G. Gordon Liddy

[tulsaslim]

I don't have a dog in this fight but using the Heritage Foundation as a source is totally self-defeating. What a bunch of tools.

[KSG_Standard]

I don't have a dog in this fight but using the Heritage Foundation as a source is totally self-defeating. What a bunch of tools.

 

They seem like fairly well educated and intelligent tools...after reading about the staff, contributors, researchers and board members, I think I'll at least give some of their opinions and research at least some credibility....The seem to do a much better job of documenting and using fact based reasoning than you or homz do :-

 

http://www.heritage.org/Experts/index.cfm

[Homz]

Homz' date='

 

I can send you this:

 

http://www.defenselink.mil/prhome/poprep2005/download/ExecSum2005.pdf

 

(Eidted attached wrong link)

 

 

[/quote']

 

I have two questions. Where is the data on socioeconomic comparisons? Secondly, where is the exact page you copy/pasted from.

[KSG_Standard]

ROFLMAO!

[Homz]

Let's just face it KSG, the new guy is your doppelganger. He got if from some right wing web site that gets it's talking points from Rush Limbaugh.

 

If not why wont he simply say where he got the copy/paste. It took some time but bluemoon finally got you to post your pathetic sources.

[milod]

Awwwww....

 

Come on folks, let's keep it nice.

 

BTW, I had a couple of encounters with Liddy... Nice guy to interview for a news story, btw.

 

Also, I think give that some of us here are or have been a bit "wild" in comparison to others, albeit expressing different politics and/or musical performances, I'm not sure any of us really should point fingers at others.

 

E.g., consider the "stature" of some ex 60s "radicals" now in positions of political or educational institution "power." They did better, some of them, from the left than Liddy on the right.

 

The funny thing to me is how at a certain point, at least among true "professionals" involved in and around politics, so often the anger turns to friendship.

 

The world's best example, perhaps, are John Adams and Thos. Jefferson. At certain points true political enemies, the two ended up friends who shared experiences and time in the trenches - even if on opposite sides.

 

I think those two are a good example to the rest of us when it comes to politics. Fight like hell on issues - then go have a coffee or other libation together.

 

Frankly I have more respect by far for those who've been in about any sort of trenches along those lines than the folks who don't get involved other than to complain and hate each other.

 

m

[Bruno690]

Let's just face it KSG' date=' the new guy is your doppelganger. He got if from some right wing web site that gets it's talking points from Rush Limbaugh.

 

If not why wont he simply say where he got the copy/paste. It took some time but bluemoon finally got you to post your pathetic sources.

 

[/quote']

 

Since you were too lazy to read the link that I posted last night, as was predicted BTW.

I realize there is over 300 pages there...so here it is laid out for you:

 

FY 2006 Highlights

 

Race/Ethnicity.

In FY 2006, African Americans were equitably represented in the military overall. In the enlisted force, African Americans were slightly underrepresented among NPS active duty accessions (13 percent) relative to the 18-24 year-old civilian population (14 percent). FY 2006 representation of "Other" minority enlisted accessions (American Indians and Alaskan Natives, Asians, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders, and those of two or more races) stood at about 7 percent, nearly equal to their share of the civilian population. Hispanics, on the other hand, continued to be underrepresented, with 13 percent among NPS accessions compared with nearly 18 percent for comparable civilians. In terms of the entire force, African Americans are overrepresented in the enlisted ranks when compared to their civilian cohorts. Higher retention rates among African Americans continue to boost their representation among active component enlisted members – 19 percent in contrast to the 13 percent of African Americans among 18-44 year-old civilians. With 11 percent of active duty enlisted members counted as Hispanic, this group remained underrepresented relative to the growing comparable civilian population (17 percent).

 

Overall, minorities appear to be proportionately represented within the commissioned officer corps. Although African Americans comprised a much smaller proportion of officers (9 percent) than they do of enlisted members when compared to college graduates in the civilian workforce 21-49 years old (8 percent African American), African Americans are equitably represented in the officer ranks. Asian officers are underrepresented, with 3 percent of the officer corps and 9 percent of 21-49 year-old college graduates in the work force. American Indians and Alaskan Natives and Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders, a very small proportion of the officer corps, are equitably represented. Hispanic officers, at 5 percent, are slightly underrepresented compared to their civilian comparison of the end of FY 2006. In general, male servicemembers are much more likely to be married than female servicemembers.

 

RACE/ TOTAL DoD 18-24 YR OLD CIVILIANS

ETHNICITY Males Females Total Males Females Total

White 77.32% 66.01% 75.43% 78.71% 77.27% 77.99%

Black 11.37% 21.24% 13.02% 13.65% 15.13% 14.38%

AIAN 2.45% 3.28% 2.59% 0.85% 0.97% 0.91%

Asian 2.72% 3.11% 2.78% 4.19% 4.13% 4.16%

NHPI 0.86% 1.29% 0.93% 0.34% 0.32% 0.33%

Two or more 0.78% 0.93% 0.81% 2.26% 2.18% 2.22%

Unknown 4.49% 4.14% 4.43% NA NA NA

TOTAL 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

 

Hispanic 12.88% 15.18% 13.26% 18.41% 16.62% 17.52%

Not Hispanic** 87.12% 84.82% 86.74% 81.59% 83.38% 82.48%

TOTAL 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

 

 

Education Level.

Practically all active duty (98%) and Selected Reserve enlisted accessions (96 percent) had a high school diploma or equivalent, well above civilian youth proportions (81 percent of 18-24 year-olds). Given that most officers are required to possess at least a baccalaureate college degree upon or soon after commissioning and that colleges and universities are among the Services’ main commissioning sources (i.e., Service academies and ROTC), the academic standing of officers is not surprising. The fact that 94 percent of active duty officer accessions and 96 percent of the officer corps (both excluding those with unknown education credentials) were degree holders (approximately 16 and 39 percent had advanced degrees) is in keeping with policy and the professional status and expectations of officers. Likewise, 84 percent of Reserve Component officer accessions and 94 percent of the total Reserve Component officer corps held at least a bachelor’s degree, with 21 and 35 percent possessing advanced degrees, respectively.

 

Conclusions.

The FY 2006 Population Representation report shows both the diversity and the quality of the Total Force. Men and women of various racial and ethnic groups of divergent backgrounds, from every state in our country, serve as Active and Selected Reserve enlisted members and officers of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard. Of particular note, the mean cognitive ability and educational levels of these soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen, and coast guardsmen are above the average of comparably-aged U.S. citizens.

Although the force is diverse, it is not an exact replica of society as a whole. The military way of life is more attractive to some members of society than to others, and that is the nature of a volunteer force—individuals making choices. Hispanics are underrepresented in the military, but their percentages have increased considerably over the years. Minorities comprise proportionally less of the officer corps; however, their representation levels are in keeping with minority statistics among the pool of college graduates from which second lieutenants and ensigns are drawn. Women continue to be underrepresented in the military, compared to their proportion in civilian society. However, accession statistics show that women have generally continued to gain in both numerical and proportional strength.

 

Below is the household income of where the recruit left to join the military.

 

MEDIAN

HOUSEHOLD TOTAL DoD CIVILIANS

INCOME % %

 

$0 - $24.9k 1.69% 2.64%

$25k - $49.9k 54.12% 53.06%

$50k - 74.9k 32.41% 31.74%

$75k - $99.9k 8.86% 10.13%

$100k or more 2.92% 2.43%

 

http://www.defenselink.mil/prhome/PopRep_FY06.html

 

I showed you mine...you show me yours

[KSG_Standard]

Since you were too lazy to read the link that I posted last night' date=' as was predicted BTW.

I realize there is over 300 pages there...so here it is laid out for you:...[/quote']

 

Odds are homz won't make through this much before he replies to your post...

[Homz]

 

Absolutely not true. How typical. Just because you don't like (or believe) something you call it a lie. I thought you liberals were open-minded

 

Do your research for you call BS to me!!!!

 

Here are the facts' date=' if you don't believe me this is public census data.

 

1. U.S. military service disproportionately attracts enlisted personnel and officers who do not come from disadvantaged backgrounds. Research has demonstrated that the quality of enlisted troops has increased since the start of the Iraq war.

2. Members of the all-volunteer military are significantly more likely to come from high-income neighborhoods than from low-income neighborhoods. Only 11 percent of enlisted recruits in 2007 came from the poorest one-fifth of neighborhoods, while 25 per¬cent came from the wealthiest. These trends are even more pronounced in the Army Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) program, in which 40 percent of enrollees come from the wealthiest neighborhoods—a number that has increased substantially over the past four years.

3. American soldiers are more educated than their peers. A little more than 1 percent of enlisted personnel lack a high school degree, compared to 21 percent of men 18–24 years old, and 95 percent of officer accessions have at least a bachelor’s degree.

4. Contrary to conventional wisdom, minorities are not overrepresented in military service. Enlisted troops are somewhat more likely to be either white. Whites are proportionately represented in the officer corps, and blacks are overrepresented, but their rate of overrepresentation has declined each year from 2004 to 2007.

 

Income:

 

Low-income families are underrepresented in the military, and high-income families are overrepresented. Individuals from the bottom household income quintile make up 20.0 percent of the population of those who are 18–24 years old but only 10.6 percent of the 2006 recruits and 10.7 percent of the 2007 recruits. Individuals in the top two quintiles make up 40.0 percent of the population, but 49.3 percent of the recruits in both years.

 

Every income category above $40,000 per year is overrepresented in the active-duty enlisted force, while every income category below $40,000 a year is underrepresented. Low-income families are significantly underrepresented in the military. U.S. military enlistees disproportionately come from upper-middle-class families.

Members of America’s volunteer army are not enlisting because they have no other economic opportunities. Most recruits come from relatively affluent families and would likely earn above-average wages if they did not join the military.

 

Education:

 

Contrary to popular perceptions, America’s enlisted troops are not poorly educated. Only 1.4 percent of enlisted recruits in 2007 had not graduated from high school or completed a high school equivalency degree, compared to 20.8 percent of men ages 18 to 24. America’s soldiers are less likely than civilians to be high school dropouts.

The military requires at least 90 percent of enlisted recruits to have high school diplomas.Most enlisted recruits do not have a college degree because they enlist before they would attend college. However, many recruits use the educational benefits offered by the military to attend college after they leave the armed forces.

 

Race:

 

The all-volunteer force was instituted in 1973 amid concerns over whether the military could maintain race representation proportional to the overall population. In a time of war, people and policymakers would be even more concerned if the burden of war fell disproportionately on certain sections of the population.

 

The percentage of white active-duty recruits with no prior military service was 65.3 percent in 2006 and 65.5 percent in 2007. Based on calculations from the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS), almost 62 percent of the U.S. male population ages 18 to 24 classified themselves as white in 2006. The troop-to-popula¬tion ratio in these years was 1.05, indicating that the representation of whites in the military is similar to, although slightly above, their representation in the overall population.

 

 

The facts do not support the belief that many American soldiers volunteer because society offers them few other opportunities. The average enlisted person or officer could have had lucrative career opportunities in the private sector. Those who argue that American soldiers risk their lives because they have no other opportunities belittle the personal sacrifices of those who serve out of love for their country.

 

God Bless all those who choose to serve our Country.

[/quote']

 

This is the post in question. The income section above was not referenced in your link. Regardless where did you get the above.

[NeoConMan]

Good stuff Homz!!!!

Let's keep this going....

[NeoConMan]

Bump for Homz's sake....