48 Comments

1. vb:

It would be interesting to compare Obama’s proposals with the curriculum at Ayers’s “peace school.”

Nov 16, 2008 - 2:50 am 2. gumshoe:

Wretchard –

this “Civilain Reserve Corps” tasked with crisis intervention and infrastructure re-building sounds an awful lot like
disaster relief-man/self promoter/mystery man Fred Cuny,
who,oddly enough worked for George Soros’ Open Society Institute…and ended up disapearing in Chechnya
(where forces battling Moscow may have gained control of some nukes.)

I picked up the book in the used section about 2 years ago.
Cuny inserted himself into war zones around the world generating praise and suspicion in almost equal amounts.
It story was pretty well told and the environment in Chechnya
described with what i imagine was a fair bit of realism.

The Man Who Tried to Save the World: The Dangerous Life and Mysterious Disappearance of an American Hero by Scott Anderson (Paperback – May 16, 2000)

http://tinyurl.com/67384f

amazon.com review:

Fred Cuny, a fearless and hugely ambitious Texan, was nicknamed “Master of Disaster” for his handling of relief projects worldwide. He stood out in a bureaucratic world with his unorthodox methods and obvious success. In 1995, during a visit to a mountain border town in Chechnya that was under heavy Russian bombardment, Fred Cuny disappeared.

Renowned war correspondent Scott Anderson became so involved in uncovering Cuny’s fate that he risked his life several times in Chechnya. He describes a larger-than-life character who could have come straight from a Le Carré novel–a flawed hero who habitually lied about his past but to whom hundreds of thousands of disaster victims owed their lives. All wars are cruel, but Anderson succeeds in convincing us that the random savagery shown by the combatants in Chechnya made its terror unique. Against the background of a ruined country, he interviews Chechen rebels and traitors, Russian generals and pathetically young conscripts, and shadowy operatives who steered Cuny toward danger. Lies and changing stories make the mystery of what happened to Cuny ever more impenetrable, yet Anderson continues his stubborn detective work. With writing that has the fluidity and psychological insight shown by the author of the novel Triage, Anderson brings to this book a passion not usually found in journalism and makes it literature. –John Stevenson

Nov 16, 2008 - 4:35 am 3. gumshoe:

some more background on Cuny
from an amazon.com review of the same book above:

8 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
Heartbreaking and Fascinating — but Ellusive, May 25, 2001
By A. Ross (Washington, DC) – See all my reviews

Even though I’d heard of Fred Cuny from a PBS Frontline show about him, I wouldn’t have been likely to pick up this biography and account of his dissapearance except that friend had strongly reccomended it. He was a man with a huge compassion toward people in need, and had a comparably huge ego. Anderson makes it clear that Cuny had large dreams, and sometimes altered details about his background and accomplishments to maintain his own mythology. A revolutionary in the field of disaster relief, he was one of the first to recognize the challenges in designing and implementing relief strategies in the post-Cold War era of regional conflicts that would devestate civil societes around the globe. When he dissapeared in Chechnya in 1995 with three colleagues, it eventually triggered a manhunt that escalated to the presidential level between the US and Russia. It’s this mystery that drives the book.
Anderson’s account begins in standard journalistic fashion, with a “teaser” opening chapter relating the basics of Cuny’s mysterious dissapearance. He then goes back to construct a biography of this remarkable man and the disaster relief wolrd he shouldered his way into. There are some interesting episodes along the way, such as Cuny’s precience about what would unfold in Somalia, his dominant role in Operation Provide Comfort in Iraq, and his ingenuity in Bosnia–but eveything builds toward Chechnya. Here, Anderson is particularly strong at capturing the horrifying randomness of the war between the Russian army and Chechen sepratists. The vital point about this war, which is made perfectly clear, is that there are a plethora of groups with subtle alliances and unfathomable agendas. There are units of Russian army conscripts (who would rather be anywhere else), elite professional soldier units (who are frightenly autonomous), commando units, Russian intelligence agents (remarkably inept), relief workers, Chechen guerillas, Chechen mafia, regular bandits, politicans in neighboring provinces, refugees, and in the midst of this malestorm of interests strode Fred Cuny.

In detailing this confusion of interests, and the multitude of rumor and disinformation concerning Cuny’s dissapearance, Anderson does tend to repeat himself. This gets kind of old, and one wishes for a bit more rigerous editing throughout. His technique of building up various theories only to be able knock them down later also gets somewhat tiresome, but is understandable. In the end, Anderson travels to Chechnya and endangers his life to try and track down the truth and must be commended for that. Unfortunately, as one might expect, many of the people who might have known something of the truth about the matter are killed along way. Anderson’s hypothesis that Cuny was dissapeared on the order of Chechan President Dudayev is reasonably convinving, but ultimately ephemeral and unprovable. While Dudayev is obviously unapproachable on matter, one wishes Anderson had spent some time trying to track down Cuny’s driver, a man who melted away.

Nov 16, 2008 - 4:45 am 4. wretchard:

A Wikipedia entry suggests Obamas mysterious civilian force is exactly the small scale outfit described by McClatchy. It quotes Robert Gates as saying:

“The Department of Defense has taken on many … burdens that might have been assumed by civilian agencies in the past… [The military has] done an admirable job…but it is no replacement for the real thing – civilian involvement and expertise… Funding for non-military foreign-affairs programs…remains disproportionately small relative to what we spend on the military… Secretary Rice has asked for a budget increase for the State Department and an expansion of the Foreign Service. The need is real… What is clear to me is that there is a need for a dramatic increase in spending on the civilian instruments of national security – diplomacy, strategic communications, foreign assistance, civic action, and economic reconstruction and development… W, having robust civilian capabilities available could make it less likely that military force will have to be used in the first place, as local problems might be dealt with before they become crises.”

My guess is that Obama’s rhetoric got him carried away and he started talking about this civilian reserve concept as if it were some huge security force co-equal to the uniformed military. It was a clumsy and overblown reference which is now driving everyone nuts because it makes no sense. At least, that’s why I think. But then again, who knows?

Nov 16, 2008 - 4:48 am 5. Manny C:

Or it’s the Department of Everything Else / SysAdmin function that strategists like Thomas P.M. Barnett have been talking about for some time. I am partial to his idea.

Nov 16, 2008 - 4:49 am 6. slade:

My guess is that Obama’s rhetoric got him carried away and he started talking about this civilian reserve concept as if it were some huge security force co-equal to the uniformed military. It was a clumsy and overblown reference which is now driving everyone nuts because it makes no sense. – Wretchard

That’s what I’ve always thought as well since th story emerged, which removes the major issue from the table but leaves a troubling residue of naive and just piss-poor judgment to contaminate other decision-making.

Annoy Mouse and others will probably groan, but “It’s the tide. The dismal tide. It’s not just the one thing.”

It’s the synergy that corrupts just as fully and completely as the individual intent.

I won’t lose sleep with this special corps of his, but without some of the grey beards Team Obama and 53% (??) of the voters so deride and disdain, this nascent team will be, as the poster says, out of their league. (Robert Kennedy Jr at EPA??)

Nov 16, 2008 - 5:26 am 7. CPT, Charles:

Look to this going into ’silent running’ mode. IF this was a serious proposal, then nothing will be publicly [openly] advanced until the fairness doctrine and ‘net neutrality’ are firmly in place. Ditto that on any and all of Dear Leader’s other ‘transformational’ policies.

Rush sank HillaryCare with a spread of 6 torpedoes at the waterline. The new crew coming in will make sure there’s no repeat of that event.

As to DL’s minions’ public pronouncements…I prefer to watch their hands…that will tell me more about their intent than any soothing words. So, am I being too negative about the new administration?

Well…consider their repeated trait of ’scrubbing’ their website EVERY TIME something questionable comes to light. No my friends, these are not the actions of someone who thinks ’sunlight is the best disinfectant’.

Nov 16, 2008 - 5:35 am 8. outa my league:

Agreed. Awaiting clarity.

Nov 16, 2008 - 5:45 am 9. dull as dirt:

Yes. The clarity of consensus.

The camel being the horse designed by committee.

Nov 16, 2008 - 6:33 am 10. MarkJ:

Oh yeah, this CNSF thing is going work out fine! *Does a Seinfeld eye-roll*

For a guy who said, “Words mean things,” Obama casually tosses them through the air like like empty beer bottles at the Dew Drop Inn on “Redneck Theme Night.”

And therein lies the danger. Obama himself may have a much more modest vision of his proposed CNSF, but his subordinates, having been given little guidance on how to accomplish this vision, may end up “working toward the Fuehrer” and create something far bigger, more expensive, and…more sinister. Some have already opined that a CNSF could easily be used to bleed the All Volunteer Force by siphoning off “the best and the brightest” who might normally consider military service. Hey, why not shuffle paperwork in a Mississippi health clinic for a year or two if it’s just as “patriotic” as taking incoming rounds in Afghanistan?

Having said the above, for all his supposed intellectualism, Obama doesn’t seem to be a particularly original thinker. Therefore, I suspect his CNSF, in reality, would be merely another entrenched bureaucratic layer or redundant agency: too big to eliminate…but too small to be effective.

Nov 16, 2008 - 7:15 am 11. Dave in NC:

CPT Charles:

Remember John N. Mitchell; “Watch what we do, not what we say.”

Truer words never spoken by a politician.

Nov 16, 2008 - 7:20 am 12. copperhead:

Ridiculous.

I don’t know where to begin with the “Civilian National Security Force.” I’m going to pretend that I don’t see its creepy parallels to a secret police or Youth force. I’m going to take it at face value for the purpose of discussion.

I’ll start with its name and its apparent purpose. National Security Force. I wasn’t aware that we were under a threat so overwhelming and everpresent that we need backyard snoops and snitches on every corner to keep an eye out on us. For the past eight years, the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard have kept us safe. The FBI, CIA, DIA. Police and border patrol. What has happened that makes them suddenly inadequate to keeping us safe? What IS the “national security” risk that is alluded in the name, anyway?

If Obama means terrorism, then why is he so opposed to the War on Terror? Why does he attack our troops who “air raid villages” and “murder innocents”? If he means terrorism, why isn’t he stronger on watching the borders?

If the “National Security” part does NOT refer to terrorism.. what, then, does it mean? And why should 500 billion be spent to create this thing, when we already have the police and FBI?

This all just smacks of a clumsy attempt for Obama to play Socialist Big Boy. Putin, Chavez, Zombie Kim Jung-Il, etc, they all look on this and recognize it immediately. So should we.

I bet CNSF will go back into the memory hole for now, and then when Joe Biden’s “test” results come back, and we’re attacked on our own soil, the admin will bring it up for a “safer America”.

Nov 16, 2008 - 8:20 am 13. hdgreene:

The Obama transition team declined to comment but its spokesman did comment. On what authority did this disembodied voice speak? His own? We should require that before Presidents get plausible deniability they should have a plausible denier.

This Civilian National Security Force is meant for domestic consumption, by which I mean it will consume locally. Kind of like, I don’t know, locusts. But they won’t be sold that way! No, these swarms will leave powerlines and windmills in their wake. Except we won’t need the powerlines because they are developing wireless electricity (should be ready in five years).

I think the cause of the confusion as regards the purpose of the SS, I mean CNSF, is the reference to “postwar reconstruction.” That’s because the war hasn’t happened yet. These things can’t be hurried.

Nov 16, 2008 - 8:46 am 14. Lifeofthemind:

Could we find them useful for mine clearance?

Nov 16, 2008 - 9:15 am 15. LFMayor:

Yes Lifeofthemind, there is always that (snicker). I myself was thinking more of Vegetable Gardening. Dynamically, on the end of a hoe, or the more carbon-nuetral static method, pushing up the vegetables through the ground above.

Ultimately, I think that’s what the Mother Earth worshippers would like to see, all of us proles living in thatched huts and tilling the munificient earth in reverant toil, for the glory of the annoited.

(More) Seriously, if this is a glimpse of truly dark plans, the trickle method of implementing it is far beyond these people. They have very poor OpSec and this lapse is extremely telling. They’ll mess up, push too far, too fast and the Big Dance and Joe’s “test” will come before the necessary steps are in place to contain it.

Smoke is on the wind.

Nov 16, 2008 - 9:50 am 16. bogie wheel:

Re: Kucinich and H.R. 808: Will somebody please inform the Congressman that we already have a federal Department that performs the international functions? It’s called the State Department. And with regard to domestic peace-keeping functions, we have the National Guard and state and local police; for conflict resolution and training, see churches, Boys & Girls Clubs, Boy Scouts, inner city scholarship programs …..

Sheesh.

Re: CNSF … agreed, the language is fuzzy and, at this point, a still-moving target. (See Orwell, “Politics and the English Language.”)

But *if* he does mean a “post-war” “reconstruction” “force” in the sense of, say, large numbers of American civilian personnel employed in rebuilding infrastructure in war-torn countries, that still raises a whole host of questions:

… Does he mean only countries in which U.S. forces have been involved in the armed conflict? Or does he intend to send American civilians into countries in which there is no sizeable American military presence? If the latter, how is the safety of American civilians to be established?

… How does he define “post-war”? i.e. at what point is it considered “post” enough for civilians to go in, in large numbers, to begin the rebuilding?

… How does he plan to transition from American-led rebuilding to local personnel trained and funded to do the same? Yes, we’re talking long term. Because unless he wants an American CNSF to be in these places for 30+ years, the locals are going to have to learn to do for themselves. Just like we have been ttransitioning a peacekeeping funciton in Iraq from American military to the Iraqi military and police. Transitions are lengthy, laborious processes. Each transition is also unique to time, place, and local conditions. You can try to plan ahead of time but all plans end up getting adapted to current and ongoing necessities.

… How does any of this differ, in goals and implementation, from the current and much-maligned-by-the-left civilian contractor roles in, say, a place like Iraq? Or how does it differ from what charitable humanitarian organizations, or the Peace Corps, already do? In other words, is he pointing to a difference in function or a difference in scale? Or a difference of organization (putting everything under one umbrella, a possible high-level federal office)?

… Where there is redundancy of effort, what happens to the existing organizations and personnel?

… Can any of this be persuasively justified, with regard to its being a function of the federal government, on national security grounds? As opposed to a never-ending international humanitarian effort. Because the Constitution mandates the federal government’s role in the former, but I don’t see a mandate for the latter. (See NGOs, charitable organizations, etc.)

… And, finally, that picayune perennial question: How does all this get paid for?

Nov 16, 2008 - 9:51 am 17. NahnCee:

I still think that Obama is casting about frantically for some kind of paid jobs he can offer his unemployed moonbat followers who elected him — something on the government payroll which doesn’t require any actual, you know, skill or education or tact. Spying on your neighbors and reporting back to Big Brother would fit the bill nicely.

Nov 16, 2008 - 10:55 am 18. Vinny Vidivici:

” . . . a representative of the Department of Peace and Nonviolence will sit on the National Security Council, recommend policy to the Attorney General and advise the Secretary of Defense and State on all matters concerning national security.”

Kinda like a party politcal enforcer assigned to an army unit or commune? This stuff gets creepier by the minute.

And does this mean representatives of Defense, State and DOJ get to advise the Department of Rainbows and Unico . . . er, sorry, Peace? Like they’d really want to (rolls eyes).

Nov 16, 2008 - 10:58 am 19. buddy larsen:

Maybe he has in mind a simple lateral expansion of the friendly & helpful ACORN into general street-management.

Nov 16, 2008 - 11:08 am 20. Aristide:

I suspect a we will see centralized control of groups that are much like Obama’s Chicago school reform. More about organizing than accomplishing.

Groups set up for “noble” purposes that can then used for other ends. It’s all about Power! SEIZE IT!.

Take this Hip Hop
City Year video and check out the message and reaction at 2:13.

Nov 16, 2008 - 11:16 am 21. Wadeusaf:

Wait…, isn’t the Civilian National Security Force just a pet name for the transition team?

From what continent does the nation of Civilian hail?

And how many armored divisions do they (like the Pope) have?

Wasn’t CNSF a mortgage broker or a branch line of Amtrak?

Nov 16, 2008 - 11:22 am 22. Wadeusaf:

As for the Department of peace, Sun Zu (?) art of war, when at war prepare for the peace, when at peace prepare for war.

Not that the president elect really understands the concept, from where I sit at least there is no indication of an understanding, but saying so sure makes it appear so.

Nov 16, 2008 - 11:31 am 23. buddy larsen:

At the close the protagonist asks his pal “Still think you can control them?”

Nov 16, 2008 - 11:32 am 24. Nomenklatura:

It is entirely predictable what an organization like this would do.

It would hire a combination of cheap foreign staff and gullible American college ‘temps’ to do something that at least looks like work, while its management and bureaucracy would be entirely staffed by left wing agitators attracted primarily by the opportunity to get on the government payroll and be made permanently unfireable by civil service regulations.

Across the Anglosphere, public sector employment is becoming inexorably a unionized, politicized racket, which will have to be addressed sooner or later. The civil service regulations, designed originally to remove politics from government employment, have been thoroughly subverted.

Nov 16, 2008 - 11:32 am 25. NahnCee:

Whoever made up the name “Department of Peace and Nonviolence” must have an affiliation with Saudi Arabia’s “Commission for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice”.

And look how well *that* group of untrained volunteers does in Saudi Arabia in preventing vice and promoting virtue.

Nov 16, 2008 - 11:35 am 26. Vinny Vidivici:

Buddy:

Mao sent the Red Guards ‘to the countryside’ to cool off when he was through using them for his Cultural Revolution. But, then, he was made of much sterner stuff.

Then there’s Moulitsas reprising the role Ernst Roehm . . .

Nov 16, 2008 - 11:39 am 27. marymcl:

It looks to me as though Iraq would be the first logical place to send the CNSF. That should fire up his base about the idea, huh?

Nov 16, 2008 - 11:39 am 28. Wadeusaf:

Buddy, at the midpoint, the vocals implore, “in a whisper, arise, arise.”

The sun on the meadow is summery warm
The stag in the forest runs free
But gathered together to greet the storm
Tomorrow belongs to me

The branch on the linden is leafy and green
The Rhine gives its gold to the sea (Gold to the sea)
But somewhere a glory awaits unseen
Tomorrow belongs to me

Now Fatherland, Fatherland, show us the sign
Your children have waited to see
The morning will come
When the world is mine
Tomorrow belongs to me
Tomorrow belongs to me
Tomorrow belongs to me
Tomorrow belongs to me

[ADDITIONAL VERSE]
The babe in his cradle is closing his eyes
The blossom embraces the bee
But soon says the whisper, arise, arise
Tomorrow belongs to me
Tomorrow belongs to me

At which point the lovely vocal is enjoined by others rising to become the harsh demanding voice of the mob, em, crowd.

The question to be answered by each of us is simple. Are we a part of the harsh or the softer notes? As well as how does the solo voice get heard over the chorus?

A cup of Cacophony, anyone?

Nov 16, 2008 - 12:12 pm 29. K:

The whole idea is upside down.

We don’t need another security force or the expense. The only reason for a new force is that it can be directly under Obama’s control. That means it would be unconstrained by tradition or staff.

It can be staffed with new hires completely dependent upon Obama’s favor and willing to do whatever he wants. It might do some good things, it might do some bad things; but, without doubt, it is to be his private police/army.

We should be downsizing the State Department not adding to it. We should be stopping US agencies in various modes from doing anything like construction, reconstruction, or instruction in foreign lands.

And we should be preparing to be a nation that protects itself and generally keeps a (smaller) military near home and not permanently stationed, and usually fighting, around the world.

Because of our involvements it will take at least a decade to restore a sane military structure and foreign policy. I don’t say quit, I say start changing direction.

Cooperation with foreign countries works best on a defined and limited project basis. We ask for something, they decide if it makes sense, it gets done, and the project ends. Or they ask for something, etc.

Instead we have developed the strange idea that the American government must and will be engaged in hundreds or thousands of tasks – some almost unilateral – anywhere in the world. And that should continue indefinitely.

Simply put, it promotes the wrong mindset. We are not the nannies of the world. Nor must we referee when others get into fights. Nor must we be the police whenever bad people do bad things somewhere.

Nov 16, 2008 - 1:24 pm 30. whiskey:

Occam’s Razor. The Security Force is to staff Bill Ayers Death Camps. After all, Obama promises to totally transform America and along with mentors Ayers and Wright, “get rid of” traditional America, particularly middle/working class Whites who did not vote for him.

Out of power, he merely ordered a smear campaign by his allies in Ohio, with mostly Black officials digging through the private government databases of Joe the Plumber and serving up his intimate details to the Press. Because Joe asked “the One” an embarrassing question when “the One” came to his neighborhood.

In Power, Obama, who hates Whites with the passion of his mentor Wright, can only hold power by a brutal dictatorship along the lines of his heroes Pol Pot and Stalin.

Of course he wants a private Gestapo answerable only to him. That’s the whole point.

It’s not just rhetoric when you pal around for 20 years with Ayers and Wright is your spiritual mentor, baptizing your kids, performing your marriage ceremony.

Nov 16, 2008 - 1:48 pm 31. Leo Linbeck III:

A CNSF as well-funded as the military? Funded from what source?

Perhaps as a bankrupt idea, it can apply for money from TARP.

L3

Nov 16, 2008 - 1:57 pm 32. Peter Boston:

Why is there any confusion about this? Obama’s extraordinary statement about his intention to create a private army was investigated by teams of reporters from the NYT and the WaPo who asked penetrating and incisive questions from everybody even remotely connected with Obama. They dug through every file, checked every appointment book, and went through the expense records to audit every penny. There were daily newspaper and TV reports about it.

Or was that Sarah Palin I’m thinking about?

Nov 16, 2008 - 2:25 pm 33. RWE:

“I still think that Obama is casting about frantically for some kind of paid jobs he can offer his unemployed moonbat followers who elected him…”

Nahncee, after working alongside Federal government civilians for over 34 years, and counting many of them as close friends, I have finally come to the conclusion that they are a large part of the problem.

Dedicated some of them are, but almost every last one of them looks at government regulation and control as well as on-going programs as a means to assured employment.

The Apollo program achieved its very daunting but very limited objectives, and when it was to be shut down, we got the Shuttle program in an attempt to save those jobs. Shuttle was proved to be infeasible and pointless in 1986 but this was not truly accepted until the Columbia broke up in 2003, and even now the calls go out to keep flying the Shuttle just a little while longer.

If Hoover Dam had been built in the 60’s we would still be building more Hoovers all over the country, mainly in places where there was no water to dam.

If Obama wants to expand and continue his legacy then a bunch of government employees operating self-licking ice cream cones would be one of the best ways.

Nov 16, 2008 - 5:05 pm 34. Fat Man:

The good news here is that the monster budget deficits are going to tie President Hussein’s hands.

Nov 16, 2008 - 7:22 pm 35. bogie wheel:

RWE -

I haven’t worked alongside Federal civilian employees, period, let alone for the length of time you have. I just know that there are 10 million federal employees in a country of approx. 300 million people. That’s about 1 Fed for every 30 citizens. And when you consider that of those 30 citizens, only about 22 are over 18, and of those 22, only about 13 pay federal income taxes, then you begin to see (as if it should not have been evident before) just how insanely unwieldy and unsustainable the bureaucratic bloat at the Federal level is.

Washington is indeed broken. But rotsa ruck to anyone seriously trying to tackle the problem. Because the problem is that there are far too many people on the damn payroll doing things that the federal government has no business being involved in. And when you start suggesting reducing services, you tick off not only the recipients of those services but even more so the bureaucrats whose jobs it is to dispense those services. And if there’s anything a person will fight tooth and nail to protect, it’s their job.

I do not “wish” unemployment on anyone, having been through a 20-month stint of it myself a few years back. Unemployment, esp. when you have few to no resources to fall back on, is absolutely brutal. But we’re talking about national solvency and the fate of the country here. The federal government is not a jobs program. The federal government is not a wealth generator. The federal government was never supposed to be the boss of the American citizen.

Unfortunately, when you grow government to where it is the largest employer in the country (Fed govt has 10 million employees; Wal-Mart, the largest private employer has 1.1 million), you are de facto creating a huge bloc of dependents who will not only vote but use (and in some cases, abuse) the power of their office to protect their turf, the most primal aspect of which is their paycheck, which many will see as their entitlement.

The equation of who really works for whom in America has been inverted (and subverted) to a degree that would dismay and quite possibly outrage the Founders.

(Comparative statistic: In George Washington’s administration, there was 1 Fed for about every 4,000+ citizens.)

Nov 16, 2008 - 10:20 pm 36. buddy larsen:

A lot of federal effort goes into planning the federal budget, which includes a vast quantity of money allotted for planning the federal budget, much of which is the cost of planning the federal budget. Budgeteers get paid to plan how they’ll get paid to plan how they’ll be paid to plan how they’ll be paid. The problem they have to solve is what to do with all that money that people keep sending in to DC.

Nov 16, 2008 - 10:54 pm 37. Frau Jedöns:

The CNSF would be like the SA and not the SS which was a real military organization. Onkel Adolf’s civilian security force was the Sturmabteilung which remained under his control and which he used in his rise to power. I guess Obama’s CNSF would be under his executive command and be a means of giving the ACORN folk a regular income without having to fill out pesky grant request papers. I see the CNSF in nut brown attire with jaunty red berets or kerchiefs, and it’s *not* a pretty picture. It sounds and smells bad.

Nov 16, 2008 - 10:58 pm 38. buddy larsen:

USSR had its Young Pioneers. Dunno where they were supposed to pioneer, tho, as Europe was already pretty well settled. I guess the plan was to unsettle it, then resettle it. Didn’t work out tho –too much resistance from those bitter clinging boojwazeez.

Nov 16, 2008 - 11:22 pm 39. RWE:

Bogie wheel:

Startling statistics!

You know, Al Gore tried to fix the problem and only made it much worse. His Reinventing Government Initiative mandated a 30% reduction in the Federal civilian workforce. And after a Democratic Congress passed the bill, implementation was handled in an approach known in DC as the “Peanut Butter Spread.” Everybody got cut by the 30% – except Congress. No one knows just what the Commerce Dept does but it was not cut more than anyone else. Ditto with Education. No one decided that the Agriculture Dept’s ratio of 1 employee per farmer was too much and cut them appropriately.

The DoD (one of the few legitimate things Fed Govt does) had already been cut by over 40% but it was not exempted from the additional 30% cut. Neither were the people at NASA that inspected the Space Shuttle, and so forth.

Al Gore’s initiative not only cut both the excess and essential equally but led the whole rest of the Fed Govt to go into permanent job-protection mode.

As a rule, the Fed Govt MAY, and with GREAT difficulty, on OCCASION be able to do something for ITSELF in a reasonably successful fashion (note: For example, WWII was fought BY the Fed Govt FOR the Fed Govt) It demonstrably cannot do things for other people, and certainly not for The People.

Nov 17, 2008 - 5:34 am 40. feeblemind:

I thought I read somewhere that Obama’s Brownshirts would be called ‘Neighborhood Allies’ and would be stocked with street youths engaged in neighborhood crime watch.

Nov 17, 2008 - 7:44 am 41. buddy larsen:

how bout we just make ‘crime’ legal, and call it a day?

Nov 17, 2008 - 8:40 am 42. Roderick Reilly:

It’s really sad when one has to hope for a serious economic downturn so such plans can be shelved due to lack of funds.

Oh, wait — stupid me — that is just the scenario to make “emergency spending and emergency methods” “justifiable.”

Nov 17, 2008 - 10:30 am 43. Fratar:

You’re missing the point entirely. This is an end run on the 2nd amendment. “Look, we’ve established just the type of militia the bill of rights contemplates and only they will be allowed to have personal arms”

Nov 17, 2008 - 10:55 am 44. Fresh Bilge » FB Randoms:

[...] What does Obama mean when he vaguely proposes a “civilian corps?” Belmont Club entertains many speculations. Some commenters find the notion sinister, some laughable. I lean to the latter. [...]

Nov 17, 2008 - 1:18 pm 45. A Conservative Teacher:

Did anyone answer that first post- what similarities does this have with Bill Ayers teachings and Obama’s radical past? Have they tried something similar in Chicago?

Nov 17, 2008 - 3:55 pm 46. john lynch:

If the transition team is telling the truth (and why wouldn’t they be? If Obama was making a Gestapo he wouldn’t have announced it during the campaign) it’s a good idea. The US military and Defense Department have become the sole agency to get anything done. The State Department is becoming a relic. Having some alternative agency to run a lot of our imperial busy work is something to be encouraged.

Nov 18, 2008 - 12:13 am 47. buddy larsen:

@ john lynch: If Obama was making a Gestapo he wouldn’t have announced it during the campaign

–well, the whole political-police notion is likely well wide of whatever Obama meant, but while we’re at it ( & wondering if internet blogs could’ve prevented WW2) let’s remember that “Mein Kampf” was written by an imprisoned dissident many years before the Nazis overran Europe, and so exposed the author’s moral insanity that it should’ve ended his political career and probably would’ve had it not seemed at the time and among ordinary people so insignificant and –if noticed at all –easily-dismissed as some silly extremist rant.

But as if to a dog whistle a small scattered pack had pricked up its ears –and a mad rant, mortally vulnerable to ridicule, began to parlay a cynically correct zeitgeist appraisal into a powerful act of leadership –among the precise selected few at whom it had been aimed.

Nov 18, 2008 - 8:53 am 48. Steynian 286 « Free Canuckistan!:

[...] O-GRUPPEN– Mysterious force: “According to the Obama transition team, the mysterious “civilian [...]

Nov 19, 2008 - 3:11 pm

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.