Steve Sailer notes that the Army is relaxing parameters on the variables in its recruitment standards (but on some variables more than others, and on IQ least of all).
"Maximum age of new enlistees has been boosted from 34 to 42..."
THAT got my attention. You can enlist at 42? Wow.
A couple more wars, a couple more hikes in the enlistment age, and **I** will be able to enlist. I wouldn't mind, and I could sure use the health insurance.Well, yeah, I'd like to have the insurance, too, although BushCo has been cutting the benefits that come with putting your life on the line for the nation. And the age isn't being pushed up to 42 because the military would just like to give older patriots the chance to enlist. Then there's that IQ comment. There've been several stories about recruiters "helping" potential enlistees beat drug tests, cover up criminal records, and falsify their education. And now that I think about it, while you'll find idiots in the armed forces and at Ivy League schools, I'd attribute the situation not to high military standards, but the economic advantage of some idiots-- the president being a perfect example. There's a reason all those recruiting ads push their college assistance and a bright future in the private sector. And just as some troops don't join out of sheer patriotism, I suspect some wealthy individuals might not be paying $30,000 tuition a year out of passion for a great education.
And now that I think about it, is Derbyshire really to be applauded for saying he would sign up, if they'd only bring the age up a few more years. I'd be willing to bet a big chunk of money that he hasn't called a recruiting station just to offer. Just forget I posted this.