Republicans: continued

[L'Emmerdeur]

The language needed to be changed. After all you wouldn't want to be denying fine young upstanding bigots the chance to be all they can be, even if they're not intelligent enough to hide their bigotry.

'Exclusive: Phrase "White Nationalists" Cut From Measure To Screen Military Enlistees'

A measure in the National Defense Authorization Act meant to keep white nationalists out of the U.S. military no longer mentions “white nationalists” after Congress quietly altered the text after it initially passed the House.

The change, which has not been previously reported, could water down a House-passed amendment meant to address the threat of white nationalists in the military. The House language was specifically drafted to encourage screening for white nationalist beliefs in military enlistees. But after the Republican-controlled Senate passed its own version of the massive military spending bill and the two chambers’ bills were reconciled, the final NDAA instead requires the Department of Defense to study ways to screen military enlistees for “extremist and gang-related activity.”

While it may seem like a minor tweak, the removal of the term “white nationalists” from the amendment text was concerning to Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), who introduced the amendment in July after alarming reports about white nationalists in the U.S. military.

[JimC]

You can always tell a non-extreme white nationalist - they'll always give a brief warning to a jew or a black before they gun them down...

[Tero]

I'm of the opinion that all Bud Light drinkers are white nationalists.

[JimC]

Is the reverse true, or are they simply 2 sets with a considerable overlap...

[L'Emmerdeur]

To be fair it isn't known that the deletion of the term was done by Republicans. To assume so is prejudiced and intolerant or something, as an absent member might have pointed out.

[JimC]

To be fair it isn't known that the deletion of the term was done by Republicans. To assume so is prejudiced and intolerant or something, as an absent member might have pointed out.

Surely any change must have a known author...

[L'Emmerdeur]

From the story:

It’s not clear who approved the language change or why. Senators on the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, including Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), did not respond to HuffPost’s requests for comment on the language.

It's just a leftist scum disinformation site though. Not to be trusted. At all.

[JimC]

What I meant was that surely there is an official record of the process of legislative changes, accessible to the public...

[pErvinalia]

How? It's a sham democracy. They don't even know where everyone is at every instance in their stupid country! [/Dutchy]

[L'Emmerdeur]

OK, I did a search of what appears to be the Senate version of the bill, and there is no mention of white nationalism in it at all, though I did find the passage in question. I also took a look at the House of Representatives conference report on the bill. In its description of changes made by the Senate to Section 530 in the House version of bill I found the following:

The House amendment contained a provision (sec. 530C) that would require the Secretary of Defense to study the
feasibility of using the Federal Bureau of Investigation Tattoo and Graffiti Identification Program and National Gang Intelligence Center, to screen for white nationalists and individuals with ties to white nationalist organizations as part of background investigations and security screenings of individuals who seek to enlist in the Armed Forces.

The Senate bill contained no similar provision.

I'd consider this as evidence showing us that the change was made by the Senate committee that worked on the bill. Of course all committees of the Senate are controlled by members of the Republican Party and the majority of each committee is Republican. Which particular Republican senator/senator's staff member made the change to the text I cannot say. They may have thought that provision superfluous, since Tucker Carlson has made it clear that there are very few 'legitimate white nationalists' in the US.

[Joe]

It's a little known secret that most white nationalists are illegitimate.

[Brian Peacock]

It's easy to sit at a keyboard and throw rhetorical brickbats. Taking time to understand various measures of democracy would undermine such facile sneering, so I offer a means of gaining this understanding with practically no belief that any will avail themselves of the opportunity. Access to the report from the EIU (the source for the Independent article linked above) requires signing up for a free account. Eliminating that minimal hurdle, I'm providing a link to the report on Dropbox. In the appendix to the report there is a useful discussion of how political scientists understand and measure democracy, as if it would make the slightest difference to those who feel most comfortable with ill-informed contempt.

Just wanted to say thank for that. I'd be interested to compare that to the 2019 report.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Cool, Brian Peacock; my pleasure. The report for 20019 will likely come out sometime in February of next year, if it follows the schedule of recent ones.

[Scot Dutchy]

20019?
It is right wing propaganda. Just tell me how the UK is a FULL democracy when the first house of Parliament is unelected? How can a party win with 45% of the vote? A load of bollocks.

[Joe]

It's easy to sit at a keyboard and throw rhetorical brickbats. Taking time to understand various measures of democracy would undermine such facile sneering, so I offer a means of gaining this understanding with practically no belief that any will avail themselves of the opportunity. Access to the report from the EIU (the source for the Independent article linked above) requires signing up for a free account. Eliminating that minimal hurdle, I'm providing a link to the report on Dropbox. In the appendix to the report there is a useful discussion of how political scientists understand and measure democracy, as if it would make the slightest difference to those who feel most comfortable with ill-informed contempt.

Just wanted to say thank for that. I'd be interested to compare that to the 2019 report.

Let me add my thanks to Brian's. I've downloaded it an put in my reading queue for the holiday break.