Jump to content

Waingro

Registered User
  • Posts

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Waingro

  1. 21 minutes ago, Prozac said:


    You’re absolutely correct there. Of course, I couldn’t find a single example of a school district in the United States espousing CRT...

    Careful, bringing up the fact that zero schools have ever espoused CRT is just one step away from asking them to define it! I'm pretty sure the Tucker talking points don't go that deep.

  2. 9 hours ago, dream big said:

    Crenshaw has teamed up with him as well. While it is surely political posturing by Cotton, it is a nice display of checks and balances.  CRT has no place in our military.  Basic treating all people with respect might do. 

    Agreed, it doesn't belong. But I doubt Crenshaw or Cotton could accurately describe what CRT actually is. And it isn't in our military, or K-12 curriculum anywhere. This is a culture war Boogeyman with as much factual basis behind it as razor blades in Halloween candy, or the "War on Christmas." Media personalities everywhere are giving airtime to politicians trying to build capital based on CRT fear. 

    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 3
  3. 7 hours ago, kaputt said:

    Pretty unreal what is happening in this country these days. 
     

    Also saw on the local news here in SoCal the other day that a boat of people trying enter the country illegally had Chinese nationals on it. Who the hell knows what’s coming through our border now as a consequence of this administration’s sick plan to import demographic change in order to win elections and solidify power. 

    I'm genuinely curious, what are the CBP employees doing differently today than they were doing six months ago, that is driving this? I'll have to assume that these accounts are true and correct. So what executive-branch policies are resulting in migrants streaming over the border and then boarding airplanes to other states?

  4. 6 hours ago, Bode said:

    Anyone done any math on the Survivor Benefit Plan? My wife is retiring and we are trying to decide whether or not to take it. Eventually I will retire as well if that plays as a factor.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Like Hoss said, very expensive for what you get. But if you sign up for the kid's plan it's literally the same benefit (your spouse is the executor so it goes to him/her either way) for like $15 a month instead. Works until your youngest is 18 or 23 if in college. That's the only way I found that it makes any sense at all to do it. 

  5. 11 hours ago, FLEA said:

    The fact they require 6 months is ridiculous. Any other job is happy with 2 weeks but the AF.... no, we want to make sure your decision to quit gives us time to make it painful. 

    What's fun is that to retire it's only 4 months required, and you get 20 days of permissive in conjunction with retirement. With 60+ days of terminal leave, you can be doing your final out just 6 weeks after dropping papers. 

  6. 9 hours ago, jazzdude said:

    Also, 2 weeks is generally just a courtesy, could be 0 (right to work goes both ways), could be more based on the employment contract.

    Right-to-work means that you can't be compelled to join a union or pay union dues. Did you mean at-will employment?

  7. 5 hours ago, HeloDude said:

    My quick bar napkin math tells me that it’s nearly impossible to be a ‘graduated’ sq cc and then have your first look.  Even if you’re early to command, I’m pretty sure your first look would still be while being a sitting commander.  
     

    I had a recent Sq commander who was not a BTZ O-5, but was a school select on his O-5 board, who then was picked up his first look while being a commander.  Interestingly enough he turned it down.  

    The majority of non-rated career fields will have O-4s as commanders. Some, like SFS and MX, they'll get multiple command tours. 

    Which is also why it's dangerous to go up for O-5 IPZ from a line job, and not school/staff - most of your competition are sitting squadron commanders. At least under the old system. 

  8. 4 minutes ago, kaputt said:

    Oh I totally agree on the fact that posting political views on social media, especially as a military member  is a foolish endeavor regardless. 
     

    But the issue I have with this is the fact that it appears an already existing road block to additional surveillance is being circumvented, and the individual heading the program leading this circumvention is a partisan political appointee who himself has some pretty extreme political views posted on his own social media. 

    Yeah, that's problematic. This seems like a solution in need of a problem. I think the mechanism for addressing bad judgement in that regard already exists.

    Case in point, I had an airman make a blatantly racist comment regarding a former POTUS on a public and widely viewed Facebook page. CMSAF personally found it, it went at the speed of light through the wing leadership and to my desk to handle. I was on the fence about taking a stripe, settled on LOR with control roster though. Probably didn't warrant Art 15 and I wasn't convinced it was winnable if he declined the Art 15. Guy came close to ruining his career because he thought it was a good idea to blow hard on Facebook, it was unbelievable. 

    • Upvote 1
  9. 4 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

     


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media

    Social media is a broad term that by this Wikipedia definition, does encompass baseops. Interactive? Check. User generated content? Check. Profile? Check. Connecting one user’s profile to other users? Check.

    It doesn’t have to be a viral app of teens posting selfies to be social media…your early days of posting on studentpilot were social media before the term was coined.

     

    Sure, it's a broad term. To me the difference is that a forum, for guns, motorcycles, military flying, sailboats, or whatever, exists to facilitate the exchange of opinions and ideas. They're generally somewhat anonymous and have no audience outside of those who deliberately seek it out. 

    Facebook, Twitter, insta, etc are all broadcast platforms. I don't recall ever seeing a discussion of any real value occur on any of those platforms. It's the teens posting selfies like you said, and the boomers sharing stupid shit, and the too common "old man yells at cloud."

    Man I hadn't thought about the political discussion side of studentpilot.net in a while, that was rowdy. 

  10. 1 minute ago, HAWDINGL said:


    So to recap:

    Opinion

    “why does anyone put opinions on social media, no one cares what you think”

    Edited to add: More opinion.

    lolz


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    This is social media? I was reading and having discussions with others back on the studentpilot.net forums many years before Facebook was a thing. People interact on forums because of the exchange of ideas. 

    Weird that you'd even be here commenting while not knowing what social media is. 

    • Downvote 1
  11. 11 minutes ago, kaputt said:

    "Although in the past the military has balked at surveilling service members for extremist political views due to First Amendment protections, the pilot program will rely on a private surveillance firm in order to circumvent First Amendment restrictions on government monitoring, according to a senior Pentagon official."

    From the article...

    I suppose circumventing first amendment protections is of no concern to you?

    I'd also encourage you to read up on Bishop Garrison. I just did so from both left and right leaning sources, and that is not a man who is seeking to find extremism in just Boogaloo clowns; that is a man who thinks extremism is having voted for Trump for President. 

    The first amendment doesn't protect one from consequences. You're welcome to put anything you'd like on your Facebook page, but there's nothing saying you won't face consequences from doing so. 

    I think the "government monitoring" ship sailed back with the passage of the Patriot Act (a misnomer if there ever was one).

    To me the real questions is why people type out their beliefs on social media anyway. Literally zero people care that someone is against kids in cages or that someone thinks the Covid vaccine is dangerous.

    Edited to add: the Venn diagram of people who propagate/believe the Big Lie and those who hold extremist views is nearly a circle, and they're rarely shy about showing it online, so that makes this an easier endeavor. 

    • Downvote 2
  12. 3 hours ago, kaputt said:

    Has it been defined yet what “extremist” views are?

    Can’t believe this is legal.

     

    Anything from the right-wing terrorist Boogaloo clowns would qualify. Like the Air Force NCO from Travis who murdered two law enforcement officers a week apart.

     

    What laws do you think this runs afoul of?

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1
  13. 2 hours ago, SocialD said:

    Right!  In reference to the bonus, you even had a few who smugly proclaimed on a few FB groups that "airlines won't be hiring for years."  Meanwhile, guys who were recently on a "no-fly" status just got awarded Captain and  guys with 5 years on property were awarded 75/76 Captain.  I'd expect for us (DAL) to announce hiring soon as well.  What a whacky time in this business.  Bottom line, big miscalculation by the AF and .gov.  

    I don't know a single pilot that stayed in, took another assignment, took the bonus etc. because of the pandemic. Maybe five guys in my squadron retired or separated during the pandemic, all are gainfully and happily employed now, to include those who wanted airline work. UPS and FedEx never slowed down. Maybe it was different in the heavy world, but in the fighter world, the pandemic did virtually nothing for retention. 

    Anyone who stuck around because of it was likely a tire-kicker and not ever serious about getting out anyway. 

  14. 3 hours ago, Day Man said:

    Shaw Viper last summer...AIB link is in that thread, but:

    "Evidence also indicates the MP was not fully engaged on the challenges of flying a night instrument approach due to his unsuccessful attempt to conduct his first ever AAR at night, which is not allowed by Air Force regulations."

    The way it's worded makes this fact somewhat ambiguous: this was his first ever attempt at AAR. And it was at night. One of just many ways his entire chain of command let him down that night.

  15. 20 minutes ago, Pooter said:

    Some pretty funny stuff coming out about Sidney Powell's defamation lawsuit right now. Apparently the only strategy left for her is to intentionally dumpster her own lawyer credentials in the hopes a judge will deem her election fraud claims too far fetched to be believed by any reasonable person. 
     

    ..which is true. No one with half a brain should have believed her.  
     

    But she was serious at the time and that's what matters. Trump seems to have this weird effect on people where they, like him, think they could get away with saying anything they want.  Here's to hoping trump and his merry band of idiots get absolutely cleaned out through these embarrassing lawsuits. Republicans need that if they want to take back control of their party. 
     

     

    It's the same legal defense that Fox News used, that no reasonable person should have considered them anything more than entertainment. 

    Sadly I work with more than one person, all college educated and literate, that still believe the election was stolen. You're right, the party needs to alienate and shun these people if they want to stay relevant and viable. 

  16. 16 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

    Don't let your bias cloud the facts.  Urging them to scrutinize ballots in certain locations is not illegal...the optics of how those votes came is was odd to some but they were ultimately validated and true votes...the LIE was saying the Trump said to "FIND THE FRAUD"...which is far closer to a crime but a complete fabrication.

    Correct, the "find the fraud" statement was verified not to have been said. Again though, the story wasn't retracted (as has been incorrectly and repeatedly stated in many posts above this one). Because the substance of the story is largely unchanged!

    Even if it's a minority of Americans, how have this many of us been conditioned to be ok with POTUS contacting elections officials? The best of us are rightly horrified by this, as we would be if Hillary, Romney, McCain, Gore, or any other loser of the general election were to do the same. Nevermind that it was POTUS. 

    Sources can be wrong and/or mislead. Newspapers print corrections as needed. This correction here isn't some shocking indictment on print journalism.

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 5
  17. 2 hours ago, GrndPndr said:

    Wonder why they are bothering to retract the story?  No one except the 48% will continue to whine about it, so just keep going.

    They didn't retract the story, it appears reading comprehension isn't strong among these commenters. They issued a correction which is substantially different. The story itself is materially the same: POTUS directly contacts a state elections official, urging them to scrutinize ballots in specific locations. Which is an absolutely mind blowing story by itself, and would only be acceptable in some banana republic. Now with the correction and the recovered recording, there's proof.

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 3
  18. 15 minutes ago, Blue said:

    Sometime around November/December 2022 is when I anticipate you'll see the formal transfer of power... 

    I haven't read that much MAGA/Q fan fiction since before the inauguration. Thanks for the chuckle.

    Is it hard to find an audience for this trash now that Parler is off the app stores?

    • Haha 4
    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1
  19. "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."
    --John Rogers

    • Haha 3
    • Upvote 4
  20. 4 hours ago, M2 said:

    Of course the upside is Dr. Seuss books are now selling like hotcakes!

     

    Good, Dr. Seuss is a classic. 

    Unless you meant the people paying exorbitant sums for the out-of-print ones, that nobody was buying before anyway. I wonder if those people will store those unread gems with their mountain of uneaten Goya beans, unused MyPillows©, or unwatched Rosanne DVDs. Or if they'll eventually make it to the trashcan with the items Tucker Carlson told them to dump, like Taylor Swift albums, NFL gear, Yeti Coolers, Keurig Makers, Starbucks mugs, Netflix gift cards, Budweiser anything, Oreo cookies, Gilette products, Nike products... It's dizzying trying to keep up with remembering all the shit that conservatives have tried to boycott for perceived injustices lately, I'm sure I missed a bunch. 

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  21. 4 hours ago, M2 said:

    Therein lies the rub.  Biden is wrong for not reading Dr. Seuss.  It is tradition to read those books on Read Across America Day.  Hell, even Former President Barack and Michelle Obama said “We love Dr. Seuss in this house” at the 2015 event.

    This long-standing tradition started by Obama himself? 😂

  22. 3 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

    Woke.thumb.jpg.ac0d2dbeac4de9ea27c889449263a58c.jpg

    Nobody got "cancelled", the estate elected to stop printing these books, none of which sell well, a couple of which have sold literally zero copies in the last few years. 

    It's been useful at helping me cull the crybabies out of my Facebook feed though, most of whom love capitalism and free market right up until they want to signal made-up virtues when private entities make business decisions on their own. Also lots of overlap with the crowd who wanted to "cancel" (in their words) the NFL, Yeti Coolers, Delta Air Lines, etc.

    This shit is entertaining. I'm eager for them to start attacking Kidz Bob next for "cancelling" the offensive swear words out of modern pop songs. 

    • Like 2
    • Downvote 6
  23. 2 hours ago, brickhistory said:

    Don't know him personally or professionally as I'm not in his district, hope he's an ok guy in person and will accept those testimonials about the many things he's done for service folk.  Appreciate that.

    However, his constituents, the ones he's elected to represent seem to disagree with his stance rather strongly to include at least one county, I believe two but stand to be corrected, GOP committee censuring him for his vote to impeach Trump.  

    His choice to roll the dice to see if they either forget by next election or whether his district gets dissolved by the Illinois legislature as is likely if the state loses a congressional seat due to redistricting.

    I do take issue with his vote to strip the bat-sh1t crazy Georgia congresswoman of all her committee assignments.  He helped deny her constituents their effective representation that they knowingly elected her to.  

    As always in politics, IMO, it's a case of follow the money.

    His just started anti-Trump PAC combined with his many appearances on liberal media looks like a way to set up a comfy post-congressional lifestyle, either via K Street and/or TV gigs.  Don't blame him a bit but it just strikes me as the B-model Scarborough.

    An Illinois county that he doesn't even represent voted to censure him. Which shows how seriously we should take county party organizations. Maybe the 4H club two counties over will censure him next!

    It's refreshing to see a true conservative refuse to go down with the ship. He also won his district by a substantially higher margin that did Trump, so his constituency is clearly well represented. 

    I hope he's the future of the party. If not, God help us all. 

    • Like 6
  24. 21 hours ago, pawnman said:

    It's photoshopped.

    It was a response to Biden bombing Syria after blasting Trump on Twitter for...bombing Syria.

    Sadly, there are certain to be some professional faux-outrage experts who think this is real. Instead of just laughing about it. 

  25. 22 minutes ago, brabus said:

    No way, has to be trolling. The wing and OG were solid fighter pilots/leaders as SQ/CCs at least...if this is true, they have lost their minds and the respect of any fighter pilot who has worked with/for them (except for those who decided to castrate themselves with the blue koolaid snips of course).

    It's real. Congrats Phats, this is, and forever will be your legacy. Assuming your leadership is pushing this on you Phats, you had options, all of them better than this. A squadron full of guys with no callsigns would be better than this Sesame Street spectacle of a naming you propose. The Warhawks deserve better. 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...