"Don White" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message
don't believe it, Jim? If not, why? Happened all of the time.


It was a commom practice up here in the '60s.
When the salaries were upped and the manpower levels dropped...the supply
outgrew the demand and the military got picky.




Your military would accept men with only 8th grade educations in the 1960's?
Any link to substantiate that claim?

JimH wrote:
"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
oups.com...

JohnH wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 12:10:34 GMT, "Jim,"
wrote:


http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...eed/print.html

Jan. 27, 2005 | WASHINGTON -- Most patients at the Walter Reed
Army
Medical Center in Washington have a lot on their minds: the war
they

just fought, the injuries they came home with, the future that
lies
ahead. The last thing a wounded soldier needs to worry about is
where
the next meal is coming from. But for hundreds of Walter Reed
patients,
that's a real concern. Starting this month, the Army has started
making
some wounded soldiers pay for the food they eat at the hospital.


I spent three months in Walter Reed. During that time, I paid for
my
meals. At the same time I was drawing a Subsistence Allowance. I
did
not expect that the Army should give me money to buy my food, and
then
also give me the food I was supposed to buy.

But hey, liberal whining makes a good story for the anti-Bush
crowd.
When Clinton was in office, the rules were the same.

Now, I really wonder why the names were withheld.

I was not in a hospital, but I was on BAS, a.k.a. separate rations,
when I was in the military. If I ate in a chow hall I had to pay
for
my meals while others ate free.

I was reveiving an extra allowance in my paycheck (IIRC it was
about
$150/mo) instead of getting free meals at the chow hall. And the
cost
of those meals I ate in a chow hall was still subsidized.

When I went to Gulf War #1 I lost my BAS. They fed me on base, so
they
didn't need to pay me a hundred-something bucks a month for food.
The
left-wing hysterics would have called that a slap in the face,
wouldn't
they? Taking away the poor soldier's food allowance when he is
sent to
war. But they either feed you, or pay you to get your own food.
But
not both.

And the way the article is written is typical. Create an image in
the
reader's head of a paralyzed amputee getting his dinner check while
he
lies in a hospital bed. Don't explain that this doesn't apply to
inpatients until the reader is frothing at the mouth and blind with
rage.

Then there's that $7.50 a day "combat pay," or whatever it's called
now. I listened to Randi Rhodes (one of the Air America crowd)
yesterday try to pass that off as what soldier's get paid...period.
She did not attempt to clarify that it was additional pay. She was
implying that soldiers are only paid $7.50 a day. And a good
portion
of her audience will think just that. If she is ever called on it,
I
can predict the way she will weasel out of it.... "I never said
that
was their total pay... I just said that is was we pay them for
getting
shot at... if the audience didn't understand that, they need to
listen
more carefully..."

Why would I listen to Randi Rhodes? Why would I listen to
Limbaugh?
Mostly for the entertainment value. But also because two halves
make a
hole. Since right wing radio only gives you the half of the truth
that
suits them, and left wing radio only gives you the other half tha
suits
them, your only *chance* of of getting close to the whole story is
to
listen to both.


I hear you. Just another example of the libs spouting lies,
professing them
as the truth, and supporting their entire argument around those lies.

Hey Chuck....sound familiar?

Huh? Did I say they lie? They tell half the truth. But it isn't just
libs that do it. The yellow dog neo-cons do it too.

Damn - I don't know hwy I can't stay out of these discussions! I
ignore most of them but sometimes manages to sucked in...

JimH wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message

don't believe it, Jim? If not, why? Happened all of the time.


It was a commom practice up here in the '60s.
When the salaries were upped and the manpower levels dropped...the supply
outgrew the demand and the military got picky.



Your military would accept men with only 8th grade educations in the 1960's?
Any link to substantiate that claim?


One GREAT example is JohnH

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 23:24:25 GMT, "Don White"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
don't believe it, Jim? If not, why? Happened all of the time.


It was a commom practice up here in the '60s.
When the salaries were upped and the manpower levels dropped...the supply
outgrew the demand and the military got picky.


Yup. They did some weird things 40 years ago.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 23:46:09 GMT, "Jim," wrote:

JimH wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message

don't believe it, Jim? If not, why? Happened all of the time.


It was a commom practice up here in the '60s.
When the salaries were upped and the manpower levels dropped...the supply
outgrew the demand and the military got picky.



Your military would accept men with only 8th grade educations in the 1960's?
Any link to substantiate that claim?


One GREAT example is JohnH

For shame!

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 13:14:13 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


P.Fritz wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 12:13:14 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


P.Fritz wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 28 Jan 2005 11:30:15 -0800, "basskisser"

wrote:


Gee, I was never IN the armed forces....'

Yep.....they do have their basic minimums.


What branch were YOU in, Fritz? Hell, by your posts here, maybe
your
not yet old enough.

YOU'RE!!!

LMAO........asslicker still doesn't get it.

You are the one who don't get it. You STILL can't act like a man, can
you? Do you act like a child on purpose, or is it that you just don't
have the mental capacity to do so?


BTW....I turned down an appointment to West Point......didn't offer
the
major I was going for...........

Bull****. You don't act like an adult to this day, let alone be man
enough to be appointed to West Point.

You obviously know nothing of West Point appointments, b'asskisser.

snicker obviously.... I will put it this way.....I was not asking to
be appointed, they really wanted me......to the point where I was getting
telegrams from the House and Senate reps.

Asslicker thinking he can determine who is man enough......LMAO


John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary
to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

Some Guy wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message

don't believe it, Jim? If not, why? Happened all of the time.

your brother, wasn't it...... iirc a thread from some time ago.
My brother joined the Army, yes.

"basskisser" wrote in message

My brother joined the Army, yes.


At the "urging" of a JP, iirc, following a spot of legal trouble. Right?

Some Guy wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message

My brother joined the Army, yes.


At the "urging" of a JP, iirc, following a spot of legal trouble.
Right?

So....do you have a POINT you're trying to make?