Obamas National Socialist Civil Defense Force

Obama thinks we need a civil defense force inside the USA as  big and as well funded as the Armed forces of the USA.  I would like to think this is an innocent mistake on the part of liberals.  I would like to think they do not know what they are asking for.  Unfortunately I think they do.   This force would naturally be staffed with correct thinking liberals.  With the 500,000 number I heard Obama bandy about its hard to imagine the recruiting not reaching into cultures and people who are solely in it for themselves and what they can gain.  The abuses will be horrific.  One gets the idea he is calling for the armed take over of the nation by the left and including a large number of blacks.  The violent radicals of the type Bill Ayers is combined with down scale street hood blacks would be a bad combination to lead the country.

No doubt this National Socialist police force of Brown Shirts will tend to help the Obama left's agenda.  You "progressives" should consult your history books to see if you are really all that progressive.  Likely "regressives" are a more likely term for you.  Remember "Arbeit Macht Frei!".   ALL ABOARD!
 

6 Responses to “Obamas National Socialist Civil Defense Force” Links are nofollows and will not increase your PageRank. This blog has Akismet installed and you will end up on a spammer list if your comment is spammy.

  1. RYAN R Says:

    not quite, why not show the whole thing? Fearmonger

    From Factcheck.org

    This false claim is a badly distorted version of Obama’s call for doubling the Peace Corps, creating volunteer networks and increasing the size of the Foreign Service.
    This question stems from an interview that Republican Rep. Broun of Georgia gave to The Associated Press Nov. 10. The story carried a headline, “Georgia congressman warns of Obama dictatorship.” It said that Broun “fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship.” And it quoted him this way:

    Rep. Paul Broun, Nov. 10: It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he’s [Obama's] the one who proposed this national security force. … That’s exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it’s exactly what the Soviet Union did.

    Similar claims have been circulating in right-leaning blogs and conservative Web sites ever since July, when Obama made a single reference to a “civilian national security force” in a campaign speech in Colorado. Obama’s detractors make much of his expansive (and exaggerated) description of such a force as being “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the U.S. military. They also ignore the context.

    Obama was not talking about a “security force” with guns or police powers. He was talking specifically about expanding AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps and the USA Freedom Corps, which is the volunteer initiative launched by the Bush administration after the attacks of 9/11, and about increasing the number of trained Foreign Service officers who populate U.S. embassies overseas.

    Here is the relevant portion of what Obama actually said, with the sentences quoted selectively by Broun and others in bold.

    Obama, July 2, Colorado Springs, CO: [As] president I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots [from 75,000] and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals, like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their effort connected to a common purpose.

    People of all ages, stations and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem – they are the answer. So we are going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We’ll call on Americans to join an energy corps, to conduct renewable energy and environmental clean-up projects in their neighborhoods all across the country.

    We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, and to be there for our military families. And we’re going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. We cannot continue to rely 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’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. We need to use technology to connect people to service. We’ll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where American can browse opportunities to volunteer. You’ll be able to search by category, time commitment and skill sets. You’ll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities.

    This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their own change from the bottom up.

    Does that sound like a force that could kick down your door in the middle of the night and haul you off to a Gulag or concentration camp? You decide.

    -Brooks Jackson

  2. FREEMON SANDLEWOULD Says:

    Spoken like a true believer. I thought all lefties were atheist?! National service? How about just getting a job and being honest? oops liberals have trouble with that one!

    Save the planet? – You lefties are a bunch of drama queens without a doubt. What if I do not care to partake in your religion of “public service” ? The liberals natural reflex is coercion.

    And finally – how else could his statement about a civil defense force be construed? We need a force at least as powerful as our armed forces? Pretty iffy if you ask me. The problem with you liberals is you believe in coercion. You want to coerce me into paying for your made up calamity called global warming. You coerce coerce coerce and talk all high and mighty. The holier than thou athiests. I’m athiest but coercion is wrong. Quite ironic as coercion is the first thing you accuse conservatives of. Coercion seems to be a liberals best friend. You all seem to have this Stalinist streak that runs to your cores. Your ideas are weak. How else would you ever convince anyone? You need peer pressure for the mentally weak and coercion for those who are not.

  3. MICHAEL Says:

    It baffles my mind that you would still argue this point? This type of RADICAL overreacting was the right-wing’s only mode of defense throughout the entire campaign. Take a 16 second clip, blow it entriely out of proportion, thow in the word “socialist” and watch the fireworks.

  4. FREEMON SANDLEWOULD Says:

    Mike – does not surprise me you are baffled.

  5. ANTI-SOCIALIST Says:

    A 16 second clip, hmmm. Seem like only the clip is in question? How many times did he say it when not being recorded? Too many. This man is a National Socialist and he’s very, very proud of it. He tells the ignorant anything to get a vote. Just as the most celebrated National Socialist did. If you don’t know who that was, look it up, I’m not like this government, you’ll have to work to earn your education.

  6. LEXIA 3 Says:

    It baffles my mind that you would still argue this point? This type of RADICAL overreacting was the right-wing’s only mode of defense throughout the entire campaign. Take a 16 second clip, blow it entriely out of proportion, thow in the word “socialist” and watch the fireworks

Leave a Reply