Government Readies Youth Corps To Take On Vets
-
Ballpeen, I want to give you one last try on this. Legacy was similarly concerned about this quote, so I posted the whole speech and showed how its meaning was completely taken out of context (by loons) and that what he's talking about is really nothing new, and certainly nothing resembling the Hitler youth or Nazi brownshirts, and just how deranged you'd have to be to think such a thing. And Leg, much to his credit, said, "Oh, okay. That's not what he meant. I feel better." He actually changed his mind when presented with new information. If only some people in here could learn that same lesson. Maybe Leg could teach a class.
Take a look at the speech again, and tell me what you think is scary about ...volunteering:
"Today, AmeriCorps -- our nation's network of local, state, and national service programs -- has 75,000 slots. And I know firsthand the quality of these programs. My wife, Michelle, once left her job at a law firm and at City Hall to be a founding director of an AmeriCorps program in Chicago that trains young people for careers in public service. And these programs invest Americans in their communities and their country. They tap America's greatest resource -- our citizens.
And that's why as president, I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their efforts connected to a common purpose. People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem -- they are the answer.
So we are going to send -- we're going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We'll call on Americans to join an Energy Corps to conduct renewable energy and environmental cleanup projects in their neighborhoods all across the country. We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, to be there for our military families. And we're going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered, and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy.
We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
We need to use technology to connect people to service. We'll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where Americans can browse opportunities to volunteer. You'll be able to search by category, time commitment, and skill sets; you'll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities. This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda, and make their own change from the bottom up."
Ballpeen, I want to give you one last try on this.
Gee, thanks.....or what??
I have no problem with people helping others.
It's that whole part about have a civilian corp. as well equipped as the military.
But later on after a quick skim I noticed people saying half brained posters etc.
Maybe you and Leg need to be concerned with quotes like that.
Off for something important...golf.
-
Well dan, atleast we know who all the Haters are.
Whats next? Find common ground, hold hands, sing camp songs, bake some cookies and drink some milk? or do they prefer kool-Aid?
Goes to show how your post on the sticky was even seen, I looked but there was so much jibba jabba i must of missed it.
Regardless, I hold no grudges over what anyone says, they are yours and mine good neighbors. they just need to crawl out from underneath the rock with the big "O" on it.
-
It's that whole part about have a civilian corp. as well equipped as the military. BAllpeen
****************************
As well equipped as the military, Heck.
Now, what equipment does the military have, Heck?
National security force.
National security force and equipped as the military, Heck.
Answer the question, stop dodging and indulging in personal attacks.
You really don't think anyone who disagrees with you can read? Really?
Perhaps you would like to try some legit conversation on what's said,
Lord knows you dance around issues and divert attention all too often to
what you think you CAN defend. You should stop that.
-
It's that whole part about have a civilian corp. as well equipped as the military. BAllpeen
****************************
As well equipped as the military, Heck.
Now, what equipment does the military have, Heck?
National security force.
National security force and equipped as the military, Heck.
Answer the question, stop dodging and indulging in personal attacks.
You really don't think anyone who disagrees with you can read? Really?
Perhaps you would like to try some legit conversation on what's said,
Lord knows you dance around issues and divert attention all too often to
what you think you CAN defend. You should stop that.
-
Cal, for one thing, he doesn't say "well-equipped." You just keep making that part up. So does ballpeen. And then you quote ballpeen, instead of the transcript. Like I said, you should stop doing that.
Here's the actual quote: "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
You're wasting your time on this one. He's simply saying we should fund the instruments of soft power with the same intent as we do the military. He's not even saying they should be equally funded. He's saying they should be "just as well-funded", as in fully or close to fully funded, like the military is.
And yes, I'm doubting your ability to comprehend what you read.
Are you still contending that Obama is proposing to arm a civilian defense corps and make them as powerful as the military? Is that what you think this speech means?
You should be able to see that you're wrong on this one by now, but I'm not holding my breath.
ballpeen, can you see that you were wrong on this one?
-
Cal, for one thing, he doesn't say "well-equipped." You just keep making that part up. So does ballpeen. And then you quote ballpeen, instead of the transcript. Like I said, you should stop doing that.
Here's the actual quote: "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
You're wasting your time on this one. He's simply saying we should fund the instruments of soft power with the same intent as we do the military. He's not even saying they should be equally funded. He's saying they should be "just as well-funded", as in fully or close to fully funded, like the military is.
And yes, I'm doubting your ability to comprehend what you read.
Are you still contending that Obama is proposing to arm a civilian defense corps and make them as powerful as the military? Is that what you think this speech means?
You should be able to see that you're wrong on this one by now, but I'm not holding my breath.
ballpeen, can you see that you were wrong on this one?
Cal, for one thing, he doesn't say well-equipped. You just keep making that part up. Like I said, you should stop doing that.
"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
You're wasting your time on this one. He's simply saying we should fund the instruments of soft power with the same intent as we do the military. He's not even saying they should be equally funded. He's saying they should be "just as well-funded", as in fully or close to fully funded, like the military is.
And yes, I'm doubting your ability to comprehend what you read.
Are you still contending that Obama is proposing to arm a civilian defense corps and make them as powerful as the military? Is that what you think this speech means?
You should be able to see that you're wrong on this one by now, but I'm not holding my breath.
ballpeen, can you see that you were wrong on this one?
No
I do admit the word equipped wasn't in the speech....so, here i copy again
We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
Just as powerful...what does he mean here....just as powerful? When I think of the military I thing of guns and bombs
Just as strong.....it goes to the above. Had the President mentioned it only once, powerful or strong, I might be able to see how he was using it in a comparative ideological manner. Twice seems to indicate two meanings.
Just as well funded?? Where is that money going to come from? The military budget is pretty darn big.
At any rate, my intent isn't to tick people off and it seems I do when I express a opinion around here, so I think it is best to just stick to a football board for a while. At least there I am not called half brained, a hick, a member of the KKK, hillbilly etc. etc.
I have better things to do than read people's drivel.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
Here's an idea of what he means by being as well-funded as the military, ballpeen:
The Peace Corps budget is $340-million. In his 2010 budget, Obama wants to increase that by 10% to $373.4 million.
That's all he means. He's talking about fully funding priorities.
Or, as you allege, you can take this to mean that he really wants to outfit groups like the Peace Corps with F-18s, Predator drones, and Hummers with 50-caliber machine guns mounted on top, just like the military. That way he can have his own military that's ready and willing to impose his vision of a totalitarian state.
Your choice.
Honestly, fellas. Can we get real? You don't have to be a f'cking idiot all of your life.
-
But those are the budget numbers Obama wants you to see.
And as we all know, the real budget is written on the back of Obama's birth certificate. In invisible ink. That only the NWO/Illuminati/Gang of 14 can read.
-
The master stroke really is arming the Peace Corps, isn't it? Because it's got the word "Peace" in the title. No one will see that coming. And then - BAM! - we've got your guns and your churches.
-
Alinskyites are good at doing stuff like that. You can read all about it in Human Events.
-
And, unlike Legacy, who mentioned his concern and then quickly realized there was no reason for concern once he saw the text of the speech, you've got three guys who still contend that this excerpt means that Obama is going to arm the young people of Americorps just like he does the military, and we're on our way to totalitarian-inspired youth groups. And they'll even make up parts of the speech to prove it!
-
Cal, for one thing, he doesn't say well-equipped. You just keep making that part up. Like I said, you should stop doing that.
"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
You're wasting your time on this one. He's simply saying we should fund the instruments of soft power with the same intent as we do the military. He's not even saying they should be equally funded. He's saying they should be "just as well-funded", as in fully or close to fully funded, like the military is.
And yes, I'm doubting your ability to comprehend what you read.
Are you still contending that Obama is proposing to arm a civilian defense corps and make them as powerful as the military? Is that what you think this speech means?
You should be able to see that you're wrong on this one by now, but I'm not holding my breath.
ballpeen, can you see that you were wrong on this one?
No
I do admit the word equipped wasn't in the speech....so, here i copy again
We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
Just as powerful...what does he mean here....just as powerful? When I think of the military I thing of guns and bombs
Just as strong.....it goes to the above. Had the President mentioned it only once, powerful or strong, I might be able to see how he was using it in a comparative ideological manner. Twice seems to indicate two meanings.
Just as well funded?? Where is that money going to come from? The military budget is pretty darn big.
At any rate, my intent isn't to tick people off and it seems I do when I express a opinion around here, so I think it is best to just stick to a football board for a while. At least there I am not called half brained, a hick, a member of the KKK, hillbilly etc. etc.
I have better things to do than read people's drivel.
No
I do admit the word equipped wasn't in the speech....so, here i copy again
We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
Just as powerful...what does he mean here....just as powerful? When I think of the military I thing of guns and bombs
Just as strong.....it goes to the above. Had the President mentioned it only once, powerful or strong, I might be able to see how he was using it in a comparative ideological manner. Twice seems to indicate two meanings.
Just as well funded?? Where is that money going to come from? The military budget is pretty darn big.
At any rate, my intent isn't to tick people off and it seems I do when I express a opinion around here, so I think it is best to just stick to a football board for a while. At least there I am not called half brained, a hick, a member of the KKK, hillbilly etc. etc.
I have better things to do than read people's drivel.
your opinion is appreciated sorry you have been ridiculed for speaking up, but thats the way they do it around here if it isn't a liberal fairy tale then use get shouted at by the board gastopo
for all of those who dont believe what the purpose of Obama's statements are, here you go they have allready started the training program.
-
Seriously. That's a story on a creepy outfit that's aligned with the Boy Scouts of America. How does this have anything to do with what we're talking about?
So after making up a quote and attributing it to Obama, now we've moved on to saying that groups unaffiliated with the government are under Obama's direct control - watch out!
Really, you should stop making things up. But look who I'm talking to - Captain Tinfoil.
It's all true, T! We're coming for you!!
...One of us. One of us. One of us.
-
Seriously. That's a story on a creepy outfit that's aligned with the Boy Scouts of America. How does this have anything to do with what we're talking about?
So after making up a quote and attributing it to Obama, now we've moved on to saying that groups unaffiliated with the government are under Obama's direct control - watch out!
Really, you should stop making things up. But look who I'm talking to - Captain Tinfoil.
It's all true, T! We're coming for you!!
...One of us. One of us. One of us.
...One of us. One of us. One of us.
It's been awhile since this was last posted.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login