Remember this?
Obama's vision of a domestic security force "just as strong, just as well funded as our military" ( and presumbly loyal to him personally) just got a lot closer.
The House of representatives has just passed HR 1388 otherwise known as the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act. This reauthorizes through 2014 the National and Community Service Act of 1990 and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973, acts that originally, among other programs, funded the AmeriCorps and the National Senior Service Corps.
However, it not only reauthorizes the programs, but also includes "new programs and studies" and an allocation of $6 billion over the next five years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
When you look at the language of the bill closely,it gets even more interesting.The bill specifically mentions possibilities if "all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service."
If these requirements were made mandatory, the bill says it "would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds."
And it mentions "The means to develop awareness of national service and volunteer opportunities at a young age by creating, expanding, and promoting service options for elementary and secondary school students, through service learning or other means, and by raising awareness of existing incentives."
Those groups of volunteers would according to the bill, be "grouped together as appropriate in campuses for operational, support, and boarding purposes. The Corps campus for a unit shall be in a facility or central location established as the operational headquarters and boarding place for the unit. … There shall be a superintendent for each camp."
Take a minute to think about the implications of all this, given the sort of person who's in the White House.
All of these things were hidden away within the 200 pages of legislation..and the bill itself was mainly billed as federal support for establishing the anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks on America as "a National Day of Service and Remembrance."
Some of the smarter boys like Duncan Hunter weren't fooled, but a number of others were, and the bill passed with an enthusiastic yes from every Democrat who's been on record as consistently voting against anything to do with our military or national security...Neil Abercrombie, John Conyers, Jim McDermott,George Miller, Jim Moran, Nancy Pelosi..and of course Keith Ellison.The whole crew was there, unfortunately joined by a number of people whom I expected would know better.
Paranoid? Perhaps, but this bears close watching.Why spend six bil on this just now?
Obama is probably quite aware that a significant number of our volunteer miiitary are not exactly his biggest fans.Is he seeking a domestic counterweight, while diminishing the pay and benefits of the regular military? Based on the cuts in defense spending he's proposing and his recent attempt to force wounded servicemen to pay for their own treatment out of their private insurance, it certainly smells that way.
At this point, I don't trust the current occupant of the White House in the least. But you can't say I didn't give him a chance.
Please, ensure that every bit of legislation is read thoroughly. Never rely on the government press releases or spin merchants. Not only looking for things being sneaked into law when they think no-one is looking, but also for the scope. How easily can laws passed for one purpose be applied to other purposes?
ReplyDeleteJust one example is the current war on photographers in the UK, especially photographers of what the police might be up to, all under anti-terror legislation.
Best of luck, you'll all need it.
No, I'm sorry, you're wrong. This is straight out of the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteIt's the Second Amendment. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
What are you, some kind of whiny liberal freak?
Slavery
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 2:37,
ReplyDeleteRead what you just wrote...
" the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".
That refers to ALL of us, not just Obama's 'domestic security force'.
Checked out Obama's voting record on gun rights lately? Ever look at th egun laws he supported in his home town, Chicago?
Who are you trying to BS? Not me I hope.
To Anonymous 2:37 PM : the right which is being explicitly recognised is 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms' . The portion you are highlighting is the introductory, explicatory section.
ReplyDeleteI invite you to read the entire text of the Constitution. The fed powers are detailed in Article 1, Section 8. The 9th Amendment explains that the people retain all their rights which have not been assigned by Article 1, Section 8, to the feds, & not merely the rights explicitly recognised in the Bill Of Rights, a list which is NOT restrictive. The 10th Amendment explains that the people & the states have any rights not explicitly granted to the feds in Article 1, Section 8.
Both political parties have ignored the Constitution for their own convenience.
I had an Obama supporter come to my door today asking for me to sign a pledge supporting Obama's policies. They were shocked that I was unwilling to sign any such pledge. I said this is America, not Nazi Germany. This shocked the Obama supporter even more that I would come to any such conclusion from a simple pledge. After this incident I began searching the web and have come across a number of sites talking about this tactic, that Obama is using with his grass roots supporters to get American's to make this loyalty pledge. I had never heard of this happening before they came to my door and am very disturbed that this can happen in America. I am now bothered that I may be on a list of non-supporters since they came to my home. They know where I live.
ReplyDelete