Sunday, November 02, 2008

Does Obama Really Plan to Spend $500 Billion on a Civilian National Security Force?

During the campaign Barack Obama said the following: “We cannot continue to depend only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that is just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.”

We know from his previous comments that Barack Obama has little faith in or love for the American military. He won’t apologize for his position on the surge. And he never talks about leaving Iraq in victory; it’s only about leaving Iraq soon, without regard to what happens as a result. And Obama feels the military is so off course that he must rebuild it.

This seems to be a common theme for the most inexperienced candidate ever to run for president: If it ain’t broke, go ahead and fix it anyway. He says America is the greatest nation on Earth, but it needs to be changed. Our military is the strongest, most professional and best in the world, but he wants to rebuild it.

So his call for a civilian national security force is a real puzzle. What does that mean? What role will the CNSF play that the military, the police and the FBI do not already play? What national security role requires a special new agency? The military costs $500 billion annually. The civilian force will be “just as well funded” Mr. Obama said. How will it be funded? Where’s the money going to come from? The middle class who earn less that $100k? Who will members of this force be? How will they be trained?

Such a force may well be unconstitutional, although one gets the feeling that Sen. Obama couldn’t care less, given his disdain for the document that is so badly flawed as to have ignored implementing a socialist government.

Is it possible that Sen. Obama’s desire to augment or do away with Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms is at the root of this new force? Could it be that by creating the CNSF it will become the “well regulated militia” the Second Amendment mentions? And that by establishing this militia the Second Amendment can be twisted to imply that the militia replaces the right to bear arms among citizens?

It’s a real mystery, and the mind can go many different directions in trying to imagine just what Sen. Obama has in mind. But then, it is his style to say things to get people all worked up without putting any meat on his ideas.

This one might be too important to let lie, however.

Click Here to Comment

No comments: