***Scroll down for updates***
…and the media haven’t reported it. What the…?
Every time I hear Barack Obama speak, I’m reminded of the expression, “Like shooting fish in a barrel.” He is the embodiment of it.
His ideas are so incongruous and on-the-fly, I wonder why mainstream media aren’t picking his statements apart. Yes, I know it’s too easy. There’s no challenge in it. Yes, I know mainstream media liberals want him to win. But news organizations report news, and a Democratic candidate advocating a civilian quasi-military security force is news.
On July 2, Obama gave a speech to an audience of what appears to be military veterans. Relevant to this post is this nugget (emphasis added):
“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives 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.”
Listen to the whole thing to get the context. It was painful for me. His voice exudes inexperience, and its phony quality makes me think of chalk scraping against a chalkboard:
Here’s where it gets interesting: In subsequent media reports and the official transcript, the “civilian national security force” statement does not appear. (See WorldNetDaily) Why? Did the Obama campaign realize how strange it sounded?
The week after the “security force” statements, Obama likened Immigration and Customs Enforcement to terrorists, simply for doing the job of enforcing immigration laws! He made this statement before members and supporters of the hispanic racialist group La Raza. Two seemingly opposing statements uttered before two different audiences.
Future president of the United States, what would this proposed civilian national security force do, exactly? Will it profile Muslims, or help secure the border, like the Minuteman group, whom George Bush called vigilantes? May it conduct immigration raids, which certainly are part of national security? If so, how do you reconcile “terrorizing” illegal aliens with immigration raids and forming a quasi-military force of civilians to help the military “achieve national security objectives?”
What does that mean?
No response from BHO headquarters.
Bloggers and right-leaning news organizations have been all over this. Check out Google blog search and Google news.
Now that I’ve returned to political blogging, I’m paying attention. And I’m astounded how Barack Obama has gotten away with this stuff. A nation of sheeple, we are.
(Hat tip: Hot Air)
Update: Commenter CorbinKale writes:
“More to the point, [Obama's] voting record on gun control says that he has no plans for any ARMED civilian security force. Maybe, it is some program to get neighbors to spy on neighbors? He just thought that was what the Vets wanted to hear. You won’t hear it again.”
I strongly suspect we won’t. 
Commenter Mwalimu Daudi writes:
“I remember how some folks went ballistic when the Minutemen simply sat and watched the Mexican border. I predict nary a peep out of those same folks about this monstrosity.”
