The relevant fact remains that because of Iraq--and I might add voluntary service--recruiters face a tough challenge and resort to overly aggressive sales pitch. 

How has recruiting been overly agressive, steve? Don't you have to show abuse before you start stifling someone's work? If this addressed abuses by recruiters I'd agree with you, but to me this seems more like singling out one career and saying that all other careers can recruit on campus.

The relevant fact remains that because of Iraq--and I might add voluntary service--recruiters face a tough challenge and resort to overly aggressive sales pitch.

I agree with Baker.  You address the abuse, you do not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

The relevant fact remains that because of Iraq--and I might add voluntary service--recruiters face a tough challenge and resort to overly aggressive sales pitch.

No.....the "relevant" fact is that this is a non-issue and "will-be" stuck down!

The measure will have no effect on military recruiters as they are allowed on school grounds under federal law, according to U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Defense.

Get that? "Federal law".

You address the abuse

Okay, quit school and join the army, or sustain good grades and become an officer, or be patriotic and join the war you don't believe in. I'd ban Wal-mart too--join us in a career of low-life.

but to me this seems more like singling out one career and saying that all other careers can recruit on campus.

Excellent point. But still has nothing to do with O'Reilly's unmitigated wrath upon a city. HJe should have simply used your argument.

Get that? "Federal law".

So much for state's and rights.

I wouldn't mind seeing San Francisco go away at times.  The majority of San Francisco represents the tragedy of the commons scenario.  They will happily exploit the benefits they freely receive thanks to the sacrifice of others while decrying that sacrifice as being unworthy.

You realize, of course, that the extreme right has its share of nut cases as well, and O'Reilly is one of them.

You got that right Steven!! ;~D

Get that? "Federal law". So much for state's and rights

State rights my butt! You going to take "federal" funds? Then you play by "their" (the feds) rules. Don't like the rules? Then by GOD don't take the funds!
And btw......don't make it sound like it's a "new" deal. This has been the case for quite some time.

Why do people think that being pro state's rights is a blanket statement for absolutely everything?

You can't do that, High School graduation (or a GED) is a requirement to join.

Thanks for the correction. But in time of war it shouldn't be. I enlisted during my junior year--but that was in ancient times. In my day as a teacher, our school welcomed uniformed alumni as recruiters and instructors, but because of the draft, they were not under pressure to meet a quota. 

You can't do that, High School graduation (or a GED) is a requirement to join. Thanks for the correction. But in time of war it shouldn't be. I enlisted during my junior year--but that was in ancient times. In my day as a teacher, our school welcomed uniformed alumni as recruiters and instructors, but because of the draft, they were not under pressure to meet a quota.

Even in time of war it should be. Look at the technology the military is using as a whole on todays battlefield. Nowadays they need a LOT more than just rifle toting grunts. Do you honestly think that people that did not graduate could run it? Yes they could be taught how to, but how long would educating the un-educated take?

Do you honestly think that people that did not graduate could run it? Yes they could be taught how to, but how long would educating the un-educated take?

Absolutely, ninety day wonders. Even draftees were motivated and learned quickly.

Do you honestly think that people that did not graduate could run it? Yes they could be taught how to, but how long would educating the un-educated take? Absolutely, ninety day wonders. Even draftees were motivated and learned quickly.

That was then, this is now. Try and teach someone who is uneducated to run a radar installation in ninety days? Ain't going to happen. Or a missle launcher that's tied to radar.

That was then, this is now.

Oh, yeah, I forgot today's public education sucks, right?

That was then, this is now. Oh, yeah, I forgot today's public education sucks, right?

Actually if you've paid attention it does suck! There is verifyable proof of that. But then that wasn't the point you were making. Was it? We were talking about 90 day wonders. I'm sorry, but having been an Aviation Electronics Tech in the Navy (AT2), there is NO WAY you could teach someone to do what I did in 90 days time.

I'll grant you that; still, there are other kinds of techs in the service that the "uneducated" could get a handle on.

I'll grant you that; still, there are other kinds of techs in the service that the "uneducated" could get a handle on.

Yes there are a "few". Very few! Unfortunately our armed services run on "high tech" stuff nowadays and not just riflemen. Radar, Communications, Weapon systems, Computers, etc........ And those can't be learned by someone in "90 days" and MOST definitely not by someone who is uneducated. Which is why "ALL" military services absolutely REQUIRE a HS diploma "before" you can enlist.

REQUIRE a HS diploma.

Even from a public high school that sucks? You're overlooking the fact that recruiters are no less motivated than football coaches; they will fudge records to meet their quotas.

REQUIRE a HS diploma. Even from a public high school that sucks? You're overlooking the fact that recruiters are no less motivated than football coaches; they will fudge records to meet their quotas.

No can do. There is no way to fudge this. For one thing a copy of your "school transcript" goes into your service jacket (how you gonna fudge that?). Along with a copy of your diploma. Can't fudge that either. You need a document before you can copy one. Quotas will NOT force a recruiter to commit forgery, perjury or any other fraudulent act. Recruiters care more for their own butt (staying out of federal prison) then they do about meeting any quotas.

You're overlooking the fact that recruiters are no less motivated than football coaches; they will fudge records to meet their quotas.

They CAN'T do that. There has to be a paper-trail, they can't just make stuff up. Besides, not only can the enlistee be prosecuted for fradulent enlistment, the recruiter can get Art 15'd too.

Fraudulent Enlistment gets thrown a people fairly often.