Obama will make cuts in the military
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
Winfred Dyer
Published: October 31, 2008
Barack Obama was elected to the Illinois State Senate and U.S. Senate by huge percentages because he was backed by “ACORN,” which is accused of voter fraud. He is on the same path to the presidency backed by this organization. If elected he will dictate how much you earn and to whom he will distribute your money.
Both President Clinton and President Carter were anti-military and Obama is exhibiting the same traits. No country can be safe and secure without a well-manned, well-equipped, and well-disciplined military. Case in point: If Israel did not possess this asset they would have ceased to exist.
When you go to the polls —and everyone eligible to do so should exercise this right —think clearly because if you don’t you may end up with only memories of a democracy.
Winfred Dyer
USAF Retired
Culpeper
Page 1 of 1
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( Geriberi ) on November 04, 2008 at 4:37 pm
You know, I don’t believe in actual “torture,“ and whether we sanction it or not depends on your idea of what defines actual “torture.“ If you mean that we make the poor little terrorists who hope to annhilate our people uncomfortable, then I guess I must confess that I, too, endorse torture. I believe in going to extraordinary measures to protect our citizens, and that includes “spying” on them if necessary. I don’t believe they are spying on your average Joe (as Obama will do to Joe the Plumber, or anyone else who questions him).
With Obama, of course, instead of “Big Brother” we’ll get “Big Sugar Daddy.“ The big government we have now is NOTHING compared to what’s coming if he’s elected.
So, you endorse a Civilian National Security Force? I think it’s more likely that it will be manned by crackheads, illiterates and drunks - the people who will be the biggest recipients of Big Sugar Daddy’s “social programs.“ To the future, Comrade!
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( anoptomist ) on November 04, 2008 at 3:29 pm
To Geirberi: Indeed our country has changed, we now endorse torture and sanction spying on Americans.
As far as looking for candidates for a new military, why don’t we look to the recent layoffs from GM, Google, Circuit City, the list goes on.
I would be interested to read more of the Obama interview you quoted.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Geriberi ) on November 04, 2008 at 8:21 am
anoptimist - just in case you hadn’t heard about this, here’s a recent quote from Obama:
“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set,” he said Wednesday. “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.”
Not sure what he was talking about here - he didn’t bother to explain. One possibility is having the recipients of his “freebies” programs be compelled to serve in this “national civilian security force,“ you know, be trained by the government for the “common good.“ Can you spell “Communism?“
If nothing else he’s said scares you, this absolutely should.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Geriberi ) on November 03, 2008 at 6:19 pm
That is one possibility for them, among others (AIP). Here are the first two items on their platform:
1. To effect full compliance with the constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Alaska.
2. To support and defend States’ Rights, Individual Rights, Property Rights, and the Equal Footing Doctrine as guaranteed by the constitutions of the United States of America and the state of Alaska.
Considering how far government has come from it’s original purpose, and how much more powerful it may be about to become, I can’t say that I blame them if they do want to secede. I wonder how many of the founding fathers wouldn’t want to join them at this point. They’re not the only state that may consider it - look at Texas. And good old California - one can only hope…
What could possibly be more important than national security? What? Do I feel more secure here than I would in any other nation on earth? Yep (at least until after tomorrow). Will that be the case if national security takes a back seat to social programs, including welfare? Gee, I don’t think so.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( rjma ) on November 03, 2008 at 5:38 pm
The AIP’s goal clearly is to split off from the union. If you doubt that read their faq’s at their website. Palin did a video welcome to their convention in April saying “Keep up the good work”. I think that is fair to say is encouragement of people who want to split up the country.
Willing to spend “whatever it takes”? Maybe 3/4 of the world’s spending on the military? 80%, 90%? No limit? Scary.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Geriberi ) on November 03, 2008 at 3:07 pm
How much do we want? As much as it takes.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Geriberi ) on November 03, 2008 at 3:06 pm
rjma - “Palin encourages people actively working to break up the US?“ Exactly how does she “encourage” them? The same way that Obama “encourages” Wm. Ayers to blow up more buildings? Lets see some back up for that little piece of propaganda. I’m sure you’re talking about the AIP. From Wikpedia, “The party also advocates positions similar to those of the Constitution Party and Libertarian Party, supporting gun rights, privatization, home schooling, and limited government.“ Where do I sign up?
Our liberal Congress wants to cut our defense budget by 25%. Who’s going to stop them if Obama is elected? Do you think we’re 25% safer than we were under Clinton?
Carter being ex-military doesn’t necessarily make him pro-military, or even pro-America, for that matter.
Need to try to remember - just try - that we are defending our freedom from many, many sources of extremism. This does require a fairly large military. Of course, it’s much more important that we make sure all the crackheads don’t have to get a job to pay for their healthcare, and we need to give them a check!
anoptimist - what is your suggestion for how we should handle the type of unrest that we could see as a result of this election - this according to the media, and many liberals? Just let it happen? By civil unrest, do you means rioting and looting and burning? We can thank the left for putting this idea out there, and pretty much insisting that it happen if their man doesn’t get in.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( rjma ) on November 01, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Ok, here’s some real figures. Currently the US makes up half of the world’s total military spending ($1.4T). How much more do you want?
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( anoptomist ) on November 01, 2008 at 3:48 pm
In 1960 President Eisenhower (a general) gave a thoughtful speech, one best known for “we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex.“ He went on to say that we should never allow this to jeopardize our democratic process. “That only a knowledgeable citizenry could compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty prosper together.“
Warning against becoming a “community of dreadful fear and hate, and be instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.“
Fast forward to 2008 where, coming to a community near you, the US Infantry’s combat team, fresh from the war in Iraq. Deployed in the US since Oct 1st, with full access to all weapons, they are an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies, including civil unrest or crowd control.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( rjma ) on November 01, 2008 at 8:05 am
We have had by far the largest military in the world for decades. They never changed under Clinton or Carter (a Naval officer by the way). We will continue to have the largest military (by far) during the Obama administration. You should be a lot more concerned about Sarah Palin who encourages people actively working to break up the US (Ak Independence Party).
Report Inappropriate Comment