The White House speaks out of both sides of its mouth, as they say. As I was browsing the aggregators this morning, I noticed these two headlines grouped together. It struck me as kind of funny.

Breitbart — White House mocks Sarah Palin from podium

Even the White House’s top spokesman is getting in on the act of mocking former Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin for looking to talking points written on her palm during a speech to “tea party” activists. Robert Gibbs showed the words “hope” and “change” on his hand as he started his daily briefing with reporters on Tuesday. Many in the room, where President Barack Obama had spoken just moments before about the need for bipartisanship, groaned at the political shot.

The Caucus — Obama Urges Setting Aside ‘Petty Politics’

President Obama declared today that “a sense of purpose that transcends petty politics” must be forged by Democrats and Republicans to create more jobs, reduce the deficit and find at least some common ground on health care.

“We can’t afford grandstanding at the expense of actually getting something done,” Mr. Obama said as he made a surprise appearance at the daily White House briefing….

Here’s a bit of philosophy from Answers.com:

The 16th-century French writer Michel de Montaigne, who is generally credited with inventing the essay, proclaimed, “Saying is one thing and doing is another.” And before him, St. Francis of Assisi, who embodied this principle, is widely credited with saying, “Preach the gospel at all times. Use words if necessary.”

Actions speak louder than words.

Brother O will spend more on welfare next year than George W. Bush spent on the entire Iraq war. He is spending $10 trillion on welfare, the largest increase in welfare benefits in U.S. history, and no one knows because it’s not being reported, says Robert Rector, co-author of a study by the Heritage Foundation.
 
“One in seven in total federal and state dollars now goes to welfare. But this is a completely unknown story,” said the senior research fellow in domestic policy studies at Heritage.
 
To provide some perspective, the Bush administration spent a total of $622 billion on the Iraq war, according to the Congressional Research Service. Brother O’s welfare spending will reach $888 billion in 2010, $260 billion more than Bush spent from the first “shock and awe” attack in 2003 until he left office in January 2009.
 
Brother O will increase annual federal welfare spending by one-third in his first fiscal year. The study projects annual spending on welfare programs will reach $1 trillion for the 2014 fiscal year, and will total $10.3 trillion ($7.5 trillion federal money and $2.8 trillion federally mandated state expenditures) over the next decade.
 
Since the beginning of the government’s “war on poverty,” $15.9 trillion has been spent on welfare programs. The total cost of every war in American history, starting with the American Revolution, is $6.4 trillion when adjusted for inflation.
 
Welfare has been the fastest growing part of the federal government’s spending, increasing by 292 percent from 1989 to 2008. That’s compared to Social Security and Medicare, which grew 213 percent, the study says.
 
While campaigning for president, Brother O attacked Bush because of the financial toll the Iraq war was having on Americans, costing each household about $100 a month. When that same standard is applied to means-tested welfare spending, the cost for each household is $560 per month in 2009 and will be $638 per month in 2010, according to the Heritage study.
 
Radio and TV commentators and pundits laughed at the video of an exuberant Peggy Joseph gushing about how she no longer had to worry about putting gas in her car or paying her mortgage for Brother O would take care of it. 

Who’s laughing now?

The seeds of the “socialism of the XXI century” (Marxism or gangsterism) that is destroying Latin America and threatens to destroy Honduras and the U.S. were planted in the Americas by Fidel Castro.

For more than 50 years, Castro has been working to harm the U.S. and spread Marxism, financed originally by the Soviet Union, and later by Hugo Chavez and drug trafficking. 

Fidel Castro transformed an imperfect but happy and prosperous island into an Orwellian nightmare, a GULAG of dire poverty and despair, where the only hope for most is being able to escape.  

Following a scheme devised by Castro to impose Marxism through “democratic” elections and referendums, Hugo Chavez took over Venezuela. With oil revenues stolen from the Venezuelan people, Chavez funded and helped implement Castro’s plan in other countries.

Daniel Ortega, Evo Morales, Rafael Correa and others, following Chavez’s example and with Chavez’s funding, have enslaved or are enslaving their respective countries. Miguel Zelaya was implementing Castro’s scheme in Honduras.  

Wiser than other Latin Americans, however, Hondurans have laws that defend them from the fraudulent scheme devised by Castro. Hondurans have seen this scheme unfold in the countries being destroyed by the Marxist thugs controlled by Castro and Chavez. They don’t want the tragedy of those countries repeated in Honduras. They would rather be isolated for a few years than enslaved for more than 50 like the Cubans! 

Castro’s Scheme

Castro’s scheme — through which Chavez, Morales, Correa, etc. have enslaved their countries — works along these lines:

1. Select a wannabe dictator — a “charismatic” and depraved megalomaniac who is ready to sell out his country (thugs like Chavez, Morales, Correa, and Zelaya). Help him run for president of the country.
2. Invest millions or billions in a “professional” campaign demonizing the opposition and promising CHANGE to help the poor, end corruption, improve schools … whatever people want to hear.
3. Commit as much fraud as possible to make sure the wannabe dictator wins.
4. Have “protectors of human rights” like OAS Secretary General Insulza — who has really been trampling on human rights by promoting communism for years — declare that the elections were “legal and transparent.”
5. Make sure that, once in power, the wannabe dictator takes over the Legislative and Judicial branches of power; destroys the country’s business community, economy and institutions; intimidates and controls the media; and demonizes, intimidates and even kills anyone trying to defend the country.
6. Have a referendum to approve a new constitution. Representatives of the people are supposed to write that constitution. In reality, people don’t even know what’s in the new constitution until it’s too late.
7. Have Insulza (OAS) and others who pretend to “protect human rights” declare that the referendum is perfectly “legal and transparent.”

The goal of the new constitution is to help the wannabe dictator become a full-blown dictator for life (like Castro in Cuba), prevent people from defending themselves, and use the country to help drug cartels, Islamic terrorists, etc. to destroy the U.S. And all of it under the cloak of “democracy”!

Hondurans were able to save themselves from the clutches of Castro/Chavez because Zelaya had not yet been able to take control of the Legislative and Judicial branches of power.

Congratulations, Hondurans! Many of us wish we could have done what you are doing before the Marxist thugs working for Castro and Chavez enslaved our countries.

We pray Hondurans can defend themselves from Castro/Chavez/Zelaya now working with Obama’s support under the sheep’s clothing of Oscar Arias.

National Security is big business nowadays. The cabinet position of Homeland Security was established in response to the attacks of September 2001. Homeland security is the term generally used to refer to the broad national effort by all levels of government — federal, state, local and tribal — to protect the territory of the United States from hazards, both internal and external, natural and man-made.

At a political rally prior to being elected, Hussein Obama proposed a Civilian National Security force. Why? Because he feels that we can no longer depend on our armed forces to secure the borders of the nation. And, this security force will be: “Just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded” as our national armed forces. HUH???

Let’s get some perspective. The U.S. military is composed of almost 3 million personnel, of which approximately half are reserve personnel. The U.S. military is one of the largest militaries in terms of number of personnel. The U.S. military draws its manpower from a large pool of volunteers and as such conscription is neither needed nor desirable as it maintains a purely professional military force. The U.S. military receives $711 billion per year in funding, constituting approximately 50% of military expenditure in the world. The U.S. military possesses advanced and powerful military equipment giving it huge military capabilities and power projection. Thus, it is considered to be by far the most powerful and most advanced military in the world, giving the United States enormous hard power and is a major factor towards deterring attacks against the United States.

Who would this CNS force be responsible to? What exactly would be their mandate? More importantly, who would have oversight? Lawfully operating within the nation’s borders there is the FBI (incompetent? yes), the National Guard, Coast Guard, state and local police forces.  All of which come under the umbrella of Homeland Security. Millions have been allocated and spent on trying to train every level to detect, prevent, and respond to terrorist attack. What would be the purpose of a national security force equal to our military??  There is only one answer.  Political suppression. Can you say Sturmabteilung, or maybe Schutzstaffel, or 5th Directorate KGB??
 
What about that world’s most powerful military? All members of our armed forces know what an unlawful order is.  Hussein may be Commander-in-Chief, but there is strong honor in the military.  Many would not obey an unlawful order or standby and watch their nation and way of life destroyed.  Hussein needs a military force that will obey him without question.  Similar to the brown shirts (SA) and SS in Hitler’s day.  The armed forces would be destroyed by confusion and desertion.  Not because they are automatons, but because they are citizens and can recognize tyranny. That is why Hussein said: “Just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded”. He can order one to stand down, and the other to attack.
 
First he must disarm the public.  That will be an agenda item of equal importance with his CNSF. 
 
To paraphrase a famous author:  These will be the times that try our souls!
 
I never broke faith with my country; rather it was my country that broke faith with me.

ER, Viet Nam, 1965-67

Don’t forget, Barack Obama will change everything with his Civilian National Security Force (may have gone by the name GESTAPO or Brown Shirts in the past)…

A Chilling Proposal by Barack Obama

Is he not aware that we already have the United States Army National Guard? So here is the change that you can expect now…

Here’s a preview:

Obama Youth Brigade March in Formation

And some scary echoes from the apparently forgotten past:

Comparison to Hitler Youth

Remember, Hitler was elected!

Related articles:

Blue Collar Muse — What in the World is Obama’s “Civilian National Security Force”?

The questions are legion and the implications of such an organization are staggering! What would it do? According to the title, it’s a civilian force so how would it go about discharging “national security” issues? What are the Constitutional implications for such a group? How is this to be paid for? Is this accounted for in some of Obama’s currently proposed tax increases or will we need more taxes to fund this enterprise? The statement was made in the context of youth service. Is this an organization for just the youth or are adults going to participate? How does one get away from the specter of other such “youth” organizations from Nazi Germany and the former Soviet Union when talking about it?

WorldNetDaily — Obama’s ‘civilian national security force’

If we’re going to create some kind of national police force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, isn’t this rather a big deal?

I thought Democrats generally believed the U.S. spent too much on the military. How is it possible their candidate is seeking to create some kind of massive but secret national police force that will be even bigger than the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force put together?

Now, maybe he was misquoted by the Congressional Quarterly and the Chicago Tribune. I guess it’s possible. If so, you would think he would want to set the record straight. Maybe he misspoke. That has certainly happened before. Again, why wouldn’t the rest of my colleagues show some curiosity about such a major and, frankly, bone-chilling proposition?

Are we talking about creating a police state here?….

I have a feeling there would be more questions from the press if I myself had proposed the creation of something as preposterous as a “civilian national security force” … I’m quite sure I would be hung out to dry as some kind of Nazi thug. Meanwhile, Obama makes this wild suggestion and it is met with a collective yawn from the watchdogs.

InfoWars — Obama’s “Civilian National Security Force”

It appears candidate Obama, if elected, fully intends to recruit young citizens into something he calls a “national security force,” apparently a large paramilitary group “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the U.S. military. Obama made passing reference to this disturbing idea in a speech delivered in Chicago on July 2. As should be expected, the corporate media, with the exception on the Chicago Tribune, completely ignored the statement and its implications….

It is no secret Obama’s top advisor is Zbigniew Brzezinski, a close Rockefeller protégé, a founding member and former director of the Trilateral Commission, and a CFR member. Obama’s wife, Michelle, is a member of the Chicago branch of the CFR. Big donors to the Obama campaign basically constitute a who’s who of corporate and Wall Street banking interests, including JP Morgan Chase & Co., Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, and Citigroup. Disgraced former Obama advisor, James A. Johnson, former Fannie Mae CEO and consummate Washington insider, is a member of the American Friends of Bilderberg, the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations….

Obama — or rather his handlers, consisting of dedicated minions who work for the global elite, the international bankers, the corporate fascists — are serious, dead serious, about creating a “domestic security force.”

It has nothing to do with al-Qaeda, either, a phantom force Joseph Farah and his neocon buddies believe pose a serious threat to America. It has everything to do with subduing those of us who may resist an accelerated move toward fascist corporate globalization, one-world government, and the effort to turn the planet into a slave labor gulag where half the population exists on less than a dollar or two a day. It’s all about forcing us to accept the New Serfdom at gunpoint.

In the months and years ahead, with the engineered deconstruction of the economy, a “domestic security force” possibly the size of the U.S. military will be required to “to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals,” as Rockefeller functionary Brzezinski might describe it.

Something of this size and scope will be required, especially with the very real prospect of foods riots and civil unrest as America is reduced to a third world cesspool, an eventuality if the NWO [New World Order] has its way.

American Thinker — Obama’s Civilian National Security Force

Barack Obama’s recent words to promote his image as Community Organizer in Chief were … about turning America into one, giant, community organizer’s sandbox at enormous cost to taxpayers….

… In his campaign document entitled “The Blueprint for Change: Barack Obama’s Plan For America,” Obama’s “Service” section runs a close second to “Education” in complexity. But, with his Colorado Springs’ statement, it grabbed first place in its projected costs to taxpayers. Obama did the cost projection himself.

He plans to double the Peace Corps’ budget by 2011, and expand AmeriCorps, USA Freedom Corps, VISTA, YouthBuild Program, and the Senior Corps. Plus, he proposes to form a Classroom Corps, Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, Veterans Corps, Homeland Security Corps, Global Energy Corps, and a Green Jobs Corps. Here a corps – there a corps – everywhere a corps corps.

So it made sense in Colorado Springs when he said his call to community service “will be a central cause of my presidency.” He couldn’t be clearer in signaling his intentions, including a Social Investment Fund Network to link local non-profits with the federal government….

Senator Obama aims to tap into the already active volunteerism of millions of Americans and recruit them to become cogs in a gigantic government machine grinding out his social re-engineering agenda. It’s Orwellian-like, with a novice social activist’s mentality at the helm….

Barack Obama wants to “bring about redistributive change” through “coalitions of power.” He wants to “break free from the essential constraints” of our constitution. Hear his own words…

Transcript

“If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement, and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossed peoples, so that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be OK. But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society and to that extent as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the constitution — at least as it’s been interpreted — and the Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you, it says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn’t shifted, and one of the … I think … the tragedies of the civil rights movement was, because the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change. And in some ways we still suffer from that.”

Considering the most prevalent buzzword of the presidential primaries, popular cable television host Glenn Beck has written a treatise on political change. Here’s an intro. You will probably want to visit his website and read all of it.

Let’s talk about change, shall we? Let’s talk about that change that everybody wants so much. It’s the change election, right? Wouldn’t it be helpful if from time to time somebody recognized that change isn’t necessarily good….Incandescent light bulbs to fluorescent light bulbs, Classic Coke to New Coke. Not necessarily. The change the Democrats and apparently many Republicans want, capitalism to socialism. I don’t know. It didn’t work out for most of the world. In fact, I can’t think of any place where it worked out too well for anybody….