Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Obama's Plan to Impose a Marxist Dictatorship

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Obama's Plan to Impose a Marxist Dictatorship

    Georgia congressman warns of Obama dictatorship
    By BEN EVANS –

    WASHINGTON (AP) — A Republican congressman from Georgia said Monday he fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist dictatorship.

    "It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he's the one who proposed this national security force," Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press. "I'm just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may — may not, I hope not — but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism."

    Broun cited a July speech by Obama that has circulated on the Internet in which the then-Democratic presidential candidate called for a civilian force to take some of the national security burden off the military.

    "That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did," Broun said. "When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist."

    Obama's comments about a national security force came during a speech in Colorado in which he called for expanding the nation's foreign service.

    "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set," Obama said in July. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

    The Obama transition team declined to comment on Broun's remarks. But spokesman Tommy Vietor said Obama was referring in the speech to a proposal for a civilian reserve corps that could handle postwar reconstruction efforts such as rebuilding infrastructure — an idea endorsed by the Bush administration.

    Broun said he believes Obama would move to ban gun ownership if he does build a national security force.

    Obama has said he respects the Second Amendment right to bear arms and favors "common sense" gun laws. Gun rights advocates interpret that as meaning he'll at least enact curbs on ownership of assault weapons and concealed weapons. As an Illinois state lawmaker, Obama supported a ban on semiautomatic weapons and tighter restrictions on firearms generally.

    "We can't be lulled into complacency," Broun said. "You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. I'm not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. What I'm saying is there is the potential of going down that road."
    Repugs are such Chicken Littles. Here's CBS's report on Obama's July speech:

    CNSNews.comObama's ‘Civilian Security Force' Prompts Questions Thursday, August 07, 2008 By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer


    (CNSNews.com) – Advocates of limited government are concerned about comments by Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) regarding his national service plans and views on the "burden of global citizenship." Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, promoted national service initiatives and expansion of international programs during a speech last month in Colorado Springs, Colo.

    "We're going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy," Obama told the Colorado audience. "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that 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," he said.

    Just five days later, the July 7 issue of Defense News published an interview in which Obama elaborated on his goals. "I believe we can reconfigure our civilian national-security force. We still have a national security apparatus on the civilian side, in the way the State Department is structured and USAID, that harkens back to the Cold War," Obama said. "We need to be able to deploy teams that combine agricultural specialists and engineers and linguists and cultural specialists who are prepared to go into some of the most dangerous areas alongside our military," he said.

    Such proposals sound either like the creation of new programs or the expansion of existing ones, said Brian Darling, director of Senate Relations for the conservative Heritage Foundation. "He clearly leans toward the diplomacy side in world affairs," Darling told CNSNews.com. "Foreign aid, agriculture aid, using federal tax dollars to buy a country's affections is one element of diplomacy. But I hope he realizes that having a strong military is another form of diplomacy."

    A similar theme was repeated when Obama gave a speech entitled "A World that Stands as One" in front of 200,000 Germans in Berlin. Obama called himself a "citizen of the world," and said, "The burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. "In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more – not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity," he added.

    The Obama campaign did not respond to phone and e-mail messages Monday. Specifically, Obama's national service plan addresses foreign and domestic issues. He favors expanding AmeriCorps from 75,000 slots to 250,000 slots, geared at tackling issues such as education, energy and health care. He would double the size of the Peace Corps to 16,000 and would send Americans fluent in foreign language abroad to "expand diplomacy."

    Under the plan, all middle and high school students would be required to do 50 hours of community service, and it would establish a $4,000 per year tax credit for college students who volunteer for 100 hours of volunteer service. "The American people are not the problem, they are the answer," Obama told the Colorado audience. Obama's Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, has also talked about a national service initiative if elected though not in such detail. McCain has praised national service goals as patriotic and said the public and private sector can work to establish ways for young people to volunteer.

    "Voluntary national service has grown in popularity in part because of the educational benefits used as incentives, as well as frequent appeals from the bully pulpit of the White House, but mostly because the young Americans, no less than earlier generations, understand that true happiness is much greater than the pursuit of pleasure, and can only be found by serving causes greater than self-interest," McCain said in a May speech.

    "A sense of community, a kinship of ideals, has invigorated public service again," he said. But such proposals have their critics. It becomes "government mandated volunteering," said Michael Tanner, senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute. He said if most of the projects were worthwhile, the private sector or government would already be directly involved "It's more about building the civic virtue of the people volunteering. It benefits the doers more than the receivers," Tanner told CNSNews.com.

    "It assumes the state has a claim on you and becomes political. Maryland's service requirement for students recognizes organizing homeless people to vote as a plus, but not joining the NRA (National Rifle Association)," he said. Taxpayers should be concerned about where the expansion of a "civilian national security force," David Williams, vice president of policy for Citizens Against Government Waste.

    "We need to beware. Who knows?" Williams told CNSNews.com. "This could become another AmeriCorps, or another No Child Left Behind. Programs are started and we're saddled with them for years and years with no metrics to determine their performance or any other oversight or accounting."

  • #2
    Funny how the idiot from Georgia lets his hatred of liberalism blind him so much that he forgets the fact that it was a liberal, Weimar republic government which the Nazis destroyed in their rise to power.
    A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

    Comment


    • #3
      That's a good one. Instead of "Heil Obama", it'll be "Yes We Can" with the arm raised...

      By the way, I'd really rather you not imply all Republicans are crazy ****ers. At least ten percent of Republicans are perfectly intelligent, sane people ...
      <Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
      I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.

      Comment


      • #4
        "We can't be lulled into complacency," Broun said. "You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. I'm not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. What I'm saying is there is the potential of going down that road."
        Yes he is (that's exactly what's he's doing), he's just desperately trying to insert some sort of anti-godwin disclaimer there in order to not get laughed to death by national media.

        OTOH, I don't see a reason why this should be made a big deal of. A lone congressman calls attention to Obama's authoritarian congressional history, asks the public to pay attention to their constitutional rights. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

        Oh, and an important point to understand when learning the lessons of history: Adolf Hitler was not democratically elected to be the leader of Germany. He used corrupt behind-the-scenes deals so usual to the parliamentary system in order to gain "temporary" power, then banned the opposing parties, one by one.
        Last edited by RGBVideo; November 12, 2008, 15:22.

        Comment


        • #5
          Hitler was a Marxist?

          Comment


          • #6
            You see how intelligent that idiot is, Aeson?

            A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

            Comment


            • #7
              in the end, "isms" are meaningless...

              Originally posted by MrFun
              Funny how the idiot from Georgia lets his hatred of liberalism blind him so much that he forgets the fact that it was a liberal, Weimar republic government which the Nazis destroyed in their rise to power.
              The "liberals" of the Weimar Republic were for small government, the "conservatives" against free speech, for government handouts to big industries and against citizens right to a firearm outside the military. The "liberals" of today in the US are the "conservatives" of the Weimar Republic.

              What I'm saying is that your reasoning is as simplistic as the reasoning that the Democrats of today are for slavery because the Democrats of the 1860s were pro-slavery.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by snoopy369
                By the way, I'd really rather you not imply all Republicans are crazy ****ers. At least ten percent of Republicans are perfectly intelligent, sane people ...
                Some of my best friends are Republicans. Other than befriending me, they seem to be normal.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Well, they're clearly in the 90% then. But i'm sure you'll find someone other than me in the 10% someday...
                  <Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
                  I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: in the end, "isms" are meaningless...

                    Originally posted by VJ

                    The "liberals" of the Weimar Republic were for small government, the "conservatives" against free speech, for government handouts to big industries and against citizens right to a firearm outside the military. The "liberals" of today in the US are the "conservatives" of the Weimar Republic.

                    What I'm saying is that your reasoning is as simplistic as the reasoning that the Democrats of today are for slavery because the Democrats of the 1860s were pro-slavery.
                    I wasn't claiming that liberalism of that time period is same as it is today.
                    A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      If Obama's a Marxist I'm Pat Buchanan.
                      Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Never ceases to amaze me how blindly ideological people can be.
                        "Beauty is not in the face...Beauty is a light in the heart." - Kahlil Gibran
                        "The greatest happiness of life is the conviction that we are loved; loved for ourselves, or rather, loved in spite of ourselves" - Victor Hugo
                        "It is noble to be good; it is still nobler to teach others to be good -- and less trouble." - Mark Twain

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Aeson
                          Hitler was a Marxist?
                          Remember you're dealing with idiots. These people honestly think Hitler was a communist. They latch on to the name National Socialist and since they're to stupid to know the difference between Socialism, Fascism, and Communism it all just melds together in their rotted minds.
                          Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Remember that someone like David Floyd had an redone axis that had freedom and something like libertaranism as all the way on the right and totalitarian governments like Communism and Facism all the way on the left... its a failure of our left-right axis.
                            “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
                            - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Oerdin


                              Remember you're dealing with idiots. These people honestly think Hitler was a communist. They latch on to the name National Socialist and since they're to stupid to know the difference between Socialism, Fascism, and Communism it all just melds together in their rotted minds.
                              A

                              A lot of people don't realize that Hitler was a fascist, Marxist, Nazi, Muslim fundamentalist, liberal, pinko. And that was before he turned to evil.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X