Cruz in November? 🍺 Speaking of MJ, don’t vote for her if you don’t like her policies, that’s fair enough. But good people can have a diverse array of political views. It shouldn’t be that she is “uneducated” or is a “rat” just because she is a Dem. If she’s legit a good person (and I don’t know, but seems that way), then she’s legit a good person, full stop, even if you disagree politically. I have several Republican friends who, if they ever ran, I would vote for over a hypothetical doucher entrenched Democratic incumbent who wasn’t doing the people’s work anymore. Not always an easy call when you differ substantially on policy, but leadership and character also matter in my book, and I will always give a good fair look to a fellow veteran regardless of party. Even my right-wing friends who I could not vote for are still good people, and I’d absolutely encourage them to get involved in leading the country. We need more good people in general and veterans in particular to step up and serve again. Food for thought.

This is the scorpion jet to a T, and the AF knee-capped it out of consideration a full 18 months before their proposal for light attack even went out. I remain skeptical that light attack ever pans out in any capacity.

Hell of a good farewell statement by someone I didn’t always agree with politically, but whom I greatly respect as an American. 🇺🇸

I love how the President was implicated in a felony by his lawyer, who pleaded guilty to multiple felonies including ones related to the 2016 election, on the same day that his former campaign manager was found guilty of multiple separate felonies, and like 24 hours later we're posting links to the body count from Stalinist Russia. Great pivot guys! Truly masterful.

Obviously given my background I’m well aware of that. Still would be a massive change from the bag if goods being sold up to this point, i.e. 300 tails, relieve pressure from the 4th en fleet, we needed this 10+ years ago, etc. If this is a small FID fleet we hand off to the Bulgarians or whatever, we already have that program and it’s the A-29 at Moody and we just wasted 2 years and a bunch of effort to keep dribbling the ball in the same spot. Selfish reason too: the ANG has been slated for many of the theoretical 300 aircraft, but with a fleet of 20 that probably ain’t gonna happen...

https://amp.timeinc.net/thedrive/the-war-zone/23075/the-air-force-says-it-might-only-buy-20-light-attack-aircraft-in-the-end?source=dam So maybe only 20 huh? 🙄🤦‍♂️

I mean, except for: Michael Flynn (pleaded guilty to lying about Russian contacts during the campaign) Rick Gates (pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud the United States) George Papadopoulos (pleaded guilty to lying about contacts with Russians) 13 Russian nationals & 3 Russian companies (indicted for election interference), and 12 Russian military intelligence officers (indicted for hacking and related crimes during the 2016 election) And that list totally takes newly-minted felon Paul Manafort off the table for the purposes of this discussion. This info is all a very cursory overview from the #1 google return when you type in, "russia investigation indictments," and was published by Fox News yesterday. The full text of all of those indictments are also available to read online I believe. So basically, other than all of those, you're right! I would hold up very well, never having committed any crimes more serious than traffic offenses and never having associated myself with shady-ass individuals. I'm assuming the same can be said for the vast majority of people reading this.

Of course Reid knew the GOP would want revenge, it's our recent race-to-the-bottom spate of party-first partisanship and like I said, neither side has clean hands here. My big point was the Mitch McConnell of all people does not get brownie points for following the rules as Lawnman implied. IMHO he is the worst offender of breaking the rules in the pursuit of raw partisan political power, but I also suspect that McConnell might actually take that as a compliment. Reid was a dirty old political fighter but McConnell did him one better in the end by stealing the Scalia SCOTUS seat. That's just not accurate. History lesson: the Dems won control of the Senate in the 2006 midterms and picked up more seats in the 2008 presidential, which combined gave them a substantial majority. The GOP gained 6 back in the 2010 midterms, the Dems got +2 in the 2012 presidential, but the GOP got +9 in the 2014 midterms and re-took the chamber. They've been in power since then, but it's fairly likely that the Dems will be able to retake the Senate in the 2020 presidential, pending results of the upcoming 2018 midterms. No serious political analyst or politician believes in thousand year reichs. They all know the pendulum swings back and forth as voters get fed up and want change. In fact that's exactly what drives the most political players to want to break the rules and use their power immediately, long-term consequences be damned...they'll all be gone anyways by time the chickens come home to roost. Really, you generally don't accumulate power for power's sake, you build it up so you can get things done and if doing those things costs you the power, well I hope you swung for the fences. It's what the Dems got wrong with Obamacare (they tried to compromise and had to kowtow to conservative Dems not wanting to be too bold) and what the GOP got right when many of them sold their souls to support Trump, knowing they could justify all the indignities in exchange for conservatives on the Supreme Court, tax cuts, and "owning the Libs," all of which have already been delivered. It's the same short-term thinking that causes publicly-traded companies to obsess over quarterly numbers to the detriment of workers and sometimes the long-term success of the business, and what causes shitty leaders in all places, including the AF, to do what's best for them and their next career move and care little for the real long-term consequences.

You do realize that he escalated the issue and extended the nuclear option (ie simple majority) to Supreme Court nominees right? Reid and the Dems changed the rule in 2013 for lower court and admin appointees. In 2017 McConnell and the GOP maintained that precedent and several cabinet secretaries would not have received the previously-required 60 votes. McConnell and the GOP then also went further, and have put one (soon to be two) justices on the Supreme Court with a simple majority. McConnell and the GOP effectively also gained one of those SCOTUS seats by another rule/norm change when they refused to even hold a hearing on Merrick Garland rather than just voting him down (which they had the power to do) if they really objected to him on court. So neither side is clean here, but McConnell especially get absolutely zero Boy Scout Points for playing by the rules in the Senate. I share your surprise that he has not moved to a simple majority for regular legislation, but that’s only due to my very low opinion of his leadership, ie I expect the worst. The fact that the GOP President is publically pushing him to go even further is telling when it comes to how far we’ve fallen in terms of what is considered acceptable. And interestingly enough, I am probably on the pro side of doing away with the fullibuster entirely. I just wanted to make sure the record was clear on who did what and when.

I concur, Petraeus is problematic. Put him aside if you’d like. What about the rest? What about what McRaven said? Their point is valid. Shoe on the other foot - McChrystal was critical of the Obama admin and specific people in it. Did Obama threaten to strip his clearance or actually do it? No, he didn’t. Nor has that happened to anyone else for political reasons on either side. This is petty banana republic BS. I agree it’s often distasteful for retired mil officers in particular to become political pundits, trust me, as a Dem they are much more often critical of Dems. It’s not that you have to love Brennan or everything he says. But former officials are free to speak their mind once their government service is complete and for high ranking intel folks, it’s frankly a benefit to the government, not the person, to retain their clearances so that they can continue to be consulted on things they worked on if current officials request their help.

Do you really not think any of the people on this list are trustworthy? It's a bipartisan and largely non-partisan list of high-level CIA professionals voicing a very specific critique of one of the President's policies toward someone they all likely know well. Here's the list for those who didn't click through: William H. Webster, former Director of Central Intelligence (1987-1991) George J. Tenet, former Director of Central Intelligence (1997-2004) Porter J. Goss, former Director of Central Intelligence, (2005-2006) General Michael V. Hayden, USAF, Ret., former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (2006-2009) Leon E. Panetta, former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (2009-2011) General David H. Petraeus, USA, Ret., former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (2011-2012) James R. Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence (2010-2017) John E. McLaughlin, former Deputy Director of Central Intelligence (2000-2004) Stephen R. Kappes, former Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (2006-2010) Michael J. Morell, former Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (2010-2013) Avril Haines, former Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (2013-2015) David S. Cohen, former Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (2015-2017) I'll ask again; do you not find any of these folks to be trustworthy? Do you not think McRaven in particular is a credible judge of character and leadership? As far as I know, he's never shilled on cable news since his retirement in 2014. He wrote a book and has been working as the chancellor of the University of Texas system. Y'all likely know my position on many of the President's policies based on the political party I support, but putting that aside, these folks are not speaking as partisans hacks looking to get a quick hit on CNN to shout their hot take about the latest tweet. These are professionals with specific knowledge of an issue saying that a line has been crossed. Good for them for doing so, and I'd hope serious people would do the same no matter who is in the seat at the top.

Is there something about the game (offensive schemes, rules, etc.) that changes things for you to say that you love to watch college ball but don't like the NFL? Because all but the oldest NFL players were all playing college ball less than a decade ago; it's a subset of the same people. I get that it's a different game in some ways but I enjoy both college football and NFL FWIW. And hell yea I'd like these guys living next door to me...they're mostly millionaires so my property values would probably be ballin' 😎 A good chunk of the Tennessee Titans who stay local year-round live in the Brentwood/Franklin area of Williamson County, TN and it's an extremely nice area with, "Some very fine people on both sides (of the street)" haha. https://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/news/2016/04/27/new-tennessee-titan-demarco-murray-bought-a-3m.html

Space Force by 2020 😂😂 Based on the given timeline for the light attack aircraft (proposal out Dec 2018, bid awarded Q4 FY19) + dispute delays, we’ll apparently have Space Force before we can manage to buy a single god damned AT-6, and we needed a fleet of them about 15 years ago. GL to the poor bastards at the pentagon who have to work this! Maybe they can commiserate with the guys planning the $12m parade in DC 🙄

Well considering we're the third most populous country on the planet, and neither us nor the top 2 provide universal healthcare for their citizens, I can't give you an answer based on how you asked the question. China does it, so can we. No excuses for, "too many people." What I can tell you is that Japan has 127 million people and they do it. Germany has 83 million people and they do it. The UK & France have 66 million people a piece and they do it. All using very different systems. This isn't just something that works for tiny, homogenous Nordic countries. We can develop a system that covers all Americans and works with the unique geographic, cultural and historical factors present in our country; it's not like some kind of impossible problem. It just takes the national will to do so. Right now we accept, through collective inaction, that we'll all just have to pay more than anyone else in the world by far and that on average we'll receive worse care than many other advanced nations. I've got opinions on what parts and pieces of other countries systems would work best here as well as new ideas that could help make those systems more compatible with the unique aspects of our country, but like you said, no need to derail further on the thread. Edit to add: looks like China has made huge strides toward universal basic health insurance coverage in the last few years. They've got almost 1.4 billion people, so I'm sure we can find a way to make it work with a measly 325 million. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851015001864#bib0355

https://www.amazon.com/Healing-America-Global-Better-Cheaper/dp/0143118218 For the TL;DL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Healing_of_America Happy to discuss the details of the many options for how to design the more effective, more cost-efficient healthcare system that Americans deserve. But let's be real, the standard circular firing squad on this thread isn't about policy details. It's about political warfare and most dudes around here just like to poke each other in the eye and that's fine. I gladly participated more than most. If I'm wrong on people just wanting to fight because it's fun sometimes, let's at least try to be better than using big labels and writing each other off; just talk about exactly what you mean. People on the right saying, "Socialism is bad" just like people on the left saying, "Trump is evil" isn't the start to an argument that's worth having.

Have worn both; green bag for life. Two-piece is better for hot & sandy locales and taking a shiite, but looking cool is approx. 69% of the job from what I was told the day I joined and the bag looks cooler. The simplest minds sometimes know best...show up at your kid's elementary school in multicams and they'll all say, "Look at that Army man!" Show up in a bag and it's, "Look at that pilot!" Luckily I'm in the Guard now where basically the only thing that's truly mandatory is showing up. Well, I mean you gotta show up most of the time at least...😎 Edit to add: +1 to Star Wars being "A long time ago..." It's literally the first thing you ever learned about the entire franchise.

I about fell out of my seat reading the headline. Good thing they clarified the timeline in the body of the article - Dec 2018 contract award. The editor over there at FlightGlobal.com really doesn't know how fiscal years work does he/she?

I'd quit my real job today at less than age 35 with $2m in the bank. I'd leave that sudden windfall invested in a similar fashion as my current portfolio, start drawing ~4% per year, and have almost $1K per week to spend after paying for my house (would not pay off right away due to very low interest rate for the next 28 years...can invest much more effectively than that). I'm not even sure I could spend that much although I guess it would be fun to find out. And all that is never touching your principal so long as you're willing to adjust your spending a little during downturns in investment success, i.e. still plenty of wiggle room to fund a mid-life crisis Ferrari or boat or whatever. Honestly I would keep up being a DSG in the Guard because I like serving, plus I'd like to get my Guard pension one day and stay eligible for Tricare. Purely optional though and if it ever sucked too much I could punch no questions asked. TBH a lot of people don't realize that you don't need 10s of millions of dollars to quit your job and still live a comfortable, upper-middle class lifestyle even if you are still young. YMMV, but in general your number can also likely go down with age & after factoring in other pensions if you have them. Like I said, I'm < 35, have a mortgage, don't have a pension in the bag, and have 1x elementary-aged kid...and my number is still only $2m. In your hypothetical of being debt free, no college fund to save for and a mil pension, hell, IDK but it'd be a lot lower. $700K or maybe less? Depends on how much your pension is paying monthly, e.g. AD O-5 > 20 pension, yea, prob $700K would work.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/07/20/so-you-wanna-fly-air-force-pilots-can-apply-to-new-aviation-only-program/ BLUF: Majors or Major-selects with 11-13 YOS can apply starting soon. Seemed like you only fly plus work stan eval, training or tactics. PME and AAD are optional. ALso targeting 5 years at one duty station.

Can we chance the title of this thread to “HarleyQuinn Hates Elon Musk” just so the point is clear for everyone? FFS man, we get it...fill out a hurt feelings report and keep an extra on hand just in case. If you hate Elon Musk so much, @ him on twitter for a while, I doubt he browses these forums.

I’ll just leave this here and see myself out...

Was it N.O. Xplode? Because that would be ironic as hell.