Posted on 11/07/2008 4:32:12 AM PST by Perseverando
Report cites Frank's proposal to cut military 25%
President-elect Barack Obama raised questions during an election campaign stop in Colorado Springs when he asserted the U.S. needs a "civilian national security force" that would be as powerful, strong and well-funded as the Army, Marines, Navy and Air Force, but few of those questions have been answered.
But now one report is proposing a possible solution for part of the equation: From where would the money for such an organization come? Democrats in Congress now are floating the idea of cutting U.S. military spending by 25 percent, or $150 billion a year, and according to a report from blogger Jay Tea, that could be used for the new "security force."
The idea to cut the military, proposed by Rep. Barney Frank, already is being opposed by Republicans.
Frank, D-Mass., recently told a newspaper the Pentagon will have to start choosing the cuts from its weapons programs because he wants to slash more than $150 billion from the estimated $607 billion in defense spending already approved for fiscal year 2008.
Sen. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., argued America now is fighting terror worldwide, including active wars in Afghanistan and Iran, and that has stretched the capabilities of the military already.
He warned cutting funding in such a drastic way would be irresponsible.
"You know if we don't make the right decisions about the military nothing else will matter will it? Because if we don't have a free country then you know what do these other programs matter at all? That's the number one responsibility," he said.
The blogger, however, saw the plan linked this way: "Representative Barney Frank, apparently not content with his role in wreaking havoc on the nation's financial system, has announced that he will push for a 25 percent cut in
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
I'm very suspicious of this 'new' group and dislike cutting funding to our military.
Isn't one of our rights the right to a strong defense? Isn't trying to undermine and underfund our military unconstitutional?
I believe in selective filibusters. This is one time to use it.
Curious. Wondering if Obama is planning this “Civilian National Security Force” as contrived logic to state with such in place there isn’t any need for Americans to own guns?
He is a gun grabber. Might be just the basis of his ruse.
So of course they are now making plans to bring their dreams to fruition.
Because he can't use the Military to put down civilian dissent...but he could use the "civilian National Security Force" (aka Gestapo).......
It’s just putting into place a national network of well organized and motivated thought police who are ready to spring into action using communist secret police and nazi tactics when weapons of mass destruction (WMD”s) are used on American and Obama declares martial law.
We will all be labeled enemies of the state. What do you think will happen to those of us who can’t or won’t be expediently re-educated?
Never ever proposed by any other President...In fact, goes against the "No standing Army" of our forefathers.
Note to the ‘Rats, I have a four digit number for y’all: 2010 :)
Talk like this really has to worry nations like Aphganistan, Taiwan, Israel, the Ukraine, Georgia, Checkoslavakia, Poland, Lithuiania, Latvia and Estonia.
WND can make a fortune fomenting citizen fear of the US government instead of its usual foreign terrorist attack scare tactics.
I agree!!! I betcha Joe Lieberman would join the filibuster.
Uh, against whom would such power be used, Barney? You would use massive military-like force against citizens in this country? When we can't even "spy" on them by monitoring their calls to terror suspects overseas?
Something seriously wrong here...
Re: .In fact, goes against the “No standing Army” of our forefathers.
That’s right. They’re not “a standing army.” So what are they really?
And is coming from the same people who want to flush the Second Amendment.
Puts me in mind of this quote...
Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA - ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't serve the State.
Heinrich Himmler
Occupying the country with a Federally controlled army. The insanity of this is mind boggling. What about posse comitatus? I guess he’ll have to wait for the system to be developed under the guise of community activism and simultaneously stack the judiciary more before arming the brownshirts. The history of tyranny is trying to repeat itself.
This article seems to talk about the issues with a civilian “national security force” in terms of $$. But what about purpose? How is this different from Dept of Homeland Security, FBI, Border Patrol, and police? My fear is that this is a Gestapo of some kind, devoted to special projects, like: confiscating guns, monitoring media (including Internet) for “fairness”, enforcing “tolerance”, etc. Whatever the rationale, fighting terrorism will be a distant second.
I’m wondering if Obama will want to federalize, arm and supply local police organizations.
The filibuster will not exist come February, 2009. The 111th Congress starts in January, and it will set new rules that lower the threshold for overturning a filibuster to 51 or 55 seats. And then the filibuster simply goes away - it cannot be used.
Mark my words - the filibuster as we know it today is gone; it will be left as a hollow shell only so the Slavery Party (the Democrats) can claim they were “bipartisan” and left it alone with small changes. But it will be functionally eliminated.
The GOP will have zero say in anything - the House, the Senate, and of course the White House. It will be a virtual one-party town now with all possible input from the GOP turned off.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.