Happy Face Gestapo?

What, pray tell, is Barack Hussein Obama's explanation for this?:

For several days now, WND has been hounding Barack Obama's campaign about a statement he made July 2 in Colorado Springs – a statement that blew my mind, one that has had me scratching my head ever since.

In talking about his plans to double the size of the Peace Corps and nearly quadruple the size of AmeriCorps and the size of the nation's military services, he made this rather shocking (and chilling) pledge: "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives 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."

Just so there's no quibbling over whether he really said that, check out the video footage at about the 16:42 mark:

You might want to go back about a minute or so before that in order to establish the context for this poorly worded phrase. He's speaking about the American people being "asked" to serve in all manner of regimented, quasi-fascistic domestic "corps" of one sort or another, and then attempts to link it to the war on terror and his contention that we should stop fighting the Islamists militarily and go back to engaging them diplomatically and addressing the "root causes" of their religious psychopathy. This is, presumeably, the "civilian national security force" to which he was making reference - an army of do-gooders whose selfless errands of mercy will, their Messiah thinks, transform Muslim theocratic bloodlust into joyously tearful sobs of profound gratitude. Or, at the very least, provide the terrorists with a steady stream of targets and hostages for exploitation at their leisure.

Seen outside of its proximate context, "civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as the U.S. military (half a million troops in the army alone, nearly half a trillion dollar annual budget) sounds like a hopeandchange amalgamation of the Gestapo, KGB, and Stasi all rolled into one. Clearly Obama's Enemy Media worshippers drew that conclusion, as virtually every outlet other than the Wall Street Journal and the Denver Post omitted that sentence from their transcripts of his speech. Which, naturally, only fed the suspicions of a far more sinister context on the disenfranchised Right.

So which is it? Dangerous naivete and simpering boondogglery from a man so supremely arrogant as to believe that his abysmal judgment is in no need of the leavening only experience can provide, or Barry's secret police with Michelle as his Himmler?

My take? More the former than the latter, but the two options are not mutually exclusive. Like all utopian zealots, BO is a True Believer who is convinced beyond reason that his long-discredited ideology will magically work if HE is the one to impliment it. If he is given the power to do so, he will fail miserably just like the rest of his tinpot ilk, only he will neither draw nor accept the logical conclusion this suggests - that he was wrong and his opponents were right and he needs to reverse policy course. He'll get consumed with the irrationality of persistance, the belief that if he tries long and hard enough, somehow his rancid philosophy will work. And when it still doesn't, he'll get paranoid, blame his failures on his opponents, and the hopeandchange veneer on his "civilian national security force" will blister and crack and necrotize, and it'll morph into something else.

Remember Obama's personal background "context" - mentors and advisors who to the last one of them hate America and want to see it transmogrified into "something else." He inculcated their Soviet socialist values for most of his life, and only broke with the likes of "Rev'rund" Wright, "Father" Pfleger, Bill Ayers, Bernadette Dohn for temporary PR reasons.

Keep in mind as well Lucifer's plans to finish the gutting of the U.S. military that Bill Clinton started. If those plans are fully realized, our surrender to the terrorists will be a fait accompli because there simply will no longer be any troops or equipment to "redeploy." Why else does he want to abandon 90% of our tanks, APCs, combat helicopters, and munitions in Iraq? It sure as hell isn't because he wants to replace them with upgrades.

I think it more likely that Obama intends this envisioned "civilian national security force" to replace the armed forces rather than be co-equal with them.

Either way, though, the prospects for America's near future are, indeed, chilling. Brother Meringoff, I think, puts it in its proper perspective: