Don't Say I didn't Warn You!

So, today we learn yet another of Mr. Obama's grandiose schemes to enslave us all. On July, 2, 2008, he said publicly, that he would, if elected, establish a "Civilian National Security Force". This force would be as strong as the US Military, just as powerful, and funded at the same level. Time for some arithmetic here(apparently not taught at Harvard).

The total US Military budget for 2007, was in the neighborhood of 440 billion dollars. This represents over 3 and one half per cent of the value of our gross domestic product. Therefore, if we are to take Mr. Obama at his word, then where will the money come from to equal this same 440 billion dollars? Next, comes the not so small matter of populating this "Civilian National Security Force". In as much as there are currently over 1 and a half million Americans in the active military, and another almost 1 and a half million comprising the National Guards of the various states, and other reserve units, where will this manpower come from? Sounds a lot like conscription lies in wait around the corner for unsuspecting young Obama supporters.

Then, there is the "Mission Statement" itself. What in God's name will this super charged civilian para military force be charged with doing? What will be it's aims, and it's goals? More importantly, does America really need this? Does our Constitution allow it? There is something called "Posse Comitatus", which was enacted into Federal law in 1878, immediately after the "Reconstruction Act". The Federal government is pohibited from using it's active duty military forces within the United States as a police force. It is simply impermissible. Ergo, we need a civilian equivalent?

Today is the dawn of a new era in political thinking. Lest we forget, do we remember the infamous Gestapo of WWII fame? How about the STASI, that secret police arm of East Germany? Let us not forget the notorious KGB, the Soviet equivalent of all these examples. When a "civilian" security force is created, history teaches that it is the political power of the state, and not the rule of law, which is desired most by those who control such organizations, in this case: the executive branch of government. It would not be incorrect to identify such controlling organizations as being authoritarian, or totalitarian. Talk about your slippery slopes!

Hopefully, Mr, Obama is not intent on bringing to life these examples I have cited. Personally, I believe it simply "sounded" like a good idea. It was in a way, Kennedyesque, if you will. However, it also puts firmly into the glare of an unforgiving spotlight, the naivete, and the not quite ready for prime time character of this man who would be president. For these reasons, we just can not "afford" this man as our next president. God save us!

Looks like my job with the children became a little harder...but we'll manage, we always do.