Obama’s National Security Force: The Seeds are Planted

The Gadfly ^ | The Gadfly

[The Conservative Yogini]

There is no higher religion than human service. To work for the common good is the greatest creed. – Woodrow Wilson (and his worship of the STATE)

Way back when, during the campaign, Obama made the declaration that America needs a national civilian security force, that is “just as strong and just as well funded as the military.“

Well, folks, here it comes.

The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, known as the GIVE Act -- sponsored by Reps. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y, and George Miller, D-Calif. -- was approved by a 321-105 vote and now goes to the Senate.

[flaglady47]

“Just a random thought, but mothers might just be the demographic which reacts to having their children taken from them. I know it sounds silly that the mothers would object acts an age when her child normally goes off to military or to college anyway, but this represents a rupture of the bond to no advancement for the child. It throws children into the hands of nameless faceless apparatchiks for no well-known or broadly accepted purpose. It exposes the children not just to psychological and political indoctrination, it also exposes them to an atmosphere of community sex.
The mothers must know that the teenager who goes off to these indoctrination centers will come back an individual who likely will be something other than her child. She must fear that she will never be able to redeem them.”

Excellent, this is the argument that must be made to the nation at large. Bookmark your comment so that it can be circulated to what’s left of our media (talk radio, and Fox Cable, and the conservative web sites) when needed.

[nathanbedford]

I posted my notion that this is a problem which cannot be solved by logic but which must be accomplished by resort to emotion. The hold by Obama on the left is essentially emotional in character and we would be foolish indeed to underestimate the power of that emotional bond. In a vanity which I posted before the election I tried to describe the daunting challenge we face in trying to bring these people to a true understanding of the nature of the Obama threat. I doubt it can be accomplished by logic at least not with logic that comes before an emotional epiphany because they simply will not be open to rationality. Here is part of my vanity:

The conclusion of anyone with common sense who has seen the films of innocent children singing their Obama songs or who has watched the quasi-military chanting and saluting of the Obama Youth in military garb must conclude that there is something very, very wrong with these people. I remember when I first saw the YouTube Children singing their Obama song I became conscious after a while that my mouth was gaping open, so appalled was I. My reaction to seeing the paramilitary gang marching into the karate hall was a mixture of embarrassment that these kids would make such fools of themselves and anger that adults would so brazenly manipulate children. Then I felt a creeping sense of unease that there was something potentially very sinister going on. Dear merciful God, this is Orwellian!

Beyond a very healthy repugnance to the spectacle of brainwashed children put on display, beyond the inescapable Maoist symbolism of it all, a commonsense person asks, what kind of man would permit this to go on in his name? What kind of parent would not seek to protect his child from such a man? What kind of pathology would lead parents who presumably love their children to consign those children to the demons of mind control? How could Americans fall for such a transparent cult of personality?

Unfortunately, we need not be uncertain about what kind of man would permit this grotesquerie to be advanced in his name. History provides us with plenty of examples: Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Kim Jong-Il come to mind and now we add Barak Obama to the list. Why has he not spoken out and repudiated this? Would not a decent man do so if only for the children?

If Obama will not speak out now as a candidate when a little modesty, even false modesty, would advance his chances, what will he do when he gains office with no resistance anywhere on the horizon; no opposition in either the House or the Senate, no voice in traditional media to be raised against him, no institutional resistance on a national level of any kind organized to discourage him? Because he condones this obscenity one must ask, Is Obama really a narcissist as has been claimed? If so, how far will he go when he has the levers of power in his hands when there is no effective resistance to his ego?

How dangerous is Barak Obama?

Is he too dangerous to be put in a place where he could literally get us all killed? Or Is he the indispensable man in some sense? I do not think so. There is nothing in his career that suggests that he is the man for this season. In a time of war he has no military experience. In a time of looming financial disaster, he has no economic credentials. If he is potentially dangerous and if he is not indispensable, why would so many people want to put him in a position where he could do us harm, even get us all killed?

My commonsense explanation is that there must be a pathology, a mass psychosis, that brings people to the point where not only are they eager to make him the most powerful man in the world but they are invoking his name and calling upon him to be their savior. This they do rather than falling on their knees out of fear of The Real God.

This is the Obama pathology.

To a middle-class conservative who instinctively rejects conspiracy theories and normally wants to think the best of people because that's what he learned in Sunday school, this deification of an empty suit is as bewildering as it is frightening. What in the world are these people thinking? Do they not weigh the risks of consigning their fate to an unqualified man, worse, a person tainted his whole life with stunningly dangerous confederates including felons and Communists and terrorists? What is the upside? What is it about this man whose career is utterly uninterrupted by any accomplishment which would motivate these people to risk their children and my children to whatever he might do to them? How do they know? How can they be sure? Don't they have any doubts?

My problem is that I am seeking after that which I cannot find. I want to find an explanation in logic for a phenomenon of emotion. It is easy for middle-class conservatives to overlook the power of emotion even though history provides plenty of examples even within our own culture in America. Can logic explain why so many drank Jim Jonse's Kool aid? Why Charles Manson commanded such blood loyalty? How many cheered OJ Simpson's acquittal? Why did princes Diana's passing traumatize a nation? These are not questions which are answered with everyday commonsense. One almost has to go to the Bible to see the answer in Old Testament allegory which lets us know that evil is and there will always be worshipers of the golden calf.

I fear that in November we conservatives might find ourselves involuntarily embarked upon a journey that is foreign to our epistemology. We may be going into dark places and we might well be pushed into a netherworld where our common sense values are of no use because it is a place where down is up and black is white, a place where gravity does not pull but pushes, a place where we will need a pocket translator in order to converse in English with our government, our children's teachers, and our keepers even though they superficially use the same words we do. We sense we are about to be overwhelmed by forces guided by the ghost of Saul Alinsky.

I fear the downside of the Obama Pathology after his election may extend to dimensions we cannot begin to fasten to our everyday understanding or to our common sense. We have no way of knowing what will come because we don't know anything really about Barak Obama. We do not know if he is purely evil, we do not know if he is a committed communist, we do not know if he is a racist, we do not know if he wishes to see the submergence of the United States into a greater world order, we do not know if he is a megalomaniac, we do not even know, God help us, if he hates America. We do not know, in short, if we are backs - to- the- wall confronted with the Liberals' quadrennial nightmare: A real Authoritarian Personality.

We do know that Barak Obama has already encouraged a cult of personality whose implications are truly frightening and fundamentally un-American.

[MichiganCheese]

I don’t give a rats rear if mentoring is in the bill. There will be many things that sound good and noble. That’s what they will trumpet in order to get it passed. The mentoring will in reality become indoctrinating the young.

Don’t get soft, defend the consitution. In this case, it’s the 13th amendment. They will have to kill me to get to my kids.

[Jenny217]

We already have a great many programs that mentor youth. This bill is full of language that enables the implementation of mandatory service to the government - focusing on what the government deems important.

I was mentored through the Junior Achievement during high school. It was a great learning experience. It was voluntary.

This is not that.

[Yaelle]

Your post is completely correct.

President Obama is a very, very needy man. Who could hear details of this person’s childhood and not feel sad? Even my own father, who lived through the Holocaust in Germany as a child, in some ways was more blessed, because he was loved, deeply, by both his parents. Little Barack was literally abandoned by both, early and often. He may never have known want, but he was pretty unwanted himself.

He is not dumb and he learned what he needed to fake. He came of age in the 1970s when patronizing to minorities was bigger than bell-bottoms. He had looks enough and charm enough, and the intense, insatiable drive to Be Somebody and achieve mass acceptance and love.

He’s exceeded even his own dreams.

But when he was lost and searching, desperate to belong, back at Columbia, he was “discovered.” No one was more perfect than he to be groomed for big things. The entire path was paved for him. And just as Hillary instinctively knew that to be the first major party female presidential candidate would bring her automatic votes by the million, he and his people knew that the First (big party) Black Nominee would do the same.

And here he is, achieving his goals and basking in the adoration he has needed for so very long.

Our job now is to help people gently realize they have been fooled. Their “good intentions” are quite far along the road to hell. But too much shouting in their faces, and they will discount everything we say. We need to stress the Founding Documents, that everyone should believe in, and to stress true freedom, true freedom of “choice,” a word that does not only apply to killing babies. This needs to be done bit by bit, because our President is backed up by either the most clueless or the most evil mass media ever, fast becoming the message itself.

[nathanbedford]

He is not dumb and he learned what he needed to fake. He came of age in the 1970s when patronizing to minorities was bigger than bell-bottoms. He had looks enough and charm enough, and the intense, insatiable drive to Be Somebody and achieve mass acceptance and love.

You are spot on here I think. We have a match made in heaven, an individual insatiable, as you say, to be somebody and a society desperate to expiate its white guilt and achieve forgiveness for America's original sin.

I presume to burden you with another post most of which was written six month before the election:

In my preceding post I try to explain my views about how the Obama pathology gripped the nation and impelled this unknown and potentially very dangerous individual onto the very highest seat of power which exists in the world. Now I would like to express my view about why this pathology gripped America and was, like a new virus strain, utterly immune to reason.

So I mean to take honest intellectual issue with you about why these three moderate elitists succumbed to the Obama pathology and abandon their reason and their principles to vote for an unknown quantity who presented such a grave danger to the country. I do not for a minute believe that they were the only falling in line with the elitists to vote for another elitist who was one of them, "They loved and fawned over 0bama because he was one of them; he attended the right schools.... Their respective political philosophies seemed somewhat irrelevant to these elitist fools.... So they sold out their beliefs for their elitist connections."

I think we must look to the single most compelling issue in American history: race.

I think that elitist factor completes the fantasy that Obama could be the "Magic Negro" that these men and liberals had been subconsciously searching for since Martin Luther King had a dream. In other words, the elitism alone was not enough and the racism alone would not have been enough but, fortuitously combined as it was in this individual, this empty suit, this apparently empty vessel, the chemistry was perfect. Rather one might say the alchemy was perfect and it caused the Obama pathology which I described in my preceding post.

This from a post which also preceded the election by six months:

Yes Obama is an empty suit but he is actually more than that, he is a candidate who is African American and this racial reality entirely disguises the fact that the suit is empty. In fact, it was always better for Obama's campaign for the suit to be empty.

The American left, indeed the international left, is a hodgepodge of mutually inconsistent plans and programs which history has demonstrated cannot work. Leftists persist in their leftism because they believe that they are smarter than everybody else. Which really means," I am smarter than all the leftists who've come before and failed with this idea." The glue which holds leftism together when it should splinter apart because of its mutually inconsistent precepts, because it has shopped the entire country to ravening special-interest groups, is their idea that Republicans/conservatives are racists and they are not.

As long as we are racists and they are not, the left need not face up to its own looniness. This is why the left reacts so vehemently to politically incorrect racist remarks.... The coin of this political race card is white guilt.

Now comes Obama. As one black writer has pointed out, he has made a tacit deal with white liberal America: you support me blindly and I will in turn refrain from rubbing America's nose in its history of slavery and segregation. You can expiate your white guilt by voting for me. But Obama has to hold up his end of the deal, he must not rub our noses in our sins like Jesse Jackson or Reverend Al. As long as he was seen to be an empty suit-offering no reproach to America-we were comfortable with him.

Now comes The Right Reverend Wright. He has broken the deal. This is why Obama had to disown him. Wright rubs our noses in racism. To a conservative his crazy allegations are so bizarre that it makes not much sense and doesn't change the equation. We don't buy into this AIDS in Africa business, for example. But for a liberal, Reverend Wright's allegations are not bizarre but actually within the realm of intellectual respectability. We can dismiss them, but the left cannot because much of it comes right out of their own catechism.

What about the great mass in the middle? The moderates, the undecideds, the people who don't follow politics until after Labor Day, the folks who permit the likes of Barbara Walters or Oprah Winfrey to persuade them, what about them, the people who actually decide our elections? These decent folks don't want to be racists. They are always looking for a savior because they will tell you, "I always vote for the man." They shrink from the very idea of voting based on ideology. So an empty suit is no problem for them as long as he is also a savior. Obama was a savior. More, he was an empty vessel into which we could pour all of our yearnings and our simplistic hopes about the political process.

[flaglady47]

“We do not know if he is purely evil, we do not know if he is a committed communist, we do not know if he is a racist, we do not know if he wishes to see the submergence of the United States into a greater world order, we do not know if he is a megalomaniac, we do not even know, God help us, if he hates America. We do not know, in short, if we are backs - to- the- wall confronted with the Liberals’ quadrennial nightmare: A real Authoritarian Personality.”

We know now.....

[GOPJ]

The press did a great job vetting ... /s

[9YearLurker]

Young TelePrompters?

[wku man]

The orchestrated ‘AIG rage’ is just sleight of hand being done to distract from the real corruption.

Yep. This and the Fed's Weimar Republic plan only two days apart. And did we hear of either until after the fact? No. Why? AIG, Obamanation's Special Olympics quip and March Madness. Almost like it was planned, hmmmmm? We're being played like a bunch of Les Pauls.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[Yaelle]

If it were not for people like you who truly understand this frightening situation, I'd think I've fallen into a bizzaro world.

My heart leapt in recognition at your statement that what holds liberals together is their belief that Republicans / conservatives are racists, and they, the libs themselves, are not. I'd just been saying yesterday that in this country, for some reason, the worst thing to happen to a white person is to be thought a racist. Even if he is NOT a racist.

Now, if our white American guy is a smart enough fellow, and someone calls him an IDIOT, he can brush it off. It's not even that offensive to him. He can deflect the insult by demonstrating the nastiness of the name-caller. But because of some kind of collective white guilt, if that same man is called a RACIST, it offends him and frightens him deeply. He does not even consider deflecting the words by showing the aggressor up as a rude, name-calling person. He will hotly defend himself against the charge. Which he would not have done against the charge of idiocy!

In fact, the average white American is so deadly afraid of even being THOUGHT a racist that he will twist himself into a obsequious pretzel to prevent such a charge. (See: Congressional Republicans)

And into this charged atmosphere, named "post-racialism," comes Mr. Barack Obama. He and his people knew exactly what they were doing. They were brought right into the hearts of America as into the gates of Troy, the dreams of Communism only now escaping from his belly.

I don't think race is the most important issue in America. But I do think that many liberals would be happy with that perception. The above-mentioned guilt is POWER to them. Sadly black Americans have been fooled by "their" media and "their" leaders. We are not on the path to colorblindness, because the colorblind (so very many of us from all races) are quiet. The race-baiters are out there, and noisy. And worldwide, race has had some success at helping the spread of communism. Since discerning the truth through slanted media sources is never taught in schools, the masses can still be swayed through the fake "power" of race.

[Salamander]

Beware the Ides of March.....:-\

[nathanbedford]

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

It seems to me there are two sides to the race card used by the left. First, there is the negative side which we have seen played against people like Trent Lott and Senator Allen. Second, there is also an affirmative action side. This is plain to see in affirmative action a cases, for example, in admittance to university where a finite census makes the process a zero-sum game and the inclusion of one race, based on race, means the exclusion of another race.

My real objection to playing the race card has even more to do with the second ploy than the first. The first is unfortunate and tends to intimidate whites into political correctness. That is a very dangerous cultural conditioning process. But the second category describes an even more dangerous game which is more dangerous because it carries with it the inevitability of corrupting the rule of law and are very democratic process. In other words, it elevates considerations of race over the Constitution, the equal application of laws, and the electoral process. If American cities descend into chaos because black majorities elect corrupt politicians, that is ultimately dangerous for the whole country. If black juries are routinely declining to convict for black on white violence, preferring instead the prerogative of "jury nullification" we have lost some of the rule of law.

I have previously posted these two replies which I ask you to read in this context, which is the context of preserving our representative democracy and our precious system of constitutional law. One was written before the election and the other afterwards:

There are two facts about Barak Obama which stand out above all others: first, he is so inexperienced that he is unqualified to be the president of the United States of American. Second, he is regarded to be African-American.

The truth, which no one seems to be willing to tell, is that such an inexperienced individual would never be the nominee of America's largest political party if it were not for the fact that he is accepted to be black. He would not be nominated if he were not African-American.

One of the ways he got nominated, apart from the mainstream media like Chris Matthews anointing him to assuage their white guilt, was because he polled better than 90% of African-Americans in the primaries. Another truth that is rarely mentioned is that, quite simply, African-Americans voted their race. They voted for Obama because he is black. That is the essence of racism.

The problem with this development for white voters is that people like Chris Matthews ask us to unilaterally disarm in the face of this racism. We are told at every turn that criticism of Obama's inexperience is thinly disguised racism. The mainstream media who tell us that, as well as black voters who are motivated by racism, are not just playing some game, they are trying to attain political power over all voters including white voters.

That is, after all, what politics is all about: who gets to enforce the decisions at the point of a gun about who gets what and who pays for it. In extreme instances, the chief executive commits our sons, and now daughters, to die on some battlefield. The stakes are almost infinite. They involve our blood and treasure.

If the game of politics is to be rigged by racism it is folly for white people to play a different game. If blacks can vote for Obama because he is black, whites can vote against him because he is black. If blacks can vote their race, whites can vote their race too, and do so free of taint of racism.

The mainstream media, and Chris Matthews is the prominent example, perhaps unconsciously, have been struggling to divert white voters' attention away from these realities and away from voting their own self-interest, or even the interests of the nation as a whole.

The best that can be said of Obama is that he is inexperienced and unqualified for office. The worst that can be said of this campaign is that it is racist at its core.

............................................................................................................................................................

Colin Powell has actually done conservatives a very great service in his remarks which unfortunately will probably go largely unremarked as our attention gets diverted to Rush Limbaugh.

For years now on these threads I have been asserting that Tip O'Neill had it wrong, all politics is not local, in America, all politics is racial. Colin Powell has just confirmed that for us on two levels. First, and least important, his slip in admitting elsewhere that he voted for Obama at least in part because of his race confirms what many of us have been saying for some time, Obama was elected only because he was black and would not have been elected had he been white. Powell provides anecdotal evidence of the racism of the black vote in America. Second, and this is truly significant, Powell is decamping the party that gave him everything for the party which will be the majority party because of race.

Powell is obviously laying the predicate here for his subsequent announcement that he will become a Democrat. What is significant is why he thinks the Republicans are in electoral trouble for a long time to come-and he is right. As Powell moves from the "white" party to the party of mixed race, he does so knowing that it is safe to do so. The election of a mixed-race president has preceded by a few years the demographic reality. Powell is intelligent enough to know that there is not the slightest chance that Obama will actually close the borders and freeze illegal immigration. He knows Obama and the Democrats will enfranchise on a wholesale basis immigrants who, for the most part now, will be of color, that is, Brown. So we are going to become a nation of color and there is no political means available to stop the demographic tidal wave which is impending over our political destinies.

This is usually the time in which the writer is obligated to state that his objection is not to the color of the voter but to his policies. I hear no objection from Powell about the policies or politics of either Obama or the people who elected him. I hear an obeisance not to the principles which moved Afro-Americans and other of voters of color but to the voters themselves and that because of their color. This is the essence of racism.

Why must I as a writer on this forum perform obligatory ritual disclaimers of racism on my part when Colin Powell is telling everyone that these groups must be pandered to solely because of their color or their race? Explicitly he says that principles of the conservative/Republican party must be put aside to accommodate what is in the "hearts and minds" of people of color. Why? For no reason other than that they will be in the majority. Is it fair to assume that Colin Powell thinks that white racism is legitimate today because whites are still in the majority? What about what is in my heart and my mind as a white person will that count when I go into the minority?

So long as more than 50% of the electorate votes because they are people of color or because they are guilty because they are white, principles, any principles even liberal principles if they have any, are irrelevant. Color and demagoguery conquer all. In playing this race card the Democrats are flirting with the death of democracy as well as constitutional government and the rule of law.

In America all politics is racial -and that is a truism owing no thanks to conservatives.

[Freedom56v2]

bump

[Yaelle]

Race was used as a gimmick to get President Obama elected. White liberals and blacks were fooled. That is true.

But not all politics is racial. I do not know where you are from, but I live in a very mixed race area. I think that the ideal, the MLK dream, is to live as one brotherhood and be colorblind. In some ways, society has made great strides in this direction. I know so many people in mixed marriages these days.

The dirty little secret is that whites (and Asians and Hispanics) are more ready for colorblindness than blacks. Maybe some of it is just natural, chalked up to past experiences or human nature. But so much of it actually comes from black “leaders” and “black media” actually turning people into Victicrats (term coined by Larry Elder). And liberal white politicians who promise the moon, and create generations of dependency on the state.

But I disagree with you that everything is about race. Race would hardly be an issue today were it not for the liberals and the Jeremiah Wrights screaming about discrimination that barely exists today.

[nathanbedford]

In rephrasing Tip O'Neill I do not mean that it should be taken literally. I meant that a political scientist would have to take note of several factors in analyzing the American political scene. First he would have to observe that 95% of 12% of the (African-American) population will vote Democrat no matter what. Couple that with a percentage floating somewhere around 70% of Hispanic Americans who comprise 14% of the population also voting Democrat-but subject to variation-you have a combined assurance on election morning that the Democrat candidate has 21% of the vote before he gets out of bed. Add 80% (of 3%) for the Jewish vote, and it becomes clear that Republicans, if they are restricted to whites, must somehow find an overwhelming percentage of white voters to compensate.

This colors and conditions tactics and strategy on both sides. The utter reliability of the black vote means that Democrats have much greater freedom of strategy and tactics. If the election issues are masked by identity politics and misshapen by a complaisant media, these realities drive the election debate. We have seen the results of this in the last election.

Every Republican candidate must know that one in every five voters are irretrievably lost to him if he runs in a district which is reflective of the whole country. The reciprocal factors are not true for Democrats. This reality is a dominating factor in American politics.

[Yaelle]

That is, sadly, correct. The voting blocs in those racial or cultural groups appear to be fixed in stone, and indeed, it’s all about appearances. They think their interests are served by the Democrats, though they are not. THEY ARE NOT.

Democrats want to weaken the traditional values of all three groups, and increase dependence on the government for the first two groups. Don’t even get me started with the Jews (of which tribe I am a member)!

But the good intentions, the supposed open-mindedness of the Democrats, are all that counts. The white horse is riding in to save us, but year after year, his hoofbeats don’t get any closer.

Of course my district(s) (State and Congressional) is thoroughly lost to Republicans. When they redistricted last, our Congressman lived a block away. Suddenly he found himself X’ed out of a job, as his was one district erased to make way for some creepy, crawly gerrymanders. Stuff happens.

So you are right about that.

[mojitojoe]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/amendment.xpd?session=111&amdt=h49

http://www.infowars.com/give-mandatory-service-act-strips-first-amendment-of-volunteers/

[OafOfOffice]

Thank you Mojitojoe. gestapobama is now coming after our children, teens and young adults. obama and rahm said they will make them understand what it is like to be a American citizen. Then they will send them off to wars they create.

obama and the communists now want us to be silent or they will imprison us if we speak out. If that one amendment goes through we are doomed to Hitler’s regime. Or live our lives in prison camps for civil disobedience like in Iran today.

Take a look at our future.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123785115192919205.html

It is all so repugnant. It’s evil.

[Boucheau]

The upside to all of this is America will get an education regarding tyranny.

This whole thing is going make me look like a scholar AND a prophet, an enslaved one, have you, but nonetheless...

You heard it here first:

These are communists NOT liberals (you wish your only worry was Garafolo-type schmucks—who will join sides with you here shortly, believe it, or not).

These are not socialists.

They are DELIBERATELY bankrupting the country to create desperation and an environment to change forever the fundamental system of American government—you WILL NOT get it back if it is taken away—TOTALLY, COMPLETELY, UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE to regain the freedom that humans have, until now, known is this country.

In a way, this country was ahead of its time. Humans, evolution-wise, are not ready to rule themselves, NOR ARE THEY FIT TO RULE. We are still struggling along.

They are creating a perfect storm within which to end freedom, as you know it, and raise up a hard-left government.

There are only two kinds of human beings, makers and takers. Right now, the takers have the makers by the b***s. Justice is when the makers realize the takers need a regular a**whoopin’ to keep them in line and to keep them from looting. If the makers get too cozy with the takers the takers will bonk them on their heads and steal their meat.

Time to fight makers. Time for a good, long-time-comin’ a**whoopin’ for the takers. Takers are easily frightened by fierce and focused makers. It won’t be too hard once the makers wake up and realize the takers have scurried out the back door with their catch.