About Us
Mission Statement
Rules of Conduct
 
Name:
Pswd:
Remember Me
Register
 

Ask a Vet
Author: TriSec    Date: 08/20/2013 10:27:09

Good Morning.

Today is our 4,335th day in Afghanistan.

We'll start this morning as we always do; with the latest casualty figures from our ongoing war, courtesy of Antiwar.com:

US Military Deaths - Afghanistan: 2,258
Other Military Deaths - Afghanistan: 1,100

We find this morning's cost of war passing through:

$ 1, 465, 749, 900, 000 .00



Well, let's dive right in. Sometimes the military can be chowderheads in some regards. While a vast effort has been made of late to try to address the ongoing scourge of sexual assaults throughout all the military, sometimes you have to wonder what's going on. Despite their best efforts, there are still many fails to report...like the story about a "blame the victim" anti-violence poster that's surfaced at Wright-Patterson AFB (Ohio).


A civilian employee upset over a poster in a women’s restroom at Wright-Patterson about tips to avoid sexual assault posted a letter over the poster because she objected to what she described as a culture that blames victims.

Her letter got her some attention on national websites including The Huffington Post and MSNBC.

The poster, headlined: “Preventing sexual assault is everyone’s duty!” listed several tips to “avoid becoming a victim.”

“It upset me,” Jennifer D. Stephens, 32, a contract specialist said in an interview with the Dayton Daily News. “It probably angered me a little bit and I felt like it just speaks to all the wrong things.”

The poster in Building 1 listed eight tips such as try to avoid areas that are secluded, be prepared to get yourself home, don’t leave a group situation with someone you don’t know well, and socialize with people who share your values.

“I think that’s just the wrong emphasis to put for curbing sexual assault,” said Stephens, also a captain in the Ohio Army National Guard. “That immediately makes the victim feel maybe I did something wrong because I was walking to my car by myself and I did get assaulted.”

The note over the poster said, in part: “Posters like this only contribute to alienating victims by making them feel as though they will be blamed for what happened to them. This type of rhetoric only serves to promote the current rape culture that is entrenched in the military today by putting the spotlight on the victim instead of nailing the perpetrator to the wall.”

The note was removed within a day of being posted.

Base spokesman Daryl Mayer said someone posted the tips poster on the base’s Facebook page July 29, which set off a debate online.

“If someone’s got an objection (to the poster), they’re within their rights to express their objection to it,” he said.

Facebook commenters debated, among other issues, a culture of blaming the victim versus telling perpetrators of the criminal consequences of their actions.

Mayer sent a statement on how the Air Force handles sexual assault in response to a request to interview the base sexual assault response coordinator. The prevention and response program tries to prevent assaults through “focused education, compassionate advocacy, and accountability to promote respect and dignity throughout our Air Force,” the statement said in part.

“The Air Force takes a multi-faceted approach to dealing with sexual assault, which includes not only holding sexual offenders accountable and supporting victims, but also by preventing sexual assault from occurring in the first place,” the statement said. “The poster in question is hardly the sum total of our attempts to prevent sexual assault.”

In her response to the poster, Stephens said she listed advocacy groups victims of military sexual trauma could find help.

“Every survivor of military sexual assault, that has seen the poster has said the same thing,” she said. “It’s victim blaming.”

“A lot of victims don’t trust the military because the military is the one that failed them in the first place,” she said.


But of course, it's not just women. "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was repealed recently after a long struggle. A wounded veteran, who just happens to be gay, was recently booed out of a city council meeting in San Antonio simply for pointing out that while he went to war, he might not find a job now.


As a gay U.S. Marine veteran who advocated for the repeal of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, Eric Alva has grown accustomed to being in the spotlight.

But the San Antonio native said he never expected the boos and hisses directed at him Wednesday night while he addressed the City Council on proposed changes to the anti-discrimination ordinances at a Citizens Heard hearing.

"I said that if this ordinance doesn't pass, I could be fired from a job and even thrown out of a restaurant, and people started to boo me," said Alva, 42. "I was real hurt by that. It was unbelievable."

Alva was the first American injured in the U.S. invasion of Iraq. He received a medical discharge and was awarded the Purple Heart. His prosthetic leg was visible Wednesday, under his khaki shorts. News of Alva's 3-minute speech spread via social media that night.

"To all you people that preach the word of God, shame on you, because God loves me, like the day I lay bleeding on the sands of Iraq," Alva said to the crowd. "And that's why he saved me."

Mayor Julian Castro's senior policy adviser reached out to Alva on Thursday, when he "wanted to see how I was doing, and even apologized, saying that the mayor was disappointed that I went through all that," Alva said.

While getting coffee on Friday morning, shortly after he read about statements that Councilwoman Elisa Chan made on a secret recording that bashed gay people, Alva heard from U.S. Congressman Joaquin Castro.

"The intolerant views expressed by Councilwoman Chan and the deplorable actions of those who booed a wounded warrior do not represent the sentiments of most San Antonians," the mayor's brother said in a statement. "Our city celebrates diversity and prides itself in supporting our veterans as Military City, USA."


Of course, even a little bit of good news is polluted by the atmosphere. The Department of Defence recently authorized up to a 10-day leave so same sex military couples could travel to those states where it's legal for them to marry if they choose to do so while in uniform. Of course, this makes sense. look at this map; if I happened to be at Eglin Air Force Base (Florida), it's quite a hardship. Predictably, the right is outraged.


WASHINGTON — Conservative critics are blasting the Defense Department for giving gay troops an early wedding gift: up to 10 days uncharged leave time for same-sex marriages.

Pentagon officials say it’s about fairness, not generosity. Only 13 states and the District of Columbia allow same-sex marriages, creating a hardship for U.S. servicemembers stationed in many parts of the world.

The policy change came last week as part of Pentagon plans to extend spousal benefits to all married couples, gay or straight, in the wake of a Supreme Court ruling in June knocking down the federal Defense of Marriage Act. For the last two years, defense officials have said that law barred them from offering any military benefits to legally married same-sex couples.

Along with housing stipends, health care coverage and separation pay, the new rules allow commanders to grant free leave time — up to 10 days for troops overseas, up to seven days for U.S.-based troops more than 100 miles from a state that recognizes same-sex marriages — for gay troops to marry.

Members of the Family Research Council, which opposed the “don’t ask, don’t tell” repeal, labeled the uncharged leave policy government-endorsed “homosexual honeymoons.” Peter Sprigg, FRC’s senior fellow for policy studies, said the move goes well beyond simply recognizing same-sex couples in the ranks.

“It could well be argued that the new policy actively discriminates against opposite-sex couples, who receive no special leave for their weddings,” he wrote in a FRC news release on Thursday.

DOD officials dismissed those arguments, saying that military life presents extra difficulties for gay troops looking to get married. Travel to the states that allow same-sex marriages is a significant problem for troops stationed in places such as Texas or South Korea.

“(The uncharged leave) will provide accelerated access to the full range of benefits offered to married military couples throughout the department and help level the playing field between opposite-sex and same-sex couples seeking to be married,” said Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a Pentagon spokesman.


It's still the irony of it all; shouldn't the troops be getting the same rights that they ostensibly defend? I suppose that's an ongoing argument for military rights lawyers and constitutional scholars.
 

99 comments (Latest Comment: 08/20/2013 22:04:08 by Scoopster)
   Perma Link

Share This!

Furl it!
Spurl
NewsVine
Reddit
Technorati

Add a Comment

Please login to add a comment...


Comments:

Order comments Newest to Oldest  Refresh Comments

Comment by wickedpam on 08/20/2013 12:56:33
Morning

Comment by Mondobubba on 08/20/2013 13:07:26
Hello.

Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 13:09:33
Jim ---



Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 13:10:08
Good Morning!

The new water heater is going to be installed soon.

Comment by Mondobubba on 08/20/2013 13:10:27
Quote by Raine:
Jim ---




What ijit conspiracy is Mr. Ward embracing now?

Comment by wickedpam on 08/20/2013 13:13:19
*sigh* have 30 min Webinar at 10 and of course have to call in since God-forbid we have the proper computer equipment at our desks

Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 13:18:46
Quote by Mondobubba:
Quote by Raine:
Jim ---




What ijit conspiracy is Mr. Ward embracing now?
Jim is pro greenwald... he believes the Brits are the police state.

lots of strawman, imo.

Speaking of GG...and the Guardian: We Were Forced to Smash Our Computers While Government Goons Observed


http://banter.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/office_space_printer.jpg


Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 13:19:19
Quote by wickedpam:
*sigh* have 30 min Webinar at 10 and of course have to call in since God-forbid we have the proper computer equipment at our desks
Do you at least have headphones?


Comment by Mondobubba on 08/20/2013 13:21:09
Quote by Raine:
Quote by Mondobubba:
Quote by Raine:
Jim ---




What ijit conspiracy is Mr. Ward embracing now?
Jim is pro greenwald... he believes the Brits are the police state.

lots of strawman, imo.

Speaking of GG...and the Guardian: We Were Forced to Smash Our Computers While Government Goons Observed


http://banter.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/office_space_printer.jpg


Yeah, right sure you were. :eyeroll:

Comment by Mondobubba on 08/20/2013 13:21:48
Excellent use of an "Office Space" picture.

Comment by wickedpam on 08/20/2013 13:22:38
Quote by Raine:
Quote by wickedpam:
*sigh* have 30 min Webinar at 10 and of course have to call in since God-forbid we have the proper computer equipment at our desks
Do you at least have headphones?



nope - no headphones, no mic, no nothing so I have to call in, I really just want them to put up a video on how to operate their overly complicated pricing program so I can watch it.

Comment by Scoopster on 08/20/2013 13:54:30
Mornin' all..

Damn it feels good to be a gangsta.

Comment by wickedpam on 08/20/2013 13:58:31
back in 30ish

Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 14:02:41
Why didn't the Guardian report about smashing computers immediately after it happened?

Gah -- this is all really shoddy crap happening here.



Comment by Scoopster on 08/20/2013 14:04:15
omg Raine..3 more days!

Comment by Mondobubba on 08/20/2013 14:05:07
Quote by Raine:
Why didn't the Guardian report about smashing computers immediately after it happened?

Gah -- this is all really shoddy crap happening here.




You know I used to read the Guardian all the time. Now, not so much.

Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 14:05:26
BTW, all three stories were good reads today, Tri.

Personally I think the DoD taking this course is the right way to do things now that DOMA (parts) and DADT have been lifted.



Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 14:05:55
Quote by Scoopster:
omg Raine..3 more days!
wOOt! and we'll have a nice new water heater!




Comment by wickedpam on 08/20/2013 14:16:59
woohoo! I was the only person in the chat so it only took 10min to get the info I needed! *happy dance*

Comment by Scoopster on 08/20/2013 14:20:01
I'm glad Rachel did this segment.

We may not necessarily be of the same view on this whole thing, but she has a real talent for expressing her views in a reasonable and educated manner.

Comment by wickedpam on 08/20/2013 14:27:06
did I miss a JAWS reference?

Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 14:29:55
Quote by Scoopster:
I'm glad Rachel did this segment.

We may not necessarily be of the same view on this whole thing, but she has a real talent for expressing her views in a reasonable and educated manner.
I was just reading about this. Rachel will not go under the bus by me --

I'm just not entirely convinced that what Greenwald is doing is journalism. My mind has not been closed, but when a journalist starts to threaten governments, as GG did -- then it is a person revenge thing -- it stopped being about the story.


Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 14:31:42
Life was so much nicer when we didn't actually KNOW who deep throat was, ya know?

Comment by TriSec on 08/20/2013 14:33:11
Quote by wickedpam:
did I miss a JAWS reference?


One always needs a bigger boat.



Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 14:33:20
And I will say this, Miranda should not have been held under the guise of terrorism. To that I agree. Rachel is really a treaure.

Comment by wickedpam on 08/20/2013 14:34:17
Quote by TriSec:
Quote by wickedpam:
did I miss a JAWS reference?


One always needs a bigger boat.



of course one does


Comment by Will in Chicago on 08/20/2013 14:35:35
Quote by Raine:
Why didn't the Guardian report about smashing computers immediately after it happened?

Gah -- this is all really shoddy crap happening here.




Good morning bloggers. I hope that everyone is well.

TriSec, thanks for a great blog. I am very worried about the issues that you raised. The military has to deal with the issues of sexual assault and the treatment of LGBT members of the armed services. I am distressed with what happened in San Antonio and I find myself wondering how people who call themselves patriots can boo a veteran.

As for the Guardian story, I am troubled. If this indeed happened, the Guardian should have fought in court. (I am not familiar with the British legal system.) If the government indeed made such demands, I am angry and disturbed. I want to know why this was not brought to the public's attention when it happened. As a former reporter, I would have brought the meetings to the public's attention immediately and see if public pressure could prevent the government from doing anything without going through the courts. (Again, I am not familiar with the British legal system.)

I am reaching the point where there is no one I am truly happy with in this whole NSA affair. I find myself doubting Snowden, Greenwald and Assange. I find myself doubting the NSA officials when more reports of failure to follow rules come out.

However, I have faith that we will see Congress address these issues and put in safeguards. There is enough desire to do so from Democrats and Republicans to do so.

Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 14:39:04
Quote by Scoopster:
I'm glad Rachel did this segment.

We may not necessarily be of the same view on this whole thing, but she has a real talent for expressing her views in a reasonable and educated manner.
I know I may be splitting hairs here but when Rachel suggested that the USA could have protested more about the detention of Miranda -- would that have made sense considering he is a Brazilian resident? If it were Greenwald himself detained then I could see legit outrage at detention -- he is still an American citizen.


Comment by Will in Chicago on 08/20/2013 14:44:30
In the job search news, I am still finding some things to apply to out East. A friend also spotted something local for me.

The good news is that I am sure something will break soon. The headache and the heartache is not knowing when or where.

Comment by TriSec on 08/20/2013 14:47:33
Learned some new things about the ol' ACA yesterday.

Did you know that the "Platinum", "Gold", "Silver", and "Bronze" levels of coverage bandied about by some pundits are actually specifically defined and categorized in the legislation? It has to do with what percentage of medical expense the plans cover...and it's officially named "metallic tiers". (For example, "Platinum" covers 90% of all billed medical expenses, with the balance being out-of-pocket).

Also, there's a Minimum Credible Care requirement...meaning the law requires that a minimum of treatments and procedures be covered....but the states get to define what that is, not the feds. (Meaning in Mass, we'll cover abortions and ART, whereas in NH they may not.) It's unclear what happens where state plans overlap. (Like members living in Southern NH on a Massachusetts-based plan...who's regulations prevail?)

And I'll tip our cap another time....because Massachusetts was light-years ahead of the nation on this, and because Deval Patrick is friends with the President, we've been granted some exemptions from compliance, because "RomneyCare" has some benefits that are better than what is mandated in the ACA, so we have permission not to take a backwards step. The only state in the Union with such an exemption, I may add.


Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 14:49:50
You see I DO care about Greenwald and what the NSA is doing. I can do nuance. I really didn't like that Pierce shut her down like that.

Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 14:52:46
For some reason, I keep coming back to something I wrote last year:

Who is Anonymous to determine what is or is not immoral enough to have their private information revealed? Anonymous, along with WikiLeaks, have deems themselves as arbiter of what is and is not moral. Many Americans believe that Government spying into personal emails flies in the face of the constitution. Why would we celebrate a group of people doing the same things that we decry when it comes from Government?

Do the ends justify the means? What is the end game? Let me repeat something posted earlier: "The material contains privileged information about the US government's attacks against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks and Stratfor's own attempts to subvert WikiLeaks," the whistleblower website said. I don't believe I need to give the backstory regarding Mr. Assange here. I think it is fair to question motives at this point. I have long held the belief that when a group operates in anonymity we should question motives and reliability. Who is to say that you or I won't be next for writing something unsavory about WikiLeaks or anonymous?

We have a sincere lack of privacy in this nation -- and world. I believe that is a given. That said, I ask: when a group such as Anonymous steals private information and reveals it, how can we expect to see more transparency from the very groups that we desire it from? It appears that Anonymous/Wikileaks had no proof that this company was doing anything illicit aside from what appears to be a "hunch" based on the notion that it may be acting like a shadow CIA. I suspect we will see an ever bigger clampdown of information instead of more transparency.

Why do we justify this situation and criticize others for doing similar things?
I bolded things.






Comment by TriSec on 08/20/2013 14:54:35
Comment by Scoopster on 08/20/2013 14:56:01
Quote by Raine:
And I will say this, Miranda should not have been held under the guise of terrorism. To that I agree. Rachel is really a treasure.

I personally think this was not only fine, but legal as well. Miranda was knowingly acting as an agent for Poitras & Greenwald - smuggling state secrets (albeit not the UK's secrets) across an international border. There was reasonable suspicion to detain Miranda before he could transport such information.
Now the question that's been all over is what the contents of these documents was, and whether UK Schedule 7 (the law which was cited for detaining Miranda) was applicable. If it could be construed to contain anything that was related to ongoing investigations into terrorism then the material is sensitive enough where if it found its way into the wrong hands it could be used by actual terrorists to change their actions. So yes, it was legal to hold him for a while, and it was legal to seize his equipment and either destroy it or attempt to decrypt it. There clearly was not enough cause to arrest him for terrorism tho, which is why he was released (albeit after the maximum amount of time.
Earlier this morning I responded to a tweet from Rude Pundit about this same topic (and about the Guardian's destroyed hard drives). I used two examples in comparison - someone stealing plans for a nuclear/bio weapon, and the Valerie Plame outing. If Miranda had been smuggling stuff related to either of those, NO ONE would be questioning why he was detained. The former case is pretty cut & dry; The latter is much more subtle and comparable to the current discussion. Imagine Miranda's transporting a stolen list of real names, cover names & companies etc. of covert operatives themselves. If that stuff gets out PEOPLE ARE PROBABLY GONNA BE KILLED, and not just covert analysts and agents. Why isn't it reasonable that the same action be taken now, in this real case? We may have pretty good knowledge that the information Snowden stole is pretty benign, but these laws exist for those OTHER reasons and choosing not to apply them in this case, or with Snowden, or even going back to Bradley Manning or Julian Assange, is a risk that shouldn't be taken.

Comment by Will in Chicago on 08/20/2013 14:57:15
Quote by TriSec:
Learned some new things about the ol' ACA yesterday.

Did you know that the "Platinum", "Gold", "Silver", and "Bronze" levels of coverage bandied about by some pundits are actually specifically defined and categorized in the legislation? It has to do with what percentage of medical expense the plans cover...and it's officially named "metallic tiers". (For example, "Platinum" covers 90% of all billed medical expenses, with the balance being out-of-pocket).

Also, there's a Minimum Credible Care requirement...meaning the law requires that a minimum of treatments and procedures be covered....but the states get to define what that is, not the feds. (Meaning in Mass, we'll cover abortions and ART, whereas in NH they may not.) It's unclear what happens where state plans overlap. (Like members living in Southern NH on a Massachusetts-based plan...who's regulations prevail?)

And I'll tip our cap another time....because Massachusetts was light-years ahead of the nation on this, and because Deval Patrick is friends with the President, we've been granted some exemptions from compliance, because "RomneyCare" has some benefits that are better than what is mandated in the ACA, so we have permission not to take a backwards step. The only state in the Union with such an exemption, I may add.



It is that attitude of trying new things and being a leader in education that keeps me applying to jobs in the Bay State. Mind you, I think a lot of people will be interested to see how Vermont implements single payer health care.

Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 15:10:25
Quote by Scoopster:
Quote by Raine:
And I will say this, Miranda should not have been held under the guise of terrorism. To that I agree. Rachel is really a treasure.

I personally think this was not only fine, but legal as well. Miranda was knowingly acting as an agent for Poitras & Greenwald - smuggling state secrets (albeit not the UK's secrets) across an international border. There was reasonable suspicion to detain Miranda before he could transport such information.
Now the question that's been all over is what the contents of these documents was, and whether UK Schedule 7 (the law which was cited for detaining Miranda) was applicable. If it could be construed to contain anything that was related to ongoing investigations into terrorism then the material is sensitive enough where if it found its way into the wrong hands it could be used by actual terrorists to change their actions. So yes, it was legal to hold him for a while, and it was legal to seize his equipment and either destroy it or attempt to decrypt it. There clearly was not enough cause to arrest him for terrorism tho, which is why he was released (albeit after the maximum amount of time.

Earlier this morning I responded to a tweet from Rude Pundit about this same topic (and about the Guardian's destroyed hard drives). I used two examples in comparison - someone stealing plans for a nuclear/bio weapon, and the Valerie Plame outing. If Miranda had been smuggling stuff related to either of those, NO ONE would be questioning why he was detained. The former case is pretty cut & dry; The latter is much more subtle and comparable to the current discussion. Imagine Miranda's transporting a stolen list of real names, cover names & companies etc. of covert operatives themselves. If that stuff gets out PEOPLE ARE PROBABLY GONNA BE KILLED, and not just covert analysts and agents. Why isn't it reasonable that the same action be taken now, in this real case? We may have pretty good knowledge that the information Snowden stole is pretty benign, but these laws exist for those OTHER reasons and choosing not to apply them in this case, or with Snowden, or even going back to Bradley Manning or Julian Assange, is a risk that shouldn't be taken.
Agreed -- I wasn't clear I guess, I think using section 7 as a reason ws a bit sketchy. (Kinda like our patriot act) I can see your reasoning for why he was held. that makes sense.

and you make another good point about Plame. Something thta a lot of people kinda missed in this entire kerfluffle was something from Der Spiegel after this all started happening:
SPIEGEL has decided not to publish details it has seen about secret operations that could endanger the lives of NSA workers. Nor is it publishing the related internal code words. However, this does not apply to information about the general surveillance of communications.





Comment by Scoopster on 08/20/2013 15:21:55
Heh.. Laura Poitras is on the byline for that Der Spiegel story. She's one of Greenwald's crew, and also an ex-pat for the same paranoid reasons as GG.

Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 15:24:57
Quote by Scoopster:
Heh.. Laura Poitras is on the byline for that Der Spiegel story. She's one of Greenwald's crew, and also an ex-pat for the same paranoid reasons as GG.
Der spiegal was also one of the Outlets Wikipedia chose for the afghan war leaks.


Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 15:31:13
Bob Cesca is going to be a guest on the show -- this could be interesting.

Comment by Scoopster on 08/20/2013 15:36:06
Quote by Raine:
Bob Cesca is going to be a guest on the show -- this could be interesting.

on SMS? ooh I may need to tune in for that!

Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 15:37:10
Quote by Scoopster:
Quote by Raine:
Bob Cesca is going to be a guest on the show -- this could be interesting.

on SMS? ooh I may need to tune in for that!
RIGHT NOW!


Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 15:39:06
Cesca makes another good point: Miranda was a courier -- not a journalist.

Comment by Scoopster on 08/20/2013 15:49:18
Quote by Raine:
Cesca makes another good point: Miranda was a courier -- not a journalist.

Well to be fair, a courier whose plane ticket was paid for by The Guardian.

Man, I only caught the tail end of that conversation cuz I was slow to the draw!

Comment by Raine on 08/20/2013 15:50:56
Quote by Scoopster:
Quote by Raine:
Cesca makes another good point: Miranda was a courier -- not a journalist.

Well to be fair, a courier whose plane ticket was paid for by The Guardian.

Man, I only caught the tail end of that conversation cuz I was slow to the draw!
Right -- that was something that Greenwald failed to mention.

I think the Guardian is starting to lose serious credibility with this whole affair.


Comment by wickedpam on 08/20/2013 15:55:07
ack! just saw the trailer for Sims4! I want!

Comment by Will in Chicago on 08/20/2013 16:32:17
Why do so many school districts use applications that do not permit sharing data? I have spent all morning typing data that I had entered previously elsewhere.

Comment by livingonli on 08/20/2013 16:34:25
Good day, folks. Less than 3 hours until Current TV officially becomes Al-Jazeera America. The channel I was getting Al-Jazeera English on is now a simulcast of RNN on FiOS here in NY. I wasn't home but it looks like it was switched at Midnight. For our DC contingent, I was wondering what replaced AJE on your channel lineup.

Comment by clintster on 08/20/2013 16:57:38
Quote by Will in Chicago:
Why do so many school districts use applications that do not permit sharing data? I have spent all morning typing data that I had entered previously elsewhere.


I have filled out a couple of applications for districts that used the same data entry company, thereby allowing me to simply share all the data from one to the other. Can't remember the name of the company/software, but I was pleasantly surprised when all I had to do was click "Share previously entered data" and I was done.

Meantime, I have an interview scheduled for Thursday in Boone. It's a shipping shop (think UPS Store) but it's work, at least until I get something closer to my field. Also it looks like it's full-time which I hope means I get some kind of benefits.

Comment by clintster on 08/20/2013 17:08:48
And in other Tar Heel State news: a legislator who has gotten fed up with the GOPALEC bullshit has decided to resign her seat and make a difference outside the capitol building:

I am heartened, however, by the many grassroots efforts to fight for the rights, the health and safety and the opportunities our people need and deserve from the Moral Monday movement to the many non-governmental organizations that advocate for the people of our state, not the special interests. It is here that I want and need to put my energy and efforts. I am working with others on a grass-roots project to make sure everyone in the state has a proper voter ID so that no votes are denied, even though the Voter ID bill is aimed at exactly that - repressing the vote.


Comment by TriSec on 08/20/2013 17:20:50
Why is it, I wonder, that all the states I have ever considered moving to have gone nucking futs?

North Carolina - gah!

Maine - yeesh!

Ohio - augh!

Florida - aieeeeeeeee!

Only California seems OK on my short list these days.

Not that I'm actually planning on going anywhere right now.....