Blue Collar Muse

The election was decided just two days ago. It didn’t take long for one of Obama’s most controversial and largely unheralded new programs to hit the news wires. It’s not his tax plans or his plans to “spread the wealth”, it’s not a cabinet or staff appointment, it’s not even a demure revelation that the US is a big place filled with many different views and that he was going to take some time to make sure the things he does are good for all Americans.

Nope.

The first major balloon floated by the nascent Obama administration after the announcement controversial Clinton appointee Rahm Emanuel would be Obama’s Chief of Staff (didn’t take long to drop the idea of “Change”) is a salvo in the sure to be hard fought battle to establish Obama’s “Civilian National Security Force.”

Back in July, in Colorado, Obama called for the creation of such a group.  His statement, largely unreported at the time and even since, was reported in a post here that quickly became and remains the most popular post at BCM attracting  hundreds of visitors per week looking for information.

In a July 2 speech outlining plans to expand opportunities for people to serve in areas such as AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps, Obama makes the following statement with no explanation or amplification.

“We cannot continue to rely 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.”

When I read that, I furiously started looking for it on the web. Interestingly, I found only 3 references to it. The Chicago Tribune reported it. Joseph Farah at World Net Daily reported it.   It’s reported that Congressional Quarterly reported it as well but I can’t find the article. Google searches reveal only blogs are covering it and none of the usual suspects have it. There are references to some discussion on Sean Hannity’s forums.

With the US Army alone at over 500,000 serving members and the US Military budget at over $400 billion for 2007, there were a lot of questions regarding such a gargantuan, sweeping program. Most important, how is it to be funded?

This morning, World Net Daily reports some light is being shed on the question. It is reporting Barney Frank is proposing cutting the budget for the military by 25%, by $150,000,000,000, and diverting the money to pay for his civilian national security force.

This will be an issue to watch closely. Not only is it the first example of things Obama will do as “the President but not my President”, it is the first example of Obama’s intentions for the future of this country. I have said, in offline discussions, that I believe a Barack Obama Presidency has the capacity literally to destroy this country. That sentiment has been pooh-poohed by Obama supporters who assure me Obama is a proud American who loves this country and would never do anything to harm it. In the face of such statements, for an administration yet to have served a day in actual power to float, as one of their very first ideas cutting our military budget by a fourth while we are still at war isn’t exactly confidence inspiring.

I applaud the President-elect’s efforts to cut spending. I’m all about that! But generally, when talking about spending cuts, the first things to eliminate are wasteful, redundant, unnecessary spending. Why start slashing Defense? Obama and company couldn’t find $150 billion dollars in the unconstitutional entitlement programs this country funds?

It appears Obama is taking this mandate thing a lot more seriously than he is taking his pledge to be my President, too! Keep watch over here for more on this as it develops …

Blue Collar Muse

ADDITIONAL READING:

Obama’s Plans for the Involuntary Servitude of American Youth by Velvet Hammer @ Velvet Hammer.

Community Service, Yep - Mandatory by Walter Olson @ Overlawyered - Hat tip to IInstapundit

Popularity: 44% [?]

UPDATED: In a follow up piece to the one linked below, World Net Daily notes that Obama’s comments are disappearing from the few places they had been recorded on the web. The video is vanishing as well. However, Fort Hard Knox has audio of the speech.

(Welcome to our World Net Daily, Alex Jones InfoWars, MoonBattery and No Silence Here readers. You all might also enjoy the series we’re doing on Eminent Domain abuse, ‘Will the Circle be Unbroken’. Click on the Eminent Domain category for more. Thanks for coming by!)

I was getting ready to start my day early this morning when my phone rang. It was a friend of mine in DC who wanted to know if I had seen and/or blogged about a comment Barack Obama made recently at a speech in Colorado. I told him it was unlikely and asked what he said that was so earth shattering.

In a July 2 speech outlining plans to expand opportunities for people to serve in areas such as AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps, Obama makes the following statement with no explanation or amplification.

“We cannot continue to rely 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.”

When I read that, I furiously started looking for it on the web. Interestingly, I found only 3 references to it. The Chicago Tribune reported it. Joseph Farah at World Net Daily reported it. It’s reported that Congressional Quarterly reported it as well but I can’t find the article. Google searches reveal only blogs are covering it and none of the usual suspects have it. There are references to some discussion on Sean Hannity’s forums.

As both my friend and Joseph Farah observed,

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?

The questions are legion and the implications of such an organization are staggering! What would it do? According to the title, it’s a civilian force so how would it go about discharging “national security” issues? What are the Constitutional implications for such a group? How is this to be paid for? Is this accounted for in some of Obama’s currently proposed tax increases or will we need more taxes to fund this enterprise? The statement was made in the context of youth service. Is this an organization for just the youth or are adults going to participate? How does one get away from the specter of other such “youth” organizations from Nazi Germany and the former Soviet Union when talking about it?

Joe Farah has, so far, been unsuccessful in getting any information out of the Obama camp on this. No MSM outlet is asking about it and the blogosphere is just ramping up. I’d like to see the rest of us get involved and get some clarity on exactly what Barack is proposing. At the least, it would seem a major expense that would have to be paid for. The ‘at worst’ options are pretty terrifying to contemplate. I’ve put in a request to the Obama campaign for some amplification and clarification. We’ll see what they have to say. More on this later …

Blue Collar Muse

NOVEMBER 6, 2008 UPDATE: Possible funding source for Civilian National Security Force?  Slash Defense Spending!

SEE ALSO:

Obamalitia? by BadIdeaGuy at Target Rich Environment

What is Obama’s $400 Billion Civilian National Security Force? by Leslie Carbone at Leslie Carbone

Have You Heard About Obama’s Civilian National Security Force? by Fred Dooley at Real Debate Wisconsin

More Agenda Items by Kay Brooks at Kay Brooks

What in the World is Obama’s Civilian National Security Force? at ARRA

Obamassiah’s National Army at Stix Blog

Obama Gets Scarier by Van Helsing at MoonBattery

Obama to Build Security Force to Rival Military by Mario Burgos at Mario Burgos

When is a Military Force Not a Military Force? by Skip at Granite Grok

Popularity: 46% [?]