These are the things people are talking about this week. Read for yourself:
-- On July 2, Sen. Barack Obama read a public service address that contained the following line:“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the
Hmmm . . .
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.”
-- CBS News and some other news outlets are questioning whether Sen. John McCain is too old to be president. Could it be that the BHM, aka MSM long knives are going to come out every time Obama self destructs?
Hmmm . . .
14 July 2008
Is Obama Calling For A National Police Force? Is McCain Too Old?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Why is Obama's message so startling?
We have contract screeners at the airports making minimum wage, the land borders aren't secure, the sea ports aren't secure (what do we inspect now, 5% of cargo containers?), etc.
Properly securing the US at home isn't mutually exclusive to using the armed forces abroad. Whether or not one agrees with being in Iraq, etc., why are we not doing what we can to secure America at home? Seems like a valid question.
I didn't listen to the address, but just reading what you pasted, it seems like he more likely meant what I put, rather than some scary draconian national police (isn't that what the FBI is?).
A. Esq.
Wasn't Reagan older than McCain when he was inaugurated? Three years or so?
IIRC, Reagan was older for his second term - they spin it by saying McCain would be the oldest first term president.
I didn't check, but that's my recollection...
All, thanks for writing. A, there is no national police force in the U.S. FBI only has jurisdiction in certain cases. We are a local police force nation. Here in Ohio, we don't even have a state police. State Highway Patrol has jurisdiction only in certain places and has to be invited in on a case. Words matter,A, as you know. There should be stepped up enforcement in all these areas, but it can be done by beefing up existing agencies, not creating yet another layer of bureaucracy and a national police force.
Brent - I think you are mis-reading into Obama's language that he's for creating something brand new. He's saying we don't have a civilian national security force that's sufficiently "powerful, strong, and well funded." That's true - we have a structure that's weak and underfunded.
Beefing up existing agencies is not inconsistent with what he said. Having said that, maybe you are exactly right and he has something bigger in mind, but to me your reading requires a lot more assumptions than mine...
If he really had new, big ideas in this area, rather than just shoring up what's already there, don't you think he'd crow about it?
As always - love the blog - keep up the great work!
A, Esq.
Post a Comment