winsor

Indeed... thanks

"In the beginning God created Man. Man, being a gentleman, returned the favor." Clarence Darrow

Here we have yet again irrefutable proof of Baal's wonders, and you downplay it. Sheesh. What, you are going to suggest that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created this just by the touch of his Noodly Appendage? I think the FSM has been getting all too much credit these days, that's what I think.

Don't be silly. The Government can print all the money necessary for anything. Actually, it only takes a keystroke to create $trillions anymore. It's PFM (the Mandrake Mechanism, to be specific). BSBD, Winsor

I drink a lot, what can I say, mia copa, (or however da fuck that is said) Mea culpa.

Keynesian economics has worked a whole lot better than the Voodoo Economics of 2000-2008. That is about as useful a datum as the claim that Unicorns are faster than Centaurs.

"Prerequisite for becoming a believer in atheism" I'll give you a clue for $0.50

Ha. That you know of. 40 years ago sex-reassignment surgery was not a reality. Someone with mismatched gender equipment would not have made it past "turn your head and cough." Similarly, women with adam's apples and penises would have been flagged during the physical. I have most certainly known a few Ts since returning to civilian life. I am not sure where they fall into the mix, but again, if they can carry a rucksack all day in bad guy country and reliably provide accurate covering fire if I'm in a jam, they have my vote. BSBD, Winsor

I missed this when you first posted it, Winsor. It's very well stated and very thoughtful. The only thing I want to say is that I think that DADT was good for its time 15 years ago, but it's time to move on now. The problem I have is when a set of individuals coalesce into a pressure group with agenda separate from the mainstream and things get blurry. Say the Library Workers Union International is going through a time of Byzantine infighting, and this results in the leadership taking a strong stance on a municipal budget policy. If one opposes their standpoint for economic reasons, they immediately come under fire for being "Anti-Librarian!" and so forth. The point here is that, when any pressure group coalesces as a distinct political entity, they should be prepared to be judged as a group. This is very significant. When I was in Grad School, I strongly opposed the existence of the Black Students Union on campus as being a racist organization. My logic was that if it was a White Student Union people would go berserk, and that the selection of "black" or "white" in the descriptor was immaterial to the racist nature of the organization. Fast forward to this week, and West Chester University just caused everyone to go berserk when students circulated fliers about a "White Student Union" to supplement the "Black Student Union." I have known GLB (no T) military people from E-1 on up that were entirely professional and whose sexuality was never an issue. I think it is asinine to base their fitness to serve on their sexual preference. If, however, a "GLBT Servicepeople's Union" became a reality and began making demands to accommodate agenda separate from the "norm" (whatever that might be), there will be similar blurring about the basis of any objection to the GLBT Servicepeople's Union's agenda. Put another way, there are only two kinds of people - "Us" and "Them." If a group fights for the right to be part of Us, that is one thing. If, however, they fight to be treated as a group separate from Us, they choose to be Them. Thus, if people insist that who they do or do not sleep with is none of my goddamn business so long as I am not involved, I am cool with that. If they insist on making who they do or do not sleep with their defining characteristic, they should beware of the consequences of said decision. I greatly prefer that merit be the only consideration in whether someone is accepted in a military unit, and that sexuality be left as far out of the equation as possible. If a skilled and dedicated close air support pilot is disqulified in favor of a more timid airman, or if a combat medic who is cool under fire is replaced by someone who becomes useless when things go bang, I oppose whatever policy makes that happen. I greatly value said pilot and medic, and want them on my side. BSBD, Winsor

As have eating shrimp and lobster. That was my original point and you've just circled yourself right back to it. Tell us again, please, what JC would say about eating these tasty little shellfish? Bye. He was observant, and shellfish are not kosher.

Not impossible, but still unlikely. Most generally occupy an arctic or sub-arctic habitat. My guess is you are thinking of penguins. They are actually denizens of the southern hemisphere, which includes the Antarctic. There are lots of seals in temperate areas. San Francisco Bay is full of them. BSBD, Winsor Doesn't the baddest seal of all live in the antarctic? It's a "true seal", too. They eat penguins for breakfast, lunch, dinner and supper! Brunch, too! Outside of Alameda Island, my guess is that you are right. The leopard seal is one eating machine. People who are blase about encroaching upon charismatic megafauna's territory are those who have never witnessed them in action. I would not willingly go somewhere that animals like that might conclude that I would do well as a snack. Whatever real estate they occupy, they can have. BSBD, Winsor

Fun article.

Not impossible, but still unlikely. Most generally occupy an arctic or sub-arctic habitat. My guess is you are thinking of penguins. They are actually denizens of the southern hemisphere, which includes the Antarctic. There are lots of seals in temperate areas. San Francisco Bay is full of them. BSBD, Winsor

Col. Tibbetts was most certainly a terrorist. The idea of the attack was to convince Japan to surrender while there were still babies, grandmothers, widows and orphans left to incinerate. His intended purpose, which was to incinerate babies, grandmothers, widows and orphans, was achieved. Ironically enough, the capitulation of Japan was not as much in response to another two cities being incinerated by particularly efficient means as it was the declaration of war against Japan by Russia. Curtis LeMay was well on the way to achieving his goal of reducing the Japanese population "by half;" prior to the forays by the Enola Gay and Bock's Car, some 67 cities were bombed by conventional (incendiary plus antipersonnel) means, with damage ranging from 11.9% (Nishinomiya) to 99% (Toyama). Considering the sanctimonious pontificating that came after two relatively minor, if photogenic, screw-ups on the part of the Luftwaffe - Guernica and Rotterdam - it is interesting to note that the complete silence regarding the intentional devastation of a city populated primarily by refugees (your widows and orphans again) - Dresden. The fact that as many downed fliers made it to POW camps as they did is rather amazing when you consider how eager these fliers were to achieve "collateral damage." Hey, if you try to kill my wife and child, you can forget about mercy. Nothing personal. If anything, the islamist assholes that are getting us to bark at the moon and chase our tails are masters of the game. Lenin noted that the purpose of terrorism is to terrorize (most people miss that one), and killing lots of people will not necessarily do that. Stalin pointed out that two dead is a tragedy, but a million dead is a statistic (he was evil, not stupid). We bomb the snot out of people, and all it does is piss them off. The islamist assholes FAIL to set off potentially explosive sneakers and diapers and our society melts down. Talk about bang for the buck, those guys did not even get to hang out with all the other virgins. In any event, those who pursued Emilio Douhet's theory of victory by air power did little more than achieve a supreme level of evil, whether wittingly or not, regardless of the side they supported. As you may note, I am a lot more concerned for the rights of widows and orphans than I am the feelings of people who blow them to smithereens or incinerate them - but that's just me. BSBD, Winsor

Torah makes no mention of any "heaven" or "hell." If Moshe could work with those terms, I think I can too.

I have seen plenty of guys that can't hack that standard you set. Personally I think EVERY job should be open to ANYONE who wishes to volunteer for it. If you have the apptitude for it.. and you can hack the same standard, you get the job. Roger that. I do not give a rat's ass WHAT kind of special privilege someone claims - whether they are from a favored ethnic group or their daddy was a Senator - if they can not deliver. If, however, someone is from a favored ethnic group or their daddy was a Senator and they do a brilliant job, all I care about is the fact that they are committed to doing a brilliant job and deliver. Screw it - as Joe Namath said, "If you've got it, flaunt it!" BSBD, Winsor

The problem with Ann Coulter is that I can not get past her screaming in print to find out whether I agree with her or not. Same thing with Amazon. The idea that homosexuals are unfit for combat would have kept Alexander the Great at home, had he subscribed to it. The same goes for some of the most brilliant military men (and perhaps women, witness the Amazons...) throughout history. Some of the problems we have had with security breaches originating with gays have more to do with our society in general than with the military per se. Though an outsider to the "gay world," I have lived in areas with very large gay populations, and have been exposed to some of the realities of their lifestyle. One guy, who was very gay (he died of cancer), was asked by my brother why he had a wife. He responded that he married to be "normal," since "nobody wants to be a pariah." He later accepted the fact that he was gay, and his wife had already figured it out and was at peace with it. As a matter of survival, many gays have lived a lie for the bulk of their lives. Since admission to their sexual persuasion could result in expressions of disapproval ranging from shunning to unemployment to severe beatings to imprisonment to death, many gays are understandably leery about letting on their sexual persuasion. The EPQ (embarrassing personal question) disqualifier for employment with the NSA is "have you had an adult homosexual experience?" Homosexuality is up there with kleptomania and drug use, in that the willingness to engage in proscribed activity is enough to remove one from consideration. It is, of course ironic, that Alan Turing was one of the most gifted cryptanalysts that ever lived, and he was destroyed for his homosexuality. Would I share a foxhole with a homosexual? If they could shoot straight and stay awake on watch, you had better believe it. When you're up to your ass in gomers and things are going bang around you, the last thing I am worried about is who someone does or does not sleep with. Similarly, my only objection to women in combat is if they are not strong enough to carry me back to safety should I be wounded. If you have a woman who can saddle up a 65 pound rucksack plus a machine gun and hump it 14 miles before nightfall, I want her on my fire team. As James Webb noted, if you train by touch-football rules it does not help you much when you go up against the Green Bay Packers. When going into combat, it is best to count on facing the Varsity. In any event, from the standpoint of reliability in combat, the idea that sexual orientation is a factor is absurd. There have always been stellar combat leaders whose homosexuality was accepted, if not openly acknowledged. I have been honored to know a number of them. From the standpoint of security, however, the track record of gays in the U.S. intelligence services has been less than stellar. Perhaps allowing them to let on that they are gay, while still holding them to "conduct unbecoming" standards (spare me the details, dude, that's too much information...) would change this. If everything one does is a Felony, the whole right/wrong thing is seen from a rather skewed perspective. Had the person who leaked all these documents openly aligned himself with the Baha'i faith, one could expect rather a groundswell of opinion against the dastardly Baha'i. Unfortunately for the gay community, he is a cranky homosexual. When voting for a bill, the options are pretty much "aye" or "nay;" there is no box for "it is not that simple." While I am in favor of universal conscription, and for service as a prerequisite for citizenship a la "Starship Troopers," I think that a form of DADT that protects gays from malicious outing is the best we can do for the moment. In any event, given all the things I need to worry about, I am glad this is not one of them. BSBD, Winsor

Stalin would have taken them all out. You say that like it is a bad thing.

Not all, by any means.

Try Google or ask Rockwell. Nicht notwendig - es war rhetorisch. Wer ist Rockwell?

There you have it, fixed it for you. idem You have chancellors? Wow. Interesting. Sometimes it's just "leader." How does that go in German?

Come on, everyone has the right to have a hobby. Give the guy a break.

No more so than those who critcize her I'd spot her 50 IQ points just for starts.

Okay, Palin is not an idiot by dint of her verbal gaffes, she is an idiot who is prone to verbal gaffes. Obama is not unfit for public office because of his gaffes, either. Far from being an idiot, he is possessed of political genius at the very least; he is unfit for office because he is entirely unqualified to occupy it. Where his limitations exist, they are total. To come up to speed with what he needs to know to successfully execute the tasks required of him would require years of dedicated study, and there is a good chance that he is fundamentally incapable of catching on. Bob Bondurant observed that there are some people who can drive in traffic without problems, but simply cannot master the skills necessary to survive going to the limit. Just because I think one side sucks out loud, please do not assume that I have the slightest bit more affinity for the other side. Both sides of the aisle are proof that the scum rises to the top. BSBD, Winsor

I know, I know! They would be too shy to go through them, and everyone would have lived happily ever after! Terrorists are real modest.