Subscribe by RSS
One more item on the list of terrible Obama policies flying under the radar right now, the “GIVE” Act which is rather disturbing if you break it down. “GIVE” stands for Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act which is chock full of things that fly in the face of voluntarily giving time and/or money.
Michelle Malkin blows the lid off the boondoggle:
Maybe it’s just me, but I find federal legislation titled “The GIVE Act” and “The SERVE Act” downright creepy. Even more troubling: The $6 billion price tag on these bipartisan bills to expand government-funded national service efforts. Volunteerism is a wonderful thing, which is why millions of Americans do it every day without a cent of taxpayer money. But the volunteerism packages on the Hill are less about promoting effective charity than about creating make-work, permanent bureaucracies, and left-wing slush funds.
The House passed the “Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act” – or the GIVE Act – last week. The Senate took up the companion “SERVE Act” Tuesday afternoon. According to a Congressional Budget Office analysis of the Senate bill, S. 277, the bill would cost “$418 million in 2010 and about $5.7 billion over the 2010-2014 period.” And like most federal programs, these would be sure to grow over time. The bills reauthorize the Clinton-era Americorps boondoggle program and an older law, the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973.
The programs have already been allocated $1.1 billion for fiscal 2009, including $200 million from the porkulus package signed into law last month. In addition to recruiting up to 250,000 enrollees in AmeriCorps, the GIVE/SERVE bills would create new little armies of government volunteers, including a Clean Energy Corps, Education Corps, Healthy Futures Corps, Veterans Service Corps, and and expanded National Civilian Community Corps for disaster relief and energy conservation. And that’s not all. Spending would include new funds for:
*Foster Grandparent Program ($115 million);
*Learn and Serve America. ($97 million);
*Retired and Senior Volunteer Program ($70 million);
*Senior Companion Program ($55 million);
*$12 million for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014 for “the Silver Scholarships and Encore Fellowships programs;”
*$10 million a year from 2010-2014 for a new “Volunteers for Prosperity” program at USAID to “award grants to fund opportunities for volunteering internationally
in coordination with eligible organizations; and
*Social Innovation Fund and Volunteer Generation Fund-$50 million in 2010; $60 million in 2011; $70 million in 2012; $80 million in 2013; and $100 million in 2014.
“Social Innovation Fund?” If that sounds familiar, it should. I reported last fall on the Democratic Party platform’s push to fund a “Social Investment Fund Network” that would reward “social entrepreneurs and leading nonprofit organizations” and “support results-oriented innovators.” It is essentially a special taxpayer-funded pipeline for radical liberal groups backed by billionaire George Soros that masquerade as public-interest do-gooders.
Especially troublesome to parents’ groups concerned about compulsory volunteerism requirements is a provision in the House version, directing Congress to explore “whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.”
Those who have watched AmeriCorps from its inception are all-too-familiar with how government voluntarism programs have been used for propaganda and political purposes. AmeriCorps “volunteers” have been put to work lobbying against the voter-approved three-strikes anti-crime initiative in California and protesting Republican political events while working for the already heavily-tax-subsidized liberal advocacy group ACORN.
Lets all have a flashback to the good ‘ole days following the socialist victory in November 2008.
The “GIVE” Act seems to resemble something which became a controverisal policy shortly after Obama’s election victory when everyone began exploring CHANGE.gov, the administration’s transition website.
We reported on the issue back on November 7th, 2008:
Many people have been pouring over the President-elect Obama transition team website, located at CHANGE.gov, and have been finding some inconsistencies in the hastily assembled programs. The first and foremost seems to be the “America Serves” plan, I’ll explain below.
Here’s the page on change.gov which describes the plan:
America Serves
“When you choose to serve — whether it’s your nation, your community or simply your neighborhood — you are connected to that fundamental American ideal that we want life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness not just for ourselves, but for all Americans. That’s why it’s called the American dream.”
The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.
I commend any president calling on Americans to give time to community service. I wish President Bush had done more of that following 9/11. However, President-elect Obama seems to take it a step further. Leaders should inspire people to volunteer.
However, the first quote discusses people who “choose” to serve the nation. The paragraph which describes the plan then discusses “requirements” of serving in community service.
How does a “choice” to serve square with forcing high school students to serve? That’s not volunteerism, that’s indentured servitude when the government not simply compels, but requires you to serve.
It should be noted that once this text was discovered on the CHANGE.gov website, it was altered to make it sound more like true volunteerism instead of an Obama community organizing army.
Well fast-forward to today and we’re debating the “GIVE” Act which is damaging to free speech and equally as offensive in the way it attempts to open the door to forced community service.
Here’s what Section 6104 of the “GIVE” Act describes:
Section 6104 of The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act requires that a commission be established to investigate, “Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.”
They want to determine the best way to require government-forced community service on every high school student. There is nothing “giving” about that, the government is taking people’s time by force and making them participate in fraudulent groups like ACORN among others.
What’s more alarming is the provision in the “GIVE” Act which would prohibit “volunteers” (read forced government labor) from participating in protests.
Examiner.com explains:
Perhaps one of the key reasons there were so many votes against this supposedly good act was the little amendment buried down as the 12th Amendment to the act. Remember it is the little invasions to our liberties that open cracks for increased federal power and decreased freedom. “Amendment to prohibit organizations from attempting to influence legislation; organize or engage in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes; and assist, promote, or deter union organizing.” Those in support of this legislation will argue this amendment is limited in scope and is not meant to interfere with the rights of citizens to protest, petition, boycott, or strike in resistance to government proposed laws.
However, the people associated through service under the GIVE Act are considered volunteers, still free citizens, yet it will be unlawful for them to take part in any protests against any legislation. This is as close to a sedition act, a violation of 1st Amendment rights, as has been proposed in recent history. A basic right as a part of our natural, inalienable rights, is to resist government. Our founders not only knew it was a right but it was a responsibility. This legislation begins to break that down significantly.
Is this what Obama wants? To force people into government service and then strip their rights to demonstrate against the very government forcing them to volunteer?
This is getting pretty sick in my opinion.
When you force people to “volunteer,” they’re not volunteering. Am I the only one who finds this offensive and insane?
UPDATE (Babs)
An amendment was introduced on the floor of the Senate this afternoon by Viter (R-La) to HR 1388, the bill being discussed here. The admendment blocked releasing any funds to ACORN or its affiliates.
On a vote along party lines, the Democrats have shot down the amendment. They say it okie dokie for the taxpayers to continue funding federally indicted ACORN and its affiliates.
2nd Update (Nate)
Michelle Malkin was on Glenn Beck today discussing the GIVE Act:
Amen.
Visit the You Decide Politics Store »
Loading ...
Gotta love alarmists.
Me, I was forced into volunteer work in high school. It was a requirement for graduation – guess it was a state thing. I certainly wouldn’t have done it on my own. It was a great experience for me though, and if I have kids I’ll make sure they do something similar whether their school is forcing them or not.
You may rant and rave against the evils of government-facilitated volunteer programs, but I’m ex-peace corps and proud of it. I’ve known some Americorps volunteers too, good people, and they’ve committed such atrocities as working hospice care and helping out schools in bad neighborhoods. Nice to see you here trashing their selfless efforts.
Our country is embroiled in two foreign wars, nationalizing institutions left and right, and you’re taking issue with domestic volunteerism? I’d be more upset if I didn’t think you were just completely off your rocker.
Keep preaching your alarmism, I’m sure the choir is listening.
The details given are sketchy to say the least.Three thoughts however……It seems odd that the liberal left is all for making COMMUNITY ORGANIZERS OUT OF US but ask them to serve in the MILITARY (WHERE I GOT MY INDENTURED SERVITUDE)and they go ballistic.Two do they really think kids or anyone else are going to put all their energy in or learn anything from FORCING them to do it?Or are they just going to walk through it.As you know I’m experiencing a family member who is in a nursing home and I see how much or little is done by these high school VOLUNTEERS. Lastly we can’t get welfare recipients to work for the money they receive so how can you expect people who aren’t paid to work? Taking the responsibility to VOLUNTEER for the Peace-Corp or Americorp is different than indentured servitude.I suggest we read the whole piece of legislation and you can find it at:
http://www.thomas.loc.gov
Type in the number( S 277)or the bills name and it will give you any action taken,sponsors,and all the details of the bill.
“Me, I was forced into volunteer work in high school. It was a requirement for graduation – guess it was a state thing. I certainly wouldn’t have done it on my own. It was a great experience for me though, and if I have kids I’ll make sure they do something similar whether their school is forcing them or not.”
Bones you make a good point and I agree 110%. I was made from the age of 12 to volunteer at the nursing home my mother worked as a nurse at. It was a great experience that I can look back on, it even crafted my future in the sense that I knew I didn’t want to work in health care. I went on to volunteer and intern with an Assemblymen,district judges and a D.A in high school which prepared me for college and the career I actually wanted. But it was a parents influence that pushed me to do all this, not the government. There assuming that we don’t know how to raise our children and they can do a better job, that gets me fighting mad. The Government is overstepping its bounds, let parents and teachers make the call on volunteering.
You sure can twist things, bones. Let’s look at the definition of “volunteer”.
Do you see the word mandatory in any relation to volunteerism? No, you don’t.
Do you see legal consequences if you refuse to volunteer anywhere here? No, you don’t. In fact, #4 explicitely says
“a person whose actions are not founded on any legal obligation so to act.”
Volunteerism is great – but it cannot legally be forced by a DEMOCRATIC government. We all volunteer in one way or another to better the conditions and lives of others. But the government attempting to force attitudes of giving (of our time or money) to volunteerism is not something a free thinking democratic society does. That is called IN-DOC-TRI-NATION and is defined as:
And we’ll add to that definition:
1. brainwash, propagandize.
More thoughts on this:
The bureaucracy that this would involve would be mind boggling but then again thats probably what President Obama wants.It does create jobs to administer this rambunctious idea even if it is government jobs that don’t produce any income.speaking of the administration just how are you going to make sure there isn’t:
Someone with a drug problem working in a hospital
Someone who is a child molester working at a day care center.
Someone with a police record working at Police HQ
Someone with a knowledge of computers working with access to government records.
AND LASTLY no matter how you slice and dice it it violates the Declaration of Independence making us subservient to government where it should be the other way around.I quote:
“That secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving there just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it and institute new Government……”
bones,
Not all of us want the government controlling our lives. If that’s cool with you, then ignore these articles as they’re meant for people who think individual liberty is more important than Obama’s forced “volunteerism”.
Plus, you read what you want to read. I am not attacking people who genuinely volunteer out of the goodness of their heart for positive causes. Not because they’re forced, which is NOT volunteering, it’s meeting a government mandate.
I am criticizing a government-mandated forced form of volunteerism because I believe the federal government should not be in the business of forcing people to do much of anything. Furthermore, they should not be curtailing people’s right to assemble, which this legislation does.
If a local entity such as a school district or a state wants to entertain such ideas, I’d be less opposed because it’s a much more local level.
However, you’re off your rocker if you think the fools in Washington DC know the best way to force people to volunteer in Montana or any other place out in real America.
bones, it is people like yourself who will let the socialism come because they have chipped away at your principles one at a time. The rest of us will stick up for you though since you haven’t realized that politicians work day and night to curtail your liberty with “innocent” programs like these.
Please, explain to me the constitutional argument behind the government forced “volunteerism” to the organizations of it’s choice? I’ll be waiting but I won’t hold my breath for anything of substance.
Oh on more thing.
Will the government tell me that volunteering at my church or other religious organization doesn’t count because it’s not a secular institution?
We don’t even want to entertain the idea of having the government choose which form of forced “volunteering” is good and which is unacceptable now do we?
Agreed, Nate, and I got wound up and didn’t say this before – awesome article and great job, you did a lot of searching to put this together, and I appreciate it. It had slipped under my radar, and it’s disgusting.
The XIII Amendment to the Constitution
Neither slavery or involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shal have been duly convicted shall exist whithin the United States or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Here’s a quote to remember where the Liberal Left is coming from:
“The central Conservative truth is that it is culture, not politics that determines the success of a society.The central Liberal truth is that politics can change a culture and save it from itself.”
Daniel Patrick Moynihan former Sen.(D)New York
Well, DD, maybe you’ve hit on something with the XIII’s amendment. We’re supposed to pay for slavery for how long? Some say we haven’t paid enough – maybe this is obama’s way of punishing us for our forefathers actions. Making us all slaves.
The real issue here is that Obama believes all power and rule should flow from the government against the people.
In truth, it should be the other way around as intended by the Founders. Our representatives should be volunteering to serve us, not their political careers.
And thank you Babs, appreciate it.
Yes, small town mayors do not get paid. City councilmen don’t get paid. Where does the line begin? I believe my county commissioners get expenses, maybe pay. I’ll ask today. I’m not opposed to paying Congress, as long as they’re putting in 40 hrs. a week, but I agree with the proposal that an hourly wage would suit them more. Some would never see a penny.
Remember when (well, no you’re too young) Pres. Kennedy was elected and tried NOT to draw a salary of any kind as President. The government forced him to draw one dollar annually. Wouldn’t it be nice in these troubled economic times if obama said hey, I’m making millions on my books, give me a dollar a year like the CEO’s I’ve forced to accept $1 a year. And maybe even cancel a few of those parties they’re holding regularly in the White House that we’re paying for.
lol. Sorry, Bones, you must have know this was going to happen. This is a conservative site. I especially, liked how Nate said,
“If that’s cool with you, then ignore these articles as they’re meant for people who think individual liberty is more important”
Which translates to, if you don’t agree than don’t say anything and, if I recall correctly, that attitude is what Nate hates about the idea of not being able to protest.
Gotta love the double standard.
Now back to the issue at hand. I just want to understand everyone. It is ok (as CG said…110% OK) for parents to force their kids to volunteer and I am assuming you all are ok if your high school requires some volunteering for graduation but if the city, state, or national governments asks us to volunteer that it is from the devil.
We have an evil government that wants us to volunteer…. We must live in the worse country on this earth! How dare they ask me to volunteer my time. If i wanted to give to others than I would just do it on my own…Insert baby crying here.
Your talking to space JD.bones and another poster just throw the grenades to see what they can hit and then run.They’ll return when the smoke clears to throw another one.
But by reading your last paragraph you have the tactic of evading facts and throwing grenades down pat yourself.
JD, I’m not seeing a point to your post, only sarcasm. Is there one?
lol. We all keep grenades on us… This was more of a flash bang.
In all seriousness, I don’t think the Mandatory volunteer is something that is going to pass. I see Obama going with the route of the 4000 dollar carrot toward college as a way to get the goal of 250,000 volunteers involved in the communities.
None the less, I don’t like the amendment to the bill that says you can’t protest. I also don’t see this amendment as making it past the senate. It will probably be scratched in the Senate version and then go back to the house for a vote.
I also, don’t know why you are blaming Obama for this, either. From what I can tell, Obama did not write this amendment or bill. This comes from the house…and I am not suggesting that Obama didn’t ask for legislation like this but I think we are putting to much blame on the president when this is a piece of legislation and the problem of congress.
We all know how this works. It passes from the house to the senate. The senate adds their changes and votes. It then goes back to the house and back and forth. Only when there is a final bill agreed upon by both houses, is it put on the desk of the president.
JD, we put it on obama because it’s his baby.
http://www.whitehouse.gov.....a/service/
jd
You love to paraphase a person and come up with a conclusion
“Gotta love the double standard”.
What Balls
Babs, babs, babs,
You know better than that. Again, there is no doubt that Obama is putting pressure on Congress and this bill is what the house has produced.
Again, I am not saying you all don’t have a point but rather that this is why there are two houses in congress. This is the first of multiple volleys that the bill will go through and it will not end with this version of the bill.
Still, I don’t really care. Blame Obama if you want.
I think this bill is too early in it’s conception to really fear it. I will wait to see how the senate changes it before I get too worked up.
Example being that
Point 1 : I don’t think the amendment of anti-protest will make it.
Point 2 : the forced volunteer is not even included in the bill. It is just asking the question. I don’t see this getting tacked on to it anyway. Since, i believe Obama is looking to tap college students with the tuition re-embarrassment program.
ALSO,
Obama is talking live with the internet questions…
http://www.whitehouse.gov.....questions/
No, more like if you can’t grasp the basic concept of personal liberty and limited government then you won’t understand the protest to forced government volunteerism. No double standard, just concepts that most people can understand.
See? Very easy to grasp, or so I thought.
This is laughable:
“How dare they ask me to volunteer my time.”
That’s the point JD, they won’t be asking, they’ll be forcing. Again, please try to grasp the difference there if you can, and I know it may be difficult with your Obama voter blinders on.
So when do we protest? When it’s being signed by Obama? Things like this need to be killed before they get traction in any form. As in telling the legislators “Don’t even think about it!”.
Once again, don’t make me quote “First they came..” to point out that we need to stand up now while we have the opportunity to before things like this are passed.
This is Obama’s agenda which many ultra-liberal Democrats share, they believe everything stems from the government, not the individual.
I agree with Nate, you’re in denial, JD. The bill has 37 co-sponsors, that’s a lot.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi.....1:H.R.1388:
Let me tell you what I think of this part:
“Makes anyone 55 years of age or older eligible as Senior Corps volunteers.”
I’ll be 55 in September. I’ve volunteered all my life. At 55, nobody’s going to tell me what to volunteer for anymore. After a lifetime of putting everyone else first, I now put my aging mother, my grandchildren, and myself first. I’ve done my time and obama and congress can stick it where the sun don’t shine.
I’ve watched the “townhall” meeting with questions on the TV, actually recognizing some of the questions from the website. I watched with an open mind, and it took all of 2 questions to see that the goal is not to be accountable to citizens, but to use their questions to further his spending and socialization programs. So I turned it off. Nothing new is being said, nothing honest is being said.
JD…….According to the tape you submitted the President states it will be health care passage which has a lot to do with the budget.Using that logic why is it that Europe has had nationalized health care for years now and they are facing the same financial crisis we are facing?
Next during a speech at UCLA in early February of this year Michelle Obama stated “He’s going to demand you put down your division,your cynicism.That you come out of your isolation.Barack will require you to work”
Also why do you always try to shut down a discussion by saying “Still I really don’t care”?
JD……Your coffee house patriot friends bones and Kendale seem to have absconded from covering your back. Instead of trying to defend Obamas EVERY policy by yourself why not admit you have second thoughts or doubts about them instead of answering “I’ll wait and see” or “Still I really don’t care.” Your feeling of Obama being stigmatized and misconstrued by members of this site and by your role playing of Gen.Custer in his support is getting tiring. I personally don’t get any enjoyment from this constant one sided shadow boxing and taking scalps.I’m not asking you to follow apostasy or give up your deification of government no more than I will give up my conservatism.Instead of frittering away my time with the kabuki club I’m going to give more time to ACTUALLY closing the entrance ramp to the road to serfdom.
You will still hear from me from time to time.
DD, First, I agree with Nate that there is nothing wrong with creating attention to a problem. However, to be honest, it would not bother me if there was a requirement for our youth to participate as volunteers. Again, I don’t see this happening though so for that reason you are not going to see me get worked up.
On the other point of not being able to protest when you enlist in these select organizations… I am waiting to see what the senate does with the bill. What is wrong with that? I am not telling you, Nate, babs, and CG can’t petition, camp out, and fight the house’s bill.
Also, DD, I concede points to you guys from time to time which is much more that I get from you. Hell, If I disagree with Nate, I am told that is because I don’t don’t believe in personal liberty. Which is a joke.
I have no problem that you all don’t agree with me. I think the most arrogant thing is when the people who don’t agree call me or others idiots.
As for you all blaming the world on Obama… Well, i can relate. I though Bush was making the sky fall when he was in office. So I do feel for you and can understand.
I’ll tell you why I’m not in here bickering with you guys, DD. I don’t really see the point, how many of these threads have been productive for anyone? They’re not productive, just time consuming and maddening.
Just since I posted this morning I there’s been enough arguing and insulting to keep me occupied for hours trading responses. I don’t have the energy, I’m too exhausted from all my grenade-throwing, tap-dancing, moon-walking ways (as you refer to them).
Nate thinks my disagreement must come from a disdain for personal liberties, and that I want to lead the country toward socialism. Either that or I’m too stupid to differentiate between some key things. Fair enough, my comments were inflammatory too.
But productive discussion? that’s not going on in here, nor is it likely to. So tell JD you’ve got him outnumbered and surrounded if you want. I’m sure he’ll come out with his hands up.
Naw, Bones, I am going to come out with my pants down. That will really throw them off. lol.
In all seriousness, I understand why they are so upset. They have had their way for the past 8 years and although Bush spent trillions on his War (and did nothing for the budget) they enjoyed 8 years of power.
It hurts to lose power and it is humbling.
bones
Cut the inflammatory. Unlikely it will thrown at you.
Be productive, might get that thrown at you
bones, no one is hear to bicker. If you find the discussions nonproductive, I would suggest it is because your mind is closed to discussion. It probably is, since I rarely see you discuss an issue – only throw barbs and sarcasm. I assume that’s your purpose here.
When you want to join the grownups, join.
By grownup talk do you mean stuff like “maybe this is obama’s way of punishing us for our forefathers actions. Making us all slaves.”
Funny thing about that remark, it only makes sense if you assume all Americans are white. Surely you didn’t mean that Obama is trying to punish blacks, hispanics, asians, ect for the deeds of their forefathers?
Don’t worry babs, I don’t think you’re a biggot, I just think you’re real white
Thanks for throwing more insults out to illustrate the futility of my point about the futility of productive discussion. Pardon me while I work on that growing up thing
Yeah, bones, I do mean “stuff” like that. Where have you been lately? The issue has been a big one nationally, and internationally. And bones, I don’t care if you think I’m a bigot or racist or white or purple. The president and his attorney general says we should have an open and honest disucssion on race. Can’t you do that?
Now, would you like me to make you a list of all of your comments while you work on that growing up thing?
You’re welcome to take up all the comments I’ve made here and load your guns with ‘em. That’s just fine by me. But doesn’t it illustrate my point that we can’t even have a productive discussion about having future productive discussions?
This is exactly the sort of futile bickering that I’m talking about. And I’m sure you’d put this all on me, but your comment was clearly NOT an example of an open and honest discussion about race. Now get back to your adult conversations, this kid’s going to recess.
bones
I don’t agree with you often’ but from experience I know Babs ibsults. Without insults being thrown at her.
I never insult anyone intentionally Bill. Unless it’s a reaction.
Babs
You do not wish to check
“Nearly 50 House Dems Preparing to”
Babs Mar 5th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Sure, anything obama or any of his administration says on any given day affects the market. So does earnings reports, jobless figures, and a whole host of other things. In fact, it doesn’t even take news from anywhere to move the market on any given day. The market is nothing if not fickle.
Sure, obama said we might not recover if we don’t spend all this money. So do a lot of democrats. But saying it loud don’t make it so.
I’m not going there on links and “proof”. I would have thought you knew the history of the market without links if you’ve been investing as long as you say you have. So I don’t know what you’re asking for there, and I’ll stay out of it.
Babs said
“Now, would you like me to make you a list of all of your comments while you work on that growing up thing?”
DDMao said he will come back once in awhille yestersay. The bickering bothered me today.
When you do your list on bones, add list on me. jd, DDMao, and yourself. You might not want to post the results. Maybe it will open YOUR EYES. If it continues I will post the lists.
Can’t you answer bones and jd without returning insults ? Your ” I never insult anyone intentionally Bill. Unless it’s a reaction” is great answer for me. For I own one hat. You own 2 hats at this site. Your second hat got tarnished by your first.
“One bad apple spoils the bunch”
Proverb quotes
Spoils quicker when apple is in authority and reacts causing more spoiling.
Babs
“I never insult anyone intentionally Bill. Unless it’s a reaction”.
You did here:
Babs Mar 26th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
“GOP Finally Finds Voice in”
Senate passes Serve America Act, the Kennedy-Hatch
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_12003930
Serve Act will be in the house as early as Monday for a vote.
http://www.opencongress.o.....-s277/text
Wait… a thought just occurred to me and yes it was painful. I don’t get many of them.
Isn’t the reason why some of you have been buying automatic guns, for this reason. I think CG said it was to stand up for against our government. How can the government force you to give if you have your trusty AR-15 at your side?
I think you all should take up your 2nd amendment rights and go to the streets with your guns and loads of ammo screaming, “Hell no, we won’t volunteer!…you can’t make us volunteer!… Down with Peace corps, Down with Americorps!”
Just saying if they make it mandatory. Which they won’t but if they did…
JD, I think that’s the purpose of all the Tea Parties being held in all states all across the country – to stand up to the government and make their voice heard. Unfortunately, obama will never address them.
funny that a black president wants to enslave people.
in addition, some of us, including my wonderful wife, volunteer in the true sense of the word – my wife takes care me -a schizophrenic man. Now, Obama wants her to do more for no pay? She is already being taken for a ride by the government who doesn’t “allow” her to save over $3,000, or I won’t get my Medicaid and my meds. They won’t “allow” her to have life insurance over $1500. Let me ask this: She, an American citizen, taking care of me, someone know one else in the world would take of, she, is financially HURT by the government – and she’s worse off than an illegal AND are illegals going to have to work as slaves?
This country is sick to the core and Obama is out of his mind.
Jose, Obama is not making anyone work the volunteer organizations. This is not mandatory. You can read the links above on both the senate and the House bills.
Neither of them are making it a requirement. however, the House bill does as for investigation to see if it would help bring youths from all back grounds together if they asked High school\college students to do so.
Again, This is not a mandate and it would be hard pressed to make anyone do it. Hell, we couldn’t even draft people for the military without people protesting. The same would happen if we drafted for volunteer work.
Your wife will not be forced to volunteer.