CAP Talk

While I am all for CAP participating in community events, posting the colors at a political rally seems a little bit beyond our scope.  Any comments from our friends in PA Wing?
http://www.kittanningpaper.com/2010/04/26/tea-party-held-along-the-banks/6404

oh noes... I won't say nothing cuz if you all remember what happened in ORWG a couple years ago... 'nuff said.

Uniform wear at political events is explicitly forbidden. (Unless the Air Force approves it, and the odds of that are virtually nil.)

I can see heads rolling for this.

I foresee many former members to come out of this.

Relieved not to read that a CAP chaplain offered the invocation in uniform ---- whew!!!

read 39-1 table 1-1 it TELLS you that you cannot wear the uniform at those kinds of events.

I've seen this happen myself first hand, too bad it still happens and has anybody learned from the previous events yet?

Here's my guess on what will happen:

Project Officer gets hands smacked severely.
Participants get counseled to not ever, ever, ever do that again, and the reasons.
A letter goes out to everyone in the food chain reminding folks why they aren't supposed to participate in political events.

I am wondering who approved this, though. Seems like it ought not be left just to the squadron commander.

Quote from: SarDragon on April 26, 2010, 08:24:43 PM
Here's my guess on what will happen:

Project Officer gets hands smacked severely.
Participants get counseled to not ever, ever, ever do that again, and the reasons.
A letter goes out to everyone in the food chain reminding folks why they aren't supposed to participate in political events.

I am wondering who approved this, though. Seems like it ought not be left just to the squadron commander.

IIRC sqdn CC approved the last one I still vividly remember, don't know what happened at the wing side or if they cared/knew.

This why some wing commanders tear their hair out.  ::)

The PAWG/CC finds out about this through a certain CT reader and, it is being taken care of as we write.  Ahh, the power of the internet.

Quote from: FW on April 26, 2010, 08:42:49 PM
This why some wing commanders tear their hair out.  ::)

The PAWG/CC finds out about this through a certain CT reader and, it is being taken care of as we write.  Ahh, the power of the internet.

That's exactly how I got into something pretty messy which shouldn't have been.

Ugh. The sorriest part about it is, especially if, the color guard participants did it because they were asked to do it and, although you would imagine they might think first ..

They could have been doing just the best they knew and with all the best intent. Heck, perhaps they even got mislead into it, that it wasn't anything political. But if you even heard the word "tea party", you have to pretty much live in a cave to not realize ..

Do they have caves in PA? Bat Cave, NC is .. well, maybe not, close.

Quote from: FW on April 26, 2010, 08:42:49 PM
This why some wing commanders tear their hair out.  ::)

The PAWG/CC finds out about this through a certain CT reader and, it is being taken care of as we write.  Ahh, the power of the internet.

I'm pretty sure I probably beat NHQ by only a few hours on this.  They seem to have the same sort of google and yahoo news alerts that I do (which is how they get a lot of content for VolunteerNow) and I'm sure they would have told someone in PA about it. 

Well if this has happened before I wish someone would get the word out to the masses.

My color guard did the Nevada Repulican Convention a few weeks back.  I guess I'm going to hell!   >:D

Well, according to 39-1...

Quotewhen 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.

I'm not really sure a party convention is in the same league as a demonstration.

I'd say there isn't much of a difference there.  After all, what are conventions but a bunch of partisan political speeches.

Quote from: raivo on April 26, 2010, 09:27:54 PM
Well, according to 39-1...

Quotewhen 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.

I'm not really sure a party convention is in the same league as a demonstration.

bold emphasis mine

its a political public speech, therefore the M39-1 prohibits it.

Quote from: lordmonar on April 26, 2010, 09:06:41 PM
Well if this has happened before I wish someone would get the word out to the masses.

My color guard did the Nevada Repulican Convention a few weeks back.  I guess I'm going to hell!   >:D

Sure seems that way don't it? I'm surprise nobody remembers the Obama townhall incident in Medford, OR

FWIW IMHO nobody to blame but overly regulated CAP, and FTW it seems like we'd be doing our country a disservice if we didn't post the colors when asked so I dunno...

ONE thing I could say is what if we sent out a color guard post the colors and if they want to stay, they could change into civvies and it would no longer be a CAP sanctioned event?

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 09:59:45 PM

Quote from: raivo on April 26, 2010, 09:27:54 PM
Well, according to 39-1...

Quotewhen 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.

I'm not really sure a party convention is in the same league as a demonstration.

bold emphasis mine

its a political public speech, therefore the M39-1 prohibits it.

Well...not really.....it only says that the USAF has to approve.  So....who and how do we go about making sure it is Kosher.  Because I know that the USAF honor guard performs at events where there are political speeches.

Quote from: lordmonar on April 26, 2010, 10:04:33 PM

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 09:59:45 PM

Quote from: raivo on April 26, 2010, 09:27:54 PM
Well, according to 39-1...

Quotewhen 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.

I'm not really sure a party convention is in the same league as a demonstration.

bold emphasis mine

its a political public speech, therefore the M39-1 prohibits it.

Well...not really.....it only says that the USAF has to approve.  So....who and how do we go about making sure it is Kosher.  Because I know that the USAF honor guard performs at events where there are political speeches.

If the USAF really does do honor guard at public speeches I'm betting they don't stick around once they've done their part.  In that case I would bet we need to submit changes up the CoC to permit us to perform only color guard and anything else beyond that would be prohibited as far as being sanctioned by CAP.

As for getting USAF approval in time for a political event, dunno but if the above rule were to be applied you would not need approval?

Anyone note the irony in the TEA party using a taxpayer supported color guard at this event? 

^Well, technically, no taxpayer dollars were harmed or used at this event..... ;D

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:11:57 PM
Anyone note the irony in the TEA party using a taxpayer supported color guard at this event?

I was gonna say, what taxpayer dollars? I don't think taxpayer monies support CAP itself unless it comes from the USAF of course.

The broadest reading of the chart would seem to prohibit acting as a color guard at pretty much any public event. So we will expect to see a host of IG complaints the next Fourth of July when those horrible little cadets go out and raise the colors at activities that knowingly and willfully offer "political speech" in support of the Country, The Constitution, and the Flag?  I can understand not participating in protests, but if we can't support pro-American activities, what can we support?

Major Lord

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 10:15:09 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:11:57 PM
Anyone note the irony in the TEA party using a taxpayer supported color guard at this event?

I was gonna say, what taxpayer dollars? I don't think taxpayer monies support CAP itself unless it comes from the USAF of course.

Who do you think paid for the uniforms that the cadets were probably wearing?  Some of the other equipment was also probably ultimately paid for by the fed?  If a squadron van was used to get to the event that was purchased wtih fed dollars.   Liability coverage for the CAP members was paid for by CAP with money received by the federal government.

Quote from: raivo on April 26, 2010, 07:46:44 PM
Uniform wear at political events is explicitly forbidden. (Unless the Air Force approves it, and the odds of that are virtually nil.)

I can see heads rolling for this.

Just curious. What constitutes a "political event"? If the President is giving some sort of speech, and the colors are posted by the CAP color guard, and the speech has some sort of thumbing-of-the-nose at a Republican measure, is the event now political?

To be clear, I'm not a Tea Party supporter, nor am I trying to even barracks-lawyer the members out of what should have been a pretty clear situation of a "political event." I'm just curious as to where the line is, since "supporting the President", while usually okay because he's the C&C, is almost always going to result in the "support" of a speech on his party's behalf.

Quote from: Nathan on April 26, 2010, 10:23:12 PM

Quote from: raivo on April 26, 2010, 07:46:44 PM
Uniform wear at political events is explicitly forbidden. (Unless the Air Force approves it, and the odds of that are virtually nil.)

I can see heads rolling for this.

Just curious. What constitutes a "political event"? If the President is giving some sort of speech, and the colors are posted by the CAP color guard, and the speech has some sort of thumbing-of-the-nose at a Republican measure, is the event now political?

Simple, ask the Air Force.  If they authorize it, its ok by our regulations.

I am sure we have approval in writing for  "Wreaths across America" from the Air Force, right? Does anyone have direct knowledge of an adverse personnel action taken against a member of CAP for raising the colors anywhere on American soil?

Major Lord

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:16:45 PM

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 10:15:09 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:11:57 PM
Anyone note the irony in the TEA party using a taxpayer supported color guard at this event?

I was gonna say, what taxpayer dollars? I don't think taxpayer monies support CAP itself unless it comes from the USAF of course.

Who do you think paid for the uniforms that the cadets were probably wearing?  Some of the other equipment was also probably ultimately paid for by the fed?  If a squadron van was used to get to the event that was purchased wtih fed dollars.   Liability coverage for the CAP members was paid for by CAP with money received by the federal government.

Does congress actually set aside tax dollars for CAP? I know they do for USAF, that's part of their defense funds.  Yeah sure our tax dollars at one point paid for uniforms the cadets are wearing now also remember that servicemen do regularly purchase new uniforms with their own funds and are donated (sometimes) when not needed so its NOT just tax dollars that pay for it.

What about donations? I don't think the purchase of vans and aircraft are ALL tax dollars.  In fact I had a member tell me that cadets actually pay for their uniform as part of their membership dues (and I am a little puzzled by that for a reason) ok so cadet gets free uniform voucher and NHQ sends uniform to cadets and makes sense if that means they paid for that uniform when they signed up HOWEVER regulations stipulate that cadets (and senior members) must return squadron issued uniforms should the member not maintain membership beyond their first year. If that is the case why not allow a SM to purchase uniform from NHQ during their first membership signup?

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 10:32:42 PM
I am sure we have approval in writing for  "Wreaths across America" from the Air Force, right? Does anyone have direct knowledge of an adverse personnel action taken against a member of CAP for raising the colors anywhere on American soil?

Major Lord

IMHO WAA isn't political far from it, its to honor the fallen no approval needed.

There are many people on the left who would disagree with you, ask Cindy Sheehan, she will give you an earful. . If you are arguing that Commander's have the ability and responsibility to distinguish an appropriate activity from an inappropriate one, without "asking the Air Force" ( May as well write a letter to Santa Claus....) I would have to agree with you.

Major Lord

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:11:57 PM
Anyone note the irony in the TEA party using a taxpayer supported color guard at this event?

I don't remember ever getting a single dime out of the government/NHQ/Wing for support for my Color Guard.

As for the event we did....we the Nevada Republican Party bought us a new flag as a token for our support.  I don't know if that makes it better or worse.

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 10:49:41 PM
There are many people on the left who would disagree with you, ask Cindy Sheehan, she will give you an earful. . If you are arguing that Commander's have the ability and responsibility to distinguish an appropriate activity from an inappropriate one, without "asking the Air Force" ( May as well write a letter to Santa Claus....) I would have to agree with you.

Major Lord

you talking about WAA? I have no idea who Cindy Sheehan is, but you brought up another topic for another thread... commanders are like the REST of the membership how are they to be able to determine what is appropriate and isn't? Heck, can the AF figure it out for themselves? They are collectively just as human as we are; although they ARE our boss!

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 10:36:19 PM

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 10:32:42 PM
I am sure we have approval in writing for  "Wreaths across America" from the Air Force, right? Does anyone have direct knowledge of an adverse personnel action taken against a member of CAP for raising the colors anywhere on American soil?

Major Lord

IMHO WAA isn't political far from it, its to honor the fallen no approval needed.

The problem is....the nature of the event may in and of itself not be political....but if WAA or the Veterens day or 4th of July celebration includes polititans making speeches.......have we or have we not crossed that line.

If we can't go to present the colors a T-party Rally or an Election Rally.....where is the line drawn.....who makes the call....and how do I get my request to him so I don't end up getting called to the carpet?

The little guy in the field wants to know.

Quote from: lordmonar on April 26, 2010, 10:51:34 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:11:57 PM
Anyone note the irony in the TEA party using a taxpayer supported color guard at this event?

I don't remember ever getting a single dime out of the government/NHQ/Wing for support for my Color Guard.

As for the event we did....we the Nevada Republican Party bought us a new flag as a token for our support.  I don't know if that makes it better or worse.

I would hear from squadron members who would speak at a staff meeting or squadron meeting and comment that there were/are members of the community who request an honor guard or color guard that ask if they are required to pay CAP for services rendered (of course we tell them no, a donation is gladly accepted however) but we don't ask for a donation we don't even mention (unless asked) it the cadets do it and have a good time and leave when it is appropriate to do so.

Quote from: lordmonar on April 26, 2010, 10:56:51 PM

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 10:36:19 PM

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 10:32:42 PM
I am sure we have approval in writing for  "Wreaths across America" from the Air Force, right? Does anyone have direct knowledge of an adverse personnel action taken against a member of CAP for raising the colors anywhere on American soil?

Major Lord

IMHO WAA isn't political far from it, its to honor the fallen no approval needed.

The problem is....the nature of the event may in and of itself not be political....but if WAA or the Veterens day or 4th of July celebration includes polititans making speeches.......have we or have we not crossed that line.

If we can't go to present the colors a T-party Rally or an Election Rally.....where is the line drawn.....who makes the call....and how do I get my request to him so I don't end up getting called to the carpet?

The little guy in the field wants to know.

Yes I realize it may INCLUDE politicians making speeches, but not every event HAS a politician making a speech. IIRC our WAA didn't have a politician available so is it safe?  4th of July although I think had city council or mayor I can't remember they count as a politician? But are they making a political speech? Just because they are politicians does not mean everything they say is political.

Give the controversy around the Tea Parties, would it really be something that CAP should put itself out for? It's also pretty clear that it is a partisan event surpporting certain party canidates.

Remember that soldier who got in trouble for announcing (in uniform) that he 'was speaking to the next commander in chief) at a Rudy Guiliani rally?

WOW

All this talk about uniforms, color guards etc at politico events...

BITD ....circa 1970's... there was a definite explanation by Sqdn CC's / Winng CC's about NOT wearing a uni and whatnot and it was pretty well explained during the daze of cadet programs of the 1970's and the no no's as to wear of the uniform .....especially political events

But since it's CAP Inc of 2010....do whatever ya want.

Quote from: heliodoc on April 26, 2010, 11:21:41 PM
WOW

All this talk about uniforms, color guards etc at politico events...

BITD ....circa 1970's... there was a definite explanation by Sqdn CC's / Winng CC's about NOT wearing a uni and whatnot and it was pretty well explained during the daze of cadet programs of the 1970's and the no no's as to wear of the uniform .....especially political events

But since it's CAP Inc of 2010....do whatever ya want.

As mentioned before, some events don't seem to be political or at least aren't until a politician shows up. We're living in grey matter nowadays.

In your eyes, the WAA program may not be a political statement, but I will guarantee you that there are leftists and atheists who will be profoundly confirmed in their beliefs that CAP conducting memorial ceremonies with Christian Symbols in support of the dead of the wars will view it as political speech. Now if you are saying that this is not a political activity, you have used your discretion to make that determination. As far as I know, the Air Force is silent on the matter. If you are saying we (Commanders specifically) don't have leeway in determining which activities are within our proper purposes, then you are arguing that we need the Air Force to approve anything that even resembles a CAP public activity. I don't believe that to be the case. The AF does not want us out there throwing rocks and participating in demonstrations, or even going on stage in Uniform and saying " Candidate X is not such a bad guy", but that does not mean we can't carry out traditional color guard activities in ordinary civic activities.

Of course, the chart above the entry in question forbids doing even these things, in support of communists, fascists, etc. You can still support socialists, since they don't advocate (openly) the overthrow of the United States by unconstitutional means. ( Of course, I believe a socialist is just a communist who is good at hiding his AK)

Major Lord

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 11:28:39 PM
In your eyes, the WAA program may not be a political statement, but I will guarantee you that there are leftists and atheists who will be profoundly confirmed in their beliefs that CAP conducting memorial ceremonies with Christian Symbols in support of the dead of the wars will view it as political speech.

I missed the Christian symbols that CAP was using, what were they?   Also please provide a cite for the leftists and atheists believing that?   I already know you believe that.

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 10:35:44 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:16:45 PM

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 10:15:09 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:11:57 PM
Anyone note the irony in the TEA party using a taxpayer supported color guard at this event?

I was gonna say, what taxpayer dollars? I don't think taxpayer monies support CAP itself unless it comes from the USAF of course.

Who do you think paid for the uniforms that the cadets were probably wearing?  Some of the other equipment was also probably ultimately paid for by the fed?  If a squadron van was used to get to the event that was purchased wtih fed dollars.   Liability coverage for the CAP members was paid for by CAP with money received by the federal government.

Does congress actually set aside tax dollars for CAP?

You're kidding, right?  Almost all of CAP's budget at the national level, (where the planes and vans come from) comes from federal tax dollars.  Sure, membership dues and some corporate donations are in there, but they don't account for much.  The case is different at the squadron and wing level  where other funding sources are much more important.  But, even then about 2/3 of CAP wings receive taxpayer funds from the states. 

CAP not using tax dollars???  BS

The two Wings I have been involved with get grants for many thing ranging from comm to the very functions of a Wing

Folks thinkin that CAP does not get federal funds or grants from the Feds or Federal to State pass through money are kidding themselves

I forgot many in CAP forget that little fact!! ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 11:47:44 PM

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 10:35:44 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:16:45 PM

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 10:15:09 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:11:57 PM
Anyone note the irony in the TEA party using a taxpayer supported color guard at this event?

I was gonna say, what taxpayer dollars? I don't think taxpayer monies support CAP itself unless it comes from the USAF of course.

Who do you think paid for the uniforms that the cadets were probably wearing?  Some of the other equipment was also probably ultimately paid for by the fed?  If a squadron van was used to get to the event that was purchased wtih fed dollars.   Liability coverage for the CAP members was paid for by CAP with money received by the federal government.

Does congress actually set aside tax dollars for CAP?

You're kidding, right?  Almost all of CAP's budget at the national level, (where the planes and vans come from) comes from federal tax dollars.  Sure, membership dues and some corporate donations are in there, but they don't account for much.  The case is different at the squadron and wing level  where other funding sources are much more important.  But, even then about 2/3 of CAP wings receive taxpayer funds from the states.

That was my point, the taxpayer dollars is at the NHQ level so that is why I was asking if congress actually sets aside funds JUST for CAP or does it get given to the USAF to decide? Seems to me the USAF pays for our planes and vans or is that not the case? My understanding is the USAF pays for o-rides obviously but I'm not sure if I am mistaken if they also pay for some of the maintenance on the planes too?

Anyway, taxpayer or not it would seem to be a disservice not to honor the colors for an event if requested again whether a politician is there or not I would say (not my choice because the regs are the regs) let the USAF allow the colors to be honored and then leave prudently afterwords to limit exposure would that be harmful?

Quote from: Short Field on April 26, 2010, 11:36:53 PM

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 11:28:39 PM
In your eyes, the WAA program may not be a political statement, but I will guarantee you that there are leftists and atheists who will be profoundly confirmed in their beliefs that CAP conducting memorial ceremonies with Christian Symbols in support of the dead of the wars will view it as political speech.

I missed the Christian symbols that CAP was using, what were they?   Also please provide a cite for the leftists and atheists believing that?   I already know you believe that.

" The Arlington Wreath program was started by Morrill Worcester (Worcester Wreath) in 1992 with the donation and laying of 5000 Christmas wreaths to Arlington National Cemetery.  This became an annual journey for Mr. Worcester."

Christmas Wreathes are Christian Symbols. Respectfully, I don't think you know what I believe since you seem to have some kind of reading comprehension problem. I don't think you will have any problems finding atheists or leftists who object to WAA if you look. (Atheists are not big on Christmas by the way) I fully support the WAA program, and it clearly is one the kinds of activities we should be doing.

Major Lord

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 11:52:46 PM
That was my point, the taxpayer dollars is at the NHQ level so that is why I was asking if congress actually sets aside funds JUST for CAP or does it get given to the USAF to decide?

Congess just doesn't give the AF a pot of money and let them spend it how they will.  Congess tells them how much to spend on CAP.   Heck, if it was up to the AF CAP's budget would be a fraction of what it is (they try to cut it every single year and Congress puts the money back in). 

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 11:58:52 PM

Quote from: Short Field on April 26, 2010, 11:36:53 PM

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 11:28:39 PM
In your eyes, the WAA program may not be a political statement, but I will guarantee you that there are leftists and atheists who will be profoundly confirmed in their beliefs that CAP conducting memorial ceremonies with Christian Symbols in support of the dead of the wars will view it as political speech.

I missed the Christian symbols that CAP was using, what were they?   Also please provide a cite for the leftists and atheists believing that?   I already know you believe that.

" The Arlington Wreath program was started by Morrill Worcester (Worcester Wreath) in 1992 with the donation and laying of 5000 Christmas wreaths to Arlington National Cemetery.  This became an annual journey for Mr. Worcester."

Christmas Wreathes are Christian Symbols. Respectfully, I don't think you know what I believe since you seem to have some kind of reading comprehension problem. I don't think you will have any problems finding atheists or leftists who object to WAA if you look. (Atheists are not big on Christmas by the way) I fully support the WAA program, and it clearly is one the kinds of activities we should be doing.

Major Lord

Um, wreaths and trees are actually pagan symbols if you get right down to it.

I'd like to think that most CAP officers have enough common sense to tell between a partisan political event and a genuine "community" event.   I think the fact that such cases as this are apparently rare seems to back that up. 

I don't think that we have to worry too much about the fringe groups that can make just about anything political.  After all, you could try to stretch things and say "If there is an anti-military demonstration against CAP, then attending a CAP meeting is a prohibited political activity." 

Quote from: RiverAux on April 27, 2010, 12:04:19 AM

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 11:52:46 PM
That was my point, the taxpayer dollars is at the NHQ level so that is why I was asking if congress actually sets aside funds JUST for CAP or does it get given to the USAF to decide?

Congess just doesn't give the AF a pot of money and let them spend it how they will.  Congess tells them how much to spend on CAP.   Heck, if it was up to the AF CAP's budget would be a fraction of what it is (they try to cut it every single year and Congress puts the money back in).

makes sense, learn something new everyday :)

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 11:58:52 PM
Christmas Wreathes are Christian Symbols. Respectfully, I don't think you know what I believe since you seem to have some kind of reading comprehension problem.

Lets see...you believe that Christmas wreathes are christian symbols, that leftists believe laying a wreath on a serviceman's grave is a christian event, and that atheists believe laying a wreath on a serviceman's grave as a christian event.  Did I miss something?

Now, please provide a cite where leftists and atheists believe laying wreaths on graves are christian events.

Wow, I'm going to catch flak from some friends for this, if they see it. I've already had to explain to a few people I know that we're not some bunch of anti-government militia running around in the hills training for Armageddon. That, you know, we're actually a semi-federal-unarmed-emergency-services-non-profit-corporation-military-auxiliary-thingy ...

Quote from: Marshalus on April 27, 2010, 12:44:32 AM
Wow, I'm going to catch flak from some friends for this, if they see it. I've already had to explain to a few people I know that we're not some bunch of anti-government militia running around in the hills training for Armageddon. That, you know, we're actually a semi-federal-unarmed-emergency-services-non-profit-corporation-military-auxiliary-thingy ...

How can we be militia if we ain't got any guns? :P

Quote from: Short Field on April 27, 2010, 12:38:51 AM

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 11:58:52 PM
Christmas Wreathes are Christian Symbols. Respectfully, I don't think you know what I believe since you seem to have some kind of reading comprehension problem.

Lets see...you believe that Christmas wreathes are christian symbols, that leftists believe laying a wreath on a serviceman's grave is a christian event, and that atheists believe laying a wreath on a serviceman's grave as a christian event.  Did I miss something?

Now, please provide a cite where leftists and atheists believe laying wreaths on graves are christian events.

Are you currently taking prescription medication?

Major Lord

Quote from: heliodoc on April 26, 2010, 11:52:13 PM
CAP not using tax dollars???  BS

The two Wings I have been involved with get grants for many thing ranging from comm to the very functions of a Wing

Folks thinkin that CAP does not get federal funds or grants from the Feds or Federal to State pass through money are kidding themselves

I forgot many in CAP forget that little fact!! ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Not saying CAP does not get TAX dollars....but the Nellis Composite Squadron Color Guard does not.

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 11:58:52 PMChristmas Wreathes are Christian Symbols.

No...actually that are a pagan sysmbol that has been incorporated into our christmas traditions.  Yule, Yule tide, the evergreen tree and decorating there of...are all pagan traditions that were co-opted by the early christians as the moved into the middle europe.

As an athiest...I got no problem with WAA as it is primarily a way of honoring our veterans and NOT a religious celebration.

While I am sure that there are some extreme leftists and Athiest groups that don't like it.....most of us could care less.  We are much more upset about "In God We Trust" and "One Nation Under God" then WAA.

Quote from: lordmonar on April 27, 2010, 12:51:26 AM

Quote from: heliodoc on April 26, 2010, 11:52:13 PM
CAP not using tax dollars???  BS

The two Wings I have been involved with get grants for many thing ranging from comm to the very functions of a Wing

Folks thinkin that CAP does not get federal funds or grants from the Feds or Federal to State pass through money are kidding themselves

I forgot many in CAP forget that little fact!! ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Not saying CAP does not get TAX dollars....but the Nellis Composite Squadron Color Guard does not.

So the Color Guard isn't part of CAP then?

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 10:35:44 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:16:45 PM

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 10:15:09 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:11:57 PM
Anyone note the irony in the TEA party using a taxpayer supported color guard at this event?

I was gonna say, what taxpayer dollars? I don't think taxpayer monies support CAP itself unless it comes from the USAF of course.

Who do you think paid for the uniforms that the cadets were probably wearing?  Some of the other equipment was also probably ultimately paid for by the fed?  If a squadron van was used to get to the event that was purchased wtih fed dollars.   Liability coverage for the CAP members was paid for by CAP with money received by the federal government.

Does congress actually set aside tax dollars for CAP?

No. The fed money we get comes out of the AF budget. CAP is a line item in their budget.

QuoteI know they do for USAF, that's part of their defense funds.  Yeah sure our tax dollars at one point paid for uniforms the cadets are wearing now also remember that servicemen do regularly purchase new uniforms with their own funds and are donated (sometimes) when not needed so its NOT just tax dollars that pay for it.

Service members get a clothing allowance to replace worn uniforms. Most of the time, it isn't quite enough to keep an adequate supply of uniform items on hand for day-to-day work.

"Donated" uniforms are almost always used, even though they may be in excellent condition. Most used uniforms have problems that preclude their use as a nice dress uniform.

QuoteWhat about donations? I don't think the purchase of vans and aircraft are ALL tax dollars. 

AFAIK, all the planes and vans are paid for by the AF.

QuoteIn fact I had a member tell me that cadets actually pay for their uniform as part of their membership dues (and I am a little puzzled by that for a reason) ok so cadet gets free uniform voucher and NHQ sends uniform to cadets and makes sense if that means they paid for that uniform when they signed up HOWEVER regulations stipulate that cadets (and senior members) must return squadron issued uniforms should the member not maintain membership beyond their first year.

The initial cadet uniform issue is not paid for out of the cadet dues. They are AF issue, and come from the AF military clothing sales in Lackland (?), not  Alabama. The folks at NHQ have nothing to do with the issue process, other than forwarding the form to Lackland.

QuoteIf that is the case why not allow a SM to purchase uniform from NHQ during their first membership signup?

SMs can just as easily order their own uniforms direct from the source. Why complicate the process?

Quote from: JThemann on April 27, 2010, 01:03:49 AM

Quote from: lordmonar on April 27, 2010, 12:51:26 AM

Quote from: heliodoc on April 26, 2010, 11:52:13 PM
CAP not using tax dollars???  BS

The two Wings I have been involved with get grants for many thing ranging from comm to the very functions of a Wing

Folks thinkin that CAP does not get federal funds or grants from the Feds or Federal to State pass through money are kidding themselves

I forgot many in CAP forget that little fact!! ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Not saying CAP does not get TAX dollars....but the Nellis Composite Squadron Color Guard does not.

So the Color Guard isn't part of CAP then?

Not to extent that I every got one cent from the federal government to equip, train and deploy my team.

Quote from: JThemann on April 27, 2010, 01:03:49 AM

Quote from: lordmonar on April 27, 2010, 12:51:26 AM

Quote from: heliodoc on April 26, 2010, 11:52:13 PM
CAP not using tax dollars???  BS

The two Wings I have been involved with get grants for many thing ranging from comm to the very functions of a Wing

Folks thinkin that CAP does not get federal funds or grants from the Feds or Federal to State pass through money are kidding themselves

I forgot many in CAP forget that little fact!! ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Not saying CAP does not get TAX dollars....but the Nellis Composite Squadron Color Guard does not.

So the Color Guard isn't part of CAP then?

Sure it is. But the Nellis color guard apparently survives on funds which source is NOT the corporation or the federal government.

Yes, I shall say it.

Tunnel vision seems to be the most common affliction of the Senior Member crowd.
THAT is MY opinion, to clarify, not a proven fact... yet.

I do so enjoy seeing such arguments- makes me crack up, and late at night, when the little siblings are asleep, I have to stifle my laughter til I about choke  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Back on topic, I have a question. Does anyone think the cadets will be reprimanded for this? That would seem a little unfair, seeing as SM guidance should have come into play...

Quote from: SarDragon on April 27, 2010, 01:05:04 AM

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 10:35:44 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:16:45 PM

Quote from: mynetdude on April 26, 2010, 10:15:09 PM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:11:57 PM
Anyone note the irony in the TEA party using a taxpayer supported color guard at this event?

I was gonna say, what taxpayer dollars? I don't think taxpayer monies support CAP itself unless it comes from the USAF of course.

Who do you think paid for the uniforms that the cadets were probably wearing?  Some of the other equipment was also probably ultimately paid for by the fed?  If a squadron van was used to get to the event that was purchased wtih fed dollars.   Liability coverage for the CAP members was paid for by CAP with money received by the federal government.

Does congress actually set aside tax dollars for CAP?

No. The fed money we get comes out of the AF budget. CAP is a line item in their budget.

QuoteI know they do for USAF, that's part of their defense funds.  Yeah sure our tax dollars at one point paid for uniforms the cadets are wearing now also remember that servicemen do regularly purchase new uniforms with their own funds and are donated (sometimes) when not needed so its NOT just tax dollars that pay for it.

Service members get a clothing allowance to replace worn uniforms. Most of the time, it isn't quite enough to keep an adequate supply of uniform items on hand for day-to-day work.

"Donated" uniforms are almost always used, even though they may be in excellent condition. Most used uniforms have problems that preclude their use as a nice dress uniform.

QuoteWhat about donations? I don't think the purchase of vans and aircraft are ALL tax dollars. 

AFAIK, all the planes and vans are paid for by the AF.

QuoteIn fact I had a member tell me that cadets actually pay for their uniform as part of their membership dues (and I am a little puzzled by that for a reason) ok so cadet gets free uniform voucher and NHQ sends uniform to cadets and makes sense if that means they paid for that uniform when they signed up HOWEVER regulations stipulate that cadets (and senior members) must return squadron issued uniforms should the member not maintain membership beyond their first year.

The initial cadet uniform issue is not paid for out of the cadet dues. They are AF issue, and come from the AF military clothing sales in Lackland (?), not  Alabama. The folks at NHQ have nothing to do with the issue process, other than forwarding the form to Lackland.

QuoteIf that is the case why not allow a SM to purchase uniform from NHQ during their first membership signup?

SMs can just as easily order their own uniforms direct from the source. Why complicate the process?

Complicate? Seems to me if its complicated to have to order from Vanguard or AFFEES for the first time IMHO streamlining uniform issuance to be sent to the SM for the first time then after that SM buys their own uniforms.

Quote from: DakRadz on April 27, 2010, 01:08:03 AM
Yes, I shall say it.

Tunnel vision seems to be the most common affliction of the Senior Member crowd.
THAT is MY opinion, to clarify, not a proven fact... yet.

I do so enjoy seeing such arguments- makes me crack up, and late at night, when the little siblings are asleep, I have to stifle my laughter til I about choke  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Back on topic, I have a question. Does anyone think the cadets will be reprimanded for this? That would seem a little unfair, seeing as SM guidance should have come into play...

As you said back on topic, I agree cadets should not be affected by the consequences ALTHOUGH they should be taught as to why their SM counterparts are getting their hairs ripped out so that when a SM is misguided they can be better informed to let their SM counterparts know.

The last time I saw this happen there was quite a discussion about it but nothing happened at least that is coming from my POV (Point Of View) anything that may or did happen I don't know about.

Quote from: DakRadz on April 27, 2010, 01:08:03 AM
Yes, I shall say it.

Tunnel vision seems to be the most common affliction of the Senior Member crowd.
THAT is MY opinion, to clarify, not a proven fact... yet.

I do so enjoy seeing such arguments- makes me crack up, and late at night, when the little siblings are asleep, I have to stifle my laughter til I about choke  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Back on topic, I have a question. Does anyone think the cadets will be reprimanded for this? That would seem a little unfair, seeing as SM guidance should have come into play...

I think anything more than a lecture to the cadets on proper decorum would be going to far. The cadets didn't screw up but they should learn from it nonetheless. Some SM somewhere really screwed the pooch on this one. That is the one that should get the consequences.

Quote from: DakRadz on April 27, 2010, 01:08:03 AMBack on topic, I have a question. Does anyone think the cadets will be reprimanded for this? That would seem a little unfair, seeing as SM guidance should have come into play...

What for?  One would assume that some senior member (like the squadron commander) was in the loop and approved the function.

I know in my case I as the DCC got approval from the CC before we proceded.

Quote from: mynetdude on April 27, 2010, 01:10:50 AMComplicate? Seems to me if its complicated to have to order from Vanguard or AFFEES for the first time IMHO streamlining uniform issuance to be sent to the SM for the first time then after that SM buys their own uniforms.

NHQ has nothing to do with the cadet uniform issue, besides forwarding a form. SMs do not get issued uniforms. How is getting NHQ involved in SM uniform procurement not complicating the process?

Quote from: davidsinn on April 27, 2010, 01:14:21 AM

Quote from: DakRadz on April 27, 2010, 01:08:03 AM
Back on topic, I have a question. Does anyone think the cadets will be reprimanded for this? That would seem a little unfair, seeing as SM guidance should have come into play...

I think anything more than a lecture to the cadets on proper decorum would be going to far. The cadets didn't screw up but they should learn from it nonetheless. Some SM somewhere really screwed the pooch on this one. That is the one that should get the consequences.

Definitely a learning experience; a lecture would be the most effective direct method. The truly lasting method would be seeing Major Bagodonuts walk out of the CC's office as Captain Bagodonuts:
"Hey guys, no politics from now on..." "Yeah..."

Quote from: JThemann on April 27, 2010, 01:03:49 AM

Quote from: lordmonar on April 27, 2010, 12:51:26 AM

Quote from: heliodoc on April 26, 2010, 11:52:13 PM
CAP not using tax dollars???  BS

The two Wings I have been involved with get grants for many thing ranging from comm to the very functions of a Wing

Folks thinkin that CAP does not get federal funds or grants from the Feds or Federal to State pass through money are kidding themselves

I forgot many in CAP forget that little fact!! ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Not saying CAP does not get TAX dollars....but the Nellis Composite Squadron Color Guard does not.

So the Color Guard isn't part of CAP then?

In the Corpus Christi Composite Squadron the color guard items are paid for by MAJOR CARRALES, CAPT PHELPS and some minor items by Cadets and Cadet parents.  The Knights of Columbus donated two parade rifles.  Since the USAF uniform program has neither been prompt nor timely...most uniforms were purchased by MAJOR CARRALES and CAPT PHELPS.

I don't think we need to attend the TEA PARTIES in any capacity as CAP.  However, don't suddenly suggest that CAP does things based on Federal dollars, that is disingenuous at best and a lie at worst.  Most things we do in our unit come from member support or donations from supportive community support.

You are confusing us with AFJROTC, which is Federally funded to a much greater degree.

So, there are color guards out there that do not wear any of the free uniform items provided by federal tax dollars or use corporate assets paid for with federal dollars.  I guess you do learn something new every day.

QuoteDoes congress actually set aside tax dollars for CAP?

QuoteNo. The fed money we get comes out of the AF budget. CAP is a line item in their budget.

I'm sure you meant, "yes" since the AF budget is money that is set aside by the Congress for Air Force operations, which includes line items, set by Congress, for CAP.  So, yes, Congress sets aside money for CAP, it just happens to be within the overall AF budget.  It is not something that the AF has discretion over spending (or not).

Congress directly approves the AF budget, not the CAP budget as a distinct entity. Yes, they have consent of the line items, but as parts of the larger whole.

No one said Congress approves the minutia of CAP's budget, but they set aside exactly how much money will be going to CAP from the federal government and the very broad categories upon which it will be spent. 

Quote from: RiverAux on April 27, 2010, 01:53:55 AM
So, there are color guards out there that do not wear any of the free uniform items provided by federal tax dollars or use corporate assets paid for with federal dollars.  I guess you do learn something new every day.

I'm not sure if you were ever a cadet, but those uniforms do wear out. I've gone through 3 pairs of slacks in my JROTC experience from growing, and an incident with a van door handle. And it's the equivalent to what some of my CAP cadets are experiencing now- growing, learning to treat the uniform like a uniform, etc. So at some point, it's very possible that ALL expenses are out of pocket. As far as equipment, I've been in ALWG (NHQ, anyone?) and GAWG- yet to see a corporate van or other equipment other than a laptop in each squadron- not at all specifically Color Guard.

Quote from: RiverAux on April 27, 2010, 01:53:55 AM
So, there are color guards out there that do not wear any of the free uniform items provided by federal tax dollars or use corporate assets paid for with federal dollars.  I guess you do learn something new every day.

QuoteDoes congress actually set aside tax dollars for CAP?

QuoteNo. The fed money we get comes out of the AF budget. CAP is a line item in their budget.

I'm sure you meant, "yes" since the AF budget is money that is set aside by the Congress for Air Force operations, which includes line items, set by Congress, for CAP.  So, yes, Congress sets aside money for CAP, it just happens to be within the overall AF budget.  It is not something that the AF has discretion over spending (or not).

Its as I have been saying all along...CAP is based on the local level.  80 percent of what we have, the 20 percent being assets like the van, plane and radios, has been the result of local work.  That includes the computers (donated), use of personal laptops, printers, uniforms (large stock pile rescued from thrift stores and donated by ex-service men and women) and even the coffee maker.

Some people seem to think that funding flows "down" in CAP and we do what we do based on funds from WING, its acutally local level funds that make it work.  Congressional money is not driving growth in CAP, members funds and hours are.

^^^^

Amen!

Quote from: Major Carrales on April 27, 2010, 02:14:34 AM
80 percent of what we have, the 20 percent being assets like the van, plane and radios, has been the result of local work. 

CAP would not exist without the airplanes paid for by the federal government.  Take that away and we'd disappear within a few years.  That is the only thing that makes it somewhat sensible for the AF to have two cadet programs. 

I certainly don't dispute that most squadrons take care of themselves, but a significant number of those are actually dependent on local government support in some form or fashion, whether it is direct monetary support or donation of free space in government buildings or hangers or free space on the local town's airport ramp.  I'm reasonably sure that every squadron in my wing is getting some level of local government support and I know the wing is itself.

I don't care how you cut it, but there is not a CAP unit out there that would exist were it not for federal government support of CAP at the national level.  It is probably the single most important thing that keeps this organization viable.   

Quote from: RiverAux on April 27, 2010, 03:00:19 AM

Quote from: Major Carrales on April 27, 2010, 02:14:34 AM
80 percent of what we have, the 20 percent being assets like the van, plane and radios, has been the result of local work. 

CAP would not exist without the airplanes paid for by the federal government.  Take that away and we'd disappear within a few years.  That is the only thing that makes it somewhat sensible for the AF to have two cadet programs. 

I certainly don't dispute that most squadrons take care of themselves, but a significant number of those are actually dependent on local government support in some form or fashion, whether it is direct monetary support or donation of free space in government buildings or hangers or free space on the local town's airport ramp.  I'm reasonably sure that every squadron in my wing is getting some level of local government support and I know the wing is itself.

I don't care how you cut it, but there is not a CAP unit out there that would exist were it not for federal government support of CAP at the national level.  It is probably the single most important thing that keeps this organization viable.   

We didn't even have an aircraft assigned for local stewardship nor a van until about two years ago.  Simply put, not functional squadron...no easy aircraft useage.

Now, I know how you love arguing in circles endlessly about academic things for the purpose of entertainment.  That said, I am going to say that there would be no aircraft if there were was a diminished membership.  The planes are there for the PEOPLE (CAP MEMBERS), not the other way around.

Organizations are made of PEOPLE...not aircraft.  Unless a unit works its butt off to make a steady program and justify the use of an aircraft, all the King's van and all the King's planes an organization does not make.

Okay.....CAP is paid for by the Federal Government.

Bottom line......is supporting a political rally a no no or not?

If it is verboten....where is the line between presenting the colors at the local football game and presenting the colors at the Communist Party Rally?

As was pointed out.  The local 4th of July event may have politicians giving speeches.  I know at Nevada WAA event there were several politicians who are running for office who have speeches.

So if it just a matter of getting USAF approval.....what is the process?

Quote from: lordmonar on April 27, 2010, 03:12:34 AM
Okay.....CAP is paid for by the Federal Government.

Bottom line......is supporting a political rally a no no or not?

If it is verboten....where is the line between presenting the colors at the local football game and presenting the colors at the Communist Party Rally?

As was pointed out.  The local 4th of July event may have politicians giving speeches.  I know at Nevada WAA event there were several politicians who are running for office who have speeches.

So if it just a matter of getting USAF approval.....what is the process?

I would say it was like this...

Poating the colors at the Democratic or Republican national, or State Nominating Convention, even caucuses, would fly because they are "parts of the process" and not really support for either political group...but, showing support for the American Process.  So would posting the colors at an swearing in or other inaugration, these are CIVIC in nature as opposed to POLITICAL.

Posting the colors at a candidate's fundraiser or Tea Party would be a different matter.   One is a personal drive to Office where political ideology is key, the other is an exercise of political assemble as per the 1st Amendment.   These would be more of POLITICAL than CIVIC.

Quote from: lordmonar on April 27, 2010, 03:12:34 AM
Okay.....CAP is paid for by the Federal Government.

Bottom line......is supporting a political rally a no no or not?

If it is verboten....where is the line between presenting the colors at the local football game and presenting the colors at the Communist Party Rally?

As was pointed out.  The local 4th of July event may have politicians giving speeches.  I know at Nevada WAA event there were several politicians who are running for office who have speeches.

So if it just a matter of getting USAF approval.....what is the process?

The process? Too long, and you will just watch the event happen.

Quote from: RiverAux on April 26, 2010, 10:11:57 PM
Anyone note the irony in the TEA party using a taxpayer supported color guard at this event?

:clap:

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 11:28:39 PM
In your eyes, the WAA program may not be a political statement, but I will guarantee you that there are leftists and atheists who will be profoundly confirmed in their beliefs that CAP conducting memorial ceremonies with Christian Symbols in support of the dead of the wars will view it as political speech. Now if you are saying that this is not a political activity, you have used your discretion to make that determination. As far as I know, the Air Force is silent on the matter. If you are saying we (Commanders specifically) don't have leeway in determining which activities are within our proper purposes, then you are arguing that we need the Air Force to approve anything that even resembles a CAP public activity. I don't believe that to be the case. The AF does not want us out there throwing rocks and participating in demonstrations, or even going on stage in Uniform and saying " Candidate X is not such a bad guy", but that does not mean we can't carry out traditional color guard activities in ordinary civic activities.

Of course, the chart above the entry in question forbids doing even these things, in support of communists, fascists, etc. You can still support socialists, since they don't advocate (openly) the overthrow of the United States by unconstitutional means. ( Of course, I believe a socialist is just a communist who is good at hiding his AK)

Major Lord

Lordy, Lordy!
As an agnostic Buddhist liberal Obama-loving Democrat member of CAP, IT NEVER CROSSED MY MIND THAT WAA WAS REMOTELY A POLITICAL EVENT!  We were helping to honor fallen American veterans.  And has anyone from the Vast Leftwing Conspiracy said a peep about WAA?  Might some crackpot on the far left of my side of the spectrum betch and moan about WAA?  Perhaps.  But even most of us godless socialists would say they are full of crap.  Just because someone has a D after their name doesn't mean they don't love their country. 

Quote from: Major Carrales on April 27, 2010, 03:17:24 AM

Quote from: lordmonar on April 27, 2010, 03:12:34 AM
Okay.....CAP is paid for by the Federal Government.

Bottom line......is supporting a political rally a no no or not?

If it is verboten....where is the line between presenting the colors at the local football game and presenting the colors at the Communist Party Rally?

As was pointed out.  The local 4th of July event may have politicians giving speeches.  I know at Nevada WAA event there were several politicians who are running for office who have speeches.

So if it just a matter of getting USAF approval.....what is the process?

I would say it was like this...

Poating the colors at the Democratic or Republican national, or State Nominating Convention, even caucuses, would fly because they are "parts of the process" and not really support for either political group...but, showing support for the American Process.  So would posting the colors at an swearing in or other inaugration, these are CIVIC in nature as opposed to POLITICAL.

Posting the colors at a candidate's fundraiser or Tea Party would be a different matter.   One is a personal drive to Office where political ideology is key, the other is an exercise of political assemble as per the 1st Amendment.   These would be more of POLITICAL than CIVIC.

Sparky:

I mostly agree with you but here's the problem with the Democratic and Republican events.  If we say the Tea Party events are verboten as partisan--which I think they are--aren't the D and R conventions also partisan?  I agree, the major party conventions are part and parcel of our political process.  But the Tea Party folks would argue, successfully I might add, they are also part of the "American Process."  (And believe me, I'm no Tea Party supporter.)  What about the Libertarian Party convention? The Reform Party?  Here in SD, we have several "off-brand" parties that make the ballot from time to time that are frankly, well, "out there" IMHO.  But they are legally recognized, just like the Ds and Rs.

My point is, where do we draw the line?  I think a complete ban on participating in events in uniform that are primarily partisan is the best interpretation of the regulation.  While the 4th of July parade might have politicians in it who even give speeches, if it is primarily to celebrate the USA's birthday and features the community, it is ok to participate.

In Sioux Falls, we had this very issue come up concerning a public high school band last year.  They were told the Tea Party event was "non-partisan."  Then they performed and got to listen to a couple of hours of how bad Pres. Obama, Democrats, liberals, moderates, some Republicans, non-Christians, and everyone who wasn't wearing a tricorn hat and puffy shirt and were.  The public high school administration, band director, and students got used.  That's why we have to be careful.

As a Democrat, I would not want my squadron's cadets or SMs subject to my own party's hectoring or think they they or CAP endorsed them or their candidates. 

As someone who has been heavily involved in partisan and elective politics, I think it is important for all citizens, including CAP members, to be involved in such activities, whatever their political party or ideology.  But CAP cannot take sides or give the perception that is is taking sides by participating in political events, IMHO.  And I think the regulation backs me up on that.

Thanks for a thoughtful posting.

Quote from: tdepp on April 27, 2010, 01:35:33 PM

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 11:28:39 PM
In your eyes, the WAA program may not be a political statement, but I will guarantee you that there are leftists and atheists who will be profoundly confirmed in their beliefs that CAP conducting memorial ceremonies with Christian Symbols in support of the dead of the wars will view it as political speech. Now if you are saying that this is not a political activity, you have used your discretion to make that determination. As far as I know, the Air Force is silent on the matter. If you are saying we (Commanders specifically) don't have leeway in determining which activities are within our proper purposes, then you are arguing that we need the Air Force to approve anything that even resembles a CAP public activity. I don't believe that to be the case. The AF does not want us out there throwing rocks and participating in demonstrations, or even going on stage in Uniform and saying " Candidate X is not such a bad guy", but that does not mean we can't carry out traditional color guard activities in ordinary civic activities.

Of course, the chart above the entry in question forbids doing even these things, in support of communists, fascists, etc. You can still support socialists, since they don't advocate (openly) the overthrow of the United States by unconstitutional means. ( Of course, I believe a socialist is just a communist who is good at hiding his AK)

Major Lord

Lordy, Lordy!
As an agnostic Buddhist liberal Obama-loving Democrat member of CAP, IT NEVER CROSSED MY MIND THAT WAA WAS REMOTELY A POLITICAL EVENT!  We were helping to honor fallen American veterans.  And has anyone from the Vast Leftwing Conspiracy said a peep about WAA?  Might some crackpot on the far left of my side of the spectrum betch and moan about WAA?  Perhaps.  But even most of us godless socialists would say they are full of crap.  Just because someone has a D after their name doesn't mean they don't love their country.

Todd,

I am in no way making the case that the WAA program is "political speech". I am arguing  that the regulation is ambiguous and subject to local interpretation. I am sure that you as a self-described godless socialist can appreciate that SOME people from the left make that argument. Cindy Sheehan was my specific example. I don't believe that all Democrats are atheists, nor do I believe that all Democrats are Socialists. Some from the Right might make the argument that a Cadet receiving his Spaatz award from the Hands of B. Hussein Obama  at a political function is a violation of the regulation. The strictest reading of the Regulation could arguably be interpreted that way.

The Unit Commander is for all practical purposes the approving authority for color guard activities, and to expect AF approval for every public appearance of a CAP color guard is just preposterous. Various tests for what constitutes an activity have been implied in this thread, with no real consensus. That fact that some people see National  Party Conventions as okay, but "Tea Party" events as impermissible shows a wide variance in the views and interpretation of the regulation. If the test is merely that someone objects to CAP participation on the grounds that they view the activity as political, we won't be permitted to do any public activities.

The issue of public funding in my mind is just a red herring. ( No offense is intended to any communist fish)

Major Lord

My goodness.  Is this really that difficult?

Events that are strictly political would be verbotten.  Posting the colors for the events of Dems, GOP, TEA Party, Socialists, Nazis, Communists, etc...would be off limits.  Being in uniform for ANY kind of protest would not be allowable.  Posting the colors at an event where a politician might show up and say a few words, such as a 4th of July Parade, Veterans Day, etc...would be fine.

Last I looked, President Obama was in our chain of command and thus an appropriate presenter of a cadet achievement award. 

Quote from: Major Lord on April 27, 2010, 03:12:30 PM

Quote from: tdepp on April 27, 2010, 01:35:33 PM

Quote from: Major Lord on April 26, 2010, 11:28:39 PM
In your eyes, the WAA program may not be a political statement, but I will guarantee you that there are leftists and atheists who will be profoundly confirmed in their beliefs that CAP conducting memorial ceremonies with Christian Symbols in support of the dead of the wars will view it as political speech. Now if you are saying that this is not a political activity, you have used your discretion to make that determination. As far as I know, the Air Force is silent on the matter. If you are saying we (Commanders specifically) don't have leeway in determining which activities are within our proper purposes, then you are arguing that we need the Air Force to approve anything that even resembles a CAP public activity. I don't believe that to be the case. The AF does not want us out there throwing rocks and participating in demonstrations, or even going on stage in Uniform and saying " Candidate X is not such a bad guy", but that does not mean we can't carry out traditional color guard activities in ordinary civic activities.

Of course, the chart above the entry in question forbids doing even these things, in support of communists, fascists, etc. You can still support socialists, since they don't advocate (openly) the overthrow of the United States by unconstitutional means. ( Of course, I believe a socialist is just a communist who is good at hiding his AK)

Major Lord

Lordy, Lordy!
As an agnostic Buddhist liberal Obama-loving Democrat member of CAP, IT NEVER CROSSED MY MIND THAT WAA WAS REMOTELY A POLITICAL EVENT!  We were helping to honor fallen American veterans.  And has anyone from the Vast Leftwing Conspiracy said a peep about WAA?  Might some crackpot on the far left of my side of the spectrum betch and moan about WAA?  Perhaps.  But even most of us godless socialists would say they are full of crap.  Just because someone has a D after their name doesn't mean they don't love their country.

Todd,

I am in no way making the case that the WAA program is "political speech". I am arguing  that the regulation is ambiguous and subject to local interpretation. I am sure that you as a self-described godless socialist can appreciate that SOME people from the left make that argument. Cindy Sheehan was my specific example. I don't believe that all Democrats are atheists, nor do I believe that all Democrats are Socialists. Some from the Right might make the argument that a Cadet receiving his Spaatz award from the Hands of B. Hussein Obama  at a political function is a violation of the regulation. The strictest reading of the Regulation could arguably be interpreted that way.

The Unit Commander is for all practical purposes the approving authority for color guard activities, and to expect AF approval for every public appearance of a CAP color guard is just preposterous. Various tests for what constitutes an activity have been implied in this thread, with no real consensus. That fact that some people see National  Party Conventions as okay, but "Tea Party" events as impermissible shows a wide variance in the views and interpretation of the regulation. If the test is merely that someone objects to CAP participation on the grounds that they view the activity as political, we won't be permitted to do any public activities.

The issue of public funding in my mind is just a red herring. ( No offense is intended to any communist fish)

Major Lord

Oh my Lord!
I'll tell you the same thing my Republican friends said after the 2000 Presidential election and the Supreme Court declared GWB the President.  Get over it.  I wasn't wild about GWB but he was the President, even my President.  You may not be wild about BHO, but he is the President, even your President.  He is the commander in chief of the armed forces.  One of the hallmarks of our system has been the military's respect of civilian rule, no matter who is in charge.  And as members of a USAF auxiliary, I think that applies to us as well.

If you don't think President Obama is a natural born American or whatever, you can certainly hold and advocate those views on your own time.  But as far as CAP is concerned, he's the President and in our official capacities, we show at least his office the respect it is due from us.  We don't get to pick and choose who we will or won't follow as CAP members.  If we feel strongly enough and there is evidence of wrongdoing, there is a process to oust our own members and leaders.  And there's also a process to impeach a President.  But that is not a CAP concern.

Remember, that whole chain of command thing?

There is nothing in the regulation that states "strictly political" as an element of the regulation. So we agree that the regulation is subject to local interpretation. Good. In your view, a Party Activity would not be appropriate (unless someone in our chain of command was there...... introducing yet another arbitrary criteria to the test for permissibility.) Would wearing the CAP uniform at a military funeral be permissible? What if the lads from the Westborough Baptist Church were there to protest? Would our presence be considered participation, and an endorsement of a political or religious system? We could be shown in uniform on TV next to the protest signs! Crikey! Your view of an activity that is strictly political varies with your own biases. How many words would a political figure have to say in your view before a July Fourth celebration became political?

Assuming the Commander at the local level was in the decision loop, and a group of Cadets did not go rogue and start honoring our Nations Colors willy-nilly, (those hooligans!)  the commander made the decision that raising the flag at a pro-American, pro-constitution rally was not in conflict with the regulation. The same decision was made by the commander ( presumably) to carry our Nations Colors at a political convention. Neither commander apparently felt that the spirit of the regulation, which was clearly designed to prohibit partisan advocacy, was violated.

Major Lord

Again, this is not a CAP call to make and is not subject to local discretion, rather it is up to the AF (presumably in the person of the CAP-USAF State Director) to decide whether any even that is even remotely questionable should be participated in by uniformed CAP members. 

You know, I would like to make a correction in some of the above posts.  As far as I can tell, President Obama is our President.  I do not think he is in our chain of command.  If you will look at our chain of command, he does not fall in it.  We are directed by the BOG and the National Board. President Obama is the COC of the Armed Forces and we are in no way the Armed Forces, nor do we in any way fall under that category.  We are a civilian corporation that falls under the Air Force as an Auxiliary with either a large A or a little a, depending on what our task is at the moment.  More and more of our task are under the little a.  This is not disparaging President Obama, he is our President, but he is not our COC and not even in our chain of command..     

Quote from: Major Carrales on April 27, 2010, 03:17:24 AM

Quote from: lordmonar on April 27, 2010, 03:12:34 AM
Okay.....CAP is paid for by the Federal Government.

Bottom line......is supporting a political rally a no no or not?

If it is verboten....where is the line between presenting the colors at the local football game and presenting the colors at the Communist Party Rally?

As was pointed out.  The local 4th of July event may have politicians giving speeches.  I know at Nevada WAA event there were several politicians who are running for office who have speeches.

So if it just a matter of getting USAF approval.....what is the process?

I would say it was like this...

Poating the colors at the Democratic or Republican national, or State Nominating Convention, even caucuses, would fly because they are "parts of the process" and not really support for either political group...but, showing support for the American Process.  So would posting the colors at an swearing in or other inaugration, these are CIVIC in nature as opposed to POLITICAL.

Posting the colors at a candidate's fundraiser or Tea Party would be a different matter.   One is a personal drive to Office where political ideology is key, the other is an exercise of political assemble as per the 1st Amendment.   These would be more of POLITICAL than CIVIC.

Coulnd't this just be the end of the thread?
XD Yeah, right.

At least stay on topic, even?
Well, I tried.

OFF TO CAP!!!!!! :D I love Tuesdays

A CAP-Talk thread spiraling out of control?  Whoa, whodathunkit?

This is my 2.5 cents worth (adjusted for inflation) as a 28 year veteran of the organization and a guy who has been to/marched/posted the colors at many a community parade/holiday/meeting, I can give some fairly clear cut suggestions for "the little guy in the field."

1) If its a Federal holiday-type event (parade or ceremony) sponsored in some way by the community, like Veteran's Day, Memorial Day, President's Day, Independence Day, Labor Day or Martin Luther King Day, then chances its probably A-OK to participate.  Might there be "political speech" at an event like this?  Perhaps.  Usually its by an elected official, and its more of a "Hey, I'm the mayor!" kind of thing, not "hey, I'm a pastafarian and I want you to vote spaghetti this fall!"

2) If its a Federal holiday-type event (parade or ceremony) sponsored by a private organization (Kiwanis, Elks, Moose, Grange, etc), its probably A-OK to participate (ie. my old unit has participated in the local Elk's Lodge Flag Day ceremony for years with zero ill effect). Again, elected officials could be invited to attend (we frequently had the mayor and the chief of police at ours, occasionally a state rep), but its more a 'community event' not a 'political event.'  (the Elks thing was so small that frankly I'm surprised they still have it... )

3) If its an event sponsored by a named political party (local or otherwise) or some kind of clearly political group, then its probably NOT OK.  For example, if my town's "Young Pastafarians" sponsored a rally on Independence Day that was a "We Want Ours Al Dente!" themed rally, perhaps that's not the best place for a CAP squadron to be posting the colors.  Or  if 'Sauce On.org" sponsored a "Smother Your Pasta" event, I'm guessing that we'd get splattered and shouldn't attend.

4) If its an event, on a Federal Holiday or not, that has as its purpose to provide a platform for a specific party or candidate, whether that candidate is an incumbent or not, then its probably not OK.  So if Mayor Rigatoni is running for re-election this year, and his Pastafarian supporters hold a rally "Rigatoni for Dinner!"  its probably not a good idea for a CAP color guard to be there.  Or, if Candidate Green Bean from the Green Vegetable party was holding a "Steamed? Yeah, Me Too!" rally on the state house steps, its probably not cool.

True Story: I worked at a college in the "First in the Nation Primary" state.  We got a LOT of political traffic thru, both people in the "exploratory" mode, and candidates in full-blown campaign mode.   Rudy Guilani's campaign held a rally at some point in 2007, in the run up to the 2008 election, in our student center with pretty extensive TV coverage.   I get there a little late (I was pretty chapped off at the campaign folks who whined and complained incessantly for unfettered internet access and when we provided it, they didn't use it.  jerks), but I can se eon the TVs scattered around that there is a kid who I know to be a student and a USAR soldier sitting in the FRONT ROW of this rally (right at the edge of the big red-white-and-blue floor riser with "RUDY" in gigantic letters) IN UNIFORM.  CNN was _all_over_ this kid, too.

But even WORSE was a local ARNG recruiter, ALSO IN UNIFORM, standing in the back of the room
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XZMjBbjG-KE/Ri9UwzsOe7I/AAAAAAAAAL8/o2MMkQ-F2ek/s320/Giuliani_04_24_2007.jpg)
(you can clearly see him in that shot, standing in front of the stairwell door to the left of Rudy. And oh, look, there I am, behind the guy, above Rudy's elbow..<GRIN>)

Now, clearly this is a political event.  Its sole purpose is to advance the platform of one political candidate.  Its completely, 100% politically motivated. 

The worst part was when the microphone got passed around the "town hall," one of Rudy's enterprising staffers managed to get it into the hands of this Army National Guard guy, and the first thing out of his mouth is "I'm very honored to be speaking to my next Commander-in-Chief.."  I about passed out. Seriously.  What a political coup for the Guiliani folks: here's a serving member of the armed forces endorsing Rudy IN UNIFORM!   Isn't Rudy GREAT? 

After the event was over I encountered this recruiter in the hallway. I walked right up to him and said "Excuse me, Sergeant, but did the DoD rescind the restrictions on participation in political events in uniform especially when such participation might lend the appearance of approval or sponsorship?"

He looked me up and down, caught the haircut and said "Well, sir, I wasn't aware of any such..."

I cut him off "Come on, you can't tell me that an Army National Guard E-7 doesn't know you're not supposed to go to a political rally _in_uniform_.  This is Basic Training stuff, Sergeant. And would surely be reinforced in PLDC, BNCOC and ANCOC..."

He stammered out something about not knowing it was against the rules.  I said "My advice to you is to head back to your office and call your first sergeant or your sergeant major and give them a heads up before your diatribe hits the airwaves tonight and they get some one-star from National Guard Bureau lighting their phones on fire.. ."

The guy got as green as the foliage green in his ACUs and he said "Oh, uh, I better do that.." and scampered away..

:)

Cadets: Don't go to things in uniform unless its a) part of your official duties; and b) your commander knows about it.

Commanders: Use common sense and judgment when picking activities to participate in.  The 7th Annual Veterans Wreath Laying sponsored by the VFW is probably OK.  The 1st Annual Fight Against Canned Spaghetti-Os sponsored by "Pastafarians For Fresh Pasta" featuring the former Chief Scientist for Chef Boyardee is likely a political hackjob you should steer clear of.

:)

I'm hungry for spaghetti now.

Quote from: NIN on April 27, 2010, 10:20:20 PM
A CAP-Talk thread spiraling out of control?  Whoa, whodathunkit?

This is my 2.5 cents worth (adjusted for inflation) as a 28 year veteran of the organization and a guy who has been to/marched/posted the colors at many a community parade/holiday/meeting, I can give some fairly clear cut suggestions for "the little guy in the field."

1) If its a Federal holiday-type event (parade or ceremony) sponsored in some way by the community, like Veteran's Day, Memorial Day, President's Day, Independence Day, Labor Day or Martin Luther King Day, then chances its probably A-OK to participate.  Might there be "political speech" at an event like this?  Perhaps.  Usually its by an elected official, and its more of a "Hey, I'm the mayor!" kind of thing, not "hey, I'm a pastafarian and I want you to vote spaghetti this fall!"

2) If its a Federal holiday-type event (parade or ceremony) sponsored by a private organization (Kiwanis, Elks, Moose, Grange, etc), its probably A-OK to participate (ie. my old unit has participated in the local Elk's Lodge Flag Day ceremony for years with zero ill effect). Again, elected officials could be invited to attend (we frequently had the mayor and the chief of police at ours, occasionally a state rep), but its more a 'community event' not a 'political event.'  (the Elks thing was so small that frankly I'm surprised they still have it... )

3) If its an event sponsored by a named political party (local or otherwise) or some kind of clearly political group, then its probably NOT OK.  For example, if my town's "Young Pastafarians" sponsored a rally on Independence Day that was a "We Want Ours Al Dente!" themed rally, perhaps that's not the best place for a CAP squadron to be posting the colors.  Or  if 'Sauce On.org" sponsored a "Smother Your Pasta" event, I'm guessing that we'd get splattered and shouldn't attend.

4) If its an event, on a Federal Holiday or not, that has as its purpose to provide a platform for a specific party or candidate, whether that candidate is an incumbent or not, then its probably not OK.  So if Mayor Rigatoni is running for re-election this year, and his Pastafarian supporters hold a rally "Rigatoni for Dinner!"  its probably not a good idea for a CAP color guard to be there.  Or, if Candidate Green Bean from the Green Vegetable party was holding a "Steamed? Yeah, Me Too!" rally on the state house steps, its probably not cool.

True Story: I worked at a college in the "First in the Nation Primary" state.  We got a LOT of political traffic thru, both people in the "exploratory" mode, and candidates in full-blown campaign mode.   Rudy Guilani's campaign held a rally at some point in 2007, in the run up to the 2008 election, in our student center with pretty extensive TV coverage.   I get there a little late (I was pretty chapped off at the campaign folks who whined and complained incessantly for unfettered internet access and when we provided it, they didn't use it.  jerks), but I can se eon the TVs scattered around that there is a kid who I know to be a student and a USAR soldier sitting in the FRONT ROW of this rally (right at the edge of the big red-white-and-blue floor riser with "RUDY" in gigantic letters) IN UNIFORM.  CNN was _all_over_ this kid, too.

But even WORSE was a local ARNG recruiter, ALSO IN UNIFORM, standing in the back of the room
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XZMjBbjG-KE/Ri9UwzsOe7I/AAAAAAAAAL8/o2MMkQ-F2ek/s320/Giuliani_04_24_2007.jpg)
(you can clearly see him in that shot, standing in front of the stairwell door to the left of Rudy. And oh, look, there I am, behind the guy, above Rudy's elbow..<GRIN>)

Now, clearly this is a political event.  Its sole purpose is to advance the platform of one political candidate.  Its completely, 100% politically motivated. 

The worst part was when the microphone got passed around the "town hall," one of Rudy's enterprising staffers managed to get it into the hands of this Army National Guard guy, and the first thing out of his mouth is "I'm very honored to be speaking to my next Commander-in-Chief.."  I about passed out. Seriously.  What a political coup for the Guiliani folks: here's a serving member of the armed forces endorsing Rudy IN UNIFORM!   Isn't Rudy GREAT? 

After the event was over I encountered this recruiter in the hallway. I walked right up to him and said "Excuse me, Sergeant, but did the DoD rescind the restrictions on participation in political events in uniform especially when such participation might lend the appearance of approval or sponsorship?"

He looked me up and down, caught the haircut and said "Well, sir, I wasn't aware of any such..."

I cut him off "Come on, you can't tell me that an Army National Guard E-7 doesn't know you're not supposed to go to a political rally _in_uniform_.  This is Basic Training stuff, Sergeant. And would surely be reinforced in PLDC, BNCOC and ANCOC..."

He stammered out something about not knowing it was against the rules.  I said "My advice to you is to head back to your office and call your first sergeant or your sergeant major and give them a heads up before your diatribe hits the airwaves tonight and they get some one-star from National Guard Bureau lighting their phones on fire.. ."

The guy got as green as the foliage green in his ACUs and he said "Oh, uh, I better do that.." and scampered away..

:)

Cadets: Don't go to things in uniform unless its a) part of your official duties; and b) your commander knows about it.

Commanders: Use common sense and judgment when picking activities to participate in.  The 7th Annual Veterans Wreath Laying sponsored by the VFW is probably OK.  The 1st Annual Fight Against Canned Spaghetti-Os sponsored by "Pastafarians For Fresh Pasta" featuring the former Chief Scientist for Chef Boyardee is likely a political hackjob you should steer clear of.

:)

Very nice explanation that sums up my thoughts pretty well.

I think there's another side of this to consider.

NIN's story provides a pretty good example of a member in uniform participating in a slanted event in such a way that indicates support. A general no-no.

The question I want to ask, though, is what technically constitutes "participation." The obvious definition is "being there", but I think there is more to it. I wish I had the reg here in front of me, but I think the more important part of the idea of participation is the image of support, and that isn't always there, despite the purpose of the gathering. For instance...

1) When I got my Spaatz award, a HoR member presented it to me. He was a Democrat, and spoke about what a cool fellow I was. Does the fact that his ideals are Democratic and that he thought I was a cool fellow indicate that he was saying I was a good Democrat? Of course not. Despite the fact that we had a political member (acting as a political staff member) present and speaking at the event with CAP members present about his opinions, the event was obviously not an indication of CAP's support of the HoR member or his ideals. Right?

2) If a CAP unit goes in uniform to a speech presented by President Obama, and gets a unit picture with him, does the nature or proposed nature of his speech indicate the appropriateness of CAP presence? For instance, if he is going to talk about how we need more money for education, well, that's technically a political issue. It will be voted upon, and some people will vote against it. Can a CAP unit still show up and watch the President speak and get a picture with him?

3) Take the same thing, except enter in various different people. For instance, if it was a former Republican President? A Senator? A Presidential candidate? A former Presidential candidate? Does it make a difference if it is election season?

I think the very nature of the color guard also makes the difference of "support" within "participation" important. A typical color guard is not supposed to do anything but present and retreat the colors. Other than that, they don't participate in the event (in uniform), just listen quietly. If we are under the assumption that our color guard does nothing more but present the colors, stand off to the side, and then retreat them...

4) Is it "participation" in the event to present the colors at a political event? Does it indicate support for the Republican party to post the colors at an event run by Republicans if the CAP unit does not break the above assumptions? Is it support for the Democrats to present the colors for the President when he makes a statement against the Republicans, just because the cadets presented the flag?

5) Is it support for terrorism if a color guard posts the colors at an event where world leaders give speeches (such as a college event) and the leader of Iran gives a speech against American values?

I'm inclined to think not. Posting the colors does not, in itself, seem to be to be an act of support for anything but the United States. There is not going to be any serious candidate for President, Senator, or whatever that is going to be anti-American, and as long as they respect the flag, I think that it would technically be inappropriate for CAP cadets to post the colors. I don't particularly agree with the Tea Party or the way they do things, but after taking a step back, it's pretty hard to say that they're anti-American, and that they use the flag disrespectfully. As long as that criteria is met, I am not entirely sure that "participation" in the event is necessarily a problem, so long as "support" for the event is not implied by the participation.

I don't know about you guys, but "participation" does not equal "support" for the ideals of the event, and as long as the flag is being respected by the participants of the event. It would simply be a respect of the colors at an event that is talking about legal, political ways to change America, and, especially with political rallies, I'm not entirely sure that we need to worry as long as we don't have problems like NIN's occur.

Of course, for this to work, we'd not only have to have the common sense of the commander's intact, but we'd have to follow the rules "equal airtime", in that if a Republican party got to use the color guard, then the Democratic party should have equal ability to use that color guard, should it be available to them. Obviously, it can't be obligatory, since we're using cadets, but the spirit of the idea is there.

And I know, this philosophy probably couldn't be accurately written down in words. But the line IS pretty gray, and I think that we can find the black-and-white line if we differentiate between those advocating illegal, fringe bias, and those expressing legal, patriotic methods of change (or whatever). Our cadets would then only be showing support for the colors at a political event, not for the political event itself.

Am I off base here?

So River Aux leaves us with the "nothing can be done without AF approval" model, and NIN suggests guidelines for participation that will probably be safe enough to not result in the CAP version of a keelhauling. This leaves us with the status quo: Its only a problem if someone complains.... CAP, being CAP, someone always will! Personally, I think that the Commander should use his best Judgment, and that the regulation was not intended to make us seek a mother-may-I for every public activity.

Major Lord

Actually, I think NIN's guidelines make a whole lot of sense and the "probably not oks" that he mentioned are just the sort of thing you would want to ask the SD about just to make sure. 

^^^ Common Sense - what a concept.   :clap:

Quote from: RiverAux on April 28, 2010, 12:38:00 AM
Actually, I think NIN's guidelines make a whole lot of sense and the "probably not oks" that he mentioned are just the sort of thing you would want to ask the SD about just to make sure.

I cannot take anyone seriously who advocates that we be allowed to post the colors at a Tea Party event.  They are not a political party like the Ds or Rs.  They are group of people with an ax to grind against President Obama, Democrats, liberals, non-Christians, and basically anyone who isn't like them.  I think that is EXACTLY the reason why such a ban is in place and requires USAF approval.  Let's reverse the politics.  Would anyone allow a CAP color guard participate in posting the colors at a Green Party event?  An American Socialist Party event?  They would also claim to be "pro-American."

I don't know about your squadrons, but my squadron's color guard is extremely busy presenting the colors at ANG, NG, city, veterans, and other such non-partisan gatherings and events.  If either the left or the right politicizes CAP, we will lose members, credibility, and financial support.  Our missions, once again, are emergency services, cadet training, aerospace education, complaining about Vanguard, and coming up with new uniform combinations.  Nowhere does it say politics.  If you want to be involved in politics, great.  There are local candidates and parties who need your help. But not while you are wearing a CAP uniform or in the name of CAP. 

Hurricane season doesn't start until June, but CAP has already gearing up for the "Tempest in a Teacup"

Quote from: tdepp on April 28, 2010, 01:30:32 AM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 28, 2010, 12:38:00 AM
Actually, I think NIN's guidelines make a whole lot of sense and the "probably not oks" that he mentioned are just the sort of thing you would want to ask the SD about just to make sure.

I cannot take anyone seriously who advocates that we be allowed to post the colors at a Tea Party event.  They are not a political party like the Ds or Rs.  They are group of people with an ax to grind against President Obama, Democrats, liberals, non-Christians, and basically anyone who isn't like them.  I think that is EXACTLY the reason why such a ban is in place and requires USAF approval.  Let's reverse the politics.  Would anyone allow a CAP color guard participate in posting the colors at a Green Party event?  An American Socialist Party event?  They would also claim to be "pro-American."

I don't know about your squadrons, but my squadron's color guard is extremely busy presenting the colors at ANG, NG, city, veterans, and other such non-partisan gatherings and events.  If either the left or the right politicizes CAP, we will lose members, credibility, and financial support.  Our missions, once again, are emergency services, cadet training, aerospace education, complaining about Vanguard, and coming up with new uniform combinations.  Nowhere does it say politics.  If you want to be involved in politics, great.  There are local candidates and parties who need your help. But not while you are wearing a CAP uniform or in the name of CAP.

I would appreciate it if you kept your POLITICAL opinions to yourself

Tick-tock. Tick-tock. Tick-tock.

Quotethe commander made the decision that raising the flag at a pro-American, pro-constitution rally was not in conflict with the regulation

It makes you wonder what the reaction would have been if the posting of the flag had been done at a Coffee Party Rally - you know those left-wing, socialist, minority, athiest whatevers some just seem to hate around here.

Quote from: cap235629 on April 28, 2010, 01:32:44 AM

Quote from: tdepp on April 28, 2010, 01:30:32 AM

Quote from: RiverAux on April 28, 2010, 12:38:00 AM
Actually, I think NIN's guidelines make a whole lot of sense and the "probably not oks" that he mentioned are just the sort of thing you would want to ask the SD about just to make sure.

I cannot take anyone seriously who advocates that we be allowed to post the colors at a Tea Party event.  They are not a political party like the Ds or Rs.  They are group of people with an ax to grind against President Obama, Democrats, liberals, non-Christians, and basically anyone who isn't like them.  I think that is EXACTLY the reason why such a ban is in place and requires USAF approval.  Let's reverse the politics.  Would anyone allow a CAP color guard participate in posting the colors at a Green Party event?  An American Socialist Party event?  They would also claim to be "pro-American."

I don't know about your squadrons, but my squadron's color guard is extremely busy presenting the colors at ANG, NG, city, veterans, and other such non-partisan gatherings and events.  If either the left or the right politicizes CAP, we will lose members, credibility, and financial support.  Our missions, once again, are emergency services, cadet training, aerospace education, complaining about Vanguard, and coming up with new uniform combinations.  Nowhere does it say politics.  If you want to be involved in politics, great.  There are local candidates and parties who need your help. But not while you are wearing a CAP uniform or in the name of CAP.

I would appreciate it if you kept your POLITICAL opinions to yourself

Hey, I didn't start this thread or initially bring up the Tea Party or suggest that it would somehow be ok to have CAP at a Tea Party event in ANY capacity.  And when others tell me here what great Americans they are and how pro-American they are, that's not how I see it.  Which is the whole point to not allowing political involvement while in CAP uniform to begin with. 

There's also an ignore feature you can place me on if you find my views inappropriate.  Or dime me to the moderators. 

Frankly, I'd rather concentrate on talking about how we can make our organization better, how we can help the public, how we can better promote CAP, talk about our proud history, discuss why Vanguard is the progenitor of all evil in the world, and debate whether we need still more uniforms.

RINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!  TIME'S UP.   :)

Quote from: tdepp on April 28, 2010, 01:51:06 AM

Frankly, I'd rather concentrate on talking about how we can make our organization better, how we can help the public, how we can better promote CAP, talk about our proud history, discuss why Vanguard is the progenitor of all evil in the world, and debate whether we need still more uniforms.

Exactly my point, and I agree that the posting of the colors was inappropriate. That was the point of the thread, not to debate politics....

Quote from: tdepp on April 28, 2010, 01:51:06 AM
There's also an ignore feature you can place me on if you find my views inappropriate. 

There isn't one. If there was I would use in for one poster in particular.

Does this mean I shouldn't invite politicians, ie, Congressmen or Senators to present my cadet awards, such as the Eaker, etc.??  What would I do if they decided to break into a political statement.  If I invite a Democrat, does that suggest my squadron and CAP support Democrats??

AirAux makes a good point- what to do when there are only one party's members of Congress in your represented area?

Though I believe the regs say that certain awards should be presented by members of Congress

Quote from: DakRadz on April 28, 2010, 02:43:46 AM
AirAux makes a good point- what to do when there are only one party's members of Congress in your represented area?

Though I believe the regs say that certain awards should be presented by members of Congress

By default there will always be only one party represented by your area. Think about it for a minute. You only send one rep from your district.

Quote from: davidsinn on April 28, 2010, 02:59:15 AM

Quote from: DakRadz on April 28, 2010, 02:43:46 AM
AirAux makes a good point- what to do when there are only one party's members of Congress in your represented area?

Though I believe the regs say that certain awards should be presented by members of Congress

By default there will always be only one party represented by your area. Think about it for a minute. You only send one rep from your district.

Senators represent the state, however.

I meant when the Rep. and both Senators (even the governor in Georgia) are all the same party. That's how it is for me- doesn't mean I would be supporting the Republican Party by having them as a guest for my Spaatz award (in the distant future), I just would love to have such a high-ranking gov. official present it to me; besides, Col. promised that would happen :D

Guys, I don't think anybody is suggesting (legitimately) that having your duly elected legislator (state, federal), county commissioner, mayor or whatever come present an award at your CAP squadron is inherently "political."  Yes, they are a part of a party (and, as I seem to recall, 98+% of the US Congress is part of one or the other of those parties, so unless you live in Vermont, Connecticut or some other place that I can't recall off the top of my head, chances are the guy/gal in your area whose name is prefaced by "The Honorable.." is either a Democrat or a Republican.. fancy that, huh?), but the presentation of awards and such is a civic rather than a political duty.

Instead of continuing to just throw about a bunch of partisan stones by using highly charged words like "Republican" or "liberal," I chose to offer up some guidance to CAP members who might, heaven forbid, legitimately come to this site seeking some guidance from the *cough* "brain trust" located here.

Instead of complaining about the Great Vanguard Conspiracy, or why Hawk Mountain sucks.... or whatever this weeks cause célèbre might be.

Last time I looked, this wasn't the Daily Kos or Free Republic.  It was CAP-Talk. 

Sooo, why don't we talk about CAP, in a way that can be constructive for people looking for information, advice, guidance and confirmation.

Sheesh.

I wholeheartedly agree with NIN on this one.  :clap:

Quote from: NIN on April 28, 2010, 03:23:52 AM
Guys, I don't think anybody is suggesting (legitimately) that having your duly elected legislator (state, federal), county commissioner, mayor or whatever come present an award at your CAP squadron is inherently "political."  Yes, they are a part of a party (and, as I seem to recall, 98+% of the US Congress is part of one or the other of those parties, so unless you live in Vermont, Connecticut or some other place that I can't recall off the top of my head, chances are the guy/gal in your area whose name is prefaced by "The Honorable.." is either a Democrat or a Republican.. fancy that, huh?), but the presentation of awards and such is a civic rather than a political duty.

Instead of continuing to just throw about a bunch of partisan stones by using highly charged words like "Republican" or "liberal," I chose to offer up some guidance to CAP members who might, heaven forbid, legitimately come to this site seeking some guidance from the *cough* "brain trust" located here.

Instead of complaining about the Great Vanguard Conspiracy, or why Hawk Mountain sucks.... or whatever this weeks cause célèbre might be.

Last time I looked, this wasn't the Daily Kos or Free Republic.  It was CAP-Talk. 

Sooo, why don't we talk about CAP, in a way that can be constructive for people looking for information, advice, guidance and confirmation.

Sheesh.

NIN,
I don't know why the moderators are allowing Religious and Political threads to florish here lately and extend 5 plus pages with out a timely lock.  Look at the mess it is causing.

C'mon people, there are millions of other Political, Policy, Partisan and Religious forums...let's keep this out of CAPTALK.

Quote from: Major Carrales on April 28, 2010, 04:13:46 AM
I don't know why the moderators are allowing Religious and Political threads to florish here lately and extend 5 plus pages with out a timely lock.  Look at the mess it is causing.

C'mon people, there are millions of other Political, Policy, Partisan and Religious forums...let's keep this out of CAPTALK.

I think the thread is fine without too much moderator intervention. Could it use a little "moderator guidance?" Maybe.  If this was CS, my mod staff would have squashed this one sooner rather than later, but then at the same time, several members of the community would have offered up constructive guidance on getting the thread back on track.

Honestly, folks need to be responsible for their own content here and think hard about what constitutes "community standards" before running off at the mouth on subjects or tangents that are only marginally related to the purpose of the site.  At the same time, its the responsibility of the participants in this online community to provide guidance, direction, course corrections, etc, to other participants who may stray away from the community standards.   In a respectful and constructive way.

As I was fond of saying "BITD" on CadetStuff: "Hey, look, at the end of the day, this is the house I setup and I'm holding the party in. You're the guest here, and you just came in, spilled beer on my carpet, crapped on my coffee table and wiped your butt on my sofa.. Unacceptable.."

The mods can't be everywhere at once, and more importantly, aren't the cavalry, ready to ride in and "make it all right."   On the one hand, people complain loudly about capricious moderation or "too much" moderation, but on the other hand, there are elements here who tend to take advantage of the lack of moderation and run roughshod over others.  So which way do you go?

Honestly, we're all adults here, I think (or in the case of Cadets, young adults).  And we should endeavor to act as such.  All the time.

(Try an exercise: Pick a controversial user and read his/her posts going back, say, 10 months or a year.   Of the total number of their posts in that timeframe, how many are constructive and how many are not?  Now look at my profile and go back the same amount of time and look at the same metric.  I'm not saying I'm the perfect CAP-Talk participant, but I think after all these years on the Internet, especially doing CAP stuff on the Internet, I've figured out how to participate in a constructive way...)

Amen!!!!!!!!!!!!!  ;D

no, No and NO.

CAP is supposed to be apolitical.

It does not matter who the C-in-C (POTUS) is, or what party s/he is from, does not change the fact that s/he commands all uniformed services, reserve components, Guard components in Federal service and auxiliary components.

I have a bumper sticker on my car from the '08 campaign, but that is my right as a private citizen.  In no way does it connote CAP/USAF involvement, consent or endorsement.

Frankly, I don't want to hear politics in a CAP context.  In fact, I've probably ticked a few people off when I've been the ranking officer in a CAP setting and people start getting political and I tell them to knock it off until the activity is over and they're speaking as private citizens.

There's enough (too much) political infighting in this country.  It's got no place in CAP.

Quote from: CyBorg on April 28, 2010, 07:07:16 PM
no, No and NO.

CAP is supposed to be apolitical.

It does not matter who the C-in-C (POTUS) is, or what party s/he is from, does not change the fact that s/he commands all uniformed services, reserve components, Guard components in Federal service and auxiliary components.

I have a bumper sticker on my car from the '08 campaign, but that is my right as a private citizen.  In no way does it connote CAP/USAF involvement, consent or endorsement.

Frankly, I don't want to hear politics in a CAP context.  In fact, I've probably ticked a few people off when I've been the ranking officer in a CAP setting and people start getting political and I tell them to knock it off until the activity is over and they're speaking as private citizens.

There's enough (too much) political infighting in this country.  It's got no place in CAP.

:clap:

Politics have no place in CAP... unless we're lobbying congress for more money.

Political and Religious debates are not part of the basic fabric of CAP.  In fact, they must never be.  We are here to serve the UNITED community, getting into partisanship and "siding" with either side will only spell ruin for the organization.  I don't care if the local offical is a "D" or an "R...," CAP serves us all.

Fellows, these are the most trying political times in history.  There is polarization like never before.  I find the "Bush Bashing" and "Obama Hating" as well as the "DEMONIZING of DEMOCRATS" and "RADICALLIZING of REPUBLICANS" to be stupidity at its worst and being VERBOTEN in CAP discussions.

Sorry, NIN, but LIBERAL and CONSERVATIVE Agendas need to stay at home.  Our only AGENDA is the mission.  May I remind you that images of President Obama with a toothbrush moustach and photos of President Bush dressed as "THE ANTI-CHRIST" were all produced by adults.  Need I remind you all of the threats made against public officials based solely on political leanings.  Need I point to some of the posts here that deal with politics and religion where the line is "crossed" and tempers flare?

If moderators can lock STAR TREK threads, ones where people from other regions are holding sessions where they are mingling, threads that vary only slightly from topic via evolution of the discussion...then I think threads steeped in POLITICAL and RELIGIOUS bile too should be locked.

I love N Harmons  "No placve in CAP for politics". But what planet is he on? CAP is so full of politics, it's make Congress looks like a knitting society.

Quote from: BillB on April 29, 2010, 01:53:13 AM
I love N Harmons  "No placve in CAP for politics". But what planet is he on? CAP is so full of politics, it's make Congress looks like a knitting society.

*ahem*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tongue-in-cheek