Typepad HTML Email While I worked night shift 1800-0600, I always HATED the daily GQ drills, as they were typically held during our sleeping hours. However, they paid off in the long run. From: TypePad

That pay raise we received Jan 1st was greatly appreciated, but it was eaten up by higher Tricare deductibles. Essentially what they've done is give us money in one hand, only to take it out of the other. When I was working, I always used my employers health care plan & let Tricare pick up the remainder. Now that I'm not, it's getting to be almost too much for me as a retiree.

Necessity is the mother of invention.........

Being in the Navy and in particular, the Aviation component of the Navy, I've seen more than my share of women trying to do the same job that the men do. With FEW exceptions, they simply cannot. I don't know of too many women that have the actual strength to lift a T58 turboshaft engine with only the help of another. (Yes, the Navy does use engine hoists, but there are times when that equipment isn't available) Hell, I'm a big brute, or at least I was and I had a hell of a time torquing an aft transmission (400 lbs/ft Tq). I couldn't see a woman manually shoving, pulling or pushing an MMG-1 or an A/M24M-5 (mobile electric power unit) across the hangar deck by themselves, which I've done many a time while I was active duty. I've run across women who normally can't even lift a tool box up onto the aircraft where they need to work and that's a job requirement. Sure, there are always exceptions to the rule, but I just don't see where it would provide beneficial to the military to allow women to be in active combat roles. In my opinion, it's a mistake. A very BIG mistake.

You failed to mention that women tend to be more of the "nurturing type". That, in itself, presents a problem while on patrol or doing any type of Ops.

Nail, meet hammer..... One of the things I was fortunate enough to NOT experience was having women aboard my various ships. While I did have women in my various squadrons, they still presented a problem. There was fraternization, despite the "rules", unnecessary drama, etc. We still got by, but there were always some sort of tensions created by the co-ed Military.

Not only his Sailors, but Sailors, past & current, are rallying around him on Facebook. We can see the injustice being perpetrated against Capt. Honors. I'm one of them.

As a career Sailor, I must admit that the videos were hilarious. Were they out of line?? Maybe through some enhanced video editing, they appeared that way. However, it is the XO's responsibility to keep morale up. Being haze gray & underway for extended periods of time is pretty tough on people. A little break from the monotony of 12-16 hour days is often welcomed. It's sad to say that the upper echelon and the PC police have disregarded the actual GOOD that Capt. Honors did while he was XO. I would have LOVED to have a Skipper or XO like him. I actually did have an XO & CO like him at one command, Cdr. A.J. Billings, who wrote, "Seawolf28". All in all, I was saddened to hear the news that Capt. Honors was reassigned and relieved of command. This shows that the upper echelon of the Navy and the DOD is out of touch with the reality of shipboard life. It also shows they are out of touch with their men. I DO have to question the timing of the release of the video and what ulterior motives were behind the release of something four years old. What about the CO? Will he go unpunished for allowing these videos the be broadcast on the ship's closed circuit television? After all, he's the one ultimately responsible. (Not that I'd like to see another Sailor's career thrown down the drain.)

This is pretty old news (3 years old now): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492804/The-uninvited-guest-Chinese-sub-pops-middle-U-S-Navy-exercise-leaving-military-chiefs-red-faced.html Yes, it DID happen. And, yes, the Shitty Kitty has been decommissioned: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Kitty_Hawk_%28CV-63%29

Anybody that thinks or believe that this was NOT terrorism is simply naive, stupid, or just doesn't want to face the facts.

AMEN, WOTN Editor. "Indian" needs a cranial-rectumotomy. BZ MsMarti!! While I don't really like to see death, Pvt. Manning would be one that deserves the death penalty should it be confirmed that his theft has caused any military or civilian deaths. Murder by proxy, at best.

LW: Honestly, I can't remember when this was or which airport. I want to think it was in 1995 when I did a lot of flying around for training to different places. However, it could have been in 2000 or 2004. I just remember the incident and me walking out of there pretty disappointed and a little disgruntled. I doubt that the same people would be working at any of those places now. It IS good to know that the USO of Indiana allows everybody. But, nowadays, I don't do much flying.

I like the fact that the USO is out there to support our troops. However, I have an axe to grind with them. As a military retiree, I was at some airport a while back and wandered into the USO to maybe grab a cup of coffee and hang with my brethren, shoot the breeze, etc. I had some time to kill between flights. When I attempted to sign in, they flat out rejected me because I wasn't active duty and bluntly told me that I wasn't allowed in there. That kind of bias and treatment didn't sit very well with me.

I'll check into why their endorsements haven't been yanked. In case you haven't been following this closely, last Friday, ALL of the VFW-PAC board members have been recalled and essentially fired by the National Commander. I don't know what authority the National Commander may have over their web site. It's very possible that he has none and this, too, must be addressed by the delegates of the National convention. You may want to read what the Texas State Commander has put out here: http://www.texasvfw.org/UserFiles/File/dept_pac_stmt.pdf

The PAC followed their own by-laws. These by-laws have been in place since their inception. The problem with the PAC is two-fold; 1.) a messed up set of by-laws & 2.) the failure to demonstrate some flexibility when confronted with some problematic endorsements. #2 has been fixed. I'm sure that the National Commander didn't want it to come to this and that is why it took a while to get it corrected. #1 will be fixed or the PAC will go away. Again, the Commander is operating per the by-laws of the VFW. If y'all are too hard-hearted to recognize that the Commander is doing the best as he can within the rules that he MUST abide by, then I feel for you. A couple of important factors in the way the PAC operates: 1.) The By-laws are pretty clear about that too. The final decisions are made by the Director, the Treasurer and a nine member Board of Director's, ALL of whom are appointed by the National Commander and they DO NOT HAVE TO CONSULT WITH ANYONE. They may, if they wish, take advice from anyone they chose, but there is no official line of communication with anyone other than themselves. That's how the system was set up and that's how it's operated. As anyone who knows something about tax-exempt organizations knows, such an organization operates outside it's published By-laws at great peril to its tax exempt status and the PAC has done nothing at variance with those By-laws when determining who to endorse. 2.)Of primary consideration shall be the candidate's position and/or voting record on issues involving national defense and veterans legislation. And whether the candidate holds a leadership or policy-shaping position in his party or on a congressional committee or is likely to hold such a position in the future. Once I saw the the endorsements that the PAC made this year, I was pretty pissed off, too. I wasn't involved with the VFW in 2008. The larger fact is that WE put the PAC in the limelight and showed how messed up they are. Now that this is accomplished, the VFW can move forward. It's not time to abandon the VFW, it's time to hold them to task!! I think that many of us have been asleep at the wheel when it comes to the VFW, politics, or even the goings on in the World. Today's modern world with the internet has really opened people's eyes because of the near-instant communications. Today's political climate is much different than it was in 2000 and 2004. It's heated, people are scared of what Obama and his ilk might do, and people are frustrated because the inept "leadership" is NOT listening to its constituents. (I remember one candidate saying that he'll vote how he pleases, regardless of what his constituents wanted.) At least the VFW Leadership heard the cry of outrage and acted!!

My Post had come to a consensus to send a letter requesting EXACTLY this. I guess we won't need to send that letter up the chain of command within the VFW now. I have to commend the National Commander for stepping up to the plate and demonstrating some true leadership!!

Since when does being scared equate to "torture"? Major Tom needs to go through SERE school or even easier, go find & watch the movie, "Bravo Two-Zero" Methinks that "Major Tom" hasn't even served....

At my post, we are calling for the recalling of the PAC Board members. In all essence, fire them until this whole thing gets squared away. (Can one actually "fire volunteers?) The National Commander has that authority, at least that's how we interpret it. We realize that it will be too late for this election cycle. @ Constitutional Insurgent: There are many Dems on the endorsement list. There are only a handful that we have a problem with. And yes, I would endorse a WAR Veteran before I would endorse some of these folks.

Mr. Mahoney: While I might concur with you to some extent, many of these politicians have demonstrated a strong anti-military sentiment. With that in mind, I ask you who makes up the body of the VFW? It's those that are on active duty in a combat zone or those who have served in a combat zone. One simply CANNOT be anti-military and pro-veteran as they run hand in hand. Sure, a politician can certainly endorse veterans issues, but when they berate, withhold funds, and otherwise disparage our troops, their true colors start to be revealed. Are their Dems & Independents that DO support our troops?? Most certainly. However, and I'm repeating myself, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Harry Reid, Alcee Hastings, Sheila Jackson Lee and their ilk have constantly shown their sentiment towards our troops and it's not positive. There are others, too. I just mentioned the main ones that stick out in my mind.

"Teh stupid" is strong in Oklahoma!! I live about half a mile south of the OK border in Texas. Oklahomans are the bane of my existence when it comes to driving, common sense, etc. They come over her to shop for groceries because OK charges sales tax on EVERYTHING. This was on the local news last night. At least someone FINALLY did the right thing. I have a problem with "Toll Roads" in general. They use taxpayer's money to get most of them built and then they charge the people to use something that they already paid for.

Mr. Wolf: I don't perceive WOTN Editor as defending the PAC, only the VFW. As far as the PAC board members resigning, I don't see that happening. They have become accustomed to the DC lifestyle. Wining & dining on the VFW & its Auxiliary members' dime. Is it right? Definitely NOT! Here's what I want to see out of the PAC, if they continue to exist: Continue to lobby and keep getting veterans' issues bills passed. Not to endorse ANY candidate, period. In my opinion, the VFW shouldn't be in the endorsement game. However, the PAC needs to continue as a lobbying entity because without them, I don't feel that needed legislation would get passed. I will admit, they certainly fell down this year, as military retirees weren't granted a COLA, many of those retirees belonging to the VFW. I know of four at my small post. (We have an ACTIVE membership of about 20 out of some 250+ actual members. By "active", I mean those that attend meetings or participate in Post functions in one way or another.) The VA issues seem to be getting resolved, but I can't say that the VFW PAC had a lot to do with that. They may have or not, but I don't think so.

I'm with you, Uncle Jimbo..... What I've never been able to grasp is WHY the Phelps' have chosen military funerals as their "podium". Why aren't they protesting at Gay Pride parades, Gay bars, etc.?? It seems inappropriate to protest at a military funeral mainly because the military really isn't "pro-GLBT". Seems to me that they are pretty much "preaching to the choir" and disrupting what would be & should be an honorable event.

I am so pissed that I am beside myself. I personally spoke with Mike Wysong. They simply refuse to comply with the National Commander's request to simply not endorse any candidate, and fully intend on heading into the abyss of dishonor. I think that the consensus is that, until the next National Convention, no funds will be appropriated for them, no funds will be donated to them (at least from the VFW members and the Ladies Auxiliary), and it will roll on from there. I've spoken with a few insiders on this and it just may be that the PAC will cease to exist, at least that's their thoughts on the issue right now.

I spoke with Mike Wysong, a board member of the VFW-PAC, this afternoon, and they are sticking by their endorsements with NO intention of compromise.