Obama's Civilian National Security Force???

Printable View

04-05-2009, 06:44 PM
cr4zybe4utifu1

Obama's Civilian National Security Force???

Has anyone heard about or know about this?

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/...nal_secur.html

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=69601
04-05-2009, 07:31 PM
a500lbgorilla

an amusing sidebar as to why politics is bs: Guy jabs at Obama noting how frequently he's required to mention MLK. Then tees off repeatedly on Obama being a glorified community organizer.

Also, I would tend to ignore any article about obama pre-election.
04-05-2009, 07:40 PM
UG

SERVE UR CUNTRY OR DYE
04-05-2009, 08:28 PM
boost

I mean, it kinda makes sense. We have the FBI whos territory is within these boarders, and we have the CIA whos territory is outside these boarders. It would be a little bit absurd to ask either agency to assume the duties of the other. But ya, what rilla said, pre election stuff is kinda moot.
04-05-2009, 09:25 PM
cr4zybe4utifu1

Well, yeah the articles were written pre-election, but I'm asking if anyone has heard about any reference to this recently. Like, is anything actually coming of it?
04-05-2009, 09:41 PM
boost

Quote:

Originally Posted by cr4zybe4utifu1

Well, yeah the articles were written pre-election, but I'm asking if anyone has heard about any reference to this recently. Like, is anything actually coming of it?

I doubt it... I think the big man has his hands full and will for quite a while.
04-05-2009, 10:01 PM
cr4zybe4utifu1

Quote:

Originally Posted by boost

I mean, it kinda makes sense. We have the FBI whos territory is within these boarders, and we have the CIA whos territory is outside these boarders. It would be a little bit absurd to ask either agency to assume the duties of the other. But ya, what rilla said, pre election stuff is kinda moot.

I don't want a civilian army running around, especially when they're moving to make it almost impossible for private citizens to own guns (and no, I'm not talking about crazy people, but law abiding citizens).
04-05-2009, 10:08 PM
givememyleg

on a semi-related note, your avatar is kinda hot
04-05-2009, 10:09 PM
cr4zybe4utifu1

Quote:

Originally Posted by givememyleg

on a semi-related note, your avatar is kinda hot

haha
04-05-2009, 10:38 PM
wufwugy

Quote:

Originally Posted by cr4zybe4utifu1

Quote:

Originally Posted by boost

I mean, it kinda makes sense. We have the FBI whos territory is within these boarders, and we have the CIA whos territory is outside these boarders. It would be a little bit absurd to ask either agency to assume the duties of the other. But ya, what rilla said, pre election stuff is kinda moot.

I don't want a civilian army running around, especially when they're moving to make it almost impossible for private citizens to own guns (and no, I'm not talking about crazy people, but law abiding citizens).

Yeah, that's not happening. Guns are too hot an issue, and too many Americans want their guns for the Democrats to return to the issue, at least as long as there's bigger fish to fry, and at least as long as there are the high level of dems who likes guns in the first place. Obama admin and dem leaders have many times acknowledged that they're not going after firearms anymore.

With regards to firearms, going the way of Europe would be EV++++++ for American society, but even with that fact it's not going to happen because the Second Amendment is ambiguous enough and there are enough Americans who love their guns. However, there are better ways of gaining the positive social impact that would come about by outlawing firearms without actually outlawing them.
04-05-2009, 10:45 PM
cr4zybe4utifu1

Quote:

Originally Posted by wufwugy

Yeah, that's not happening. Guns are too hot an issue, and too many Americans want their guns for the Democrats to return to the issue, at least as long as there's bigger fish to fry, and at least as long as there are the high level of dems who likes guns in the first place. Obama admin and dem leaders have many times acknowledged that they're not going after firearms anymore.

With regards to firearms, going the way of Europe would be EV++++++ for American society, but even with that fact it's not going to happen because the Second Amendment is ambiguous enough and there are enough Americans who love their guns. However, there are better ways of gaining the positive social impact that would come about by outlawing firearms without actually outlawing them.

I should be more up on this, but do you know what happened to that bill that was just in the House that has major regulations on guns with clips? Last I heard it had good support, though I haven't followed up on in in the past month.
04-05-2009, 11:31 PM
wufwugy

Nothing has been big news for a while, so I don't know about it. If you pay attention to conservative media it's ALL BIG even when it's not
04-05-2009, 11:32 PM
boost

Quote:

Originally Posted by cr4zybe4utifu1

Quote:

Originally Posted by boost

I mean, it kinda makes sense. We have the FBI whos territory is within these boarders, and we have the CIA whos territory is outside these boarders. It would be a little bit absurd to ask either agency to assume the duties of the other. But ya, what rilla said, pre election stuff is kinda moot.

I don't want a civilian army running around, especially when they're moving to make it almost impossible for private citizens to own guns (and no, I'm not talking about crazy people, but law abiding citizens).

ya, I def see what youre saying.
04-06-2009, 11:01 AM
cr4zybe4utifu1

Quote:

Originally Posted by wufwugy

Nothing has been big news for a while, so I don't know about it. If you pay attention to conservative media it's ALL BIG even when it's not

I don't really watch the news. I just hope that HR 45 doesn't pass, which I don't think it will.
04-06-2009, 11:13 AM
BennyLaRue

Quote:

Originally Posted by givememyleg

on a semi-related note, your avatar is kinda hot

Yeah, I feel hot when I get nauseated too.