CAPS LOCK = MORE READERS
PencilPal
Hello and welcome to the Poor Man's Blanket. I'm your man behind the desk, PencilPal.
When I named the PMB, I wanted something amusing and self-deprecating. Because feigned humility is still humility, right? What I got, unfortunately, was inaccurate with what I am now publishing. A better name would be "PencilPal talks out of his ass about things he knows nothing about, some people nod sadly most people just ignore him." But I think that's a bit too long. The PPTOOHAATHKNASPNSMPJIH doesn't roll off the tongue the way the PMB does. Oh, well.
On to the news!
The talk of the town is militias: do they deserve more funding? Less funding? Should the government take control of them? This seems to be spilling into two battelgrounds. The news (Gnilraps has an excellent article about the subject, most of it over my head) and Congress' forums. With an issue as emotional as militias coming up during election season, one can expect the sparks to fly.
So what do I (a member of the USAF, never joined a militia, knows very little about military history of eUnited States) have to say on the topic? Only what others have already been saying. The militias provide many valuable services to the United States including enormous amounts of influence, serving as hubs of community, and generally being bad-ass. They cover most of their own costs, but don't have the benefit of directly taxing their constituents. For that reason, it's understandable for the United States to help send funds to keep these important institutions afloat. As to those who say that militias act only in self-interest I ask for proof. Because all I've seen is American patriots putting in the time and clicking either in direct obedience of the Department of Defense or helping our allies and interests in other ways. I'd be incredibly surprised to see anything in contrary to that.
if you liked the article.
Comments
VOTED (caps lock is fun)
CAP LOCKS ARE CRUISE CONTROL TO COOL
Why dont you have a MM yet?
Right on the money with militias.
The only reason I clicked on this lousy article is because of all the CAPS.
Glad I did though 🙂
Voted as always.
A'hem...
What you are seeing on the forums and the comments to Gnilraps article is very simple to explain (not understand, there is a difference). Nobody wants someone else to poop in their sandbox. The "It's mine and you can't have it!" mentality.
The choice is simple in my opinion. We can either make our most active military types (no matter what group they are in) as strong as possible or we can help the 2 clicker that occasionally shows up for a battle. (Before you crawl up my @$$, I have nothing against 2 clickers.) These people may or may not get more involved in the game and they will eventually be stronger because they were encouraged to fight more.
So we can compete with Serbia and Poland by making our existing forces stronger right now or possibly, in a few months, be a little stronger because a bunch of n00bs got some weapons now.
o/.....V+S
photo to pop art
pop art photos