On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 13:49:22 -0600, xrongor wrote:

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...

Then why do you compare 106% of X, to 96% of Y, as if it means
anything, Randy?

because its the only nubers that were provided as proof. if i ignored the
numbers you would have attacked me for that too. dont say you wouldnt...

The only reason I'm "attacking" you is because you're accusing Todd of
basing statements on meaningless data, while doing _exactly the same
thing_ with _exactly the same meaningless data_.

he said he could prove the numbers were high. do you think the article he
provided is proof the numbers are high? i dont.

Nope, nor are they proof that the re-enlistment rate is going down.
This has become circular and pointless.