I DIGRESS

EDIT--NONE OF THIS PERTAINS TO THE THREAD
But West Point IS the four year college education. Going there is like going to college. EDIT-generally you dont go to college then west point, you do one or the other.

They have the same minimum requirements as most standard universities and from what I understand gaining admission to West Pt is as simple as meeting college requirements and commiting to the military.

HOWEVER, what they and the military in general these days produce looks more like your pizza boy than Stonewall Jackson or George Patton.

Thats your opinion, ask a professor or someone else in academics and they will tell you the American education system has for the last 80 yrs been designed to produce workers not scholars. "And your neighborhood and family must be in the top 10% of the nation, b/c my parents are in the bottom 90% and more than a majority of my classmates fail standardized tests each and every year."


NEVERMIND

You know something? I read these boards quite a bit, and as you can see I don't post very much. But when I see a person who is supposed to be one of the leaders of our country, come out and say what he said about our troops, during a time of war, it just makes me angry. Yes it is a fact that many of the people who the recruiters go after are from less fortunate areas of the country. And while that may be true it does not really mean that those people are uneducated or ignorant. Throughout history there have been many people who have not even received anything over an eighth grade education, and yet many of those people went on to be famous inventors, to have successful buisnesses. So the unschooled education theory is not always a correct one. Of course we should try to achieve the highest level of schooled education possible to help us move on in life, but not everyone has that kind of opportunity or desire. Does that make those who are not fortunate enough to have the ability to achieve the best schooled education possible uneducated? Hardly not. I've been fortunate enough to have spent time with returning soldiers from Iraq and Afghanastan on several occasions and I must tell you that those who I have been with and have come to know were very educated as far as I am concerned. They are far from being stupid or ignorant. Perhaps if Senator Kerry took the time to meet some of these people he would realize that they have experienced things at such a young age that most of us will never experience in a lifetime. Perhaps if Senator Kerry took the time to listen to them, he would realize that they've learned things from their experiences that even the highest level of schooled education could not teach them. The senators remarks were totally uncalled for.

Getting into West Point is not as simple as you may think it is. To get into West Point you need an excellent high school average, you need to be a very well rounded person and you need to be highly recommended. Many of the West Point enrollees have been recommended by former graduates of West Point. You cannot just aplly to West Point and get in there like you would a noraml community college. Most West Point graduates maintain a grade point average of 4.0 or higher, and some of the miltary's best officers are former West Point graduates. It is quite obvious that you are not familiar with the requirements needed for getting into West Point and that you are not familiar as to the quality graduates that West Point produces.

AGAIN WE DIGRESS but.....



[quote=NYC Goodfella]
Getting into West Point is not as simple as you may think it is. To get into West Point you need an excellent high school average, you need to be a very well rounded person and you need to be highly recommended. You mean meet college requirements? Thats what I said.

You cannot just aplly to West Point and get in there like you would a noraml community college. No I guess not since ANYONE who has graduated from high school and can pay tuition can go to community college.

Most West Point graduates maintain a grade point average of 4.0 or higher, -- maybe but its not a requirement to remain at the university. I obviously never said that there were not any fine students at West Point(all colleges have students who maintain 4.0 )

and some of the miltary's best officers are former West Point graduates. ya I mentioned the two greatest generals ever in my above post

It is quite obvious that you are not familiar with the requirements needed for getting into West Point Thats what I said earlier. However on a personal note I do tutor potential college students, so I am VERY FAMILIAR with the academic requirements of admission there. And a cpl of these students have gone to one of the military schools despite NOT gaining acceptance into any of the major state schools. As far as the good ol' boy network and letters of recommendation are concerned, no, I have never applied and had to go through the process. Have you???

Mad Johnny -

You can't do this! You can't do this! You can't do this!

If in doubt, read the line above.

Nobody is expecting you to hold back from offering a different opinion on ANY subject but you are breaking the board's rules of conduct by posting such garbage as you wrote (above). You simply cannot make a personal remark attacking a fellow member. You make yourself look REALLY bad when you resort to name-calling.

If you feel you cannot abide by this basic rule I suggest you stay out of these political discussions.

I have family members, who've attended West Point and the admissions standards are clearly rigorous. Moreover, a cadet or midshipman is held to high standards just to maintain his or her standing in the academy.

That said, while on its face Kerry's statements appear insulting to the heroes who are fighting in Iraq because of their commitment to serve America, not a mental deficiency, I honestly do not believe that he intended his statement to refer to soldiers. Prior to the comment, he had been addressing what he perceived to be failures of Bush, and when he said, "you end up in Iraq," I believe he meant it as saying a lack of education, knowledge, wisdom or learning can result in unwise decisions, such as the decisions that got us involved in Iraq. I think it would have been much clearer if he said, "You end up getting us in Iraq."

Nonetheless, he should apologize for any misunderstanding. I don't think it will have any effect on the elections.

DC,
Everyone here knows of your support of the troops over in Iraq. I support them, too. After all, I am grateful that they are over there, putting their lives on the line. However, my heart breaks for them and their families, because I disagree with this war (well, pretty much any war).

However, I don't think that John Kerry meant this the way that it came out. And, yes, unitnentioned or not he owes the TROOPS an apology by making a remark that was open to such an interpretation. I think this is an attempt by BOTH parties to put a negative spin on something the week before election day.

And although I STRONGLY disagree with the name-calling and the negative posts that Mad Johnny made, because I believe they were disrespectful, I think that he made a valid point that was buried underneath a pile of refuse.

It's ALWAYS been the poor and uneducated that have fought wars. If you go back and look at our troops, I'm sure that many of them chose the military because they felt that they had no other choice. I would bet that they are mostly poor, uneducated, come from an area with high unempolyment, etc. That does NOT mean that it's a BAD choice. It does not mean that they are stupid. It doesn't mean that this might not offer them a fine career and/or a way out of an otherwise dead end. I simply believe that many chose it because they felt themselves out of other options.

Please, I caught him trying to force what I was saying to meet his own ends and I called him a jerk for it. He went ahead ignoring the factual points I made. After I called him a jerk (and its not like jerk is a terrible God forbidden swear word) for acting like one and after I addressed all his points, he still refused to actually engage in actual discussion.

He kept rolling along like any point I made did not matter.

I repeated myself several times. I think its unfair to say that calling someone a jerk is a bad thing because people have called others much worse without raising the interests of the moderators.

Mad Johnny, personal insults are a no-no on this board, end of story. And what ends up happening when you make them is that your point gets lost.

Psssh, that's not an insult. This is a witch hunt. I've seen a hell of a lot worse. But ooooo, I called DC a jerk and it gets immediate attention.

Where do we draw the line? At "idiot"? "Moron"? "Retard"?

Its not a debatable point. We simply can't allow any personal attacks. We're trying to maintain some decorum and rise above many message boards that allow such trash talking. Its virtually impossible to police every single reply and its likely some unfortunate responses did slip past the moderators but that doesn't make them right.

You're not being singled out, MJ. ANY member caught making an attack-type reply will be reprimanded, and if it continues, will be dealt with accordingly.

I understand what you're saying. I know personal attacks are bad. But c'mon man, since when has the word "jerk" in the 21st century constituted a flagrant insult?

It wasn't meant as the attack its been made out to be. If I wanted to attack him, then I wouldn't have used "jerk." I would have used something less 1950's.

Its not just the word "jerk" thats an issue here (although thats not a nice thing to say to someone). Its more that you're resorting to making a reference to the person to whom you're responding rather than arguing your differing viewpoint. When you do that you lose credibility.

When responding in writing we lose the intonation of the voice and a few other communicative skills. We have to take the written word as what you're trying to say as "gospel".

Again, I reiterate, (and for the last time) if you feel you can't stop yourself from making these types of replies simply stay out of these discussions.

White House-and Dems-want Kerry Apology

By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer
34 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A few Democratic candidates joined Republicans Wednesday in pressing John Kerry to apologize for a comment critics said appeared disrespectful of U.S. troops as several Kerry campaign appearances were canceled.

"Whatever the intent, Senator Kerry was wrong to say what he said," said Democratic Rep. Harold Ford (news, bio, voting record) Jr., running for Senate in Tennessee.

"Sen. Kerry's remarks were poorly worded and just plain stupid," said Montana Senate President Jon Tester, a Democrat trying to unseat GOP Sen. Conrad Burns (news, bio, voting record). "He owes our troops and their families an apology."

"I'm sorry he did what he did. But I think the issue ... we want to make sure it doesn't confuse the subject of the war in Iraq," Democratic Rep. Ben Cardin, running for Senate in Maryland, said on CNN.

The White House didn't back down from its call for a Kerry apology. White House press secretary Tony Snow said Kerry "put gasoline on the fire" of an already sizzling midterm election campaign. And the Republican National Committee released a Web ad, to be e-mailed to GOP activists and state party officials, called "Apologize."

"Sen. Kerry may have botched the line, but what he said was insulting to the troops, and what he ought to say is, 'Look, I botched the line, but I'm sorry for giving offense,' " Snow said on CBS's "The Early Show."

At issue is Kerry's comment, to a group of California students on Monday, that people unable to succeed in the U.S. educational system would likely "get stuck in Iraq." Kerry says he merely botched a speech line written to be critical of Bush, while Republicans seized on it as evidence of troop-bashing by the Democratic party's 2004 presidential nominee.

The backdrop for the fiery exchange evoked memories of Bush and Kerry's bitter 2004 race for the White House, and injected last-minute fireworks into a taut midterm election fight between Republicans trying to cling to control of Congress and Democrats striving to win it back.

With each party looking for any advantage in a race expected to turn in large measure on the unpopular war in Iraq, Kerry campaign appearances in Iowa, Minnesota and Pennsylvania were canceled.

A spokesman for Democratic congressional candidate Bruce Braley in Iowa said Braley had decided independently to cancel an event with Kerry scheduled for Thursday. Braley, who is running against Republican Mike Whalen, said in a statement that the White House and Kerry should stop bickering and focus on how to change course in Iraq.

Meredith Salsbery, a spokeswoman for congressional candidate Tim Walz, said Kerry made the final decision but acknowledged campaign officials were worried that the controversy would distract from his effort to unseat incumbent Republican Rep. Gil Gutknecht (news, bio, voting record).

Kerry spokesman David Wade confirmed he no longer would appear at a Philadelphia rally on Wednesday for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Bob Casey.

"We made a decision not to allow the Republican hate machine to use Democratic candidates as proxies in their distorted spin war," Wade said.

Kerry, meanwhile, sought frantically to contain the damage — to his party in next week's elections and his own potential repeat run for the White House in 2008. He and some Democrats viewed the fracas as a key test of a lesson learned in the 2004 race — that he responded too slowly when hit with unsubstantiated allegations about his Vietnam war record from a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Kerry's office released a supportive statement from retired Lt. Gen. Claudia J. Kennedy, the first female three-star general in the Army and a supporter of his 2004 bid against Bush. "When it comes to Iraq, he's right to stand up against baseless attacks, and right to keep fighting for a better course for our troops and our country," she said.

Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, head of the Democratic campaign effort, called the White House attacks on Kerry an effort by Bush "to divert attention from his failed Iraq policy."

"Instead of going on television attacking John Kerry and everyone else under the sun, the president ought to be sitting at his desk coming up with a plan for Iraq," Schumer said.

The head of the Democratic party also downplayed Kerry's remarks. "Kerry made a blooper. Bloopers happen," Howard Dean told reporters in Burlington, Vt.

Snow said Kerry — not the White House — was the one who "whipped this up into a big issue."

Bush, campaigning in Georgia Tuesday night, said Kerry's statement was "insulting and it is shameful" hours after Snow unleashed a harsh attack on the Massachusetts senator.

Kerry told a hastily arranged news conference in Seattle: "I apologize to no one for my criticism of the president and of his broken policy."

But he also said the comment was "a botched joke about the president and the president's people, not about the troops ... and they know that's what I was talking about."

What Kerry said Monday at a campaign rally was this: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

A Kerry spokeswoman, Amy Brundage, said later that the senator's prepared text had called for him to say: "Do you know where you end up if you don't study, if you aren't smart, if you're intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush."

Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record) said Wednesday he wasn't sure "how you could construe" Kerry's comment as a joke. Calling Kerry "my friend," the Arizona Republican said, "I've found that if it is just a botched joke then apologize and move on."

"As it stands, he owes an apology to the men and women who are serving in Iraq out of patriotism and love of country, not because of any academic deficiencies," McCain said on ABC's "Good Morning America."

Exactly. It is not that I didn't respect your point or understand your point. However, once you decided to get personal with me, it was at that moment that you lost all credibility in my eyes and your point no longer mattered to me or deserved a response.

Rolling right along now.


SB, I respect what you are saying. But the issue of whether this war should have or should have not been fought is irrelivant to what John Kerry said. And if John Kerry really did not mean it to come out the way that it did, that's fine and dandy, but he still owes the troops an apology.

As for the dems and the repubs using this for political advantage, well why should this be any different than any other issue that they've both tried to manipulate in the past? Do you really expect anything different from these politicians? There all a bunch of selfish bastards who will try and manipuilate any situtation to score points for their own party, and belitte the other party.

As for the issue of how and where the military recruits their potential candidates, well look back at some of my posts and you'll see that I do not deny this. What I do deny though is the insistance by some that most in the military are from uneducated backgrounds. We are one of the, if not the most powerful militaries in the world and through the years our Miitary has raised the bar on the kind of people that they now want serving in the Military. This is not like it was 20 - 30+ years ago where the military took anybody and everybody that walked into a recruiitung station. These days, as someone ese pointed out, they are looking for higher standards from their potential recruits. Hey, as somone pointed out in trying to argue this issue with me, the recruiters can now be found in many different colleges across the country. That alone proves to me that they are looking for smarter and better educated people to serve our country.


Don Cardi

Good call, Chuck. Who voted for HJ 114? Oh, that's right. Now shut the fuck up.

OK, Gospel? This is an internet message board. Since when is anything anyone says taken as their own personal beliefs?

I think people need to relax for a second. Before I even uttered the now forbidden phrase, he had already twisted what I said. I called him on it. At least I had the balls to stand up and be an individual instead of running with the herd.

My original "gospel" statement (in quotes) refers to a statement meant as the truth. What you write is meant to be taken as the truth as you see it.

Regardless of how someone else takes what you say (even if you perceive it as being twisted) you have no right to make a personal attack.

What about that don't you understand?

John Kerry has a very bad case of foot in mouth disease, and this is not the first time he has said something stupid that got him into trouble. For example "I voted for it before I voted against it." Sheesh...and I had to shut up and support the guy.

Since he is a former Naval Officer and a decorated combat Vet, I'll take him at his word that he meant to say something to the effect that if you don't study history you'll get US stuck in Iraq...and that he was taking a shot at Bush, and not the troops. Look he's not THAT stupid. Nevertheless he should apologize for offending anyone and he should then shut up, go home, go indsurfing or whatever he does, and stop his delusional thinking that he has a remote chance to ever be anything more than the Senator from Massachusetts.

The severity of the name you called Don Cardi isn't the issue here. It's the fact that you resorted to personal attacks in general.

Is jerk a super duper bad word? No, of course it isn't, but that isn't the point. You resorted to personal attacks, which is a no no. I don't know why that's so hard for you to understand.



Yea...it takes a big set of balls to call somebody a jerk on a public forum. Puh-leeze!

DC, As for Kerry apologizing to the troops, I already said that in my original post, so we are in 100% agreement there.

However, I stand by what I said regarding the makeup of the military forces. Is the military TRYING to recruit from college campuses? Of course they are! As their electronic equipment gets more and more sophisticated, so will their recruits need to be.

However, my nephew joined the military after flunking out of college. Fortunately, he finished his three years in 2002. The recruiters were merciless. The brochures and films show pictures of soldiers training in Hawaii, they promise all sorts of things, and they push, push, push. Now, I'm not saying that's not their job, but this was a confused kid who was trying to figure out what to do with the rest of his life. Needless to say, he found Fort Hood and Fort Benning to be quite a bit different than Hawaii. Also, he was promised skills that he could take with him when he left the army. You know where they put him? Armament repair (fixing tanks). THERE'S a skill that transitions well to civilian life.

And who were the folks that he went to basic with? The young guys were mostly like him, drifting and looking for a place to land. The older ones were mostly from small, depressed towns who had been downsized out of employement. Does that make up the entire military? Doubtful, but I think it makes up a lot.

What is it with people....they have to keep bashing the poster being corrected by the mod.

Come on...stay out of it and let SC handle the problem. Puh-leeze!

What in this world does it matter if the people in our armed forces has a college degree or not? The bottom line is that they joined up.



Do you think that these terroists care that our troops there have a college degree or not?

Of course not, Mig. And I certainly don't mean it as a negative towards the troops. What I was trying to say is that there was a valid point made in an earlier post, and it got buried.

If we were to concentrate on the original topic, I believe that Senator Kerry made a stupid remark, but I don't think he did so deliberately. I think he mis-spoke. And it really doesn't matter, because what he said was taken by some as an insult to our troops, so he should apologize to the troops if he unintentionally insulted them.

I read that he canceled 3 campaign events. Good now maybe he will shut the hell up.

It's doubtful. He is, after all, a politician.

well look for your ear plugs then

The army also provides excellent opportunities for graduating or current college students as well, including paying off loans as well as signing bonuses and salary. It also gives them experience, and real-life credibility.

So your nephew was a college failure who went to the army as a last resort? Okay. I'm missing the problem here - either he ends up on the streets, perhaps living off of welfare and never earning a living wage, sucking off the system, or he pulls himself up by the bootstraps and makes something of himself.

So armament repair isn't a skill he could use? I didn't realize there wasn't a need for good auto mechanics, or the dozen-or-so other things he could do with such experience. Then again, judging by his previous academic inclinations, is it surprising he was "relegated" to armament repair rather than something like computer systems?

For kids who would otherwise end up as criminals or social despots, the army can give them a chance. I for one am tired of the shameless victimization of these kids who make a voluntary decision to sign up. Most of the time it isn't even these volunteers who are complaining - as is evident here. The army gives people an opportunity to make something of themselves, real life experience, and a way to serve their country.

Regards,
Double-J