Obama's "Civilian National Security Force"
It's time we wake up, and start listening to what Barack Obama is really saying (provided his words actually mean anything). Even those people who consider themselves liberals or Democrats should be worried about this man.
On Wednesday, July 2nd, Obama gave a speech in Colorado Springs that emphasized "national service" for all Americans. That, in itself, doesn't sound too shocking, since other presidents (e.g. Roosevelt, Kennedy, Clinton, and Bush) have suggested similar goals. Typically it's just empty rhetoric.
And we've all probably heard this famous line from John F. Kennedy's inaugural address:
That sounds like a worthy goal. Who doesn't like the idea of an "all-volunteer" organization to help the poor and disadvantaged, right?
Does Obama realize there's no constitutional authority for this? We all turn a deaf ear, because it's "for a good cause". But please, let me keep my own money -- I'm poor too. Is there no end to the government spending our taxes on other people?
Here's where Obama starts getting really creepy though:
What authority will this "civilian force" have? Are there national security issues that our police and national guard can't handle?
What will we call them? ...maybe, the Green Police?
Will this only be "state-approved" secular training? ...or do parents and students have a choice?
As with the students in secondary schools, how will they monitor and enforce all of this? Who keeps tabs? Will a whole new government bureaucracy be created?
Yet, it all comes down to choice and freedom. Choosing where, when, and how (or whether we even want to) is our God-given right. No government authority should ever be allowed to command children's responsibilities, or dictate our moral convictions to us.
That's not a slippery slope -- it's a freakin' cliff.
Sounds like fascism -- not patriotism -- to me!!
*********************************************************
Sources >> Chicago Tribune / AARP / Baltimore Sun
Yet I'm curious -- why hasn't ALL of the mainstream media picked up on this?
Why aren't these questions being asked everywhere?
.
It's time we wake up, and start listening to what Barack Obama is really saying (provided his words actually mean anything). Even those people who consider themselves liberals or Democrats should be worried about this man.
On Wednesday, July 2nd, Obama gave a speech in Colorado Springs that emphasized "national service" for all Americans. That, in itself, doesn't sound too shocking, since other presidents (e.g. Roosevelt, Kennedy, Clinton, and Bush) have suggested similar goals. Typically it's just empty rhetoric.
And we've all probably heard this famous line from John F. Kennedy's inaugural address:
Obama's message started with a similar tone:"And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."
In his speech at the University of Colorado campus, Obama pledged that enhanced public service and active citizenship would be a central cause of his presidency."Loving your country shouldn't just mean watching fireworks on the 4th of July. Loving your country must mean accepting your responsibility to do your part to change it. If you do, your life will be richer, our country will be stronger."
Obama repeated his pledge to boost the size of the active military. But he also said the nation's future and safety depends on more than just additional soldiers."I won't just ask for your vote as a candidate. I will ask for your service and your active citizenship when I'm president of the United States. This won't be a call issued in one speech or one program. I want this to be a central cause of my presidency. We will ask Americans to serve. We will create new opportunities for Americans to serve."
He promised to increase AmeriCorps slots from 75,000 to 250,000 and pledged to double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011."It also depends on the teacher in East L.A., or the nurse in Appalachia, the after-school worker in New Orleans, the Peace Corps volunteer in Africa, the Foreign Service officer in Indonesia."
That sounds like a worthy goal. Who doesn't like the idea of an "all-volunteer" organization to help the poor and disadvantaged, right?
Does Obama realize there's no constitutional authority for this? We all turn a deaf ear, because it's "for a good cause". But please, let me keep my own money -- I'm poor too. Is there no end to the government spending our taxes on other people?
Here's where Obama starts getting really creepy though:
What exactly is a "civilian national security force"? ...and why do we need one?"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded."
What authority will this "civilian force" have? Are there national security issues that our police and national guard can't handle?
What will we call them? ...maybe, the Green Police?
Obama called for greater integration with schools, so that young Americans are better prepared to be active citizens.Joseph Farah, from WorldNetDaily has very real concerns about this statement:
Are we talking about creating a police state here?
The U.S. Army alone has nearly 500,000 troops. That doesn't count reserves or National Guard. In 2007, the U.S. Defense budget was $439 billion.
Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that?
If not, why did he say it? What did he mean?
Who will Obama appoint to administer this new "civilian national security force"?
Where will the money come from?
Where in the Constitution does he see justification for the federal government creating such a domestic army?
In America, are we not supposed to be FREE -- to volunteer -- or not volunteer?"Just as we teach math and writing, arts and athletics, we need to teach young Americans to take citizenship seriously."
As a parent, this one strikes me as "way over the top". He's going to withhold federal funding from school districts unless each and every student gives fifty hours of service? ...starting from age 12 and up?He said he would make federal assistance conditional on school districts establishing service programs and set the goal of 50 hours of service a year for middle and high school students.
Will this only be "state-approved" secular training? ...or do parents and students have a choice?
It's harder to force college students into this mandatory service. So basically, he's saying the government will pay them $40 per hour to do it, right? To me, it even makes sense to give college students a reasonable tax break. We all know how expensive university life can be, for both students and parents. But trying to "force" 100 hours of government service into their lives seems like a very bad solution.For college students, Obama would set the goal at 100 hours of service a year and repeated his pledge to create a $4,000 annual tax credit for college students that would be tied to that level of service.
As with the students in secondary schools, how will they monitor and enforce all of this? Who keeps tabs? Will a whole new government bureaucracy be created?
Volunteering is a great ideal. If possible, we should all do it, every chance we get.Obama said he realizes there will be skeptics who will question how he might possibly be able to get more young people motivated to do public service, but argued the nation's very spirit is tied to greater service.
Yet, it all comes down to choice and freedom. Choosing where, when, and how (or whether we even want to) is our God-given right. No government authority should ever be allowed to command children's responsibilities, or dictate our moral convictions to us.
That's not a slippery slope -- it's a freakin' cliff.
Since when did providing our children a "world-class education" include mandatory service to The State?"Renewing that spirit starts with service. Make no mistake: our destiny as Americans is tied up with one another. If we are less respected in the world, then you will be less safe. If we keep paying dictators for foreign oil, gas prices are going to keep rising, and so are the oceans. If we can't give all of our children a world-class education, our economy is going to fall behind."
Sounds like fascism -- not patriotism -- to me!!
*********************************************************
Sources >> Chicago Tribune / AARP / Baltimore Sun
Yet I'm curious -- why hasn't ALL of the mainstream media picked up on this?
Why aren't these questions being asked everywhere?
.
Last edited: