<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for Kp graduate</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/fa6834d4ae461ce37c634df584e25cc5/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:26:00 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Open Discussion/Debate for the week: 20 Sep 2009</title><link>http://cgblog.disqus.com/open_discussiondebate_for_the_week_20_sep_2009/#comment-16994580</link><description>Roctober shortly approches.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kp graduate</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:26:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Maritime Academy - Cadet Shipping | gCaptain.com</title><link>http://gcaptain.disqus.com/maritime_academy_cadet_shipping_gcaptaincom/#comment-1351216</link><description>What continues to amaze me is that the USCG  and other public vessels are exempt from the STCW training standards. We all sail on the same oceans, but apprently have different standards. Part of the reason the USCG credability among professional mariners continues to drop is USCG officers and petty officers are trained to sub-standard condtions. Then they are the agency charged to carry out regulations over those held to a higher standard, but yet fail to meet the same standard.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kp graduate</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 10:55:37 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Repealing &amp;#8220;Don&amp;#8217;t Ask, Don&amp;#8217;t Tell,&amp;#8221; hmm&amp;#8230;</title><link>http://cgblog.disqus.com/repealing_8220don8217t_ask_don8217t_tell8221_hmm8230/#comment-12419112</link><description>Unless society is ready to forgo sex seperated restrooms and locker rooms, then the Armed Forces should not be required to go through this social experiment.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kp graduate</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 22:50:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Repealing &amp;#8220;Don&amp;#8217;t Ask, Don&amp;#8217;t Tell,&amp;#8221; hmm&amp;#8230;</title><link>http://cgblog.disqus.com/repealing_8220don8217t_ask_don8217t_tell8221_hmm8230/#comment-12493207</link><description>John,&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I acknowledge there are already LGBT members in the CG.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;However, our berthing areas, locker rooms, and restrooms also inherently discriminate based upon the assumption that everyone in heterosexual and not attracted to the same sex. Thus we keep them together when in closer quarters. This is inherently a discriminatory policy. I argue that if DADT is repealed, then we must also make all facilities unisex.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;JC</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kp graduate</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:54:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: $2.1 billion Deepwater shortfall; Icebreakers not included</title><link>http://cgblog.disqus.com/21_billion_deepwater_shortfall_icebreakers_not_included/#comment-12493249</link><description>That's right. As orignially planned the Polar class and Healy were never apart of Deepwater. Remember, they receive their own funding via the National Science Foundation.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kp graduate</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:56:21 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: $2.1 billion Deepwater shortfall; Icebreakers not included</title><link>http://cgblog.disqus.com/21_billion_deepwater_shortfall_icebreakers_not_included/#comment-12502348</link><description>A great deal. Remember, the Reliabillity Improvement Project (RIP) was never completed.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kp graduate</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 10:40:32 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Repealing &amp;#8220;Don&amp;#8217;t Ask, Don&amp;#8217;t Tell,&amp;#8221; hmm&amp;#8230;</title><link>http://cgblog.disqus.com/repealing_8220don8217t_ask_don8217t_tell8221_hmm8230/#comment-12516596</link><description>Jon,&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It appears you believe it is okay to discriminate based upon gender.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;JC</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kp graduate</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 18:44:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Coast Guard Image: Change of Command</title><link>http://cgblog.disqus.com/the_coast_guard_image_change_of_command/#comment-12614575</link><description>What is the total FY expense for change of command ceremonies including CG labor?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kp graduate</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:26:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Could policy end Coast Guard social media?</title><link>http://cgblog.disqus.com/could_policy_end_coast_guard_social_media/#comment-13191127</link><description>I find it rather amazing that if we use "for profit" internet sites, which are not our own, that procurement law does not require us first to open solicit our requirements prior to use. Many different commands have used many different sites and all of these, well most, are intended to make a profit from our use. It would appear we are endorsing them by their use, but providing favoritism over others as a government agency.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kp graduate</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 00:56:57 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>