HeloDude

Really good 15 min video on the recent SCOTUS ruling and Thomas’ opinion regarding the 2A. BL: This could be huge in striking down many gun control laws in the future.

Just curious, if you think it’s silly for someone to stay on AD, why do you believe so? Reason I ask you specifically is that on other threads you’re very pro-big government and seem to trust the feds wrt environmental, health, economic policies, and in general being pro-regulation vs not. . So why not extend that same faith/enthusiasm to serving in the active duty military?

I’ll just judge the climate alarmists by their actions…so yeah, I’m not too worried.

Biden’s “climate czar” John Kerry said we absolutely do not need more oil drilling. This is the message of the left… If the GOP was smart (they often aren’t), they would run ads of a few soundbites of Biden/his administration and Dem politicians saying how they’re against oil, more oil exploitation, etc and then show the price of gas.

And when there’s no one else to blame, and your party runs both the House and the Senate, then blame the GOP lol…it’s not going well for old Joe. “Biden Blames Republicans in Congress for Soaring Inflation” https://www.nationalreview.com/news/biden-blames-republicans-in-congress-for-soaring-inflation/?fbclid=IwAR1Y_5GZV8YiTGjtv8AJqvtjZcML3UBQNSppsFBR5NxaC-Bhy-bwpSKMIDA

Sadly it’s all political. The left over the years have been on record for saying how bad they think fossil fuels are, how they want them to go away…even if it costs the average American citizen more money. Biden signs EOs to make it harder/more expensive to harness the energy of fossil fuels, he has advisors who are openly against fossil fuels, and the Dems have not produced any legislation that reduces regulations on fossil fuels. But the rising gas prices are now the fault of…wait for it…Putin’s war in Ukraine and those evil greedy oil executives. Biden doesn’t deserve 100% of the blame for the rising costs, but he does deserve 100% for not trying to lower the costs.

That’s why I asked based on what you know right now? You can always change your mind since it’s not the real election lol. You voted for Biden and he hadn’t ran anything…so I would say that running Florida is just a little more than running nothing.

Just curious, if the 2024 election was held next week and the Dem nominee was Biden and the GOP nominee was DeSantis, assuming their platform was exactly based off of what you know of both of them today, who would you vote for?

Well, we’re below when Trump was last president… Is Biden to blame, partially. Is Trump to blame, partially. But here’s the problem—Biden is president and the Dems have full control over the federal legislation process. So what is their plan?

The ad says all phases of T-6 raining.

Wait…are you referring to the “mostly peaceful protests”?

Just curious if you think things are still going well?

What squadron?

This If they’re going to be “just as good” as FAIPs because they’re doing the exact same training, then why not make more FAIPs? Oh wait…they already did that a few years ago. And good luck training a civilian to the same standard as a FAIP when the civilian can only work 40 hours a week. Oh, and who is going to train these civilians?—it’s not like UPT has open seats not being filled and that PIT isn’t running 2+ months behind.

I wouldn’t call close formation and ET3 “fundamental flying skills”…and I’m pretty sure they don’t teach this in IFT. A civilian IP can definitely learn/be able to teach it, but it will take much more training since they’ve never seen it in UPT. Oh, and here’s a data point: Some T-1 trained FAIPs have gone through CRs at T-6 PIT (and some have even washed out) for lack of formation flying abilities due to the cuts in UPT. As far as being a military officer, UPT is centered around flight instruction based on the foundation of military bearing, integrity, etc. If this wasn’t necessary, then mil cap wouldn’t be a thing. It’s not to say that 23 year old civilian pilots can’t also have these qualities, but there’s no training program to weed those people out who aren’t a good fit. Just think about people you’ve met who said they’ve wanted to be a military pilot but just didn’t have the qualities we seek in a military officer…there’s a reason why we’re different. Also, unless they rewrite the rules, you can’t work a civilian more than 40 hours a week without permission, compensation, etc. This changes the ball game quite a bit. Rucker, Kirtland, and other programs have had civilian/contractor flight instructors, but I’m pretty sure the vast majority have been very experienced military pilots in the past, and their instruction has been more/less limited to contact/instrument flying…they leave the formation and other stuff to the mil IPs. That all being said, my biggest concern is with the comments on this page who think this will make a better IP than those graduating from PIT…and across the board, I just don’t see it. Do you agree with Jice that these young civilian CFIs with 50 hours of C172 IP time will be better than a UPT graduate going to PIT to be a FAIP?

So a 23 year old, 50 hour CFI, who has never gone through any military training (flight or otherwise) will be better than a 25 year old officer who has gone through a commissioning source, graduated UPT (they still wash people out btw), and has successfully gone through the current PIT syllabus (which also still washed people out)?

I might be misunderstanding you…but are you suggesting that this program will make instruction at UPT better by making white jets more selective for AD pilots due to sending less qualified low time CFI’s through some sort of PIT (I’d be willing to bet their syllabus will not be the same as it is right now)?

The ad says they’ll be teaching in all phases of T-6 training…

If you stay in long enough, you’ll see what happened years ago (then ended), come back again.

Well, the root cause for the Taliban falling and a “democratic” Afghanistan taking place was the US invasion and occupation, so it’s not that surprising…

Yeah, definitely allows us to spend money that has a “tremendously positive return on investment”… “U.S. Spent $384,000 to Study Peruvian Brothels” https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2022/06/02/us_spent_384000_to_study_peruvian_brothels_834482.html?fbclid=IwAR04gSHh7uGawa-weNa4SfZs6T15OoVCYa1OT_3gndNje21WmBRiAD68Vx4

Never believe a progressive when they say “nobody wants to take your guns away”…because that’s exactly what they want to do.

Looks like Adam is working really hard to get that “token GOP” contributor job on MSNBC, CNN, etc. As he gets closer to that job, he starts changing his stance on “rights”. “Look, I have opposed a ban, you know, fairly recently. I think I’m open to a ban now. It’s going to depend on what it looks like because there’s a lot of nuances on what constitutes, you know, certain things,” Kinzinger told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union” when asked if he still opposed “a ban on the kind of assault weapons that were used in the shooting.” But he used to say… https://kinzinger.house.gov/issues/issue/?IssueID=126991 https://www.foxnews.com/media/second-amendment-red-flag-laws-mass-shootings

He’s in charge, for better or for worse. That being said, I’d be truly surprised if he/the Dems run him again in 2024…if he even makes it that far.

So I’m confused…Biden said we’ll use our military to defend Taiwan against China, but right after he made that statement, his staff was quick to make a a “clarification”? So which is it? Biden Says U.S. Will ‘Militarily Defend’ Taiwan against Chinese Invasion https://news.yahoo.com/biden-says-u-militarily-defend-141519941.html