Look Who Served

T

TFinalshot

Guest
This list should speek for itself. . .

Democrats

* Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
* David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
* Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
* Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
*Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.
* Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-'47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
* John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V Purple Hearts.
* John Edwards: did not serve.
* Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.
* Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star & Bronze Star,Vietnam.
* Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-1953.
* Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74.
* Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-! 91.
* Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII, receiving the Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons.
* Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam, DFCs, Bronze Stars, and Soldier's Medal.
* Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and Legion of Merit.
* Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.
* Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat V.
* Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
* Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57
* Chuck Robb: Vietnam
* Howell Heflin: Silver Star
* George McGovern: Bomber pilot, many missions. Silver Star & DFC during WWII.
* Bill Clinton: Avoided service. with student deferments. Entered draft but received 311.
* Jimmy Carter: Annapolis grad. Seven years in the Navy.
* Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
* John Glenn: WWII and Korea; ! six DFCs and Air Medal with 18 Clusters.
* Tom Lantos: Said to have served in Hungarian underground in WWII. Saved by Raoul Wallenberg.
* Wesley Clark: U.S. Army, 1966-2000, West Point, Vietnam, Purple Heart, Silver Star. Retired 4-star general.
* John Dingell: WWII vet
* John Conyers: Army 1950-57, Korea

Republicans

* Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
* Tom Delay: did not serve.
* House Whip Roy Blunt: did not serve.
* Bill Frist: did not serve! .
* Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
* George Pataki: did not serve.
* Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
* Rick Santorum: did not serve.
* Trent Lott: did not serve.
* ##### Cheney: did not serve. Had "other priorities." Several deferments, the last for wife's pregnancy.
* John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to teach business.
* Jeb Bush: did not serve.
* Karl Rove: did not serve.
* Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man who attacked Max Cleland's patriotism
* Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
* Vin Weber: did not serve.
* Richard Perle: did not serve.
* Douglas Feith: did not serve.
* Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
* Richard Shelby: did not serve.
* Jon Kyl: did not serve.
* Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
* Christopher Cox: did not serve.
* Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
* Donald Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as aviator and flight instructor.
* George W. Bush: six-year Nat'l Guard commitment (in four years); questions about his service remain.
* Ronald Reagan: made war propaganda movies.
* Gerald Ford: Navy, WWII
* Phil Gramm: did not serve.
* John McCain: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.
* Bob Dole: Army officer WWII.
* Chuck Hagel: two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star, Vietnam.
* Duke Cunningham: nominated for Medal of Honor, Navy Cross, Silver Stars, Air Medals, Purple Hearts.
* Jeff Sessions: Army Reserves, 1973-1986
* JC Watts: did not serve.
* Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.
* G.H.W. Bush: Pilot in WWII. Shot down by the Japanese.
* Tom Ridge: Bronze Star for Valor in Vietnam.
* Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
* Clarence Thomas: did not serve

Pundits & Preachers

* Sean Hannity: did not serve.
* Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a pilonidal cyst.')
* Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.
* Michael Savage: did not serve.
* George Will: did not serve.
* Chris Matthews: did not serve.
* Paul Gigot: did not serve.
* Bill Bennett: did not serve.
* Pat Buchanan: did not serve.
* Bill Kristol: did not serve.
* Kenneth Starr: did not serve.
* Michael Medved: did not serve.

--
Daniel Q. Naiman, Professor and Chair
Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics
Whitehead Hall - Room 202-C
Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, MD 21218-2682
 
Maybe more dems served because they didnt "study hard and tried to become smart" and got stuck in places like Iraq, Viet Nam, Korea etc.
Eric
deerline.gif
 
Most of those democrats are well educated, maybe they were more patriotic than there republican counterparts? you can't have it both ways, if the soldiers in Iraq are our finest as most of you far right wingers say then those dems who served are also. looks like war is a more serious matter to those who have been there than to those who have watched it on TV.
 
That list don't mean dittly squat and you know it T. Now who is looking for a fight?

I say so what and so would 99% of the rest of the country.

I can not believe you went so far as to add some friggin moron talk show host. Get a grip T!
 
* Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-1953.
* Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
* Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.

These three ***holes make the entire list mute in my eyes.
HH
 
Donald Rumsfeld had a total service time of 35 years if you include reserve time like a few others you had named. Your post doesn't state this.
Didn't I hear a while back there was some speculation as to how Bob Kerry recieved his MOH?
Then there is John Kerry who received a Purple Heart for throwing a hand grenade and some of the shrapnel flew back catching him in the a$$.Yeah like that was legit.
As a veteran I knew a few officers who put in for medals for themselves and with backing from other officers recieved those medals. Not right in my book. Medals don't always justify someone's bravery and I wonder about a few of those guys.Of course just being a democrat is brave in itself.










"RKBA....ALL THINGS CONSIDERED"
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-06-06 AT 08:43AM (MST)[p] "That list don't mean dittly squat and you know it T. Now who is looking for a fight?"

Hey 202, that's about as bad as what Kerry said. I think YOU need to appologise to those who are on the list that searved. You need to have a little more respect for the men that searved this nation. To say that list dont mean squat is to say that regognizing the men who searved and their service dont mean squat.

I only posted the list out of respect and interest. I just thought you guys would be interested in reading a few facts. The list is a list, it's non partisan, there is no political position more than what, in your judgement the list may deserve.

Please, do not porject your ugley thoughs on to me, draw your own conclusions about the list, but these are the facts they are not MY opinion. So, do you want facts, do you want opinion, or do you just want people who dont agree with you to just shut up?

Real patriot there SoTex. . .
 
This reminds me of the John Kerry thing last election. somebody's sister's boyfriends's cousin heard a freind say maybe Kerry didn't 100% deserve a medal and the far right jumps on it. Bush went AWOL and never served one day in combat and that's just peachie, talk about living in a glass house and shooting a brick cannon . here we have some very good people who served from both sides but we only recognize those from the right, real fair no wonder this country is so divided.
 
It is very rare that I get involved with political discussions, but I'm really curious here. T-Final, have you served your country? I ask this because I get into some pretty good discussions with a couple of my buddies who have not. Having spent 6 months in Kosovo, back in 95' I see the military slightly differently than my non-serving buddies. Thanks for your time.
Brooks
1st Armor/1st Cavalry Div
Budingen, Germany(the most decorated unit in the Army)
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-06-06 AT 08:42AM (MST)[p]Did not mean to imply certain political agenda with my post. It's just the facts. I think some of you asked for just the facts, so here you go, just the facts.

I never was in the military, only man in the history of my entire family that has not entered the armed forces. As I've said before, I still have lots of family in the armed services, woman and men both. This does not mean I know anything more than the next guy, it means that I'm from a military family and that I choose not to serve.

I was a civil savant, I have worked for our government, our nation and our country, while I was with the united states environmental protection agency, in WA DC for two years, one during a democrat and one during a republican - in fact, it was this republican - BUSH 2.

I'm not sure it really makes any difference if you served or not. I posted these facts not as political jab, but rather as information for each of use to look at, read, and do with what we wish. Please stay out of my head, I cant believe all the men on this site that like to draw a conclusion about what one man may think, before you ask him.

As i've said, you make your own conclusions. I think service is important, but it does mean that people who do not serve cant speak. If service was the mark of the right to speak, there would be no need to protect the freedom of speech. I do believe that if you do serve, you likely have a very different perspective, especially if you were served the armed forces.

We all have a right to speak. It is interesting to note that so many men that did not serve, also happen to republicans, they also choose to speak the very loudest about the dems not being good on security. If you value service and you believe it gives you a different perspective, particularly on war, it would seem that it would be un patriotic to condemn a party who actually has MORE military service. But I guess, it's easier to condemn someone if you've not walked in their shoes, so to speak.

In any case, say what you want, make your own conclusions; stay out of my head, just the facts man, just the facts.
 
Wow, I just asked a simple question. I certainly wasn't, as you say, trying to get into your head. Nor was I attempting to quash your right to speak your opinion. I don't believe I even stated who I have voted for in any election I've participated in(dem or rep). I was just asking a simple question. Sorry if you read into my question, more than what was there. I was just looking for the facts man, just the facts.

THE ONLY wiboy WONDERING WHY TFINAL HAS SUCH THIN SKIN!!!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-06-06 AT 09:21AM (MST)[p]youre welcome sir, and thank you for your sevice. I did not want you do be confused about me. I don know you and I dont usally get asked personal questions like the one you asked. I likely gave you more that you asked for, but then again, you ask. . .
 
"T" AGAIN YOU POSTED THIS TO MAKE A POINT ABOUT WHO SERVED AND WHO IS RUNNING THE WAR ON TERROR. THERE IS NO HIDING THIS. WHAT I AM SAYING IS JUST CAUSE YOU SERVED DON'T MEAN YOU KNOW HOW TO RUN A WAR ON TERROR OR ANY OTHER WAR FOR THAT MATTER. JUST LOOK AT THE MEN THAT RAN WWII. MOST HAD NEVER SERVED OR BEEN TO WAR AND THEY DID ONE HELL OF A JOB. THEN LOOK AT THE BUNCH THAT RAN KOREA AND NAM.
SO I SAY AGAIN THAT LIST DON'T MEAN DITTLE SQUAT.
I DO NOT HAVE TO DEFEND MY RECORD ON HOW I FEEL ABOUT THOSE WHO SERVE. DON'T PUT THOUGHTS OR WORDS IN MY MOUTH OR TRY AN SPIN WHAT I SAY "T" YOU WERE TROLLING AND IT WAS OBVIOUS NO MATTER HOW YOU SPIN IT.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-06-06 AT 11:06AM (MST)[p]Ok T - in all fairness this is not totally complete list. It doesn't list a single woman on it. That totally changes the character of the list in its entirety. It doesn't list all the current House and Senate seats either but is a list of "superstars" from both sides (some of them no longer politically relevant nor living - i.e. Reagan, Bush, Dole). It doesn't compare them by age either. It appears that the democrats are all younger than their republican counterparts, with a few exceptions which are younger. Most of these older and younger republicans are those that fell in between WWII and Korea and Viet Nam or are from after the Viet Nam era and didn't really have the disctinct opportunity that those on the democrats list did.

Some of the characterizations on the list bother me as well. I don't think it represents the facts that it purports to and is clearly politically slanted.

However it does bring up some good points, as does your long response. So I have some thoughts of my own about it.

I never served either - I guess I had "other priorities". First, I was never directly called on to do so like my father was via the draft. Oh but wait - he wasn't drafted - actually he volunteered for the Navy and became an aviation mechanic but his army draft notice came in the mail about two weeks after he was in boot camp. He was in Adak, Alaska for most of Viet Nam working on the planes our aviators, soldiers and marines were travelling on and fighting in. He spent very little time "in country" so I guess by the standards of this list, his service would be listed as "questionable", though he did pull guard duty one night in Cam Ranh Bay when a group of 3 "VC" attacked with satchel charges and he ended up shooting one of them on the runway. It was a 12 year old kid. That is a fact that I am sure would never make this list and his service would be questioned. Oh yeah, that and he got Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma from handling the hydraulics systems that delivered Agent Orange and has had radiation (which caused all of his teeth to die and fall out)and chemotherapy both. Yeah, his service would definitely be listed as "questionable" on this list. Oh wait - no it wouldn't , he's a democrat. I gues he's be right on the list up there with that guy who was a journalist. Who was that, oh... well maybe my dad would just as soon be left off this list altogether then.

OK back to me.

Second, in the absence of any pressing national conflict at that time, (Desert Storm began when I was a Senior in High School and ended before I graduated)I choose to serve a mission for my church trying to change the hearts, minds and lives of the people of South Florida through the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I guess this service would be questioned to. I just wonder in whose eyes it would be considered questionable.


After returning home from I chose to try and play college football and get my education instead of enlisting. I even passed on the opportunity to serve in the National Guard as I thought it would be important for me to get my education first. However I did vow to my wife on 9/11 that if they ever did call up a draft that I would go ahead and enlist. Because of my education, age, experience, and expertise, I would be an officer and would probably end up as a language instructor, intelligence or liason officer or interregator. So, I would probably be stationed far away from the fighting so I guess my service could be listed as questionable too.

So I better never run for political office I guess.

So I guess my point is that this list stupid.

UTROY
Proverbs 21:19 (why I hunt!)
 
I have no qualms however about the pundits and preachers list however - they are not public servants, only fat mouthed public figures who get paid to stir controversy and divide the country. If you ask me, they are the "GREAT DIVIDERS"

UTROY
Proverbs 21:19 (why I hunt!)
 
I just noticed that the list is very selective. Why don't you list each member of congress, women included, and tell whether or not they served. That would truely be more telling than a selective list.

Why don't I selectively include all of the radio personalities on the Democratic talk shows and see how many of them have served, been divorced, had abortions, used drugs. etc...

"One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
 
Hey, why not just tell me the list is a fraud, and not factual. Is it an interesting list or not? Is it a lie? Is it factual?

You guys are great, never talk about the issues never really get into the subject, but just bash the posters and your perceptions of the intent. I would have thought at least one person would have thought it was interesting, I guess not. . . I thought is was interesting to learn that the loud mouths on the war, the one's shouting "stay the course, the dems will cut and run," are the ones who never served. Isn?t that interesting no matter what your political persuasion?
 
The list is a factual list but any real professor knows how to take a real statistical sample from a population. Random names is a valid sampling method but I doubt the list is random. Rather some debunked hippie professor from a left wing collge who made a list of people in the republican party that did not serve in the armed forces. Where is the most prominant republican in the congress, Orrin Hatch? Where is Nancy Pelosi on the list? I'm sure she served, on her back, while smoking weed with homos in San Fran. How about doing a random sampling in a certain population, like congress?

The list is not a random sample from a controlled population.

How many reublicans are serving in the armed forces now? Which party do the armed forced overwhelmingly support? And why?

"One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-06-06 AT 12:31PM (MST)[p]
Yeah.....real nice list....you guys are great.....TF you are a professor right? Then why didn't you see through the fact that this is some rambling of names that do NOT COME FROM A CONTROLLED POPULATION.

Show me a list of past presidents and members of congress for the last 20 years. Then I will be paying attention. This list is BULL CRAP, and you now know it.

"One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
 
Both of my grandfather served in WWII. Both are republicans.

There's my list.

"One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
 
I would not go so far as to call myself a "professor? I did teach environmental science, botany, geography, and environmental policy at one local college and an environmental policy/science course through Northern Arizona University, but I'm NO prof. . .

Now, I think the list is what it is. If you want a different list, go make one. I am just amazed that no one has even been slightly interested in the facts of the list. I think it says a lot about how much most of you really WHANT to see facts. It looks to me like the facts are NOT what you want but instead you want to see what you want to see. . .

Nothing wrong with that. I personally dont care what the author of the list intended, I did however think the list was interesting.

Clinton should be on that list. However, Clinton did not start a war nor was he a war-hawk or a chicken hawk. He also was not unwilling to listen and be diplomatic. No sticking up for Clinton, as I said, he should be on the list.
 
Clinton is on the list....my bad.

Seriously, the list is disturbing....I agree.....but I really wish there was a list of the members of congress.



"One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
 
TF,
There is a difference between serving your country with honor and respect, as apposed to serving for political reasons, which a lot of those dems have done and proven, by showing their disdain for this country and the U.S. military. Just look at John Kerry.






"RKBA....ALL THINGS CONSIDERED"
 
Just another right winger superior dance, you guys are so full of hate you won't even admit that dems serve and die for their country . who cares if some republicans were left off the list I'm sure some dems were too, if you have time to research every present and past politition to prove the list wrong knock yourself out. the point is the dems have the right to voice their opinion on the war because they've been there also, something you can't accept.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-06-06 AT 01:01PM (MST)[p]I'd support a political whore over death. . .
 
>>I'd support a political whore over death. . .

Stalin, Mao, Mussolini, they would all love to have had you as a subject...

You may be a resident of this country, you may enjoy the freedoms is affords, but your ideas of how the country should be run are in direct conflict with its founding.

To respond to your "I'd support a political whore over death. . . " I say: Give me liberty or give me death...

Read this: http://www.law.ou.edu/ushistory/henry.shtml

Read the full text, realize what the founders sacrificed so we can enjoy our freedom...And understand that you would be on the opposite side...

As far as that list you pasted... Does military service give you cart blanch to be an uber liberal ?


Let's start another list:

Democrats:

Ted Kennedy - Murderer, got off due to his family name. Got expelled from Harvard for cheating on his final exams...was let back in due to his family name.

John Kerry - TRAITOR - met with the North Vietnamies in Paris during a time we were at war with them...Gave aid and comfort to the enemy during a time of war. Sold out our POWs...

Jimmy Carter - gave us the greatest recession since the great depression...

Bill Clinton - Disgraced the office of President...

To be fair:

Republicans:

Randall "Duke" Cunningham - Took bribes while in office...

It all boils down to... Scum is scum, no matter your history, no matter which side you're on...
 
thanks for reminding me, maybe you should remind the republican party, and the white house while your at it. Either you support this nation, or you dont, you cant pick and choose the constitution like the bush's have done. . .

Great contrabution to this thread, thanks edlbrock, now floor it!
 
When it comes to protecting Americans the Bush admin has done an OUTSTANDING job. T you are upset cause conservatives have the power. Get over it.

You need to Man Up T.
 
Ahhhhhhhhh, 202 there are no CONSERVATIVES in power, Bush is farther from a conservative than was FDR. . .
 
OK, I do not usually reply to posts like these, but lately I have had a bur up my butt about both sides so to speak. I once asked my Father if he was Democrat or Republican. His response was "that is no ones business but my own" this coming from a man who graduated collage with a doctorates at the age of twenty two (1942), was "asked" to serve his country as an Officer in the Army at Los Alamos research facility, and was present for the Trinity blast. He held his right to vote and the privacy of that right close to his heart.
Myself? well I tend to find party line voters (Dem or Rep)to be rather annoying. I say this because I have yet to find either party line to be 100% inline with what "I" believe.
Neither party has a lock on the "moral majority" and/or my best interest in mind. An example I can give is here in Washington (ran by Dems for as long as I can remember) the people in power believe it is OK to take or restrict your land for what they believe to be a better good. They believe social engineering is the answer to all of the problems. They also believe that as long as they say they are protesting The president, it is OK to attend war protests in Seattle with people carrying signs that say 911 was an inside job and that are organized by the Socialist workers Party of America. As a "party" I will not defend the republicans either. If you make a stand as a party to be ethical and for your faith, then you darn sure better be above reproach. I believe that a person who can not stand on their own regardless of party affiliation they sure do not deserve my vote.
Here in Washington we now have to choose between Democrat or Republican just to vote in the Primary, Who does this help? Certainly not me or my family. I personnally believe that government should do as little as possible to impact us. And that every man or woman owes it to their country to do some form of service (military, civil, peace corp, etc..) anything.
But that is just my opinion. No better then anyone else's.

Last note: Served with many guys I would gladly give my life for, and have no doubt they would do the same for me....but I would never trust them with my money, my wife, or my vote, LOL.
US Navy S.O.G. 1981-1987



There are only two types of people - The Hunters and the hunted,
I hunt.
Alchase
 
Well - it is a factual list - partially factual. You want the facts - so do I. ALL of them. Not just the few facts that point to one specific way and slant the other.

UTROY
Proverbs 21:19 (why I hunt!)
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-06-06 AT 03:36PM (MST)[p]Roy, thanks for finally making the point! I was hoping someone would finally make the point so that we all could get off the "facts" BS.
 
How do you know Kerry lied? were you there? don't give me the "Swift boat for republicans" crap. I'm not a Kerry fan but if you question his medals you have to question every medal ever given out. one thing is for sure he was in Nam, that's more than most of his critics including Bush can say. there are more who say he earned them than say he didn't so he should be treated as any other vet.
 
As mentioned above, MOST currently serving WILL/WOULD vote republican. So to have a list showing who has served and who hasn't does not mean a thing. So what. Who cares? I don't. I don't ever remember anyone saying that the dems don't have a right to criticize the war. Even if they didn't serve. There are way too many people in this country who believe that to be a leader you HAVE to have been enlisted. I say BS. Just because you were enlisted DOES NOT mean you would be a better leader.





It's Bush's fault!!!
 
LOL - nice try for a spin-justification my frined. There really were two points to this post, you missed them both. . .

1. facts are facts are facts - but are they . . . this post proves that facts only are facts to those who believe them, most people pointed out that this post and that list was meaningless - even thought it's a factual list and it's respectable to identify our heroes.

2. Recognize the men who served, and to point out that the men most supporting the war, and also those most damning the democrats, are the guys - elected or otherwise - pushing hardest on "stay the course, and the if you elect the dems, we will no longer be safe, and we'll have to fight them over here. . . bla, bla, bla. . .
 
Damn T, you got some serious issues with facts. Tell me where I said the list wasn't factual. Fact this, fact that. Your obsessed.
"this post proves that facts only are facts to those who believe them,"
Whos has said that these are not facts? Anybody? Who said they don't believe them? I never said I didn't believe them. What I am now asking, is what is the meaning of these "FACTS"? You post these "FACTS" so what do they mean? NOTHING. Does it mean the dems are better leaders? NO. Re-read my post.
"even thought it's a factual list and it's respectable to identify our hereos."
None of these jokers in congress are my hereo, no matter who they are or what they've done.



It's Bush's fault!!!
 
T-

The creator of this list appears to be mathamatician.

Daniel Q. Naiman, Professor and Chair
Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics
Whitehead Hall - Room 202-C
Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, MD 21218-2682

One of the fundamentals taught in the early math years is you cannot compare apples and oranges...

Most career mathamatician know that statistics can be manilpulated to produce the outcome desired by the researcher. And in this case, it's shameful of Mr. Naiman to produce a list such as this that is obviously biased.

One thing that is obvious is the additional comments provided for certain names in the lists...almost as if they are qualifiers to justify the names inclusion.

To compile a statistical analysis of the parties, each group should be taken in it's entirety.

Like I said before, this list is cherry picked.

I will say, that of the lists provided, more Democrats have served than Repiublicans.

Until a complete list of both parties is provided, the results from Mr. Naiman are bogus and skewed to produce the results he desired, if he infact produced this list.

There's a famous quote that goes something like this: "There are lies, damn lies and statistics..." This list is bogus.
 
All we've heard since awol took on Iraq is how the dems won't protect this country blah blah blah. This list simply shows that once again the reps are filling you fine people full of $hit. That's all. The dems will in fact protect this country. Don't make it more difficult than it really is.
 
WTH are you talking about Edlbrock? You do not even know what your saying. WTH does that article have to do with numbers?

Where's the mean, the deviation, the variance (dispersion), and standard deviation? Show me the statistics Edlbrock.

The only numbers I see are those just before the name, and those that represented the years of service for each entry.

When I took statistics in graduate school, we used numbers to generate information.

I also do not know how anyone can ignore the names and their political positions on this war.

Are you saying the guys just completely made up a list and that the service is bogus?

Talk about apples and oranges, you claim your taking a position that the used numbers to generate a biased outcome, but there are NO numbers - do you get that much?

This article never was a numbers game, it was list of people and their service, or lack there of, in the military.

Sure, the list in incomplete, but to try to draw some correlation to the statistics and the ability of a statistician to manipulate numbers is like trying to say you shot a mule deer in the Yukon with a 74 inch spread. You may have shot an animal with a 74 inch spread, but it was a freaking MOOOSSSSSSSSE!!!!!!!!!!
 
T, I don't see many facts in this list. If those are facts then these facts should be allowed also.

Let's play the percentages of the memeber of congress who served.

Of the members of congress (combined House and Senate)
75% of members have not served in any branch.

16% of Republicans in the Congress Served
9% of Democrats in the Congress Served


Of Presidents (Past and Present)

62% have served
38% have not

The executive Branch mirrors the Legislative Branch

24% have served
76% have not

Judicial Branch

33% have served
67% have not

Senate Armed Forces Committee
Total Members
13 Republican
10 Democrats

6 of 13 Repulicans on the committee have served=46.2% served
3 of 10 Democrats on the committe have served= 30% served


House Armed Service committee
31 Republican
30 Democrats

12 of 31 Republicans on the committe have served=38.7% served
8 of 30 Democrats on the committe have served=26.7%

I could go on and on.

My point is that anyone can spin such info anyway they wish to spin.

I don't know what the cut and paste added to the discussion.

Nemont
 
Nemont, thanks for adding somthing real to this post. I take your word for the numbers you posted, thanks again for that, it's interesting.
 
I took the liberty.

It Is The Soldier

It is the soldier, not the reporter
Who has given us freedom of the press.
It is the soldier, not the poet
Who has given us freedom of speech.

It is the soldier, not the campus organizer
Who has given us the freedom to demonstrate.
It is the soldier, not the lawyer
Who has given us the right to a fair trial.

It is the soldier
Who salutes the flag
Who serves under the flag
Whose coffin is draped in the flag
Who allows the protester to burn the flag

-Charles M. Province
 
>>WTH are you talking about Edlbrock? You do not even know what your saying. WTH does that article have to do with numbers?

Tony, if it had nothing to do with numbers it would have been one line.

"More Democrats have served than Republicans."

The fact is this list is provided as "proof" in comparing two groups. The error is that the lists are incomplete.

This list is cherry picked and any results you infer from it are bogus.

- do you get that much?
 
Of course I do, but that does not settle the fact that this has nothing to do with statistics, and even more importanatly, it does not mean that what's printed is wrong, or even un factual.

Not printing every possible piece does not make what is printed wrong.

we both agree.
 
T, you are right, it does not make it unfactual, nor does it make it wrong, but it DOES make it biased.



It's Bush's fault!!!
 
I have never heard a more truthful statement then that,
Thank you.

Funny how most except the solder tend to forget that.

There are only two types of people - The Hunters and the hunted,
I hunt.
Alchase
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

B0010332-A366-4429-AAFA-2DFE20966647.jpeg
IMG_0557.jpeg
310DA641-ABEC-4DB8-BD95-ACD164B89822.jpeg
buffalo.jpg
393.jpeg
IMG_8714.jpeg
99361266-8DA1-448A-8CAA-D07F2AE86288.jpeg
college 154 copy copy.jpg
F589961D-5CDA-4669-A1F7-7C0851A4BFCC.jpeg
A464F425-05FF-470B-90EB-38AD0A0271C9.png
IMG_1215.JPG
0423210209.jpg
Back
Top Bottom