this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2024
132 points (95.8% liked)

News

36491 readers
2695 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Hegar@fedia.io 52 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

It was $88M for 0 recruits, per that USA Today article:

The Guard received 24,800 recruiting prospects from the program in 2012, documents show. In those cases, potential recruits indicated the NASCAR affiliation prompted them to seek more information about joining. Of that group, only 20 met the Guard's qualifications for entry into the service, and not one of them joined.

The $88M was National Guard spending on nascar from 2011-13. The 20 recruits who made the right choice were just in 2012, but the military.com article that daily beast is reporting on says 'potentially no recruits' when describing the whole nascar deal.

The craziest part to me is the 25k prospects yielding 20 qualified candidates. 99.92% were unfit for service.

[–] The_v@lemmy.world 22 points 2 years ago (1 children)

2012, butThe craziest part to me is the 25k prospects yielding 20 qualified candidates. 99.92% were unfit for service.

Well they did advertise at NASCAR.....

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 years ago

No sir, for the 215th time you cannot already have a pacemaker. Next!

[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

99.92% were unfit for service.

It's that strict conservative diet of pork cracklin's, copenhagen and budweiser.

[–] Kaboom@reddthat.com -4 points 2 years ago

I wonder what the reasons were. Probably some had allergies or some minor shit like that. With the amount of waivers these days, there's probably only 20 people in the military who are actually fit for service