Leaderboard

Glad you’re not a commander.

"This decision was based on public comments made by Lt. Col. Lohmeier in a recent podcast," a Space Force spokesperson said in an email. "Lt. Gen. Whiting has initiated a Command Directed Investigation on whether these comments constituted prohibited partisan political activity." I find this very problematic. So, lets fire the commander while we determine if his words are an issue/problem and violate any rules.

Were I commander, I'd just take note of anyone who didn't wear a mask. When they make the covid shot mandatory, anyone not wearing a mask who pops red on IMR gets an article 15.

Are you new to the "guilty until proven innocent" USAF?!?

I'm starting to think that not only will we lose the next big war, but that we'll deserve to lose it...

I guess I was mostly surprised that they put it right out there in words, for all to see. Didn't even have the decency to hide the truth while screwing somebody.

*airline hires in spite of rona* big blue right now.... 😄

Leadership doesn’t need to ask. A commander can get the list of fully, partially, and non-vaccinated individuals without violating HIPAA. There is a readiness need, as some sunny locations allow fully vaccinated people to skip ROM.

Ah copy. I wasn't sure, because I knew you were a U2 guy but thought maybe you were just out of the fold. I'll have my detection meter worked on.

I’m aware. I work in an 11R squadron. Just being sarcastic.

It's posted in the Woke thread, but it is just as appropriate here... and the ACIP thread.

I just listened to the podcast, hardly seems to be anything one should get fired over. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't believe car accidents, drug abuse, heart disease, etc. are "natural causes;" nor do I believe any criminal act should be ignored. My point is the odds of being a victim of a mass shooting is much lower than it's being made out, just as claims certain minorities are being "targeted" by the police. People are not presenting compelling arguments based on facts, but media hype. My advice to them, to quote a caveman, is "Maybe next time you should do a little research." The truth is out there, but many will still ignore it!

The gas shortage that wasn't. Panic buying caused long lines but there wasn't really a supply problem. People lose their minds based on sensational news stories. Anecdotally, my uncle just drove home through 3 of the states states that were "most hit." Aside from spending a few extra minutes in line (panic buying), he didn't have a problem getting gas. He noted a few gas stations appeared to be out of gas, but hell, I saw that in Tennessee driving home during spring break this year. I remember on the evening of 9/11, even in my podunk town (pop. ~900), our lone gas station had a line of nearly 100 cars. This same thing has played out numerous times since, and so far they've all ended up a nothing burger. So far...because I acknowledge the reports that our infrastructure is vulnerable and I'm hoping IT (or government) spending will be going up soon for our those companies.

Why would you think I meant that? The answer is no, I do not believe that nor do I think my statement you quoted implies such. I won’t speculate on personhood, but if a human being medically dies when circulatory or brain function ceases, it’s logical to conclude they are alive when those functions begin. Which happens in the first few weeks inside the womb.

I want to do the least amount of work for the most pay in the shortest time period. I don't understand the desire to do the "most amount of work" if the pay for less work over the same period is the same.

A philosophically consistent mechanism for determining the beginning of human life might be using the opposite of the identified end of human life: 1. cessation of either circulatory & respiratory function OR 2. cessation of brain activity. A logical starting point would be assuming human life begins at the opposite of defined human death.

Honest question: why is this ("density") an attractive attribute? I completely understand the attraction to commutable schedules, as well as having schedules which both maximize pay and time off simultaneously. However, "density" implies a lot of work in a short period of time. Personally, I want to do as little as possible for as much pay as possible in a given unit of time. I want to maximize my credit-hour density, and not my actual work density. In other words, let's say we're talking about a 5-day stretch that is worth 35 hours of pay. Credit being equal between the two, I'd rather do four (or three!) flights with three long layovers in that 5-day stretch than 4 legs per day with 4 short layovers. My point is, "density" of work in and of itself isn't a measure of how to maximize the combination of pay and time off simultaneously. System form, trip rigs, min guarantees, etc, are what really determine this over the simple math of how many legs per day you're completing.

Block 70 F-106 concept and fan fiction backstory https://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal16/15101-16200/gal15112-F-106-S/01.jpg https://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal16/15101-16200/gal15112-F-106-S/00.shtm Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I mean...he recorded and published the evidence. I'd say he proved exactly what he was accused of. I suspect he couldn't define "Marxism" or provide an example without Googling it. But he felt the need to take a shot at the SECDEF.