So the difficulty is formulating a response which doesn't sound crazy.
For starters, we've survived without a domestic paramilitary for 240 years. Or, rather, we seem to have done all right with the National Guards fulfilling that function when necessary. We should press Obama to explain why such a thing is necessary -- and get him to be more specific than alluding to gauzy generalities about a "common experience" to remind young people what it is to be "an American."
Another point: Why does Obama wish to divert recruits from the military? Many young Americans sign up for a patriotic "common experience" which informs them what it is to be "an American" every year. We call this common-experience-providing organization the United States Armed Forces. In addition to providing common experiences to many young Americans of diverse backgrounds, the US Armed Forces also serve the minor secondary function of defending the nation against foreign threats.
What is Obama's goal here if not to undermine one of the main attractors of military service? The campaign continues running on the claim that military recruitment is low. Why does he strive to lower it further?
Getting to the creepy point: Let us concede that Obama is not Hitler the H-word and has no H-word-like designs. Even so, the idea of a permanent paramilitary for, um, "responding to emergencies" is worrisome. If anyone really believes that 18 year old college students with three months of kinda-bull****ty "civilian defense sleepaway camp" are going to be shoring up the levies the next time the Mississippi overflows its banks, I've got a collapsed bridge to sell you. What they're going to be doing is what they're always doing -- showing up late and getting in the way, smoking pot and trying to get laid.
Why are young military recruits different? Well, they're military, for one thing. For another thing, if they step out of line badly enough they can be court-martialed. Does Obama intend to impose military-style discipline and justice on his Obama Youth?
Obama's devoted cultists have already been caught abusing their jobs in the civil service -- digging dirt on political enemies, bullying a girl whose dad serves in Iraq. Why would we wish to swell the ranks of such hyperpartisan civil servants?
Given that there is so little upside to the notion of a permanent civilian paramilitary, the serious chance of small political mischief, and the small chance of serious political mischief, weight against this, um, audacious plan.
Finally, the cost. This is a somewhat secondary concern because Obama is going to pay off his cultists whether they do any work or not. The grants and giveaways for the Obama Youth are coming from the Obamistration way or the other. But those too should be fought.
Here's where my opinion on some issues is controversial for some on the forum. I believe that a short term of military service should be compulsory for everyone in this country. My main problem with the way that they're proposing this is that it creates a standing army within our own borders, which is of course unconstitutional. What Immanuel and Obama see are probably 2 different things. I would venture to guess that Immanuel see's an IDF type force, and Obama probably sees more of a police type force. Both will be dangerous to our liberties, and both need to be fought at all costs.
__________________ Ever shall I stand tall in remembrance of the sacrifice of those who came before, in the spirit of freedom not solemn but proud; that this nation has labored and secured the blessings of freedom. Vigilant I stand in action and purpose for posterity such that the spoils of our labors shall be preserved and not squandered on the prospect of equality through oppression. Such is the burden and the reward of a patriot.
The fact that we suddenly now need a force like this is obviously somehow Bush's fault and will continue to be so for 4 years (if we're lucky). After all, he is the Destroyer of all Rights isn't he?
__________________
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
The fact that we suddenly now need a force like this is obviously somehow Bush's fault and will continue to be so for 4 years (if we're lucky). After all, he is the Destroyer of all Rights isn't he?
The same way we should fight any idiotic, wasteful policy from Washington, with grassroots political effort, and by refusing to support any politician who pushes for it.
No we are not screwed. If they want to create a military force to be excercised against the people to enforce edicts that are in violation of the constitution, then we do as our founding fathers did, and it will be done with it.
__________________ 'You can all go to hell. I'm going to Texas'-Davy Crockett
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Benjamin Franklin They're up and ready for content! For Political Dicussion and more... http://www.empirepaladin.com/NewForums/
I have yet to ever hear an exact explanation of exactly what the hell he want to do. It seems that Obama was trying to mobilize those that felt left out and with out a voice. He wanted to take all that antiwar sentiment and give it a direction. He wanted to show he wasn't about handouts but about hard work.
So he said all these things like the civil defense force and community service and earning money for college and all this crap. However, I never heard any specifics about what exactly was the problem he was trying to address and what exactly he was going to do. I just took it as a bunch of election bull$hit.
He has mentioned this defense force a lot, yet no specifics. I haven't got a clue what it would look like, or even if the government can legally wield such a force. The Constitution is quite specific about military and National Guard. Smoke and mirrors as far as I concerned.
Linear Mode
