The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**d-usa**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
But, that doesn't detract from the valuable skills (depending on job) that one acquires, as well as the long term education benefits and sometimes health benefits.

From what I have heard, one of the problems with the skills is that they are frequently so very specialized that they actually end up having a hard time translating into non-military jobs and that military certifications frequently don't translate into civilian certifications.

Does the GI Bill cover trade schools as well?

**ScootyPuffJunior**

d-usa wrote:

Does the GI Bill cover trade schools as well?

As far as I know, yes. When I taught apprenticeship school I had guys come through my class that were getting money from the GI Bill (even though school was pretty much paid for by the union).

**whembly**

Ouze wrote:
whembly wrote:
I am not talking about the pie-in-the-sky, non-existent brand of socialism that is embraced by the left, but the real socialism practiced in the real world. The one that enslaves people, that poisons their cultures, that murders them for disobedience or sometimes, simply for mere convenience. Those are the hard facts in those countries that Sanders (many Democrats for that matter) willfully turn a blind eye on because it isn't the "real socialism" as described in their textbooks.

So let's give it a chaaaaaaaaaaaaaaance.

Funny enough, he sometimes forget that this isn't the 70's anymore and the scandinavian countries are NOT the socialist countries he believes they are... but, forgive him 'cuz he's totes kewl!

You got really, really defensive and angry a few months ago when people on this forum described you as a "low information voter", but then you keep posting stuff like this, which indicates you don't really know what you're talking about, and since it's been discussed on here many, many times, you really don't intend to learn more, either.

The way you frame this is that opinion doesn't matter then...

So, if that's true then... as what you stipulate, then everyone is "low information".

Which is Bull Ca-Ca.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
d-usa wrote:

Does the GI Bill cover trade schools as well?

As far as I know, yes. When I taught apprenticeship school I had guys come through my class that were getting money from the GI Bill (even though school was pretty much paid for by the union).

Yup. My father-inlaw's company has plenty of Vets who used the GI to get training.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Co'tor Shas wrote:
That's different. Probebly the area I'm form, I guess. I'd say at least 35-40% of the kids that were in my graduating class were going right into the workforce, with some going into trade schools/apprenticeships. Quite a few headed towards the military as well.

And see, I personally think that this is pretty close to what happens in the majority of the US. Last time I sat down to really count, in my graduating class of 480-something people, we had 24 that had joined the military within 12 months of graduation. There were 7 who had signed up prior to graduating. I know of a large number (couldn't give you a percentage) who still have yet to work a real job due to deciding it was better to settle down and start a family, many more who simply went to work. We also had the highest number of girls pregnant at the time of graduation in the entire city (6 public high schools and 2-3 private ones). The school had, and still has the highest number of minorities, the highest or second highest rate of delinquency, highest or second highest rate of kids on free or reduced meals, etc. Hell, our arch-rivalry football game featured a pretty massive (for our city) police escort for visiting fans to our school. But, for all the negative, I don't want to paint a picture like this school was in south-central LA, where a bloods vs. crips fight would break out at random, or we'd be featured on a documentary about gang violence. Usually, it was a pretty good, diverse school to be at.

I would frankly like to see the school system supporting reality, rather than wishful thinking. 100% of a graduating class entering community colleges or a 4 year school is simply unattainable. Sad fact is, after I left HS, with continuing budget cuts, my school went from having among the best "life prep" opportunities to, if it wasn't basic Ed or music, the school didn't offer it. When I was in, I took a welding class, there was CAD and other in depth computer sciences, there was traditional home-ec (as in, sewing, cooking, child-rearing type stuff), basically there was a whole range of courses that were offered that could give students "real life" skills.

Fact is, and I think we all know this, "success" isn't a one size fits all metric. You can't really put a dollar amount on it. For some, it's going to be having steady income, a house, spouse and 2.5 kids, slaving away at a crap job to take a 2 week vacation each year. For others, it will be a PhD, accolades and fancy crap. Why shouldn't we have an education system where kids can learn a bit about what they do and don't like BEFORE they leave the K-12 system? We sure as hell shouldn't be frowning on kids wanting to join the military (once I become a teacher, I sure as hell won't, but then, I'm also a vet and it's the military that got me to this position I'm in now), and we shouldn't be having kids grow up thinking that 4+ years of college and potentially mountains of debt is the only means to "success"

Exalted.

Maybe the best way to achieve this, is to have a robust Mentoring Program covering the various workforce industries. Most schools sorta do this with the ROTC program... right? Then let's bring the the Trade Industries as well.

**d-usa**

ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
d-usa wrote:

Does the GI Bill cover trade schools as well?

As far as I know, yes. When I taught apprenticeship school I had guys come through my class that were getting money from the GI Bill (even though school was pretty much paid for by the union).

That would be a good option then.

Stories that I have heard is from people that are trained in Diesel engines (as an example). The military may give you training in working on the specific Diesel engines that you will be working with, but not "Diesel engine" certification. So even though you spend your last 6 years working on Diesel engines, you don't have a useful skill because it is a very narrow specialized set of knowledge.

Being able to go to trade school to get the certifications and training to apply your skills more broadly will help. But that is different than the usual "the military will give you skills that get you hired" message that we often hear.

**whembly**

d-usa wrote:
ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
d-usa wrote:

Does the GI Bill cover trade schools as well?

As far as I know, yes. When I taught apprenticeship school I had guys come through my class that were getting money from the GI Bill (even though school was pretty much paid for by the union).

That would be a good option then.

Stories that I have heard is from people that are trained in Diesel engines (as an example). The military may give you training in working on the specific Diesel engines that you will be working with, but not "Diesel engine" certification. So even though you spend your last 6 years working on Diesel engines, you don't have a useful skill because it is a very narrow specialized set of knowledge.

Being able to go to trade school to get the certifications and training to apply your skills more broadly will help. But that is different than the usual "the military will give you skills that get you hired" message that we often hear.

Sure... but, I know plenty of employers who would bend over backwards to hire ex-military folks over regular civvies. So the usual "the military will give you skills that get you hired" message isn't totally bunk.

**ScootyPuffJunior**

whembly wrote:

The way you frame this is that opinion doesn't matter then...

Then stop framing your opinions as facts. You've said quite a few whoppers in these last couple of pages and have been repeatedly called out on them and have offered nothing to back them up, even after multiple people explaining to you in plain English how you are incorrect.

So, if that's true then... as what you stipulate, then everyone is "low information".

You're not a low information voter by an stretch of the term.

However, the information you consume has been carefully selected to conform to your preconceived notions while you reject anything that would actually challenge those ideas, deflecting it when it's presented to you and ultimately ignoring it until you move on as if it was never really there in the first place.

**hotsauceman1**

LordofHats wrote:
Ensis Ferrae wrote:

The one thing I will "agree" with Rubio on, is that we really do need to not be "demonizing" trade schools.

Question.

Who is demonizing trade schools?

I see quite the opposite to be honest, people demonizing colleges and those who go to college, especially those in Liberal Arts.

**Ouze**

Certainly on Dakka, HSM is right.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
in this one specific context.

**hotsauceman1**

Ouze wrote:
Certainly on Dakka, HSM is right.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
in this one specific context.

Not just in Dakka, with much of my older friends if you are in college, you are looked down on.

**LordofHats**

That's what I'm getting at.

I don't usually see Trade schools getting slapped down. No one walks around saying "you want to be an electricians? lulz good luck with that." Trade Schools aren't demonized. They're ignored. People don't pay much attention to them and we spend lots of time espousing the value of a college education (probably because it is valuable). Maybe not going to college gets a fair bit of mockery time to time, but trade schools don't seem to be on anyone specific's target list. This strikes me as another round of "we have to stop voter fraud" and "look at what the abortion doctors are doing to the dead babies." Something completely made up that Conservative pundits and politicians will start preaching as gospel.

And yeah. I've definitely seen lots of mean spirited comments and implications about being a college student. There is a huge irony in Dakka talking about how much money philosophy students make given how often I've seen Liberal Arts and the Humanities thrown through the ringer around here.

**ScootyPuffJunior**

I agree.

Blue collar work isn't demonized at all, it's just looked down on and ignored. There is a very distinct difference between those two outlooks.

What is demonized is unions. Which is why it's funny that Rubio is talking up welders so much, considering the best welders are union trained bar none. I'm not sure of his opinion on unions, but I'd imagine it's in lockstep with the rest of his extremely right wing views.

**whembly**

ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
I agree.

Blue collar work isn't demonized at all, it's just looked down on and ignored. There is a very distinct difference between those two outlooks.

With more clarity, I think I agree with this.

What is demonized is unions. Which is why it's funny that Rubio is talking up welders so much, considering the best welders are union trained bar none.

Most of the ire stems from SIEU (government unions) or Teacher's unions. Not so much in trade unions... except for obvious hypocrisy. Such as pushing for min wages as a backdoor attempt to raise union wages due to agreed contracts (at least, here in MO. I'm not sure how common that stipulation is in the contracts in the rest of the states.

I'm not sure of his opinion on unions, but I'd imagine it's in lockstep with the rest of his extremely right wing views.

He is, indeed, very anit-Union with respect to government unions. But, I've yet to see any acrimony for Trade unions from Rubio (or from right-wingers for that matters).

**Ahtman**

ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
What is demonized is unions.

That is because they are the spawn of Satan, hate the troops, and disavow baby Jesus. There may be a trade involved somewhere in there, but that is tertiary to their anti-American stance.

**Ensis Ferrae**

d-usa wrote:

Does the GI Bill cover trade schools as well?

I know for certain that it does for vocational rehabilitation programs, but you have to be medically discharged for that program. AFAIK, anyone eligible for GI Bill benefits can use them at a trade school, but I think there's something about that school having some sort of standing or recognition (as in, you can't go to Bob's Technical Vocational College of Hair Dressers and Welders)

Automatically Appended Next Post:

d-usa wrote:

Stories that I have heard is from people that are trained in Diesel engines (as an example). The military may give you training in working on the specific Diesel engines that you will be working with, but not "Diesel engine" certification. So even though you spend your last 6 years working on Diesel engines, you don't have a useful skill because it is a very narrow specialized set of knowledge.

Being able to go to trade school to get the certifications and training to apply your skills more broadly will help. But that is different than the usual "the military will give you skills that get you hired" message that we often hear.

That is of course, the rub that NO recruiter will ever tell anyone who thinks about enlisting.

Yes, the army will teach you IT skills, Diesel engine skills, jet engine skills, ninja skills, etc. But, it is up to unit leadership to allow people the opportunities to use various testing centers on base to acquire the civilian equivalent licenses. I think perhaps the few jobs that do directly translate in some way are those in aviation due to much of the aviation sector being covered by DoD regulations and FAA regs.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:

Most of the ire stems from SIEU (government unions) or Teacher's unions. Not so much in trade unions... except for obvious hypocrisy. Such as pushing for min wages as a backdoor attempt to raise union wages due to agreed contracts (at least, here in MO. I'm not sure how common that stipulation is in the contracts in the rest of the states.

Honestly, I think if more people were paying attention to local level politics, they'd be more inclined to side with their teacher's unions. At the beginning of this school year, Seattle teachers went on strike. And, when I looked it up just now, one of the local papers was lauding some of the victories those teachers fought for: guaranteed recess for elementary students, limiting the "standardized" tests (which, lets face it, denies money to the corporations who write those bloody things) that students take, eliminating certain forms of detention for certain offenses. etc.

I recall a number of teacher strikes, or near strikes around my home town when I was in high school. The most common reason for striking? Government cutting education funding, local school boards cutting pay in violation of agreed upon contracts with the unions. At one point, there was threatened strike when the school board, facing state budget cuts, felt that the only way to meet budget needs, was to cut music programs. Somewhat surprising to me, ALL teachers, even those like my football coaches who hated the marching band for "trampling the football field grass", stood up and supported the music programs.

**ScootyPuffJunior**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
d-usa wrote:

Does the GI Bill cover trade schools as well?

I know for certain that it does for vocational rehabilitation programs, but you have to be medically discharged for that program. AFAIK, anyone eligible for GI Bill benefits can use them at a trade school, but I think there's something about that school having some sort of standing or recognition (as in, you can't go to Bob's Technical Vocational College of Hair Dressers and Welders)

The United Association (my local's umbrella union) participates in Helmets to Hardhats which allows vets to utilize the GI Bill even to help offset living expenses since the apprenticeships offered are free. We also have our own program called V.I.P. (Veterans in Piping).

**LordofHats**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Honestly, I think if more people were paying attention to local level politics, they'd be more inclined to side with their teacher's unions. At the beginning of this school year, Seattle teachers went on strike. And, when I looked it up just now, one of the local papers was lauding some of the victories those teachers fought for: guaranteed recess for elementary students, limiting the "standardized" tests (which, lets face it, denies money to the corporations who write those bloody things) that students take, eliminating certain forms of detention for certain offenses. etc.

I recall a number of teacher strikes, or near strikes around my home town when I was in high school. The most common reason for striking? Government cutting education funding, local school boards cutting pay in violation of agreed upon contracts with the unions. At one point, there was threatened strike when the school board, facing state budget cuts, felt that the only way to meet budget needs, was to cut music programs. Somewhat surprising to me, ALL teachers, even those like my football coaches who hated the marching band for "trampling the football field grass", stood up and supported the music programs.

My mom is a teacher and has frequently involved herself in teacher's union activities. A few years ago, teachers had been under a pay freeze for the fifth year in a row (which was the fifth year the County's agreement with the Union had been violated as the agreement stipulated that the County could not unilaterally freeze teacher pay). Any program that wasn't being tested (Art, Music, Foreign Language) was facing severe budget slashes; my mom was teaching AP Spanish in the lunch room. Several million dollars were being spent on refurbishing football fields and the School Board president had just authorized a pay raise for themselves. Teachers were being told by school administrators to perform tasks not part of their contracts (i.e. they were being told to do work they wouldn't be paid for). They were continually told there wasn't any money for their programs or their previously agreed on salary increases.

Add in that being a teacher sucks. You have to deal with self entitled parents. You often work 60-70 hours a week and only get paid a salary of 40-60k. Administrators blame anything that goes wrong on you.

After five years of complaining and trying to resolve the problem through channels, the teachers said "screw it. Strike!" Even then, they continued to teach their classes, they just refused to do anything else. This was in Loudon County Virginia. It is one of the wealthiest counties in the entire country (it has the highest median income for any county in the US with a population greater than 65,000) and virtually every school in the county suffers serious overcrowding.

It's not the teacher's fault the education system is broken. They're the second greatest victims of the spineless brain dead way we approach education after the students.

**whembly**

This is significant...

FBI expands probe of Clinton emails, launches independent classification review

The FBI has expanded its probe of Hillary Clinton's emails, with agents exploring whether multiple statements violate a federal false statements statute, according to intelligence sources familiar with the ongoing case.

Fox News is told agents are looking at U.S. Code 18, Section 1001, which pertains to "materially false" statements given either in writing, orally or through a third party. Violations also include pressuring a third party to conspire in a cover-up. Each felony violation is subject to five years in prison.

This phase represents an expansion of the FBI probe, which is also exploring potential violations of an Espionage Act provision relating to "gross negligence" in the handling of national defense information.

"The agents involved are under a lot of pressure and are busting a--," an intelligence source, who was not authorized to speak on the record, told Fox News.

The section of the criminal code being explored is known as "statements or entries generally," and can be applied when an individual makes misleading or false statements causing federal agents to expend additional resources and time. In this case, legal experts as well as a former FBI agent said, Section 1001 could apply if Clinton, her aides or attorney were not forthcoming with FBI agents about her emails, classification and whether only non-government records were destroyed. It is not publicly known who may have been interviewed.

Fox News judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said the same section got Martha Stewart in trouble with the FBI. To be a violation, the statements do not need to be given under oath.

"This is a broad, brush statute that punishes individuals who are not direct and fulsome in their answers," former FBI intelligence officer Timothy Gill told Fox News. Gill is not connected to the email investigation, but spent 16 years as part of the bureau's national security branch, and worked the post 9/11 anthrax case where considerable time was spent resolving discrepancies in Bruce Ivins' statements and his unusual work activities at Fort Detrick, Md.

"It is a cover-all. The problem for a defendant is when their statements cause the bureau to expend more time, energy, resources to de-conflict their statements with the evidence," he said.

Separately, two U.S. government officials told Fox News that the FBI is doing its own classification review of the Clinton emails, effectively cutting out what has become a grinding process at the State Department. Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy has argued to both Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Congress that the "Top Secret" emails on Clinton's server could have been pulled from unclassified sources including news reports.

"You want to go right to the source," Gill said. "Go to the originating, not the collateral, authority. Investigative protocol would demand that."

On Friday, Clapper spokesman Brian Hale confirmed that no change has been made to the two "Top Secrets" emails after a Politico report said the intelligence community was retreating from the finding.

"ODNI has made no such determination and the review is ongoing," Hale said. Andrea G. Williams, spokeswoman for the intelligence community inspector general, said she had the same information. Kennedy is seeking an appeal, but no one can explain what statute or executive order would give Clapper that authority.

A U.S. government official who was not authorized to speak on the record said the FBI is identifying suspect emails, and then going directly to the agencies who originated them and therefore own the intelligence -- and who, under the regulations, have final say on the classification.

As Fox News previously reported, at least four classified Clinton emails had their markings changed to a category that shields the content from Congress and the public, in what State Department whistleblowers believed to be an effort to hide the true extent of classified information on the former secretary of state's server.

One State Department lawyer involved in the alleged re-categorization was Kate Duval. Duval once worked in the same law firm as Clinton's current and long-time lawyer David Kendall and at the IRS during the Lois Lerner email controversy. Duval left government service for private practice in mid-September.

How does it go?

It's the coverup that gets ya... not the crime... eh?

Anyone believe that Obama's DoJ would indict her?

I don't...

**ScootyPuffJunior**

How does it go?

Well that depends on whether they find anything. I know to you the fact that they are investigating is enough proof that she is guilty (and evil), but that's not how law enforcement works.

That article was just a lot of words jumbled together to say, "they're looking for something but haven't found anything yet."

**dogma**

whembly wrote:

Most of the ire stems from SIEU (government unions) or Teacher's unions.

Which always struck as me as odd, given that many (possibly most) SEIU members aren't government employees, and teachers are probably the one group in the US most in need of union representation. If people wanted to complain about government unions they should be looking at AFSCME., though I suppose they do get some indirect attention via the AFL-CIO.

whembly wrote:

Anyone believe that Obama's DoJ would indict her?

I don't...

Arguably it would be a waste of time, as I can't imagine a situation in which Obama didn't pardon her.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ensis Ferrae wrote:

I know for certain that it does for vocational rehabilitation programs, but you have to be medically discharged for that program. AFAIK, anyone eligible for GI Bill benefits can use them at a trade school, but I think there's something about that school having some sort of standing or recognition (as in, you can't go to Bob's Technical Vocational College of Hair Dressers and Welders)

It wouldn't surprise me, as pretty much all grants and scholarships stipulate that the funds can only be applied to the cost of attending an accredited school. There exceptions, particularly small scholarships often involve simply giving the prospective student cash while telling them to spend it wisely, but the above is the general rule.

**Breotan**

ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
That article was just a lot of words jumbled together to say, "they're looking for something but haven't found anything yet."

I read it more as, "we're examining the allegedly classified stuff that was found but haven't made a determination yet whether any of it is actually classified."

**ScootyPuffJunior**

Breotan wrote:
ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
That article was just a lot of words jumbled together to say, "they're looking for something but haven't found anything yet."

I read it more as, "we're examining the allegedly classified stuff that was found but haven't made a determination yet whether any of it is actually classified."

Which is a fancier way of saying what I said.

The addition of the scary adjective "deepen" doesn't really mean anything. They're doing their investigation and they haven't found anything.

This will be another one of those things where there is no conclusion that will make people that hate Hillary happy. If she gets the nomination and wins the Presidency, it will continue for her entire term. If she doesn't get the nomination or loses the election and retires, no one will care anymore and they'll move on the next big thing. You know, like how politics in America work.

**hotsauceman1**

What did Rubio say about trade schools, I cant find it?

**Jihadin**

We need more welders then college grad's (Philosophy majors)

Though we had this discussion awhile back on classes taken in college (Liberal Arts useless)

Its coming down to Certification/Specialize classes for niches in the work force

**Ouze**

Jihadin wrote:
We need more welders then college grad's (Philosophy majors)

That must have made a awkward moment on the debate stage, since Carly Fiorina's B.A. is in Medieval History and Philosophy. I can only imagine the internal struggle someone like, say, Whembly has with this information. Do you crap on liberal arts - a favorite pastime of conservatives - (and thereby indirectly, Mrs. Fiorina?) or do you continue to praise Mrs. Fiorina (and indirectly, liberal arts)?

Look at this list of "wildly successful ceos" who have liberal arts degrees! (Obviously, Mrs. Fiorina isn't on this list). Are you going to say something is bad, if a CEO did it, and therefore it must be good?

**Ensis Ferrae**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
What did Rubio say about trade schools, I cant find it?

http://www.cc.com/full-episodes/o17xlo/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-november-11--2015---chris-hayes-season-21-ep-21023

Video in link... IIRC it's in the second segment, and includes some nice commentary on it

**d-usa**

Trump hitting his home stretch?

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/wheels-finally-coming-off-trump-154900157.html

**curran12**

At least he is going out with an entertaining bang, rather than sulking off.

**hotsauceman1**

Ouze wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
We need more welders then college grad's (Philosophy majors)

That must have made a awkward moment on the debate stage, since Carly Fiorina's B.A. is in Medieval History and Philosophy. I can only imagine the internal struggle someone like, say, Whembly has with this information. Do you crap on liberal arts - a favorite pastime of conservatives - (and thereby indirectly, Mrs. Fiorina?) or do you continue to praise Mrs. Fiorina (and indirectly, liberal arts)?

Look at this list of "wildly successful ceos" who have liberal arts degrees! (Obviously, Mrs. Fiorina isn't on this list). Are you going to say something is bad, if a CEO did it, and therefore it must be good?

I have never understood Conservatives hate of both liberal arts and college in general

**ScootyPuffJunior**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
I have never understood Conservatives hate of both liberal arts and college in general

They don't really hate it, they just like to disparage when it's politically convenient.

**hotsauceman1**

Then why do they keep cutting financial aid.
I find it funny that republicans want everyone to be rich, but then remove tools to allow it.