The Myth Of The Underpriviliged Soldier
Another liberal myth blown to smithereens. You've probably heard over and over that our military is composed of the underclass who joined simply to escape the grinding poverty of their class.
Turns out that it's pure liberal trash.
"According to a comprehensive study of all enlistees for the years 1998-99 and 2003 that The Heritage Foundation just released, the typical recruit in the all-volunteer force is wealthier, more educated and more rural than the average 18- to 24-year-old citizen is. Indeed, for every two recruits coming from the poorest neighborhoods, there are three recruits coming from the richest neighborhoods.
Yes, rural areas and the South produced more soldiers than their percentage of the population would suggest in 2003. Indeed, four rural states - Montana, Alaska, Wyoming and Maine - rank 1-2-3-4 in proportion of their 18-24 populations enlisted in the military. But this isn't news.
Enlistees have always come from rural areas. Yet a new study, reported in The Washington Post earlier this month, suggests that higher enlistment rates in rural counties are new, implying a poorer military. They err by drawing conclusions from a non-random sample of a few counties, a statistically cloaked anecdote. The only accurate way to assess military demographics is to consider all recruits."
Will the left stop reciting their lies in the face of these facts. Of course not! When has the truth muzzled a liberal?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home