McCain could win Ohio and NH, then we would have a 269-269 tie! Wouldn’t that be a hoot if McCain got more of the popular vote. Then what would the Dems in the House do?
McCain could win Ohio and NH, then we would have a 269-269 tie! Wouldn’t that be a hoot if McCain got more of the popular vote. Then what would the Dems in the House do?
I don’t know if it used to be different many years ago, but during at least the recent past once you make Colonel you can stay in until 30 regardless of how many times you are passed over for General. Most 06s don’t make General as you know, and tend to stay in until at least 26 years (when the pay sort of maxes out).
I do believe he will make it this time. He came in the Army in 1984, so has 6 more years regardless. I believe Sean came in about 1982, but I could be off a year. I also believe he will make it.
I apologize for the following long post in advance:
VDH is indeed a National treasure, but he, like most journalists and others who use HR as an example of some perceived fight within the ranks of GOs between warfighting GOs and Pentagon bureaucrats, has this one completely wrong.
Neither HR nor Sean was passed over for being a maverick by the “Pentagon-types”. I have no love of bureaucrats in the Pentagon, but HR and Sean’s challenges with making GO lay elsewhere, and in fact their work in Iraq is what will likely get both of them on this next list.
I am a close friend of both HR and Sean, and we have served many times together since our LT days. I believe HR has been passed over twice. There are some other issues involved with HR that got him on the wrong side of many GOs (all whom are also Iraqi vets) but these issues have nothing to do with his success in Iraq. He also spent five years away at West Point (with me, so I am not insulting him for it) getting an Advanced Degree and teaching. The last one, which used to be a major plus, has in recent years been a kiss of death on Boards (mistakingly in my opinion).
Sean is a case of a late bloomer. Rightly or wrongly, by the time he made LTC his “paperwork” was not as strong as many of his contemporaries. We both then went to work for GEN Tommy Franks some years back, and GEN Franks saw his outstanding potential and literally saved his career (as he should have). Sean was not going to get a battalion most likely, but GEN Franks wrote great OERs on him and then lined him up to be GEN Shinseki’s aide. Since then he has continued to shine. I am thrilled, because I believe he is tremendous strategic thinker.
Anyway, I do hope they are both on this upcoming GO list. But it will not signify a great shift in the thinking of Boards or anything else, which is what we will all read in the coming months. It will just be a case where their strong performances finally overcame a couple of their earlier ‘perceived’ weaknesses. I hate the Army promotion system, but in this case it probably will get it right.
I will also be thrilled because they are both Armor/Cavalry officers, and in the last couple of years Armor has been taking it on the chin in boards with respect to the Infantry. I have nothing against the Infantry, but we are not promoting or giving Brigade Commands to many Field Artillery or Armor officers these days (we are all waiting to see what happens with Battalion Command Boards), and we are in danger of becoming myopically focused if we are not careful. Each of these three branches brings a unique viewpoint to the fight, and we need all three to remain viable in the future.
My wife and I felt it. We are in Fort Knox, Kentucky. It was O-dark-thirty (meaning I’m not sure of the exact time, but early this morning) and we both said, “What was that?!”
Actually, if you look at their chart closely, this has more to do with the last five polls they used rather than a trend down. In fact, of those polls (Gallup, US Today, etc) they actually show McCain has gained on Obama since the last time they polled. Once Rasmussen and a couple others are factored in during the next few days, it will swing slightly back to McCain. I am not complaining, but all this really says is it is a tight race.
I am in the Army. Right now we are having a heck of a time recruiting enough quality recruits. Now for the shocker—it is not because of the Iraq War. The problem is that when we go into a public school, we can find few young men and women who qualify. In a class of thirty, 15 can not pass the simple tests we give them—single digit addition and subtraction kills most of them. Of the 15 who are left, 4 have too many physical or emotional problems, and 2 have too many arrests already. Leaves us with only 9 out of thirty who we can even talk to about joining. The numbers—”results”—have never been worse.
Interestingly, almost 100% of the homeschoolers we test pass.
I am guessing he may select Fred Thompson. He is his friend, might help with some conservative votes, is from a different part of the country, and refused to attack him during the primaries.
I guess I am too much old school, and am not into all this smack talk.
I am not a NE fan (although I do like Tom Brady—who from all accounts I have read is a very nice guy), but we all know the truth is the Pats are clearly the best team of the 2000’s so far, so I for one will not insult them.
Tonight does belong to NY though (who I was going for), so I will just congratulate NE on a great season, and NY for a great SB victory.
I was for Hunter, and then for Fred. But I can vote and support Mitt.
I was around in 1992 when many of my conservative friends supported old Ross because George Bush was not “Conservative” enough. After that we suffered through 8 years of the Clintons.
I am in the military, and Clinton gutted us and did nothing against Bin Laden and his like.
I hope those on this thread that are once again playing the “he is not conservative enough card” remember your choice is not between Mitt and Hunter, nor Mitt and Fred, but between Mitt and Hillary or Obama. I am heading back to Iraq again this summer—willingly—and I hope come 20 Jan 2009 I won’t find that all those who died did not do so in vain because we elected a Dem to the Presidency.
Furthermore, any Reb elected will likely (though I agree not guaranteed) nominate a more conservative judge than either Hillary or Obama will.
You do the best you can and fight for another day. But even with all the trash talking on these threads here at FR (and yes, I have been a member of FR for many years), any Republican is better than Clinton or Obama. Therefore you keep fighting for the best candidate left in the race in your mind, even if it is the best of what is left, and you vote for whomever is the nominee in the general election.
If we had a very conservative nominee win, what would we have told all the GOP moderates?
Conservatives must work harder to get one of our own to win next time. But you cannot give up just because the guy nominated is not conservative enough for you.
Any of the Repubs left will support the troops better (and I will be back in Iraq later this year), all will have more conservative social policy to some degree than the Dems, all will appoint more conservative judges, and all are at least marginally better on immigration. All miss out on one of the above at lease, but I will take a partial win in politics over a total loss any day--especially on the judge front. Anyway—take what you can get and get on with your own life—if we are truly conservative we believe we control our own destiny more than politicians control us anyway. Fight locally.
Thirty years ago he supported his friend and mentor in a Republican primary. Too far back. He was a big supporter of Reagan starting 27 years ago. That is good enough on that subject for me.
We need to stick to issues in the last 20 years or so...
Although a President can affect the pro-life movement in a number of ways, the absolute best way is by appointing strict constructionist as judges. When I listen to the candidates who are pro-life, including both Huckabee and Thompson, it appears that they are both equally against abortion, but Thompson will likely appoint the best judges.
Hunter would have also, no doubt, but he just cannot get above a couple of percentage points. Too bad.
Vote for Thompson.
If Huckabee wins the nomination though, we should vote for him int eh general election.
There have been a number of studies that have shown homeschoolers on average outperform all other students, followed by private schools, with public schools bringing up the rear. I won’t chase them down at the moment, but I would guess a bit of google work would uncover them. I do know the Michigan Court case of 15 years or so ago used many of them.
But that clearly does not mean all Homeschoolers outperform public school students. There are many excellent public schools, public school teachers, and public school students.
You have hit upon the key point regardless of which venue a child it taught in. Are the parents involved and interested, taking an active role in their child’s education and instilling in their child a love of exploration and expanding one’s mind.
Bad idea, and one that the Courts—including the Supreme Court—have already tossed out as unconstitutional.
We have been part of the Homeschooling movement for years, and part of the movement to make it legal everywhere. My wife did the yeoman’s part as I traveled the World as an officer in the US Army. She started with my oldest in 1991—he is now completing his Ph’D in EE at UT Austin at the age of 24. My daughter was recruited by most of the Ivy League Schools, before deciding on Texas A&M and graduating with a 4.0 in Science last year. Both scored over 1500 on their SATs. Our youngest has have been equally as successful. My wife does not have a college degree.
The Courts threw out all the requirements like requiring Education Degrees because they determined there was no overriding society need to take measures that resulted in less parental rights (the lawyers on this thread can give the more complete legal findings if they wish).
In the Michigan case that really opened the way for Homeschooling throughout the country the Courts told the State that after reviewing all the evidence the State and the State Board of Education presented, the case was stronger for abolishing the public school system—worse education results, more crime, less capable citizens being produced, etc—than for regulating Homeschooling. Quite an embarrassment to the NEA and Board of Education. There have been numerous studies done, and all have shown less trouble and better results from Homeschooling on average than the public school system. They have also shown no better results if a parent had a degree or not.
The one factor that did make a difference was how involved and committed the parent is to the training of their child. Not surprising, because I have a number of public teachers in my family, and they tell me that is the key to a child in public school doing well also.
In fact, I actually believe--but have no evidence just a gut feeling based on all the other ridiculous overstatements from folks like Nagen--that the number of dead in NO will be much lower than the 10s of thousands he is now spouting off. What will all the loonies say when it turns out to be less than one tenth of that. Now folks ares tarting to see what exaggerations we have had to deal with in Iraq, where we consistently were stunned that the news was reporting things entirely different than what we were seeing on the ground. Oh well.
One suicide was because the policeman's wife had died in the flood...does not seem to be driectly related to the fact that he was a policeman. Don't know about the second one.
Perhaps. Are could this be another case of the media (and lawyers) trying to fins any soldiers who will try and discredit American and the Iraq War...hmmmm.
Accidents happen in war. Look at when this happened. Who would these soldiers like to sue? The American private and his sergeant who where driving a tank in the sandstorms when this supposedly happened?
Sounds to me like the abortion did LEAD to sterility, even if indirectly. I do not know what context Waxman is taking these examples from , but there clearly are risks with abortion and with so-called safe sex that are too often not fully disclosed to our teenagers.
Bottom line...these lawmakers named and the Washington Post have always hated abstinence based programs, and will find the exception where one is going overboard or will just take things out of context to try and discredit them.
I am incredibly supportive of the war effort, and in fact have volunteered to return to Iraq next month...I have a total of over 500 days in the Middle East already, including Baghdad.
But I must admit C.K. makes a very valid argument. Then again, I think he almost always does. He is definitely one of my favorite commentators.
Does anyone know why he is wheelchair bound by the way? Not that important, I was just wondering. I am almost certain it is a long-standing illness or disease, and not an accident.
Why? I say let him sell what he wants to (as long as he is licensed and selling within the limits of the law), and those that want to shop there, while those that do not shouldn't.
If he stays in business, fine. If not, too bad. I was a butcher (owned my own shop for years) before going in the service, but for health reasons often eat many health foods bought from local vegetarian groups. They certainly have a strange morality as far as I am concerned, but they sell products I want to buy, and they were not working against me, so I buy from them. I am free to do that or not. That's how good old capitalism works, and it works well.
I do not wish them ill will because they think eating animals is wrong. If that is what they believe, fine with me. I do not wish them to go bankrupt because of it.
If the particular places I buy from start to use the money I spend to work against my right to eat beef, I am also free to not support their stores. But in the case in this story, this guy just doesn't sell birth control pills himself because he does not believe in him. He has not prevented other stores from selling them.
All of your points are good, except once again that is between the people in the examples you mention and the owners of those businesses, not the gov't or ACLU lawyers.
If you own the pizza shop...sure. Why should the gov't be able to force you to sell sausage pizza if you didn't want to have it on your menu?
Actually, I have eaten at a number of Muslim resturants in the world (I have three years in the Middle East and Northern Africa under my belt), and none of them served sausage. If that bothers me, I shouldn't have gone there to eat.
I am sure the owner would if it bothered him. So we must assume this guy either is the owner or the owner agrees with him.
Therefore, that takes us back to square one...he should be able to sell or not sell...it is his business. I do not believe the government should be able to force a small businessman to sell something he doesn't want to.
And I also do not regard birth control pills as abortion pills, though I am pro-life and do not believe in abortion. But if he does...so be it.
I guess you need to qualify "reputable historians."
There are many eyewitness accounts namely in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
Reputable? Contrast other ancient writers' accounts (Plato, Sophocles, Euripides and Aristotle) to the number of manuscripts of The New Testament for reliability and accuracy.
Quoting from a book by Josh McDowell here: "When you study Plato in school, does the instructor express skepticism about the reliability of REPUBLIC?"
I think it is clear that Jesus existed. You may argue about what he called Himself and whether He was the Son of God.
Another reporter trying to get a pulitzer prize I am afraid.
The military will look into it, and I will hazard a guess they will exonerate him from any wrong doing.
If he just shot a wounded man for the heck of it, he will be charged, as he should be. But it is much more likely that you have hit the nail on the head...in the heat of combat, he saw a terrorist who he thought was dead, start to move. The Marine thus thought the terrorist was playing dead like the terrorist who shot this same Marine in the face the day before. I have sat on military boards, and we give the benifit of the doubt in these cases to the soldier. It is easy for folks to sit in their living rooms and second guess what soldiers and Marines do in combat, but it is much different to be the one in the line of fire. You have to make a quick call, and he made it. Beneifit of the doubt goes to him until someone can prove different.
But that is different from claiming that we should just kill any wounded terrorist becasue they are getting what they deserve. They in fact are getting what they deserve in those cases, but it also brings us too far down towards their level.
I saw, and really liked the Incredibles. I have heard Polar Express is good and plan on seeing it. I think its great that you got to work on it.
I agree; we should be happy anytime they produce a "G" film...claim victory and go see it just to get the point across that family friendly films are the way to go.
Thanks for the ping. This is a real hot-button issue, and I agree with the sentiments of all of your posts. We are in the midst of a pendulum swing. Pro-lifers (myself included) dare not DEMAND anything. We elected President Bush. Let's trust him to make the right decisions in this area, beginning with judges. Roe v Wade will not be overturned overnight, but I am happy to say that we have made tremendous strides in EDUCATING the American public on the great atrocity that abortion is, and that, along with sonograms is what is changing the hearts and minds of people. Those with hardened hearts (Planned Parenthood comes to mind) will NEVER change. "A gentle answer turns away wrath." So it is with convincing people that abortion is . . . genocide.
Hmmm. I think we have a good chance to pick up both LA seats. In both cases the Repub was the clear top vote getter. In one case, total Republican votes were much higher than Dems, and in the other I thought the total was about equal. My thought is the runoff election in both might go our way.
But I readily admit I am not an expert on LA politics--which as we all know are in a world by themselves.
Do you think the Dems will get one of those runoff seats?
Raed my last post. There is somethig wrong with this sotry. I was just there, and am getting set to return. The constraints are not nearly as great as this story makes it sound. If shot at, there are no constraints. If calling heavy artillery into heavy civilian areas AND you are not getting shot at, you do have to get permission, but we were getting it very quickly. Not sure what this whole 1 hour business is all about...must be more to the story than this reporter knows.
Actually, this is not as constrained as this report would have you think. If shot at, they can return fire. If not being shot at, they can still get permission to attack a senstive site very quickly. Not sure why this one took so long. I think there is more to the story.
It will be interesting when that is finally published...if it is. I know Army Times did a poll just before the election and over 75% of the soldiers polled were voting for Bush.