http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/11/us/tex...l?hp&_r=1&

While the president has the power to call National Guard units into federal service — and nearly all Guard funding comes from the federal government — the states say the units are state agencies that must abide by state laws.

leave it to the cons to claim a state's constitution overrules the supreme court. are we still debating the states rights vs federal govt argument......

Texas National Guard falls under the laws of the state of Texas. Texas does not recognize same sex marriage/unions. They are not denying the benefits, what they are saying is, if you come to the Texas National Guard Base, they cannot under state law give the benefits, they have to go to a US Base.

True it's an inconvenience and the funding for the Guard is federal funded, the Texas National Guard's number 1 priority if this country is attacked is Texas, not DC. Because they are a state militia they fall under state law. However, state militias are to be ready if called up in the time of war, but that's after the Army, Marines, Navy, and USAF and their reserves have been called up and more back up is needed.

(11-12-2013 09:50 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Texas National Guard falls under the laws of the state of Texas. Texas does not recognize same sex marriage/unions. They are not denying the benefits, what they are saying is, if you come to the Texas National Guard Base, they cannot under state law give the benefits, they have to go to a US Base.

True it's an inconvenience and the funding for the Guard is federal funded, the Texas National Guard's number 1 priority if this country is attacked is Texas, not DC. Because they are a state militia they fall under state law. However, state militias are to be ready if called up in the time of war, but that's after the Army, Marines, Navy, and USAF and their reserves have been called up and more back up is needed.

well the majority of states that have state laws that do not recognize same sex marriage/unions are not doing this.

thats a very weak argument

(11-12-2013 09:55 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 09:50 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Texas National Guard falls under the laws of the state of Texas. Texas does not recognize same sex marriage/unions. They are not denying the benefits, what they are saying is, if you come to the Texas National Guard Base, they cannot under state law give the benefits, they have to go to a US Base.

True it's an inconvenience and the funding for the Guard is federal funded, the Texas National Guard's number 1 priority if this country is attacked is Texas, not DC. Because they are a state militia they fall under state law. However, state militias are to be ready if called up in the time of war, but that's after the Army, Marines, Navy, and USAF and their reserves have been called up and more back up is needed.

well the majority of states that have state laws that do not recognize same sex marriage/unions are not doing this.

thats a very weak argument

Maybe they just don't want to. Tell me, again, why you are crying?

“get with the program“

How liberal lexicon appropriate.

Where does the federal gov't get its money?

(Here's where johnny zero gets confused )

(11-12-2013 10:17 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Where does the federal gov't get its money?

(Here's where johnny zero gets confused )

no heres where dr torch gets confused

(11-12-2013 10:20 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 10:17 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Where does the federal gov't get its money?

(Here's where johnny zero gets confused )

no heres where dr torch gets confused

What does that chart have to do with the Texas National Guard? BTW, how did the chart arrive at those numbers, ie. - what spending is included to arrive at each state's figure?

For example, a state with multiple military bases or a state that is a retirement destination would skew the numbers.

(11-12-2013 10:25 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 10:20 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 10:17 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Where does the federal gov't get its money?

(Here's where johnny zero gets confused )

no heres where dr torch gets confused

What does that chart have to do with the Texas National Guard? BTW, how did the chart arrive at those numbers, ie. - what spending is included to arrive at each state's figure?

For example, a state with multiple military bases or a state that is a retirement destination would skew the numbers.

yeah and guess what: you cant discount military spending. why? because its a benefit for the states. it provides a shitload of jobs & local business for those states.

retirement destination? are you for real?????

No one cares.

(11-12-2013 10:41 AM)Jedi Master Sipho-Dyas Wrote:  No one cares.

then why was is it front page of the NYT?????

(11-12-2013 10:47 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 10:41 AM)Jedi Master Sipho-Dyas Wrote:  No one cares.

then why was is it front page of the NYT?????

You just answered you own question.

lol

(11-12-2013 10:47 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 10:41 AM)Jedi Master Sipho-Dyas Wrote:  No one cares.

then why was is it front page of the NYT?????

Today's journalism is beyond sh*t, if you'd been born a decade earlier you'd understand this. It's really not your fault that you're so easily led by the wrong people, but you're a serious problem in the U.S. today.

(11-12-2013 10:47 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 10:41 AM)Jedi Master Sipho-Dyas Wrote:  No one cares.

then why was is it front page of the NYT?????

Lol. Methinks you just answered your own question.

so johnnyzerO, you seem to be pretty adept at finding these irrelevant charts and graphs, including those that make it clear they are based on fiction, so how about fniding this one-

How many people does this affect? How many gay, out of the closet, married, military couples are there, that are being denied this special treatment on National Guard bases in the good State of Texas? 4? Perhaps, 5?

Make your case, find some numbers. Is it in the tens of thousands? Millions, perhaps?

Nobody cares. Talk about a naked political agenda.

(11-12-2013 10:55 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 10:47 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 10:41 AM)Jedi Master Sipho-Dyas Wrote:  No one cares.

then why was is it front page of the NYT?????

Lol. Methinks you just answered your own question.

so johnnyzerO, you seem to be pretty adept at finding these irrelevant charts and graphs, including those that make it clear they are based on fiction, so how about fniding this one-

How many people does this affect? How many gay, out of the closet, married, military couples are there, that are being denied this special treatment on National Guard bases in the good State of Texas? 4? Perhaps, 5?

Make your case, find some numbers. Is it in the tens of thousands? Millions, perhaps?

Nobody cares. Talk about a naked political agenda.

If they can't find it, they'll make it up.

My problem is this chart is 9 years old.

(11-12-2013 11:02 AM)gdunn Wrote:  My problem is this chart is 9 years old.

(11-12-2013 10:25 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 10:20 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(11-12-2013 10:17 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Where does the federal gov't get its money?

(Here's where johnny zero gets confused )

no heres where dr torch gets confused

What does that chart have to do with the Texas National Guard? BTW, how did the chart arrive at those numbers, ie. - what spending is included to arrive at each state's figure?

johnny zero doesn't think through details. That's why he's a comfortable leftist. He just likes pretty pictures, it's like coloring in kindergarten.

Hey zero, still going to tell us so many science journal articles support CAGW?

Does “military spending” include military contacts?

I think Atlanta would have wonderful museums like Chicago
if Boeing was funding them with redirected taxpayer money.

MS and LA have a ton of costs for 2004 FY.

I wonder if levee repair, work along the MS River, Stennis Space Center, Kessler AFB, Ft. Polk, etc., is accounted into these figures. What type of hurricane season did these two states have from Sept. 2003-2004? Was there beach/coastline erosion?