CAP joins the TEA party

[mynetdude]

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 

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.

[davidsinn]

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 

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.

[lordmonar]

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...

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.

[SarDragon]

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.

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?

[DakRadz]

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..."

[Major Carrales]

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.

[RiverAux]

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.

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.

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).

[SarDragon]

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.

[RiverAux]

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. 

[DakRadz]

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.

[Major Carrales]

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.

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.

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.

[SarDragon]

^^^^

Amen!

[RiverAux]

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.   

[Major Carrales]

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.

[lordmonar]

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?

[Major Carrales]

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.

[mynetdude]

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.

[tdepp]

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

:clap:

[tdepp]

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. 

[tdepp]

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.