The Decline of the American Media III

[Tidewater]

There you go, bringing facts into it again

I do not think African-American are analogous to transgender, although that analog underlies a lot of leftist analysis of this issue.
I think the question for recruiters should be, "Does this recruit make the military stringer/better/more lethal to the republic's enemies?"
Stated conversely, does the blanket exclusion of members of this class hurt the military? A bigger recruiting pool (probably) means access to better recruits. Excluding women, black people or left-handed people, for example would restrict the recruiting pool for no objective benefit. Opening up recruiting to women, blacks, and left-handed people probably means better recruits. Not that left-handed people in general are better than right-handed people, but one particular left-handed person might be really good at some important military skill and arbitrarily excluding him because he is a member of a group would rob the military of his services.
On the other hand, paranoid schizophrenics are probably grossly under-represented in the US military and that is probably a good thing. paranoid schizophrenics have mental issues which will likely undermine their effectiveness on the battlefield.
I think the military in general, but during the Biden Administration especially, opened access to groups previously excluded, so I revert to my original question. For a particular man (who believes he is a woman), would the military benefit from having this guy included? For example, how firm is his grasp on reality? Does he have emotional issues of which transgenderism is a symptom? If being "misgendered" induced debilitating stress, how will he react when somebody is seriously trying to kill him? I think those are legitimate questions.

 

[jthomas666]

I do not think African-American are analogous to transgender, although that analog underlies a lot of leftist analysis of this issue.
I think the question for recruiters should be, "Does this recruit make the military stringer/better/more lethal to the republic's enemies?"
States conversely, does the blanket exclusion of members of this class hurt the military? A bigger recruiting pool (probably) means access to better recruits. Excluding women, black people or left-handed people, for example would restrict the recruiting pool for no objective benefit. Opening up recruiting to women, blacks, and left-handed people probably means better recruits. Not that left-handed people in general are better than right-handed people, but one particular left-handed person might be really good at some important military skill and arbitrarily excluding him because he is a member of a group would rob the military of his services.
On the other hand, paranoid schizophrenics are probably grossly under-represented in the US military and that is probably a good thing. paranoid schizophrenics have mental issues which will likely undermine their effectiveness on the battlefield.
I think the military in general, but during the Biden Administration especially, opened access to groups previously excluded, so I revert to my original question. For a particular man (who believes he is a woman), would the military benefit from having this guy included? For example, how firm is his grasp on reality? Does he have emotional issues of which transgenderism is a symptom? If being"misgendered" induced debilitating stress, how will he react when somebody is seriously trying to kill him? I think those are legitimate questions.

You ask the same questions that are probably asked about every recruit. How will ANYBODY react when someone's trying to kill them? How firm is ANYONE's grip on reality? Does anyone else have emotional issues? The difference here is that other recruits are given the chance to prove themselves during recruiting and training. You don't want to afford transgenders the same chance. Because you're afraid.

1. A larger recruit pool will yield better results.
2. I'm afraid that transgenders will scare off otherwise great recruits.
3. So let's reduce the size of the recruiting pool.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

1. A larger recruit pool will yield better results.
2. I'm afraid that transgenders will scare off otherwise great recruits.
3. So let's reduce the size of the recruiting pool.

1. No, a better recruiting pool will yield better results.
2. I don’t know if “scare off” is the most accurate turn of phrase here, but recruiting took a massive hit during the Biden administration.
3. Yes. How many 150 pound linebackers did Saban even look at on the recruiting trail? The answer is none.

 

[Huckleberry]

1. No, a better recruiting pool will yield better results.
2. I don’t know if “scare off” is the most accurate turn of phrase here, but recruiting took a massive hit during the Biden administration.
3. Yes. How many 150 pound linebackers did Saban even look at on the recruiting trail? The answer is none.

Here's a recent article regarding the recruiting issue:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/02/10/the-us-militarys-recruiting-crisis

And a bit more:

Army to meet 2025 recruiting goals in dramatic turnaround, denies 'wokeness' is factor

The U.S. Army expects to meet its enlistment goals for 2025 in a dramatic turnaround for a service that has struggled for several years to bring in enough young people and has undergone a major overhaul of its recruiting programs.

www.pbs.org

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I don’t know if “scare off” is the most accurate turn of phrase here, but recruiting took a massive hit during the Biden administration.

After the Afghanistan evacuation, how could it be otherwise?

Of course, having said that - Cheeto Jeezus went and told the West Point cadets (between his riffing on his persecution and "sir" stories) that nobody wanted to join and we were "cold" but now we are "hot."

A little problem with that.....like almost every word out of his mouth, it isn't true:

October 31, 2024 (e.g. before the election)

Recruitment Rises 12.5% Despite Ongoing Challenges > U.S. Department of Defense > Defense Department News

Let's be honest, part of the lower numbers were the pandemic, part were the fear of being left behind in a foreign country (fairly or unfairly), and FAR fewer folks now meet the physical fitness standards anyway.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

After the Afghanistan evacuation, how could it be otherwise?

Of course, having said that - Cheeto Jeezus went and told the West Point cadets (between his riffing on his persecution and "sir" stories) that nobody wanted to join and we were "cold" but now we are "hot."

A little problem with that.....like almost every word out of his mouth, it isn't true:

October 31, 2024 (e.g. before the election)

Recruitment Rises 12.5% Despite Ongoing Challenges > U.S. Department of Defense > Defense Department News

Let's be honest, part of the lower numbers were the pandemic, part were the fear of being left behind in a foreign country (fairly or unfairly), and FAR fewer folks now meet the physical fitness standards anyway.

DOD has been tight-lipped about the stats, but the new program the last couple of years, giving marginal intellectual/educational prospects a 90 day crash course in academics is responsible in large part for the surge. They're taking kids who couldn't qualify before and turning them into qualifiers. I'll leave it to your judgment as to whether that really increases the quality of the army...

 

[selmaborntidefan]

DOD has been tight-lipped about the stats, but the new program the last couple of years, giving marginal intellectual/educational prospects a 90 day crash course in academics is responsible in large part for the surge. They're taking kids who couldn't qualify before and turning them into qualifiers. I'll leave it to your judgment as to whether that really increases the quality of the army...

That's......not good.

 

[jthomas666]

DOD has been tight-lipped about the stats, but the new program the last couple of years, giving marginal intellectual/educational prospects a 90 day crash course in academics is responsible in large part for the surge. They're taking kids who couldn't qualify before and turning them into qualifiers. I'll leave it to your judgment as to whether that really increases the quality of the army...

It might be OK in the short term--if the goal is to send out cannon fodder--but as years wear on, may be harder to find/retain the quality noncoms that really run individual units.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

It might be OK in the short term--if the goal is to send out cannon fodder--but as years wear on, may be harder to find/retain the quality noncoms that really run individual units.

I tend to agree. There were reasons those kids were initially non-qualifiers. I guess it's better than having to call in North Koreans for reinforcements...

 

[crimsonaudio]

 

[Tidewater]

I do not know if this will be more effective at enhancing recruiting for the military, but this ad is certainly pitched in a different way than heretofore.

 

[jthomas666]

Add some music from Starship Troopers and it's perfect.

 

[Tidewater]

Add some music from Starship Troopers and it's perfect.

"Would you like to know more?"

 

[Tidewater]

It is a change of pace from this:

"I am a cisgendered millennial who has been diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder."
I wonder, what the recruiting quota was for candidates with "generalized anxiety disorder," and how did CIA recruiters screen for that?

 

[CrimsonJazz]

It is a change of pace from this:

"I am a cisgendered millennial who has been diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder."
I wonder, what the recruiting quota was for candidates with "generalized anxiety disorder," and how did CIA recruiters screen for that?

Is the CIA going back to their weird social experiments? That's what this feels like.

 

[Huckleberry]

 

[CrimsonJazz]

Holy throwback to the 80's, Batman! My hair just feathered itself. It's time to put on some Midnight Star and do some windmills in the living room. Or not....I think a dislocated hip might interrupt the flow of my day.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

 

[4Q Basket Case]

Say what you will about Fox News, they keep receipts.

Two WSJ reporters wrote an extensive article on Biden's decline. The article ran a few weeks before the infamous debate, and the authors were roasted by a laundry list of media outlets -- CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, the Biden White House, etc. None of those rants have aged well.

Here's an article on the media's coverage of a WSJ article. Note the deafening silence of the originators of the criticisms.

Media viciously attacked WSJ for report on Biden showing 'signs of slipping' | Fox News

To call Jake Tapper a hypocrite is to insult all hypocrites out there. He was full-throated denier and mud-slinger at the time of the article, insulting the journalistic integrity of the authors. Less than a year later, he's selling a book based on exactly the stuff the article first surfaced.

My, how the worm does turn.

The Democratic Party and its allies in the media are responsible for us having to deal with Trump in the Presidency. If either had done their job and the Dems had nominated someone other than Biden, we wouldn't be in this mess.

BTW -- the Fox article contains an embedded link to the original WSJ article from June of last year. It's a long read, but worth it.

 

[Bodhisattva]

Some weeks ago, when I was away from the board for a wile, the Trump interest in Ukraine's minerals was coming to a head. SIAP, but I recall seeing two articles the same day about this issue.

The first declared the agreement with Ukraine amounted to nothing and Trump was therefore a fool.

The second declared that the agreement allowed the U.S. to "loot" Ukraine's precious resources and only reinforced that Trump is a Nazi.



Amazing. Foolish Nazis are just about as bad as you can get, or so I hear.. If he is also declared "aloof," that would make him the worst person ever.