Volunteer, Schmolunteer
BARACK OBAMA IS PRO-SLAVERY?
By Mande Wilkes
FITSNews - July 9, 2008 - Not satisfied with bankrupting the nation, presidential nominee Barack Obama is adorning his socialist package with a great big bow in the form of mandatory volunteerism.
Historically termed “slavery,” American middle and high school students will be forced to volunteer 50 hours of annual service, and college students will have to contribute 100 hours.
Note that the U.S. Constitution, in the 13th Amendment, states that “neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime … shall exist within the United States.”
Though it’s pretty easy these days to circumvent the Constitution, the only way Obama’s plan could pass the smell test would be if all of the Supreme Court justices died and a stalemated Congress couldn’t agree on any replacements.
And while it is ironic that a black man plans to mandate a form of slavery, the real irony lies in the fact that Obama was a professor of constitutional law!
The media is abuzz over the semantics - about whether forced volunteerism is still volunteerism - or if it’s just a euphemism for work. The thing is, semantics have nothing to do with it.
Work results in monetary reward to the worker while volunteerism does not. Indeed, that is at its core the meaning of volunteerism, people do it freely and without expecting anything in return.
In Obama’s plan, there will be a tangible reward - for schools, of course.
Obama would mandate his proposal by attaching it as a contingency for federal education funding. Not only will this guarantee compliance from greedy institutions, it also shifts the burden of exploitation to the schools, turning them into veritable plantation owners within a system that requires educators to wield the shackles of oppression.
And make no mistake: Involuntary servitude is oppression, even when it is promulgated by the government. Especially when it is promulgated by the government. Just ask Cubans.
Oh, right, we can’t ask them because our government bars us from traveling to a nation which requires involuntary servitude from its youth.
Loading ...
Comments
By rick on July 9th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Let me guess…the mainstream media will jump on this as manna from heaven. Gotta love this guy, when talking about politicians doing anything to be elected, this guy knows his audience. Has anyone taken the time to pass this to Jesse Jackson? Maybe he needs to know about the upcoming slavery… Lets hear his excuse for backing this piece of constitutional ignorance. Never bored, always amazed.
By Jane Curtin on July 9th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Mande: “You ignorant slut”. You really are stupid. This is so wrong on so many levels, it boggles the reality-based mind.
Linking to right-wingnut writers is the first clue. Jonah “My claim to fame is my momma was a Judas” Goldberg panders to the mouth-breathers amoung y’all. I did notice Jonah’s story says John Bush III McSame wants to do “essentially” the same. I also noticed there are no direct quotes from any Obama proposal, only Jonah’s paraphrases.
The US “no-fly zone” policy against Cuban travel comes from Repugnant Party pandering to Cuban-Americans in South Florida. Junior Bush’s government certainly encourages Americans to travel to Red China(just wanted to use a term y’all would recognize) which is the greatest violator of human rights in the world.
I don’t have time for more but I always love constitutional law arguments from wingnut journalists whose closest connection to the law is when they had to apply for PTI when they got caught shoplifting in Wal-Mart. Or, I guess you could ask your boss about the criminal justice system he knows all-so-well. How did those 26 weeks of anger management classes go? Ya think they worked?
Keep it up, Mande. You’ve certainly exceeded our expectations in plumbing the depths of your ignorance. (Any one remember Mande’s fact-free drivel about Good Samaritan laws?)
Jonah, the famous Iraq War Chickhawk, the man who told us in 2005 there would be no shooting/no hostilities in Iraq by January of 2007.
By Kids need to be working paying taxes -not volunteering on July 9th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
You are so so so old fashioned. When does a President have to worry about abiding by the Constitution anymore?
The Constitution is only used to educate kids about what our founding fathers thought was important way back then.
These kids do not need to be volunteering though- they need to have jobs and be paying taxes to keep my social security check coming, and my free health care, and pay for the wars I get to watch on my color TV.
By Rob W. on July 9th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Yo, how about telling the whole story, or ripping off the entire article instead of just part of it? Even I know, and the article you link to says, that McCain favors this same “compulsory volunteerism”, and has for a while. Railing on Obama for this without even mentioning McCain’s long-term support of exactly the same idea, particularly when it’s contained in the article you yourself presented, is just sloppy. Do better.
And seriously, “educators to wield the shackles of oppression”?
By Mande on July 9th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
@ Rob W.: As far as I know, McCain has yet to set forth specific requirements for compulsory volunteerism. Supporting something (as McCain seems to support forced volunteerism) and prescribing a plan for that something (as Obama has laid out) are different things entirely. Still, in the interest of full disclosure, I linked to an article which states that McCain supports such a plan as well.
If McCain lays out specifics, I’ll probably write an article on that too. Until then, there’s just really not much of a story there.
By candace bergen-belsen on July 9th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
As someone with a law degree, I can’t even read this with a straight face. I can’t even argue with this article - it’s like trying to talk to someone that doesn’t believe in the germ theory of disease.
Will, please exercise some editorial discretion. Your site’s going to turn into a high school newspaper if crap like this keeps popping up.
By fitsnews on July 9th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Candy baby,
What’s wrong with that? Sic Willie loves high school chicks!
-FITSNews
P.S. - We think Mande rules.
By baker on July 9th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Yet another strange commentary on race from Mande. It’s a trend!
“And while it is ironic that a black man plans to mandate a form of slavery….”
This is a preposterous and, in my opinion, offensive comment. To compare a year or two of mandated public service to the system of chattel slavery black people endured is really, really absurd.
I’m not sure that I’m a fan of Barack Obama’s idea on this, but, again, it simply is not analagous to a system that:
– allowed people to be sold as individuals
– allowed children to be sold away from their families
– allowed for the severe punishment (beatings, etc.) of human chattel
– involved life-long servitude
And so on.
What do you think of this stuff appearing on your blog, Will?
By fitsnews on July 9th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Baker-
As somebody who spoonfed Spartanburgers prodigious amounts of the left’s preposterous and offensive drivel (while posing as an objective reporter), we don’t think you’ve got much room to talk, bo-bo.
Sic is sunning himself on the South Carolina coast at the moment, but when he gets to a phone we’ll be sure to ask him what he thinks of “this stuff” appearing on his blog.
In the meantime, if you don’t like it, why keep coming around to read it?
-FITSNews
By b on July 9th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Will, you need to “beat” Mande into shape…
Doesn’t she realize who she is working for?!?!? She better wear catcher’s gear when she shows up for work tomorrow.
By Oh Mande on July 9th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Poor Mande,
She’s probably only but a product of the SC school system of excellence. But she’s got great eyes to make up for rhetorical deficiencies, don’t you think?
And I might add, her whimiscal adventures in logic seem to create a lot of blogging activity, so maybe she’s “offbase as a foxette.”
By L A Law on July 9th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
#6 ..CB-B
My, arent we just so proud of ourself. Why are you wasting your time reading stupid blogs when you could be in DC advising the Supremes.
By candace bergen-belsen on July 9th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
@ #9
“In the meantime, if you don’t like it, why keep coming around to read it?”
I think some of us just see the author and are morbidly curious as to what the latest trainwreck is going to look like.
She may “rule”, but that doesn’t make her a competent writer.
By Rob W. on July 9th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Mande: Your article spent very little time talking about the specifics of Obama’s plan, and most of your time on how bad an idea this “volunteerism” is. No matter who makes the plan, the idea is going to be just as bad (although comparing it to American slavery before the Civil War is just ridiculous). Arguing against the principle of compulsory service and then saying you can’t attack McCain because he hasn’t laid out his specifics doesn’t make much sense.
As far as “full disclosure” goes, you spent the whole column railing against Obama (for specifically agreeing with McCain) and didn’t mention McCain at all. That’s not an accurate portrayal of the situation, particularly as it relates to the presidential race. It would be like if I spent a whole post railing against McCain for foolishly pumping money into a mortgage bailout plan, while linking to an equally foolish blog post that had only a passing reference to Obama’s near-identical views on the subject.
By candace bergen-belsen on July 9th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
@ 12
Am I proud of wasting three years and going into massive debt to get a nearly worthless degree that can’t even get me a decent job? ha.
However, I do understand the 13th amendment, which, combined with a dollar, may buy me a coke.
By HR Pufnstuf on July 9th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
Mande… “What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”
By SamSpade on July 9th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Candace,
If you have a J.D. and can’t find a decent job, your opinion on matters legal means little, because you are probably a bottom-of-your-class loser.
I, on the other hand, am capable not only of reading the Thirteenth Amendment but of Keyciting the bitch on Westlaw. And a careful review of the applicable precedents strongly suggests that the government cannot compel “volunteerism” unless the draft power is exercised, which seems unlikely.
By Adam Roberts on July 9th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Gotta agree. This article is trash. Saying supporting an idea but having no concrete proposal to implement is better than supporting it and having a proposal is non sensical. How can you responsibly support it with no plan for implementation.
Mande, you are a terrible analyst, and not in the “Will sucks but I will be back tomorrow” kind of way.
Time for a staff change my bald headed friend…and we know exactly how much you like high school girls.
Your comparison of volunteerism to slavery represents your total lack of understanding of either.
By It's doo doo, baby! on July 9th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
This entry was the latest in what on this blog is “the dumbest shit I’ve ever read.” Good job at lowering the bar.
By Not a hater on July 9th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Yes, it was a fluffy, nothing article, but there a lot of those on this site. Only the ones with Mande’s bylines get attacked. Incidentally, why is Mande the only one with a byline? Everything else is just posted FITS News.
By baker on July 9th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
“As somebody who spoonfed Spartanburgers prodigious amounts of the left’s preposterous and offensive drivel (while posing as an objective reporter), we don’t think you’ve got much room to talk, bo-bo.”
Will, do you have the first — any — example to back up this claim, or is it just an attempt at an insult (and perhaps an attempted diversion from criticism you must know is on the mark)? You and I may not agree on a number of issues, but your attack here is thoroughly unfounded….and I think you know it. Like I noted about your attack on The State (regarding its staffing cuts), I think it’s pretty clear you’re trying to score points rather than get at any meaningful discussion.
Which is sad.
Because I do enjoy your blog at times. You have a sense of humor — that’s enjoyable and certainly indicative of your smarts. You have some interesting inside information on SC politics, something hard to come by at times for those of us in the backcountry.
So, indeed, I think it’s unfortunate when someone as intelligent and talented as yourself resorts to name-calling and completely unwarranted accusations and the like. I also think it’s too bad that you’d allow a contributing writer to your blog actually claim that mandatory public service is somehow analogous to chattel slavery. It’s a really, really unintelligent and offensive argument, in my opinion, and I have a hard time thinking that you could possibly disagree.
But having such on your blog….that’s your call. I was just asking.
I hope you’re having a good time at the coast. Sounds like fun.
By Mande's mom on July 9th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
what a douche bag this writer is. Come on, Sic. Even YOU aren’t this fucking stupid.
Good marketing plan, though. Go for the douche bag demographic by writing things that are unbelievably stupid.
By rick on July 10th, 2008 at 6:11 am
Anytime anything is mandated with penalties attached is a form of slavery. ( Take a look at the various things we spend our time and money on complying with simply because someone thought we should) We are a free nation with independent will to choose how we spend our time. To mandate volunteerism, while a nice thing in an altruistic way, is still forcing people to perform service for free, and exacting a penalty for non-compliance is a form of slavery. To the people from Columbia (Whens ya’ll taks dem peoples and makes them pix de cotton, an dey don’t wants to, den ya’ll whips dem….thats de same principal, requirements with penalties attached for someone else’s enrichment). In this case it may be societies at large, but its still a wrongful taking of labor.
By FWFIV on July 10th, 2008 at 6:55 am
Mande, since you are such an ardent constitutional defender, I eagerly await your posts which will take the Bush adminstration to task for their mockery of the document you claim to hold so dear.
By candace bergen-belsen on July 10th, 2008 at 7:56 am
@ 17 “SamSpade”
Butler v. Perry, 240 U.S. 328, 332 (1916). “[t]he term `involuntary servitude’ was intended to cover those forms of compulsory labor akin to African slavery. . . .”
Butler is a short opinion. I hope all three of the people left monitoring these comments read it.
Now, “SamSpade”, please go back to spading whatever shitty journal you’re on. I’m sure you’ve got a lot of “bitches” to Keycite.
And BTW, I have one of the “good” legal jobs. You, on the other hand, are looking at the worst legal job market in decades.
By Rob W. on July 10th, 2008 at 8:00 am
@ 16: You win.
By Sons of Confederate Veterans on July 10th, 2008 at 8:39 am
Obama endorsed the “U.S. Rebel Flag”. See here: http://www.ridgewaysouthcarolina.com/. Click on Archives at the bottom of the screen and see the lead article in the issue for March 19, 2008.
By Fuetwabsasseks on August 2nd, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Thanks !