First off, that doesn’t follow. And if you would think for just a second you’d realize it.
Second off, you don’t know what he meant. It was vague. You’re assuming he meant the worst possible thing, so of course it sounds bad. You’re just swatting at straw men here. If he expounds on his ideas nitpick on them, at this point the only honest thing to do is ask for clarification.
This discussion of Bill Gates and whether or not private industry is public service is beside the point.
We aren’t talking about having billionaire magnates do community service, we are talking about kids who are in a compulsory school to begin with. It’s not like community service cannot be considered and educational opportunity. More Practicum for kids who might not get it otherwise is a good thing.
I didn’t say that. I said that it isn’t the federal government’s responsibility to teach science and math. Curriculum is set up on a state and local basis.
Well, McCain is old and creaky…what’s Obama’s excuse??
-XT
Hey, I was already having ‘senior moments’ when I was 47!
My line was (and is): “I used to be a professor. I’m still absent-minded.”
I’m assuming Obama meant what he said - that he wanted a civilian secuirty force that is just as well funded as the military. Thus the cite on how much we would need to spend if this force was really as well-funded as the military.
RT would like to believe that Obama doesn’t mean it anymore - therefore Obama removed it from his website and is apparently hoping that everyone will forget that he said it. The honest thing for Obama would be to admit that he was floating a trial balloon that sounded stupid when he said it, but apparently Obama is correct in thinking that everyone who matters will cooperate in pretending that it never really happened. I am not going to cooperate in that way - if Obama no longer means it, let him say so.
This is an election campaign. I am not going to give Obama a pass on every stupid thing he says, and I am not going to assume there is a one-week expiration date on the truth of whatever he proposes.
If you meant what RT meant, that is not vague at all. RT said he doesn’t care about the deficit if the programs are good enough. OK, I took him at his word, and asked, if he believed that this national security civilian corps is good enough, is it worth spending what Obama said he wanted to spend - somewhere in excess of $600 billion a year.
Well, he’s trying to get away with weaselling out of something stupid, if that is what you mean. If he were honest, he would admit his mistake, but apparently he is not.
I didn’t make any mistake - Obama did, and “conceding it gracefully” is exactly the opposite of what he is trying to do. He isn’t conceding anything - he is (apparently) trying to pretend it never happened.
And the Obamaniacs aren’t going to call him on it. That’s OK; it’s what I’m here for.
Regards,
Shodan
This is the Straight Dope. We’re about fighting ignorance.
We agree:
Which means that something like this:
Is total bullshit, because we both agree that Obama has abandoned that position, if indeed it was ever more than a slip of the tongue.
If you want to play “people ought to criticize Obama for holding that position” when he doesn’t, then I’m sure there are places where that’ll work.
This is the Dope. We’re about fighting ignorance. This isn’t one of them.
Moderator’s Note: I don’t think this forum has any need for any weather reports on the state of any other posters’ brains, OK?
My apologies. That was a bit overboard of me.
So it comes down to different interpretations of an ambiguous statement. I can live with that.
I don’t feel I was strawmanning Sam’s position, though. Hyperbolic, maybe, but he has used hyperbole himself in this thread.
I support Marley’s thought (quoted here) that what starts as “voluntary” swiftly becomes “manditory”. How much more can we lump on our kids to burn them out even faster? America is so strung out on competition and multi-tasking, if your kid isn’t doing calculus while potty training and splitting the atom by age 6, s/he has no chance of getting into college. Where is it going to end? And, does anyone ever stop to think about the impact this has on society as a whole? You never see the news quoting their resident expert on sociology, do you? It leads to an escalation in something we all try to shut our eyes to…social disease. No, not VD, silly! Drugs and Crime! It’ll make “beating the system” look more and more attractive. (Not to mention the onset of adult diseases already manifesting itself in juveniles at an astounding rate.)
Fully constrain a bridge, and it will soon buckle. So, we learned to insert expansion joints and other measures to tolerate some flexure. Fully constrain our kids with greater and greater expectations to keep up with the Joneses (i.e., stricter and stricter college entrance criteria, etc.) and they’ll buckle in ways we ALL pay for. (And, this is all in the name of a better society???)
Oh, when you drop off little Johnny at elementary school, be a dear and make sure he has his Valium! - Jinx :eek:
P.S. …You don’t really believe that little Johnny actually cares if his school gets the Federal funding or not do you?
It appears that there is a lot of activity going on around national service among people close to Obama, which might shed some light on what he’s proposing.
Service Nation is a new organization set up to promote national service. Caroline Kennedy, an aide to Obama, is one of the chairs. Reading the website, there’s a lot of ‘Change’ rhetoric, fitting in with Obama’s main campaign slogan. Bill Richardson and Sam Nunn, both top prospects for VP, are on the steering council. To be fair, it looks like it’s somewhat bipartisan, as there are a handful of Republicans involved as well.
From the website:
One of the organization’s stated goals is to build grassroots support for a National Service Act. The last National Service Act was introduced into the Senate by Charles Rangel, and it called for mandatory national service through the draft. Anyone between the age of 18 and 42 could be drafted, and if your number was called you could choose either military service or “civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security”.
A Powerpoint slide on the web site has more details, whiich sounds like Obama’s talking points in his speech - close enough that it sounds like he’s talking about the same thing:
Americans for a National Service Act is a related organization which shares some of the same leaders.
Jackboots from Birkenstock, truncheons from Prada, brass knuckles from Versace. Give us your guns, or your kids go to the Jane Fonda Re-Education and Aerobics Camp. Crunch, crunch, crunch, the goons are coming…
I wonder if “The Audacity of Hope” can be rendered into a little red book…
That or a new age Bible! Surprised neither has happened yet…
-XT
Thanks for the links, Sam Stone.
Following the link to Service Nation, the site referred this editorial in Time by Richard Stengel, also one of the leaders of the organization, which seems to be the origin for most of the talking points. Obama seems merely to have added it to his platform, though I think he has done so whole-heartedly
I can’t say I really disagree with most of his ideas.
I definitely support a Public Service Academy. It seems strange that we do not have one by now. Public affairs and public policy departments are common, yet just as the military academies recruit the best and brightest away from the ROTC programs (I don’t mean to say that graduates of ROTC programs are inferior to military academies, but there is a difference in reputation), the PSA could do the same for that field.
I would prefer that the non-profit sector have a greater role. National service does not have to mean directly serving the government, regardless of which agency, civilian or military,or at whatever level, federal or local. If more services were provided by the civic sector, less would be needed to be provided by the government.
I would also allow the option to ‘buy’ out of it. If one donates X amount of dollars, then can avoid Y number of hours of service. On the flip side, I would allow Y number of hours of service equal X amount of refundable tax credits.
Yes, and what do they mean by that?:
It’s even in the title, FFS.
And if you look elsewhere on the page, you’ll find some decidedly non-voluntary ideas, such as a draft lottery and a plan for universal service by 2020.
You mean you have to do more than read the title to determine the content of the document???
-XT
That’s just no fuckin’ fair, man!
I refuse (as do apparently most of Congress) to pay any attention to a bill unless the name can be made into an acronym.