Area Soldier Killed In Fort Hood Rampage
Stroger Makes Hollywood Play
Put Down Your Nanowrimo And Leave The House
Sox Shuffle Continues
What would you do with $180,000? Oh, the possibilities. You could buy 18,000 albums on iTunes. You could pick up that brand-new Mercedes you’ve always wanted. Or maybe you could finally afford one of those new condos springing up everywhere. Danielle Littrell had lofty dreams of her own: the Farmington, MO teen was going to use it for college. That is, until the Navy yanked their dangling carrot out from under her nose.
Littrell, 18, enlisted with U.S. Navy’s ROTC program, which would allow her to go to the school of her choice for four years in exchange for serving that amount of time later as an officer. She chose Loyola University, whose tuition clocks in at a beefy $27,000 a year. (Or is it not that beefy anymore? A lot has changed since Chicagoist was college-minded.) The Navy presented Littrell with a dummy check worth $180,000 smackers, enough to get her through college and then some, though we suppose room had to be made for books and food and stuff. Case closed, college ho, right? Negative.
Citing a back injury that Littrell incurred in 2005, the Navy rescinded their scholarship just last month. Littrell and her family received a letter from the Department of Defense, saying her “weak or painful back” would prevent her from serving her country when the time came. That’s odd, since Littrell managed to play high school basketball and earn a black belt in karate since the injury. A frickin’ black belt! We can’t reach into the fridge without lumbar discomfort. The beleaguered youth’s orthopedist even sent medical records on her behalf, so that the Navy might be otherwise persuaded. It was to no avail; a July 30 letter indicated no change in their decision. Despite the huge setback, Littrell’s still moving into her dorm tomorrow. She just doesn’t know how long she’ll be sticking around.
Image via the Maine Maritime Academy.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
There's a certain lack of clarity here, leaving questions Chicagoist needs to answer.
1. When did Littrell make this deal with the dev... I mean, Navy.
2. How was Littrell injured? Was it prior to the deal? Was it related to the deal? Did the Navy know about this injury before the deal was made?
3. Has Littrell fulfilled any part of her commitment to the Navy. Was that commitment to be fulfilled after college, or has she already served her four years?
4. How old is Littrell. Simply including this fact would have made the article much more clear. Come on, guys, this isn't even j-school level stuff. You should have learned this writing for your high school paper.
i noted she was a teenager, and with her age noted in the linked article, i figured one could put two and two together. i will insert.
I love it when Chicagoist posts an crappy and inflammatory article, then gets defensive when the comments call them out on it.
Second favorite is the "but we're just a blog" fallback. I bet they use that when requesting press passes to stuff.
Guest #1:
I don't know the answers to most of your questions, but I think I can answer Question #4.
Shannon states quite clearly in paragraph 1, 6th sentence, "Danielle Littrell had lofty dreams of her own: the Farmington, MO teen was going to use it for college." (emphasis mine) And since we know from later in the article that she's starting at Loyola tomorrow, that narrows her down to the 16-19 year old range.
Number 4,
Not necessarily, because it uses teen in the past tense. That doesn't mean she is a teen now. It could very-well mean that this is what she had planned when she was a teen, but now that she is 35, she'll do something else. Thirty-five-year-olds can start at Loyola as easily as 18-year-olds.
Again, it's a simple call for clarity any real editor would have made. If you're going to play journalist, you shouldn't get upset when people ask for you to follow the rules.
They are not journalists. They merely piggy back on what real journalists have done, and toss in some food and booze reviews and the odd interview. It probably makes a bit of money for someone higher up on the food chain--not a lot, I would suspect, not until the company is sold, at least--and lets others collect some bylines before they jump to TimeOut Chicago or similar non-newsy publications. [This not to say there is no honor in writing entertainment and listings news; it's just a very soft form of journalism that requires little from the reporter and even less from the journalist.]
somebody is having a cranky Monday...
Guest #5,
Do you REALLY think that anyone read the article to mean that she was a teenager almost 20 years ago when she made this deal with the Navy? And after high school, she lolly-gagged around for almost 20 years and now in her mid-30s, she's headed to Loyola where she's going to live in the DORMS (last paragraph, 2nd to last sentence)? And do you really think that the Navy would have let her sit around for 20 years + before they collected on their end of the deal?
I guess it's easy to play armchair journalist and tell everyone how to do a volunteer job, but I think your argument about someone starting college at 35 is weak, at best. That's not to say 35 year olds don't decide to go get that college degree, just to say that I think it's a HUGE stretch for one to think that the Federal Government is going to let someone wait almost 20 years to make good on a deal.
Based on the way the article was written when originally posted, it's just as reasonable to assume the Navy let her sit around for 20 years as it is to assume she was fresh out of high school.
When we write stories, it should be our goal not to force the reader to assume anything, because assumptions can so easily be incorrect. We should strive for clarity.
I think it would be much easier to wonder if she had gone to the Navy straight out of high school, done her four years, then come back to have her money turned down by the Navy. Since this wasn't the case, though, I see nothing to be outraged about ... which is perhaps why Chicagoist chose a lack of clarity.
Points for the title of the article btw. Bravo.
But they're just a blog.
I think the point here is that you shouldn't make the reader guess.
I think the point here is that somebody pissed in guest's cornflakes this morning.
guest(s) take(s) issue with every single post Chicagoist makes.
makes me wonder if guest isn't brushing up for the bar or perhaps the upcoming school year's debate team tryouts by jawing with Chicagoist on the Intertubes.
THIS JUST IN:
118-year-old Danielle Littrell has attempted to defraud the Navy of $180,000. Back before World War One, Littrell joing the Navy ROTC, with the promise of free college tuition if she later served in the Navy.
Back then, college tuition a semester of college cost one bushel basket of yellow onions and one shucked peck of corn -- but it had to be shucked, mind you.
Littrell waited until the 21st Century to seek her college education, knowing full well that she would not be capable of performing the duties once she graduated at age 122.
I agree with the above posts that suggest that this is a slanted article that is missing a lot of important information.
If you'll pardon the expression, let me say something in defense of Defense (the Department, that is.) The Department of Defense has a lot of statistical data on injuries to prospective and current ROTC students. With that data, the Department of Defense has a reasonable way to assess which candidates will eventually file for medical discharges from service and which will require medically restricted work activities if they are allowed to enter and complete an ROTC program.
That's right. They have reasons. They have statistics.
In fact, the Department of Defense would be negligent in their use of taxpayer dollars if they spend over $100,000 on the education of students who would not be able to serve their country. Think, also, about how that money would be simultaneously witheld from a candidate elsewhere who wants to attend college and then serve his/her country.
Now, it may be that Ms. Littrell is a motivated person who has recovered enough. It seems to me that she deserves another shot. But remember that the officials at the Department of Defense cannot get inside the heads (or bodies) of applicants nor can they predict the future on an individual basis. They are simply going by the track record of similar cases...of which their have many thousands.
The Suntimes' pull of the AP story is a bit watered down which is why the Chicagoist article is even a bit more runny.
I did a search for the woman's name - "Danielle Littrell" and the Daily Journal has much meatier story from August 14. And St. Louis Today has this gem at the end of their story:
I'd LOVE to see this family outside of recruiting stations carrying this Publisher's Clearing House-style check warning other families not to put their hopes and dreams into the government.
The family feels like Danielle was likely used as a prop to drum up recruiting which they freely admit they were fine with.
So after all the pomp and circumstance this could get really ugly for the Navy.
I am pissed that "guest" comments are grayed out and harder to read.
Anyone who has time to waste to "register" is less interesting, IMO.
Lame.
Thank you for providing a link to iTunes. Without it, no one would have understood what you were referring to.
ward: very interesting point. no doubt there are many people out there trying to defraud the navy or cover up past injury. but a black belt in karate? c'mon, whatever was wrong with her must have healed up pretty nicely. i know she's just one person and they don't know her personally, but in my mind, that's what puts the hurt on even more.
ed: thanks for the extra info. if anything, the source article makes her situation more dire.. confirmed in may, forms processed in june, yanked in july. sucks.
"...The family feels like Danielle was likely used as a prop to drum up recruiting which they freely admit they were fine with...."
The Navy openly promoted the "giant check" event to boost recruiting. That was whole point of the event. The Navy never "used" Danielle without Danielle's full knowledge of the plan to gain publicity for recruiting.
Furthermore, the agreeement that Danielle signed specified that the Navy had the option to withdraw the scholarship should Danielle be at risk of being unable, in the Navy's assessment, to perform her duties. People who have left the military because of medical reasons are currently costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars per year.
I agree that she deserves another evaluation. I support her. But remember that it's like the insurance business. The military knows what characteristics make someone at risk of not being able to serve.
Would you want $180,000 of taxpayer money given out for someone who wasn't going to serve? And then have that money be therefore unavailable for someone who would be ready and able to serve?
Hummmmm wonder how much that little Air Show costs the US Navy?
I think she should sue the tacky bell bottom pants off The Navy to the point where they are so darn broke that they have to recruit the Village People from retirement! Or at least halt the war due to bankruptcy!
It is Yvan Eht Nioj. If you are going to steal from the Simpsons, at least do it correctly.
Here are some Party Posse Lyrics for everyone.
Oh say can you rock
There's trouble in a far off nation
time to get in love formation
Your love is more deadly than Saddam
that why I got to drop the bomb
Partay Posse!!!(panicing, mumbleing)
Yvan eht nioj x4
This party is happenin
it's no mirage
So sing it again:
yvan eht nioj
Yvan eht nioj x2
Yvan eht nioj x3
Had a girl in every port
From here to Barcelona
But now I'm back to Springfield
And girl I'm gonna phone ya
Stormed a lot of beaches
But you're the one that I miss
Let's get back together girl
Let's reenlist
So sign me up
for a hitch of love
Recruit my heart
Four sweet years of love
They march all day
and clean latreens all night
don't bust me down
Let's re-up tonight x2
Bunch of jerks on here. "Wah wah wah, not good journalism blah blah blah." Hope I never meet you arrogant pricks outside of the internet. Do you walk down the street critiquing hot dog vendors and rolling your eyes at things all day?
The complete lack of knowledge here regarding how the Navy handles ROTC scholarships isn’t surprising, but the amount of people acting like they know what they’re talking about is. Also, you don’t enlist in ROTC.
I have first hand experience with this, spending my entire life up to college being the son of a Marine and then entering the NROTC program, much like she would have. The article is ambiguous, but the timeline fits, so I think it’s safe to say she failed her DODMERB physical, which is the physical that everyone in Navy/Marine ROTC has to complete before they will actually pay any tuition. Her little ceremony that she had as a congratulations was entirely be subject to the passing of the DODMERB physical. She should have known this, as the entire process is transparent, and there should have been no confusion.
It is not uncommon for individuals to fail their DODMERB physical, as they’re actually quite strict on what they allow in. However, those who fail are usually given the option to apply for a waiver. Some things are waiverable, some are not. I’m assuming a herniated disk would be looked at extremely closely, but it’s not unheard of. A friend of mine broke his back in a car accident in high school, failed his DODMERB, applied for waivers (which take time, these don’t happen overnight) and will now be a commissioned Marine. If she’s been denied from the waiver, there’s nothing she can do.
I know first hand, as I was in a car accident, and then finished my 4 years in the NROTC program, only to fail my preconditioning physical after I had had my entire tuition paid for, and been paid every month to go to school. It’s a bogus failure, but I went through the steps, applied for my waiver, was denied, and here I am one year later NOT in the military. Thanks taxpayers, you saved me about $150k of debt, and I owe nothing.
Everyone’s saying “but blackbelt!” is missing the point. One of my good friends was a junior Olympian, maxing out every physical test we had, and did not have his waiver for asthma approved. I have no serious problem easily passing any PFT/PRT, but due to the standards set forth, I’m not physically qualified. That’s the way it works. Some are waivered, some are not.
My advice to her would be to continue in the NROTC program voluntarily, and use the resources from within to investigate the waiver process if she hasn’t already. Instead of flying off the handle because she failed something she knew was contingent on the scholarship she should use what’s available if she really want’s to be in the Navy. This isn’t uncommon, nor unheard of.
I am more than willing to expand or clarify anything previously stated, because not only have I been through this entire process myself, but I've seen it from all angles.
- Nathan
i think these stories are of note because they are just one of many promises made by the military/the administration that are broken.
first of all, maybe she was fine with being the navy, but it was contingent on her getting school paid for. maybe if she had to pay for school on her own, she never would have considered it.
just like i'm sure a lot of men and women were gung ho to serve their country and feel a lot different after not being sent with proper equipment and then when injured, left to rot in the joke of a hospital that is walter reed.
it's more than bad form, it's just horrible what the government is doing in the same of 'security.'
23: for the record, i was trying to do it phoenetically.
i think these stories are of note because they are just one of many promises made by the military/the administration that are broken.
I think you're completely missing the point. There is no promise made.
And the rest of your points seem off the mark. I'm sure a lot of her decision to be in the Navy was contingent on having school paid for. There's a high likelihood that this was the case, and there's nothing wrong with that. If she doesn't want to continue with a career in the Navy, she doesn't have to, and nothing is binding.
The rest of your post is more ranting about how men and women in service are treated, and you wont see any disagreement with me on that. But that's completely irrelevant to her point.
She applied for a scholarship and was then given a symbolic awardment of said scholarship. There was no check that they pulled, they never gave her money and took it back. To be honest, the entire $180k think is ridiculous, because NROTC pays on a semesterly basis, and they pay the school directly, they never pay you, and it’s not in a lump some.
No one would be complaining about this if it was an academic scholarship and she failed her final semester in high school… An athlete on an athletic scholarship won’t have school paid for if they’re injured and can’t fulfill their end of the arrangement. The same applies here.
Instead of the sympathy piece some simple research in the original article in the Suntimes would have brought about a complete explanation of what happened, and the journalist could have sought some key details that without, we’re just left to hate the big bad Navy and their oversized check.
I guess she is the victim of "military affirmative action" Recruiting gang bangers, rapist and murderous first because you don't have to provide scholarship or signing bonuses for them. Just give them an M-16 point them in the right direction and say Kill! And when the gun gets "lost" on the streets of Chicago, NY, LA, etc" give them a rocket launcher! Its harder to steal those!