Since 1999, the Seattle P-I's circulation has plummeted, while the Seattle Times has suffered only a modest drop (Note: at the link, click "Next" at the picture tool to the right to see an interesting chart on this score). Is it any wonder this trend has occurred when the P-I editorializes today, "Kerry's Remark: Right either way":
Although there are plenty of well-educated people in our armed forces -- Kerry was one of them -- military service has long been an opportunity employer for those with less education and fewer skills than they need to work in the private sector. Indeed, the military sells itself as a place to garner skills and to help pay for higher education.And wars, including this one, are often fought by those less privileged -- albeit no less smart -- than the sons and daughters of those who lead us into them.
Apologies? Sure, from the cut-and-run Democratic candidates who've cancelled appearances with Kerry.
The combination of liberal condescension and arrogance is jarring. Makes me want to send money to Democrats with a brain like Harold Ford. Almost.
P.S. It might surprise no one the resident naif of the local blogosphere appears to miss the mark badly as well.
Posted by Eric Earling at November 02, 2006 07:29 AM | Email ThisAnd I still don't get the joke.
And Kerry still hasn't released his military records. Did he get a Dishonorable Discharge and later got changed after he got elected? Those records were the topic of the Swift Boat Vets.
After the election, Kerry allowed three friendly reporters look at those records and let them assess the damage to him. I thought it must have been pretty damaging until I noticed he was running for the president again. He must have 'rationalized' an argument in his legendary mind to minimize the damage or there was nothing there (which I doubt).
Kerry has a history of dissing the military.
Who was it yesterday that said, "First, you attack the war, and then you attack the warrior." Oh, yeah, it went way back in history. Ah, yes, Vietnam. Pretty soon we will spitting on the soldiers again. Cool!!
Posted by: swatter on November 2, 2006 08:19 AMThere are so many things to be running on versus John Kerry and his miss slam on the Shrub.
But if it's all ya got, go with it.
Posted by: danw on November 2, 2006 08:21 AMAs for the middle class, they are doing quite well as more people own homes than ever...heck the "poor" own homes. I think we are safer now as 'Terrorists' are fighting elsewhere instead of spending all their energy trying to attack us here....though they are. I suppose that Bush created the terrorists, even back when he was Gov of Texas...and if you think he's creating them, then you must also admit he's getting rid of them too by our military killing them.
As for an affordable place to live, then they need to move. If you can't live here in SEattle, then move to say Plano. I have a friend there that lives in a 3000 sq ft home and pays 1/3 what I do for my 2400 sq ft home. His taxes are 1/2.
Posted by: Dengle on November 2, 2006 08:37 AM"I can't overstress the importance of a great education. Do you know where you end up if you don't study, if you aren't smart, if you're intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq." (what Kerry wishes that he had said)
What is Bush's education? A Bachelor's degree from Yale and an MBA from Harvard.
What is Kerry's education? A Bachelor's degree from Yale and an law degree from a local law school in Massachusetts.
So Bush has about the finest education anyone can get, and Kerry uses (or at least was going to use) Bush as an example of what happens when you DON'T get a good education?
And what does that say about Kerry? Someone who also had one of the finest educations -- and ended up getting "stuck in Vietnam" and telling terribly misguided jokes?
Posted by: Richard Pope on November 2, 2006 08:45 AMThat is what they say about the PI.
Posted by: pbj on November 2, 2006 09:21 AMSelect quotes:
"The U.S. military is not a "poor man's force." "
"The data shows the force is more educated than the population at large. Servicemembers have high school diplomas or the general equivalency diploma. More servicemembers have some college than the typical 18- to 24-year-olds. "To carry representativeness to the extreme, we would have to have a less-educated force or we would want a lower-aptitude force," Gilroy said. "
" "On the socioeconomic side, the military is strongly middle class, Gilroy said. More recruits are drawn from the middle class and fewer are coming from poorer and wealthier families. Recruits from poorer families are actually underrepresented in the military, Gilroy said."
"Other trends are that the number of recruits from wealthier families is increasing, and the number of recruits from suburban areas has increased. This also tracks that young men and women from the middle class are serving in the military. "
"Young men and women from urban areas are not volunteering, Gilroy said. In fact, urban areas provide far fewer recruits as a percentage of the total population than small towns and rural areas. "
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskold on November 2, 2006 09:37 AMJust so you know this is not going to energize the GOP base (we are already energized). What it will do is energize the Veteran's base and Washington state has more Vets than any other state. All one must do is go to the American Legion site and the VFW site and see what they have posted about John Kerry needing to apologize. From all the old vets that I have talked to (even the old Scoop Jackson D's) it sounds to me like they are looking for payback against any incument/candidate that has not dennouced the Kerry remarks.
Posted by: TrueSoldier on November 2, 2006 09:38 AM-- 48.4 percent of the officers have advanced or professional degrees; 38.8 percent have master's degrees, 8.2 percent have professional degrees and 1.4 percent have doctorate degrees
-- 22.6 percent of company grade officers have advanced degrees; 16.5 percent have master's degrees, 5.7 percent have professional degrees and 0.4 percent have doctorate degrees
-- 86.4 percent of field grade officers have advanced degrees; 71.6 percent have master's degrees, 12.1 percent have professional degrees and 2.7 percent have doctorate degrees
-- 99.9 percent of the enlisted Airmen have at least a high school education; 73.6 percent have some semester hours towards a college degree; 15.6 percent have an associate's degree or equivalent semester hours; 4.6 percent have a bachelor's degree; 0.7 percent have a master's degree and 0.01 percent have a professional or doctorate degree
The Demographics of Military Enlistment After 9/11
Education. In 1999, 98 percent of all enlisted recruits had at least a high school education, compared to the national average of 75 percent among citizens who are 18-24 years old. In 2003, no three-digit ZIP code area had a higher graduation rate among its population than among its recruits. After September 11, 2001, the educational quality of recruits rose slightly.
The Times has held up much better--it has dropped an average of less than .50%/yr over the last 7 years. They have even increased in 3 out of the last 7 years. Once the PI goes under, Times circulation will probably go up also.
Posted by: Bill H on November 2, 2006 10:26 AMI have a son in the job market right now, college educated, and we run into a lot of college graduates working at the local Kinkos, or in the resturant business. Look in the local papers or online, there are very few jobs out there, if he were to take at that salary, where he would barely be able to pay rent, let alone buy a house. Let's not forget all the other costs that have gone up while the wages have stayed stagnent. Insurance, healthcare, Gas. It is sick out there for a young person, especially if they have Student loans to deal with.
Come on folks, you're the folks of the "good ole days" when mom was home with the kids, and baking cookies and dad would come home and watch the "Donna Reed show". Well you want it back? you'll need to take a look at what it takes as far as income for Dad to work alone and make that happen. It ain't there.
But here are some Democratic plans that you all just keep repeating they don't have. And if they don't win control, they wont be able to get enacted, because that's how it's working in washington DC nowadays.
As in the first 100 hours the House meets after Democrats _ in her fondest wish _ win control in the Nov. 7 midterm elections and Pelosi takes the gavel as the first Madam Speaker in history.
Day One: Put new rules in place to "break the link between lobbyists and legislation."
Day Two: Enact all the recommendations made by the commission that investigated the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Time remaining until 100 hours: Raise the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour, maybe in one step. Cut the interest rate on student loans in half. Allow the government to negotiate directly with the pharmaceutical companies for lower drug prices for Medicare patients.
Broaden the types of stem cell research allowed with federal funds _ "I hope with a veto-proof majority," she added in an Associated Press interview Thursday.
All the days after that: "Pay as you go," meaning no increasing the deficit, whether the issue is middle class tax relief, health care or some other priority.
To do that, she said, Bush-era tax cuts would have to be rolled back for those above "a certain level." She mentioned annual incomes of $250,000 or $300,000 a year and higher, and said tax rates for those individuals might revert to those of the Clinton era. Details will have to be worked out, she emphasized.
"We believe in the marketplace," Pelosi said of Democrats, then drew a contrast with Republicans. "They have only rewarded wealth, not work."
"We must share the benefits of our wealth" beyond the privileged few, she added.
I know this is long and you all don't like things that aren't in 20 second soundbites. So reserve your comments about " Hey Dan, you need to take a chill pill"
This country is much more important than 20 second soundbites.
And you think you're boy has problems getting a job now?!
""We must share the benefits of our wealth" beyond the privileged few, she added."
Take your Socialism and shove it...
Posted by: alphabet soup on November 2, 2006 10:43 AMDay 1: Party like it's 1992; citizenship for all Gitmo detainees; a blanket amnesty; and a "Circle of Healing" ceremony held on the Capitol steps.
Day 2: The troops in Iraq will leave, walking in reverse, as if someone is playing the tape backwards; special construction brigades will quickly repair all the buildings destroyed since the 2003 invasion; and the last American out will reinstall Saddam. Thereafter, whenever someone criticizes America for invading Iraq, we'll look quizzical and say we don't know what they're talking about.
Day 3: Bush tax cuts repealed, so the upper 10 percent in income pay 67 percent of all federal taxes instead of 66 percent. That will make all the difference.
Day 4: Peace Corps sent en masse to Middle East to apologize personally to everyone and hand out gas-soaked flags and matchbooks. Burn one on us! Don't you love us now?
Day 5: Peace Corps Hostage Negotiation Unit commissioned.
Day 6: Gay marriage legalized by congressional voice vote, so no one has to go on record. (This allows gay Democratic congressmen to vote no without being outed.)
Days 7-100: Impeachment hearings. Sure, Pelosi has said she's against them. But as she promised: The children will be in charge. They're cranky if they don't get their way.
Posted by: Obi-Wan on November 2, 2006 11:08 AMKerry insulted the troops, he can use every excuse he wants, but he has dissed the military at every opportunity in the last 35 years. He claims hero status on HIS military status, but then claims everyone else are murderers, rapists, mutilators, terrorizers.
This elitist, narcissistic, gigolo is an embarrassment and for the PI to back him just how out of touch they are. I haven't bought that rag for over 20 years.
Look at all the losers that the PI has endorsed too. They are out of touch and out of their minds.
Posted by: Skeptic on November 2, 2006 11:19 AMLiberals love to look down their noses at the 1950's. Back then most families had 1 car, 1 television,(we didn't even have a TV), and a house was maybe 1,600 square feet, not 2,500 square feet with a triple garage. Teenagers didn't all have cars,(drive by any high school and observe all the cars lining the streets). Practically every middle school kid has a cell phone and a computer. The average person drives a car that has more bells and whistles than the fanciest Cadillac had in 1960.
Liberals can lie all they want about how things are going to hell. It's pure nonsense.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on November 2, 2006 11:41 AMMy problem with Pelosi is what she means by this "WE" sh*t!!!!!!!!!!!!
How about Nancy and the rest of you LEFTIST PINHEADED KLOWNS share YOUR WEALTH via government handouts for the "common good". Marxist morons!
Raising the minimum wage will kill jobs, not create them. The same tired old Democratic plans of the past 50 years won't solve any problems.
If you really believe the country is important you'll vote GOP, not for the tired Socialism of the Democrats. It's never worked and it never will.
The Bush tax cuts have increased the revenue to the Treasury, not cut it.
Surrendering in Iraq won't solve any problems either. How about a plan for VICTORY, not defeat.
"Bella" Pelosi is a shrew. Her statements imply that rich people don't work for their money. Well, in her case she's right, I think she married into it... but I can tell you almost all rich people (John Kerry excepted) work very, very hard to achieve what they've done. Saying only "working families" etc. are important is ridiculous.
As for what's going to get done in the first 100 hrs you left out a few:
Gut the military.
Surrender in Iraq.
Repeal the Patriot Act.
Cut NSA wiretaps.
Start impeachment hearings.
Repeal the border fence.
Grant amnesty to illegal aliens.
etc., etc.
Looks like President Bush will finally get to use his veto pen!
Posted by: Tucker on November 2, 2006 12:05 PMAs for your idol Pelosi's remarks, it is obvious she never learned basic economics. Too bad you believe whatever these democratic "leaders" tell you instead of learning to tell the difference between fact and fiction.
Posted by: Burdabee on November 2, 2006 02:05 PMFor example, $125,000 is a lot of money, right? That's OK for Santa Barbara... But to have the same cost of living in Fargo, ND, you only need $30,000.
Earning $7.25 per hour in Pierre, South Dakota - $15,000 per year - is like making $30,000 per year in Everett. Is that hard? Yeah, it's not easy street, but bringing in $2,000 per month would allow you to rent a 2 bedroom apartment, pay for food, pay for gas, insurance, and still have some left over each month...
A federall minimum wage is absolutely the WRONG thing to do, since every location has a different cost of living. You'll mandate underpay in some places (imagine if Washington rolled-back to the federal minimum?), and overpay in others...
Posted by: Edmonds Dan on November 2, 2006 02:18 PM