Civil Air Patrol will present colors at Obama town hall

[wingnut]

Civil Air Patrol will present colors at Obama town hall

BY ASHLEY HALL & FARIS TANYOS

March 20, 2008

http://www.kdrv.com/article.aspx?id=25366


MEDFORD, Ore. -- The Medford Civil Air Patrol Cadets will present the colors at the Barack Obama's Stand For Change Town Hall event Saturday.

One of the cadets, a 15-year-old, took the initiative to request the job of presenting the colors at tomorrows event. All the cadet's say they were surprised and excited when they were chosen for the role.

The Civil Air Patrol is a community-service group that also teaches teens about aerospace engineering, search and rescue, and military skills. About 25 kids aged 12 and 18 are involved in the local civil air patrol.



Oh gee

A cadet requested this and it was approved, the question

"is this considered a POLITICAL EVENT? if so would it appear that we are  (CAP) endorsing Senator  Barack Hussein Obama?

[KFreeman]

Wingnut,

I would say that it is absolutely a political event.

It will have the appearance of a political endorsement.

Someone is not thinking (or are they?).

Regards,
Ken

[wingnut]

From National
Knowledge bank.

Question:
Are CAP members allowed to participate in partisan political activities while in CAP uniform?

Answer
No. Wearing the CAP uniform may imply official sanction of the political activity.  See rules below for prohibitions on wearing the uniform during political activities, private employment, or furthering commercial interests.


See CAPM 39-1 CAP Uniform Manual  
Table 1-1. Wearing the Uniform
Do not wear the uniform when participating in activities such as public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies, or in any public demonstration not approved by the Air Force. Wearing the uniform may imply sanction of the cause for which the demonstration or activity is conducted.
Do not wear the uniform when furthering private employment or commercial interests, if official sponsorship might be inferred.
Do not wear the uniform when engaged in private employment.
Do not wear the uniform under any circumstance that would tend to bring discredit or reproach upon the uniform.

Also AFI 36-2903 DRESS AND PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF AIR FORCE PERSONNEL              
Table 1.3. Wearing the Uniform (see notes).
Do not wear the uniform when furthering political activities, private employment, or commercial interests.

I support the Democratic process, But this stunt could Hurt CAP more than Help us!! I say 2b the Cadet squadron Commander, and to the Cadets; to the Gulag!

I await your Intelligent reply

[♠SARKID♠]

Ooh, uniformed cadets at a political rally... I sense a disturbance in the force.

[wingnut]

Yes Glasshoppa

You will see nothing, you will say nothing, you will hear nothing

The Darkside


Vader Fan
mitchell 1971

[NIN]

IIRC, didn't CAP cadets present the colors at the RNC a bunch of years ago?

[wingnut]

Oh yes, but that was not a political event. Besides they won, so it is Ok if the party wins??

my point is it should ever be ALLOWED

[LtCol White]

Oh yes, but that was not a political event. Besides they won, so it is Ok if the party wins??

my point is it should ever be ALLOWED

I have to agree. Its not appropriate and violates not only CAP Regulation but USAF Regulation as well.

I would hope that someone who knows personnel at this unit will advise them not to do this.

[CAP_truth]

I wonder if the wing commander approved this type of activity.

[mikeylikey]

Didn't the DoD just come out and say military members can not be seen at political events standing behind any the candidates? 

As far as CAP goes, this should be scrubbed.  It gives the impression that the local unit backs Obama.

[Hawk200]

Biggest problem is that it's probably too late now.

[CAP_truth]

I see a squadron commanders job becoming available in the very near future.

[Pylon]

More importantly - Hey look!  We're a community service group (watch out Americorps) who teaches teens aerospace engineering (step aside, Embry Riddle!) and search and rescue (must've missed that section in the CAPR 52-16)...

[DNall]

I guess when you can't get the real military to support you, call CAP! 

Oh crap, was that a political statement? Oh, never mind, I'm not in uniform.

[NIN]

The college I work at, by sheer dint of our location in the "first in the nation" primary state and a really, really well connected political science faculty member, has a LOT of the candidates come thru for events and townhalls in the run up to the primary.  John Edwards was our commencement speaker last year, for example.

Nearly a year ago (April 24, 07) Rudy Giuliani  held a "Townhall" at our campus that was VERY well attended.



(I'm way in the back, behind the crowd in the doorway under the Rudy banner, checking out the circus. My boss is the guy in the front row under the left side of the American flag..)

Note the fellows in the front row?  There were 3-4 guys there in uniform.  At least one was a student who is also a reservist.

During the Q&A period, an ACU-clad Army National Guard E-7 standing about 3 ft in front of where I was managed to get the microphone.  He started his question with the statement "I'm very honored to be addressing my next commander-in-chief.." with every TV camera and still photographer's lens pointed right directed at HIM, recording his every word.

I just shook my head.

Afterwards, I stopped him in the hallway of the student center, and thats when I noticed he was an E-7.  (the kid who is our student, he's an E-2.  I could almost accept an E-2 blowing this one. But an E-7?)

"Excuse me, Sergeant, but did the DoD recently relax the rules about uniformed service members participating in political events?"

He looked at me and put haircut and bearing together.  "Uhhhh, I, uh, I'm not aware of any such restriction... Sir.."

"Sergeant, I expect that response out of a PV2, but you're going to tell me that you, a full-time recruiter for the Army National Guard, a senior NCO who's been to PLDC, BNCOC and ANCOC, doesn't know the DoD-wide rules about this?"

"Uh, no sir, I didn't know there was any kind of a rule about this."

"Hey, sergeant,  I'm not here to bust your chops. Honest. But before CNN puts your wonderfully put statement into heavy rotation this afternoon, you might want to give your sergeant major a heads up, just in case.  Otherwise, some bored colonel down at the Pentagon is going to be flipping channels, catch that video, and you'll be wondering why you're re-ordering business cards that say 'Staff Sergeant' on them..."

He took off for his recruiting post, and I never did see that video (although CSPAN might have had it for all I know), but I was utterly dumbfounded that an E-7 would whip out that kind of a dipstick, mealy-mouthed response and not know the rules.  Some sham-shield, sure. I was one, I know the drill.  But an E-7?

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I had the whole "thou shalt not wear the uniform to..." thing drilled into my noggin' about 150,000 times WIWAC, and again as a young soldier in BCT.   So either they're not teaching the basics in basic training these days, or someone just got a little froggy.

[Maj Ballard]

Isn't "mynetdude" from this forum in that squadron?

[Major Carrales]

My initial reaction was...

"If they are there to present the colors, and do nothing in the way of participating in the activities otherwise (such as speaking in endorsement of a candidate or the like) I think it would be more of a matter.

Posting the colors at a public gathering...OK in my book."

But, after two years in command of a Squadron, my final judgement is...

"It is better to err on the side of good judgement and, rather than dance around the regulation, refrain from controversy by not posting the colors this occasion."

However, if Mr Obama should win, there is no issue for posting the Colors for an elected official.  I would hold the same for a John McCain or Hillary Clinton rally.

[LtCol White]

Biggest problem is that it's probably too late now.

Its never too late. "I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that we weren't allowed do this when we set it up."

[Maj Ballard]

It's too late because the meeting has already occurred.

[LtCol White]

It's too late because the meeting has already occurred.

Well, in that case I have to agree with you. LOL

[Gunner C]

Hanging offense!

GC

[Short Field]

In a lot of respects, just providing a color guard to present the flag seems like a good idea.  Sort of the "no such thing as bad press" rule.

But the more I think about it, the more it seems too political and too much of a bad idea. 

Gunner - you need to sit down for this - but I have to absolutely agree with you. 

There also ought to be some military commanders out there tracking down the folks showing up in uniforms at political rallies...

[mikeylikey]

There also ought to be some military commanders out there tracking down the folks showing up in uniforms at political rallies...

Trust me there are!

[CASH172]

I think we oughta get some for CAP too after this. 

[Short Field]

In the next election, I have to follow the advice Jack Aubrey gave in the movie "Master and Commander":  Always choose the lesser of two weevils.   

[IceNine]

In the next election, I have to follow the advice Jack Aubrey gave in the movie "Master and Commander":  Always choose the lesser of two weevils.   

Tread lightly  politics are not usually calm or well recieved discussions

Plus you are starting a huge derail

[afgeo4]

Wingnut,

I would say that it is absolutely a political event.

It will have the appearance of a political endorsement.

Someone is not thinking (or are they?).

Regards,
Ken

Presenting colors at a speech made by a US Senator isn't quite a "political event" and certainly doesn't appear to be any sort of an endorsement. Senator McCain just spent a while visiting troops deployed in southwest asia and did speak about his endorsement and possible presidency. There were uniformed troops everywhere! What do you want them to do? Dissapear?

I believe that the DoD policy and CAP policy speak of participating in political rallies that are detrimental to the US, its security and its policies. A soldier has a right to support any candidate by US law. He/she simply can't say that the branch or the military does.

Quit bunching up your panties ladies. Presenting US colors at a function of the US government (which the election process is) is honorable and in no way endorses anyone or anything aside from the flag of the United States. People read into a lot of stuff and hey, they have the right to do so, but it doesn't make it smart.

[Gunner C]

Wingnut,

I would say that it is absolutely a political event.

It will have the appearance of a political endorsement.

Someone is not thinking (or are they?).

Regards,
Ken

Presenting colors at a speech made by a US Senator isn't quite a "political event" and certainly doesn't appear to be any sort of an endorsement.

I'd have to disagree.  Anything that the three remaining candidates do right now is political.  If it involves a camera and two people, it's political.  Cadets being used in such a venue is disturbing.

GC

[afgeo4]

Wingnut,

I would say that it is absolutely a political event.

It will have the appearance of a political endorsement.

Someone is not thinking (or are they?).

Regards,
Ken

Presenting colors at a speech made by a US Senator isn't quite a "political event" and certainly doesn't appear to be any sort of an endorsement.

I'd have to disagree.  Anything that the three remaining candidates do right now is political.  If it involves a camera and two people, it's political.  Cadets being used in such a venue is disturbing.

GC

Nothing personal, but don't you have something more serious to be disturbed about? Cadets properly presenting colors at a US Senator's speech? Really? That's your worst nightmare?

[Gunner C]

Wingnut,

I would say that it is absolutely a political event.

It will have the appearance of a political endorsement.

Someone is not thinking (or are they?).

Regards,
Ken

Presenting colors at a speech made by a US Senator isn't quite a "political event" and certainly doesn't appear to be any sort of an endorsement.

I'd have to disagree.  Anything that the three remaining candidates do right now is political.  If it involves a camera and two people, it's political.  Cadets being used in such a venue is disturbing.

GC

Nothing personal, but don't you have something more serious to be disturbed about? Cadets properly presenting colors at a US Senator's speech? Really? That's your worst nightmare?

Far from my worst nightmare.  But political stuff will eventually backfire, and that's the last thing we need.  We need to remain politically neutral.  At the very least, we could loose our tax exempt status.  BIG PROBLEM.

GC

[afgeo4]

Wingnut,

I would say that it is absolutely a political event.

It will have the appearance of a political endorsement.

Someone is not thinking (or are they?).

Regards,
Ken

Presenting colors at a speech made by a US Senator isn't quite a "political event" and certainly doesn't appear to be any sort of an endorsement.

I'd have to disagree.  Anything that the three remaining candidates do right now is political.  If it involves a camera and two people, it's political.  Cadets being used in such a venue is disturbing.

GC

Nothing personal, but don't you have something more serious to be disturbed about? Cadets properly presenting colors at a US Senator's speech? Really? That's your worst nightmare?

Far from my worst nightmare.  But political stuff will eventually backfire, and that's the last thing we need.  We need to remain politically neutral.  At the very least, we could loose our tax exempt status.  BIG PROBLEM.

GC

That would take an act of Congress, so don't worry.

[afgeo4]

By the way... where does it say that CAP personnel cannot participate in political events in uniform?

Someone please quote a reg or policy letter for me.

[Pylon]

That would take an act of Congress, so don't worry.

Tax-exempt status is neither determined, granted nor revoked by Congress.  The IRS determines it.   Since we qualify for tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3) of the IRS code, we have to be very limited in any political dealings to maintain that status.

Direct from an IRS web page on 501(c)(3) organizations (with my clarification in brackets, and my bolding):

"In addition, it [the 501(c)(3) organization] may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates."   

The same page also says "Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct."



To illustrate how important this status is, it is what allows us to accept donations and for the donor to deduct them on his/her taxes, it is what allows us CAP members to deduct our expenses (like dues, uniforms, mileage, participation costs, etc.), it is what allows us to receive many grants and other types of funding, it is what keeps CAP from paying tax on everything from vehicle and building purchases to a squadron buying paperclips at the local Staples.  It's a big deal.  CAP needs 501(c)(3) status to survive in our current form. 

[Gunner C]

That would take an act of Congress, so don't worry.

Tax-exempt status is neither determined, granted nor revoked by Congress.  The IRS determines it.   Since we qualify for tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3) of the IRS code, we have to be very limited in any political dealings to maintain that status.

Direct from an IRS web page on 501(c)(3) organizations (with my clarification in brackets, and my bolding):

"In addition, it [the 501(c)(3) organization] may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates."   

It also says "Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct."

I'm just sayin' . . .

Someone has some 'splainin' to do.

GC

[afgeo4]

That would take an act of Congress, so don't worry.

Tax-exempt status is neither determined, granted nor revoked by Congress.  The IRS determines it.   Since we qualify for tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3) of the IRS code, we have to be very limited in any political dealings to maintain that status.

Direct from an IRS web page on 501(c)(3) organizations (with my clarification in brackets, and my bolding):

"In addition, it [the 501(c)(3) organization] may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates."   

The same page also says "Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct."



To illustrate how important this status is, it is what allows us to accept donations and for the donor to deduct them on his/her taxes, it is what allows us CAP members to deduct our expenses (like dues, uniforms, mileage, participation costs, etc.), it is what allows us to receive many grants and other types of funding, it is what keeps CAP from paying tax on everything from vehicle and building purchases to a squadron buying paperclips at the local Staples.  It's a big deal.  CAP needs 501(c)(3) status to survive in our current form. 

Understood. However, is presenting the colors of the United States an action for or against a political candidate?

[Gunner C]

That would take an act of Congress, so don't worry.

Tax-exempt status is neither determined, granted nor revoked by Congress.  The IRS determines it.   Since we qualify for tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3) of the IRS code, we have to be very limited in any political dealings to maintain that status.

Direct from an IRS web page on 501(c)(3) organizations (with my clarification in brackets, and my bolding):

"In addition, it [the 501(c)(3) organization] may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates."   

The same page also says "Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct."



To illustrate how important this status is, it is what allows us to accept donations and for the donor to deduct them on his/her taxes, it is what allows us CAP members to deduct our expenses (like dues, uniforms, mileage, participation costs, etc.), it is what allows us to receive many grants and other types of funding, it is what keeps CAP from paying tax on everything from vehicle and building purchases to a squadron buying paperclips at the local Staples.  It's a big deal.  CAP needs 501(c)(3) status to survive in our current form. 

Understood. However, is presenting the colors of the United States an action for or against a political candidate?

It would make us a supporting agency at that function.  I don't think we could say "Heck, we don't support political functions" when we're playing a supporting role at political functions.

[♠SARKID♠]

Understood. However, is presenting the colors of the United States an action for or against a political candidate?

It's hard not to be seen in support of the candidate.  Unless you tape a big disclaimer to the backs of the cadets' uniforms you'd be hard pressed to show neutrality.  I don't think its a matter of presenting the colors or not, I think its a matter of just being there.  Unless you're carrying a torch or pitchfork, if you show up to a rally you're probably in support of it.

As for somebody putting the foot down on these guys, nationals reads this forum, its been in the news, I'm sure they know about it and are busy pounding out the cease & desist right now.

[wingnut]

By the way... where does it say that CAP personnel cannot participate in political events in uniform?

Someone please quote a reg or policy letter for me.

READ YOUR REGS DUDE

See CAPM 39-1 CAP Uniform Manual 
Table 1-1. Wearing the Uniform
Do not wear the uniform when participating in activities such as public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies, or in any public demonstration not approved by the Air Force. Wearing the uniform may imply sanction of the cause for which the demonstration or activity is conducted.Do not wear the uniform when furthering private employment or commercial interests, if official sponsorship might be inferred.
Do not wear the uniform when engaged in private employment.
Do not wear the uniform under any circumstance that would tend to bring discredit or reproach upon the uniform.

Also AFI 36-2903 DRESS AND PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF AIR FORCE PERSONNEL             
Table 1.3. Wearing the Uniform (see notes).
Do not wear the uniform when furthering political activities, private employment, or commercial interests.

IF YOU READ THE ARTICLE IT WAS THE CADET WHO MADE THE REQUEST, CADETS HAVE NO BUSINESS MAKING PUBLIC APPEARENCE ENGAGEMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE CIVIL AIR PATROL, AND ON A NATIONAL FORUM SUCH  AS THIS. WHAT"S NEXT? Carry the colors at a Nazi rally or how about the Michigan Militia, or the Minute Men on the Border. Obama is not appearing as a "SENATOR, but at a political rally. If this thing is allowed an Official petition to the IG and to the Air Force will follow, mark my word 'Heads will roll. The senior members head who runs that Cadet Squadron will be the first.

[mikeylikey]

Nothing personal, but don't you have something more serious to be disturbed about? Cadets properly presenting colors at a US Senator's speech? Really? That's your worst nightmare?

You have to stop thinking of Mr Obama as a US Senator now, and start thinking of him as the Democratic Parties Front Runner for President.  He may be a Senator, but unless he is doing something specifically in line with his Senatorial duties, he is a Presidential Candidate.  Plain and Simple. 

With the Unit supporting his political rally (and yes that is what it is, a Rally) it says "CAP supports Obama".

[CASH172]

Tax-exempt status is neither determined, granted nor revoked by Congress.  The IRS determines it.   Since we qualify for tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3) of the IRS code, we have to be very limited in any political dealings to maintain that status.

Direct from an IRS web page on 501(c)(3) organizations (with my clarification in brackets, and my bolding):

"In addition, it [the 501(c)(3) organization] may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates."   

The same page also says "Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct."

So when it says CAP can't lobby, what does Legislative Day count as?  What does CAP's Legislative Squadron count as?  To me those sound like huge lobbying functions to get CAP's name and purpose in the mind of legislators. 

[mikeylikey]

^ Last sentence in the quote two posts up says "restricted in how much..." it does not say prohibited.  PLUS we are chartered by the Congress, we are not some Pharmaceutical firm from California trying to get our deadly pain killers on the market.

[LtCol White]

Wingnut,

I would say that it is absolutely a political event.

It will have the appearance of a political endorsement.

Someone is not thinking (or are they?).



Regards,
Ken

Presenting colors at a speech made by a US Senator isn't quite a "political event" and certainly doesn't appear to be any sort of an endorsement.

I'd have to disagree.  Anything that the three remaining candidates do right now is political.  If it involves a camera and two people, it's political.  Cadets being used in such a venue is disturbing.

GC

Nothing personal, but don't you have something more serious to be disturbed about? Cadets properly presenting colors at a US Senator's speech? Really? That's your worst nightmare?

As a DCP, No I don't. If they shouldn't do it then they shouldn't do it. Our regulations prohibit it and so do USAF regulations. Its a violation and the responsibility for it falls on the senior members of their squadron rather than the cadets themselves.

[mynetdude]

Isn't "mynetdude" from this forum in that squadron?

No, I am not from anywhere.

[mikeylikey]

Isn't "mynetdude" from this forum in that squadron?

No, I am not from anywhere.

You are from Everywhere........

[wingnut]

Well todays the Day

Now we see if the Cadets have any ADULT SUPERVISION


If not

I will like them to come to my Tupperware Party and my local Communist party is having a rally in a park at 2pm.

I now will beat the dead horse. . .

[CASH172]

After a little research into into other news sources, it seems as if the meeting Senator Obama attended was technically a town hall meeting.  Even though it was a completely Obama campaign event, I'm thinking a person could argue it was technically a regular civic event. 

Also Retired AF Gen. Merrill "Tony" McPeak was present at this same meeting. 

[mynetdude]

Isn't "mynetdude" from this forum in that squadron?

No, I am not from anywhere.

You are from Everywhere........

Yes indeed.... 

[Tim Medeiros]

After a little research into into other news sources, it seems as if the meeting Senator Obama attended was technically a town hall meeting.  Even though it was a completely Obama campaign event, I'm thinking a person could argue it was technically a regular civic event. 

Also Retired AF Gen. Merrill "Tony" McPeak was present at this same meeting. 

Hes the campaign co-chair for Obama so of course he'd be there.

[pixelwonk]

I now will beat the dead horse. . .

No. No, you won't.