Michael Medved is correct.
Regarding the "change" part...
I would love it if someone in the "news" media asked Mister Obama to compare and contrast collectivist Utopian socialism to our republican form of representative democracy.
Marxist Obama needs to be asked precisely, and in full detail, just what on earth he means when he says..."We cannot continue to rely 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."?
And finally, Marxist Obama should also be asked how important he thinks is a strong and well-equipped United States military; as well as how important to him is the maintainance of security of classified information?
.
“We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded”
WAH? What on earth would be the difference between a state-sponsored civilian national security force (or CNSF, I guess) and the military we have now, besides proffesionalism? Assuming that Obama does not have pictures of little Minutemen dancing in his head, I cannot help but have pictures of brownshirts in mine.
I am not prone to (non-joke) hyperbole, and do not believe in unfair comparisons to past dictators. That said, does Obama realize how much he sounds like Hitler favoring the S.S. (or S.A. before it) over the stodgy Prussian elite of the Wehrmacht? Is this all so he can bypass the Joint CHiefs of Staff? What the heckfire?
“”We cannot continue to rely 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.”?”
Danger, Will Robinson, Danger.
Danger, United States, DANGER.
“we canot continue to rely on our military...we’ve got to have a national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded...”
would you like brown shirts or black shirts with that sir?