| By Admin1 (admin) on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 - 8:35 am: Edit Post |
Bush treats Peace Corps well
"There is a legitimate philosophical difference here, and it involves the difference between voluntarism and service. Voluntarism is the act of doing valuable things that fall just outside the normal scope of governance.Read the op-ed and draw your own conclusions on where the Peace Corps falls in the big scheme of things as defined above: voluntarism or service? Does Bush really support the Peace Corps and is he willing to fight to defend his promise to double the Peace Corps by 2007 or is the Peace Corps next to be disappointed? Read the op-ed at:
Service is more intense: it is a full-time commitment to do the most difficult public works—policing, teaching, social casework. The Police Corps, which exists outside AmeriCorps, and Teach for America are exemplars of the latter.
They are unabashedly élitist; TFA accepts only 13% of all applicants. They involve rigorous training programs. And the goal is to leverage the altruism of the best and the brightest college students, putting them to work on the toughest jobs in the toughest neighborhoods—and, in the process, to help create a new generation of leaders like the "Greatest" generation, imbued with the spirit of sacrifice."
| Top Discussion Stories
|
| By bankass.com on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 3:19 am: Edit Post |
Joe, Unfortunately, Clinton's program was targeted and bushwacked. Those phone calls will go unreturned. Talk is cheap, watch his feet.