Oct 30 2008

The Scariest Thing Obama Has Ever Said

Published by at 8:34 am under 2008 Elections,All General Discussions

Obama’s socialistic views about sharing our hard earned money with others who did not work so hard to earn their money or who throw their money away on drugs or something is bad enough. Scary for sure. But if you want to be terrified think of an Obama administration which uses the NSA to listen in on calls AND has a Homeland Security Army to impose its will:

“Loving your country shouldn’t just mean watching fireworks on the 4th of July,” he said. “Loving your country must mean accepting your responsibility to do your part to change it.

As we say here in the Strata-Sphere, McCain wants to change DC, Obama wants to change America. But how?

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set,” he said Wednesday. “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.

Unbelievable. Does anyone think there should be national police running around in Abrams M-1A tanks, or toting 50 caliber machine guns on top of Stryker vehicles, flying around in Apache helicopters or even F-22 Raptors – keeping ‘the peace’ here in the US? Do Americans need this kind of force on our streets – in violation of many laws.  Or is it designed to fight off the real military if someone decides to hold a coup? This is really scary stuff, a real Holloween fright.  H/T Gateway Pundit and LGF.

13 responses so far

13 Responses to “The Scariest Thing Obama Has Ever Said”

  1. CatoRenasci says:

    The closest parallels to this were Mussolini’s Black Shirts militia and Hitler’s Sturm Abteilung (SA) and Schutz Staffel (SS), paramilitary organizations under party control that undermined the power and effectiveness of the existing professionally led and essentially conservative Italian and German armies. (Interesting note- neither Mussolini nor Hitler were particularly effective in exercising ideological control over their respective navies)

    In communist countries, the pre-takeover professional/conscript armies were destroyed, so there was no need for a separate party-run military, the party controlled the only military. Note also that it is only communist countries that have had extensive Border Security apparatus designed to keep people from leaving.

    This is truly frightening, but I question whether even a Democratic Congress would pass something like this. I think there would be a furor close to that which HillaryCare called forth, and I think a lot of ‘red state’ democrats would be reluctant to back it.

  2. tarpon says:

    The words freedom and liberty never seem to spring from the mouth of The naive One. I wonder why? America is a country of liberty and freedoms … and that appears to be the main thing Obama wants to change.

    I assume you have seen this video … http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zx2PP4pYGno

  3. Phil-351 says:

    I wonder if he truly thinks he can overturn the Posse Comitatus Act. The only way I could see that happen is if the ‘manufactured crisis’ Biden warned of was another 9/11-style attack. Would the Obamessiah have the gonads to let that happen to kick-start his ‘Change America’ platform?

  4. Mike M. says:

    I suspect that this is talk about some sort of work program that will be sold under the rubric of “national security”.

    Which would be an excuse for gutting an already overstretched Defense budget to pay for more domestic spending. An appallingly bad idea.

  5. dave m says:

    Obama knows he has been found out.
    I’m sorry about all the vitriol that erupted earlier about his eligibility.
    I never relied on technical analysis of that internet published COLB.
    I couldn’t care less about the analysis of a document with no forensic

    The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Lots of other bloggers have
    shown the utter improbability of Obama’s Mom being available to be in
    Hawaii during the time of the reputed birth.

    But first and foremost is Obama sealing his records. Why?
    If I could clear up the matter in 5 minutes, why would I stonewall it?
    Only if I had no choice.

    Nobody on his side thought this through. Obama will be found out and
    have no legal rights to do anything. Looks like he thinks his own
    private militia could save his butt.

    It’s hard to rely on a private army when absolutely nobody in the
    whole world trusts your paper, your treaties, your currency, your
    financial solvency. Ask Robert Mugabe.
    Poly-pundits can say lots of things, but the financial
    guys know when to protect their capital. A fake Obama presidency
    (no P intended) will crash the USA out of whatever remains of the
    world’s various economies. B B B Baby, you ain’t seen nothin yet.

    At that point all the tanks ran by obamabots will be worthless.

  6. OLDPUPPYMAX says:

    Hussein has been talking about this national “force” for months. Will these be the jackbooted thugs who break down our doors in the middle of the night in order to confiscate our guns? Or will this group simply consist of the spies who point out the houses and people “of interest?”I can’t imagine the creation of an armed “militia” of this sort. But look at the thugs who surround Farrakhan! A million raging black militants…gang members with official badges! What a pleasant thought. Goes right along with 4th graders turning in their parents for criticism of the Messiah at the dining room table.

  7. RickS says:

    You re missing the deeper and more long term implications here.

    This Homeland Security Army could constitute a ‘Militia’, which has the Constitutionally granted right to bear arms. Therefore, if there is a non-military armed Militia to bear our arms, it could be argued that the non-militia citizenry need not retain the right to do so.

    Especially with a couple of specially selected Supreme Court Justice nominations.

  8. CatoRenasci says:

    RickS – a good point, but the states would still have the right to constitute militias. I think there would also be resistance to changing the US Code definition of the militia, which is all able-bodied men from 17-45.

  9. owl says:

    I agree with the scariest and he has said some pretty scary things. Sometimes wonder if even he has a clue who is running him and then I think, no, he is pure red and does not care as long as he gets there.

    I have always thought that Farrakhan’s ‘Million Man March’ was a dress rehearsal. When he called for that civillian force……….what the heck……….it’s all in the Neighborhood.

  10. conman says:

    You people are so gullible it is scary. How many times do I and others have to point out that AJ consistently take quotes out of context and just outright lies about Obama’s statements.

    If you actually read the article that AJ cites you will see that Obama was talking about a public service force, not a military force. Here is his comment on this issue in its entirely:

    “Obama repeated his pledge to boost the size of the active military. But he also said the nation’s future and safety depends on more than just additional soldiers.

    “It also depends on the teacher in East L.A., or the nurse in Appalachia, the after-school worker in New Orleans, the Peace Corps volunteer in Africa, the Foreign Service officer in Indonesia,” he said.

    Obama had first outlined many of the proposals he talked about Wednesday during appearances in Iowa last December.

    “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set,” he said Wednesday. “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.”

    He said he would make federal assistance conditional on school districts establishing service programs and set the goal of 50 hours of service a year for middle and high school students.

    For college students, Obama would set the goal at 100 hours of service a year and create a $4,000 annual tax credit for college students that would be tied to that level of service.

    Obama said he realizes there will be skeptics, but stressed that greater public service will make the nation safer.

    “Our destiny as Americans is tied up with one another,” he said. “If we are less respected in the world, then you will be less safe.”

    Oh, by the way, we already have a civilian national security force – it is called the NATIONAL GUARD. Duh! So I guess you are now for dismantling the National Guard?

  11. AJStrata says:


    Did you screw up English as bad as you did math. From Obama

    “civilian national security force”

    Dude, your a puppet of propaganda.

  12. conman says:


    One more point about your reference to “Obama’s socialistic views.” Apparently you are not up to speed on the new McCain-Palin talking points – I know it is hard to keep up given that it changes daily. McCain is no longer calling Obama a socialist – he backed off that label in his interview with Larry King last night. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/30/obama-not-a-socialist-mcc_n_139294.html

    Too funny. Can’t McCain pick a theme and stick with it for longer than a day or two? Seriously, McCain’s campaign has to go down as one of the worst presidential campaigns in modern history.

  13. conman says:


    While he used the term “civilian national security force,” it is clear from his entire statement that he was not talking about a militarized force. Maybe you could explain why you ignore 95% of his statement and focused on a single sentence? Or maybe you can explain how you extrapolated this single sentence into an assumption that Obama was proposing to have “national police running around in Abrams M-1A tanks, or toting 50 caliber machine guns on top of Stryker vehicles, flying around in Apache helicopters or even F-22 Raptors.” Where are Obama’s comments about those details? Oh, that’s right, they don’ty exist because you made them up.

    My English skills are just fine – I’ll match them up against yours any day. As for your math skills, this is what you said about yourself just yesterday in your post about polling – “I know I am an unknown and anonymous blogger whose mathematical skills can easily be questioned.” Hey, look at that, a rare statement in your blog that I can actually agree with!