Public Service Academy??

WHY?? When numbers, statistics and published opinions all supporting one point of view are used in a post it is serious and intelligent discussion but when a personal view, opinion or bias is expressed its counterproductive and the thread should be shut down WHY?? Maybe only computers should debate things that way silly human emotions won't screw things up. Thats my rant for the day. Thank You for your time.
 
Not to re-inforce Z, but very close.

There IS a special track for USPSA Grads. They will have a Priority- non-compete code for Government jobs. They will go to the head of the line, and in some cases not require an interview for GS positions. The funny thing is, they don't have to take them. They can get the education and never work for the Government again. Or, have head-of-the-line priveleges. And if you read the outline, that is OK. Almost anything will count toward serving your country, so they can work in the private sector and have it somehow count. Z often jests, but in his sarcasm he stumbles into the truth (again and again).

One of the justifications used? 80% of students aged 16-22 years old said they thought a free 4 year school for public service with no requirement for military service or payback was a great idea and they would be interested in applying! THAT counts towards it being a viable idea. There are more examples, but they start to sound like I am making them up.
Cheers!
 
The US PSA was actually founded by two Teach for America Alumni in the wake of Hurricane Katrina frustrated by the ineptitude of public officials.

One of these guys came in spoke in a classroom here last Spring. I attended. He avoided my every question and really never answered any question anyone posed (whether cadet or Col) with a straight answer. I was disappointed and any support I might have thrown for a USPSA was lost on this self-taught bureaucrat. Disappointing.
 
Go back and listen to the whole speech, and put the clip in context. He was talking about expanding the Peace Corps, AmeriCorps, and foreign service, not some sinister civilian police force.

No, you're wrong Steve and no need to make is sound as if I'm dreaming up some convoluted conspiracy theory either...lol, the speech doesn't need to be analyzed, Barry was quite clear, it (CDS statement) stands on it's own as to his intentions. BTW, the Peace Corps, Acorn and Foreign Services don't quite fill the description of 'Civillian Defence System'...lol
And, where better to legitimise a Civilian Defense System than filling it's ranks with it's very own Service Academy! I've looked at the list of backers....biased to say the least!
 
Didn't say ACORN had anythign to do with it. AmeriCorps.

Go read or watch the damn speech. It's really not hard. He's talking about the role of various civilian organizations in supporting national security needs. It's pretty clear.
 
Didn't say ACORN had anythign to do with it. AmeriCorps.

Go read or watch the damn speech. It's really not hard. He's talking about the role of various civilian organizations in supporting national security needs. It's pretty clear.

I added the Acorn so relax, I thought I'd add some levity :smile:
But, I'm not going to listen to the speech again, I've seen it about 3 times (the whole thing too!) and it's as I said, he said and I quote "a Civilian Defense System as strong as the military and as well funded" That means: Civil Defense System as strong as the military and as well funded.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s

For those that missed it, that's Barry's speech on how "We can't rely only on the Military anymore, we need a "Civilian Defense System"
So what is he saying? The Military has failed in our Security and we need to start another form of security in America? Maybe the Public Service Academy to take over for the failed Military?
 
Didn't say ACORN had anythign to do with it. AmeriCorps.

Go read or watch the damn speech. It's really not hard. He's talking about the role of various civilian organizations in supporting national security needs. It's pretty clear.

I watched the speech all 26 Min's of it. I heard that Mr Obama (he) intends to enlarge the peace corp,americorp, foreign affairs and many other domestic programs. in addition he stated "We cannot continue to rely on only our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we set. We got to have a civilian national security force that is just as strong just as powerful just as well funded." That answers the questions of what pipeline graduates from the United Public Services Academy. What positions they will fill. and what branch of the military they will belong to. sure sounds expensive
 
As fun as it is banging my head against a wall, I'm pretty much done with this thread. He in no way says the military has failed. He acknowledges that national security takes more than just the military, and we chould increase funding to the previously mentioned organizations. How you can possibly understand his speech to mean he's going to create an American SA is beyond me, unless that's specifically what you're looking to hear. If you really want to keep playing this game, we can all go on youtube and find cherry picked quotes of politicians, but frankly, I've got better things to do.

For the record, I am very opposed to a "Public Service Academy;" it makes a lot more sense to make civilian public service more attractive to top college graduates, and a lot of their "plan" looks real weak and just plain silly.
 
As fun as it is banging my head against a wall, I'm pretty much done with this thread. He in no way says the military has failed. He acknowledges that national security takes more than just the military, and we chould increase funding to the previously mentioned organizations. How you can possibly understand his speech to mean he's going to create an American SA is beyond me, unless that's specifically what you're looking to hear. If you really want to keep playing this game, we can all go on youtube and find cherry picked quotes of politicians, but frankly, I've got better things to do.

For the record, I am very opposed to a "Public Service Academy;" it makes a lot more sense to make civilian public service more attractive to top college graduates, and a lot of their "plan" looks real weak and just plain silly.

Gee Steve, I certainly don't want you to bang your head on the wall! I'm sure a few will hear those words exactly like you, and claim.....again, I quote Barry: "We cannot continue to rely on only our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we set. " [/end Barry quote] to really mean in Barry speak: 'I think the Military has handled the current and past security problems of America yet, I'm starting a new form of security force not connected to the military or police, and we Americans will have a new and better bureaucracy helping us stay safe'

Before you leave the discussion, could you tell me why he can't just increase the military budget and task them to use resources in another way? I'll toss out a thought, because he doesn't trust the military and it's not doing it's job and needs a new security force to answer too.

Thanks Gunner1zues, where did you find the text of that speech?
 
Due to the possible of juntas and other unpleasentries, the legal use of military assets within the confines of the US boundary is extremely limited. Each use requires time consuming congressional approval.

It is proacvtive to consider alternatives to this hurdle. I am sure that if the POTUS attempted to change the law to allow more ease the mobilization of troops within our borders, the birthers would accuser him of attempting a coup.
 
Here's the text of this part of his speech. I've bolded the section where he plans on creating his paramilitary enforcement agency, in case it's tough to pick out. I tried to bold the part about where he doesn't trust the military, but it was tough to find.




There is no challenge greater than the defense of our nation and our values. The men and women of our military - from Fort Carson to Peterson Air Force base, from the Air Force Academy to the ROTC students here on campus - have signed up at a time when our troops face an ever-increasing load. Fighting a resurgent Taliban. Targeting al Qaeda. Persevering in the deserts and cities of Iraq. Training foreign militaries. Delivering humanitarian relief. In this young century, our military has answered when called, even as that call has come too often. Through their commitment, their capability, and their courage they have done us all proud.

But we need to ease the burden on our troops, while meeting the challenges of the 21st century. That's why I will call on a new generation of Americans to join our military, and complete the effort to increase our ground forces by 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 Marines.

A call to service must be backed by a sacred trust with anyone who puts on the uniform of the United States. A young person joining our military must know that we'll only send them into harm's way when we absolutely must. That we'll provide them with the equipment needed to complete their mission safely, and deployments that allow adequate time back home. They must see that we'll care for our military families while they're deployed, and that we're providing our veterans with the support, benefits, and opportunity that they have earned when they return home. That's what I've fought for on the Senate Veteran's Affairs Committee. That's what I'll promise as Commander in Chief.

Just as we must value and encourage military service across our society, we must honor and expand other opportunities to serve. Because the future of our nation depends on the soldier at Fort Carson, but it also depends on the teacher in East LA, the nurse in Appalachia, the after-school worker in New Orleans, the Peace Corps volunteer in Africa, and the Foreign Service officer in Indonesia. Americans have shown that they want to step up. But we're not keeping pace with the demand of those who want to serve, or leveraging that commitment to meet national challenges. FDR not only enlisted Americans to create employment, he targeted that service to build our infrastructure and conserve our environment. JFK not only called on a new generation, he made their service a bridge to the developing world, and a bright light of American values in the darkest days of the Cold War.

Today, AmeriCorps - our nation's network of local, state and national service programs - has 75,000 slots. I know firsthand the quality of these programs. My wife Michelle once left her job at a law firm to be the founding director of an AmeriCorps program in Chicago that trains young people for careers in public service. These programs invest Americans in their communities and their country. They tap America's greatest resource - our citizens.

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.

We'll 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. We'll enlist veterans to help other vets find jobs and support, and to be there for our military families. And we'll also 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 we have set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
 
Due to the possible of juntas and other unpleasentries, the legal use of military assets within the confines of the US boundary is extremely limited. Each use requires time consuming congressional approval.

It is proacvtive to consider alternatives to this hurdle. I am sure that if the POTUS attempted to change the law to allow more ease the mobilization of troops within our borders, the birthers would accuser him of attempting a coup.
 
With the exception of the U.S. Coast Guard, and at times, limited use of the National Guard.
 
It is proacvtive to consider alternatives to this hurdle. I am sure that if the POTUS attempted to change the law to allow more ease the mobilization of troops within our borders, the birthers would accuser him of attempting a coup.

Or might conclude that there is no need for a federal gustapo when we already have civilian federal, state and local authorities that can do so. There is NO NEED, and NO MONEY to increase that.
 
And don't even get me started on Peace Corps....talk about coruption...just look at the way that organization is run. Heck, as a past Peace corps member. I understand the reason for it, but it never panned out the way it was supposed to.
 
Due to the possible of juntas and other unpleasentries, the legal use of military assets within the confines of the US boundary is extremely limited. Each use requires time consuming congressional approval.

It is proacvtive to consider alternatives to this hurdle. I am sure that if the POTUS attempted to change the law to allow more ease the mobilization of troops within our borders, the birthers would accuser him of attempting a coup.

What are you talking about?
 
I think he is referring to Posse Comitatus.

LITS - you were in the Peace Corps?
 
I'm aware mombee's talking about Posse Comitatus. I'm not really sure why
 
I think he is referring to Posse Comitatus.

LITS - you were in the Peace Corps?



No, had a great conversation with a few people from my church who were though.

Not a huge fan of the "pre-Africa" training they received (I'm using "training" very loosly here).

Why JAM, were you in the Peace Corps? Oh, also, were you in the U.S. Armed Forces?
 
Back
Top