Walter Olson, at Overlawyered, expresses concern re: President-elect Obama's notions of compulsory national civilian service.
I hate to rain on the merry band of do-gooders' parade (actually, raining on it is working for me), perhaps we should fix what's wrong with the voluntary programs first?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
"Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by setting a goal that all middle school and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year and by developing a plan so that all college students who conduct 100 hours of community service receive a universal and fully refundable tax credit ensuring that the first $4,000 of their college education is completely free. 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." -- Change.gov
Compulsory?
Roch, did you actually READ Olson's post/other links before you began reciting the Obamagospel as it is now posted?
It's been changed: http://overlawyered.com/2008/11/community-service-yep-mandatory/
Other fact-checkers were on the case.
One of these days, I hope you can get past your blind hatred of me - for standing up to your blogger-bully tactics.
Still standing. Still here. And you cannot stand it.
Wait for it, folks. The next thing we can expect from our local fact-checker is a character or sanity-slam.
P.S. My original point still stands.
We don't need to develop any new service programs for young people until we fix what's wrong in existing ones.
It probably KILLS you that my story is more and more RELEVANT every day.
Moreover, it's been right under your nose for three years and you/your liberal citizen-journalist-blogger-buddies blew me off.
Mary,
Hey, can you and Roch call a truce? :-)
I personally like the idea of compulsory national service - as long as the rules are equal for everybody and such service is not a channel for liberal causes. My take is that the existing programs are hopelessly unfixable and maybe need just to die on the vine? That's kind of how I feel about our public education system, though we don't have enough options left for killing it.
Joel, thanks for dropping by.
I really don't see a "truce" with Roch/Ed/Sue/JR happening until my Mother reads the story of how a local Pediatrician was vindicated front page above the fold (of both the N&R and Courier Tribune) on a Sunday morning before she goes to church.
Remember that I was invited into the blogosphere by a newspaper editor . . . who promised new and wonderful things in local journalism . . . then did not deliver.
And our local blog aggregator/fact-checker makes JR look like my best friend.
One of the things that needs to CHANGE "right here in here in River City" is the way journalists and citizen-journalists conduct themselves and practice their craft. Based on the fact that local newspapers are barely hanging on by their fingernails, I'd say I'm not the only one who thinks so.
I respectfully disagree that the service programs in place are "unfixable". For instance, the problems I faced/still struggle with in state & federal service could be taken care of by simple enforcement of existing law - and/or some tweaking of state statutes that would protect whistle-blowing doctors/nurses - and young doctors in public service.
Fixing medical peer review is also a matter of tweaking a federal law that was written badly in the first place.
Tort reform would not be hard either - if the damned Congress were not run by lawyers.
Things are not "equal" now - a whole lot of people are getting something for nothing (and feeling entitled to it) while the rest of us work our buns off for what we have (and now have to worry about the government swooping in and taxing/taking more).
I am Joe The Plumber.
"Compulsory service" might work for me if those getting public assistance/not working were in line first.
Somehow, I don't see that happening.
I personally think public education is fixable too. But again, like medicine, the current problems with education are mired in a generation (or so) weaned on entitlement - demanding rights without owning up to responsibilites - along with a system that is not willing to pay those in the teaching profession what they are really worth.
I am biased. I got a (very good) education in the public schools. And Mama taught for over 30 years.
Mary,
I was jesting about you guys making up. I mean, I was kidding around.
The manner in which you describe the unlikelihood of real form happening in various existing institutions is why I say they are unfixable. Theoretically they are fixable, but it ain't going to happen.
I have no desire to subsidize loafers. Or have any kind of compulsory national service that is not 100% fair. The specter of some sort of Vietnam thing hangs over the idea like a dark cloud, where the well to do don't have to participate.
I do not thing our K-12 system serves our children well generally, especially the least academic. We are not preparing people for meaningful work in the real world in which we live.
So much to say...thanks for putting up with me.
Joel, your point about Vietnam is well taken. You are welcome here any time.
Roch, once again, when your "argument" is kicked to the curb, you revert to diversionary tactics like focusing on a typo.
[I suppose they could care less. But it would be very hard;)]
You are DETERMINED to take nothing instructive from the post - all you are interested in is "proving" your intellectual superiority (over a doctor) . . . and that is beyond sad . . . beyond pathetic. But I hope it was good for you.
This demonstrates the reason why I don't have a lot of hope that Democrats/"intellectuals" now in power are going to offer us anything really new or different. As Overlawyered/the links you did not read pointed out, they are already splitting hairs.
And there you have it, Joel. Somethings are just not going to happen.
Blogger hiccuped yesterday - and comments needing approval got mixed up in my Inbox.
This commment (meant for another thread) appeared in my Inbox as being meant for this thread:
["They could care less."
I guess that's better than they couldn't care less.]
I responded here, but then realized that when the comment actually published, it did so on the thread for which it was intended. I don't know what happened.
I apologize for the confusion. But it does not really change the sentiment.
"I really don't see a "truce" with Roch/Ed/Sue/JR happening until my Mother reads the story of how a local Pediatrician was vindicated front page above the fold (of both the N&R and Courier Tribune) on a Sunday morning before she goes to church."
That's reasonable. Hold a grudge against me for what doesn't appear in the News & Record.
It's very reasonable, Roch, given the treatment you've dished out in this blogosphere - towards someone who came to all of you for help in righting a wrong. All I was really asking for was some media attention on the case - something that might have been faciliated by a little good-ole-fashioned, HONEST citizen journalism & investigative jounalism (which is what you-all were peddling at the time).
Let me refresh your rather limited memory. Do you remember the "de-linking" from We101 (because I prefer to list with the GSO bloggers rather than Asheboro)? YOU did that. Nobody else. It was clearly designed to cut my traffic - and my exposure. That move, more than any other, showed your true colors and I lost what little respect I ever had for you as a blogger.
Once again, speaking of "grudges", let's cut to the chase. You hate my guts because I don't drink your particular brand of political Kool-aid. And for that reason, in your little "community" (which includes the aforementioned Cone/Polinsky/Robinson), I am someone to be ridiculed and sqaushed like a bug. Not very "progressive" or "inclusive" in my book, but there you go.
Moreover, it's killing you that your tactics of marginalization and ridicule have failed utterly to silence the more conservative voices in the larger blogging community (like Sam/Bubba/Joe) - if anything, it's made us madder and stronger and more inclined to use a Howitzer instead of a fly-swatter when you show up.
From where I am sitting - as a physician burned on the oh-so-ethical-watches of a bunch of Democrats - if anyone has demonstrated the concept of "situational ethics" it has been you and your merry band of liberally-oriented bloggers.
Moreover, if what you've been doing over the last few days is your best example of a gracious winner, this country is in for a rocky ride.
Now, if you have something to say about the actual content of this post - I'll continue to engage. But if all you have to offer is mean-sprited snark, don't bother.
"I personally like the idea of compulsory national service - as long as the rules are equal for everybody and such service is not a channel for liberal causes."
And as long as the "national service" doesn't turn into a partisan Goon Squad or para military Storm Trooper outfit.
Post a Comment