403 Forbidden
www.rawstory.com
  • SilentStorms@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    101·
    3 months ago

    Falsely accusing your opponent of stolen valor could very rapidly bite you in the ass when you piss off a bunch of veterans, a lot of whom would likely vote Republican.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    931·
    3 months ago

    Did he attain the rank of “Command Sergeant Major”? - Yes.

    Did he deploy under the rank of “Command Sergeant Major”? - Yes.

    Did he meet the requirments to retire with benefits appropriate for that rank? No. His benefits are for the next rank down.

    That doesn’t mean he didn’t serve under that rank.

    • GBU_28@lemm.eeEnglish
      24·
      3 months ago

      Can you explain the last point? Do you have to carry a given rank for x time to earn the veg’s Benefits?

      • BaronVonBort@lemmy.world
        39·
        3 months ago

        According to the Guard you have to have 3 years time-in-service to retire as that rank. He chose to retire as an E-8

        • Ænima@lemm.ee
          45·
          3 months ago

          That’s crazy! When I was in the guard, we had E-7+ that would squat their position just to retire as that rank. I know he had started his family around then, but wow that’s almost unheard of.

          That dude is fucking dedicated to his family. That, right there, should be enough to prove he’s genuine and not just blowing smoke. To give up that pension to dedicate time and safety for family is aspiring! This is what a true Chad looks like.

          • redhorsejacket@lemmy.world
            20·
            3 months ago

            For what it’s worth, having a lower retirement grade shouldn’t actually affect his pension at all, at least in so far as I understand it.

            Walz joined up in 1981, which was the year after the “High-36” retirement system was adopted. Under that system, the army looks at your career and plucks out the 36 months where you earned the most money. In the vast majority of cases, these are the final 3 years of your career. These are averaged out, and then multiplied by a percentage (2.5% per year of service, e.g. 20 years of service = 50%) to determine your monthly payment.

            All of which is to say that his pension calculations do take into account the time he was an E9, even if his paperwork and other privileges rflect the lower pay grade.

            Caveat: it’s been several years since I retired, and it’s a very complex process. I could be off base as it applies to Walz’s case specifically, but what I’ve described is generally true.

        • mojofrododojo@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          3 months ago

          which people still don’t realize is retiring at one of the highest ranks that can be attained on the enlisted side of the house after decades of service. ridiculous that a corporal and a dodge drafter can have anything to say about it. FUCK THEM. Bullshit pogues.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        15·
        3 months ago

        In order for the promotion to have full benefits, he would have had to have served for 2 years at that rank. He didn’t have enough time.

        So even though he earned the rank, and served in that rank, his retirement rank is 1 notch lower.

        • jaybone@lemmy.world
          9·
          3 months ago

          It’s just this kind of petty shit republicans love to split hairs over. It’s like the long form birth certificate all over again.

  • MagicShel@programming.dev
    82·
    3 months ago

    If you’re going to swiftboat someone, you have to set up the swiftboaters, too, not just expect them to be with you.

    Trump has done nothing to ingratiate himself with the military, and they’ve been a much softer right wing block for him after 2016.

    • ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.worldEnglish
      41·
      3 months ago

      Yup. I guess referring to veterans as “suckers” and “losers” didn’t sit too well with many of them. Imagine that!

      • aaron@lemm.eeEnglish
        24·
        3 months ago

        Let’s be fair, the “suckers” and “losers” he referred to were only those who died

        • Ænima@lemm.ee
          17·
          3 months ago

          … or got captured or won a Medal of Honor or didn’t vote for him (probably).

      • teamevil@lemmy.world
        4·
        3 months ago

        I mean he is the biggest asshole narcissistic windbag I’ve ever seen, and he lies more too

    • AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space
      153·
      3 months ago

      They still have the New York Times. Rest assured that they’ll be banging the drum, making insinuations about Walz’ service record until November 7.

      • jaybone@lemmy.world
        41·
        3 months ago

        Do the republicans run hit ads in the NYT? I would figure they consider that a liberal rag, and that anyone reading it would already be a decided voter.

  • PrincessLeiasCat@sh.itjust.works
    801·
    3 months ago

    Now do Trump the draft dodger, if your sacred cow is military service. I’ll wait.

    I’ll probably be here awhile, but let’s not forget about that.

    • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
      61·
      3 months ago

      Beyond that, he was well within his rights to retire when he did. Especially since his first child was being born around that time. If I was the wife I’d put my foot down on that shit real quick. No. You already served. You ain’t deploying to Iraq.

      Apparently some vets are saying this is all sour grapes from a different officer that got passed over for the position Walz earned.

  • NoiseColor@startrek.website
    501·
    3 months ago

    Walz could never go to Iraq cause of hearing issues of his long artillery career. Or so I’ve heard.

    BTW, why does vance always wear the eyeliner. It’s creepy.

  • SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.worldEnglish
    30·
    3 months ago

    Hey JD, remind us all again of your glorious accomplishments in your 4 years in the military as a reporter? Barely even checking the box there

      • moncharleskey@lemmy.zip
        4·
        3 months ago

        I think it’s because the source, MediaBiasFactChecker, doesn’t really seem accurate. Often news sites are rated left of center when the seem to be more center or even center-right. So if the bot isn’t posting accurate information, what’s the point? That’s my take anyway.

      • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
        2·
        3 months ago

        This piece of shit bot calls the Associated Press a leftist outlet. It’s just blatant propaganda for the right wing extremists that attempts to shift the Overton Window of what is normal while cloaking itself in a veneer of “objective truth”.

        It also has the funny side effect of directly admitting that right wingers are not based in facts and reality.