Pro-Hamas Supporters at LSU Didn't Know What to Do When the Fraternities Showed...
Who Thought It Was a Good Idea to Bring Out 'The Lost Jedi'?
The Left’s New School Choice Playbook in Arkansas Serves as a National Warning
Supporters of President Trump Should Not Support Biden’s DOJ or its Dark Antitrust...
The Truth About the CIA
The Left’s Radicalization Of Our Children
Holly Rehder: The Only MAGA Candidate in the Race for Missouri Lt. Governor
RFK, Jr.'s Proposed 'No Spoiler Pledge' Is a Stroke of Genius
It's Time to Use American Energy As a Weapon
Why Intellectuals Don't Like Capitalism
NYPD Reveals Details About the 'Professional' Pro-Hamas Agitators Popping Up on Campuses
Liberal Reporter Triggered by Frat Boys Counterprotesting Hamas Agitators, Calls Them 'Rac...
Columbia President Breaks Overdue Silence Amid Pro-Hamas Protests
Illegal Immigrants Ambush Michigan State Capitol to Demand Driver Licenses
Trump Narrows His VP List Down to These Four Potential Candidates
Tipsheet

A "Civilian National Security Force"?

Having had the pleasure of sitting in for Hugh Hewitt today on his radio show, much of the discussion centered around a peculiar riff by Barack Obama in a speech from July 2
Advertisement
-- one which, remarkably enough, is going unreported by the media.

In a deviation from the speech's transcript as printed in the Wall Street Journal and the Denver Post, Barack 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.

What in the world is he talking about in invoking the specter of a "civilian national security force"?  One caller -- an immigrant from Communist-era Romania -- confessed that the language reminded him of the dark days of Soviet domination.

Or could it be that he's simply trying to equate an army of young government Peace Corps types with the military -- except they'll be armed with brooms and shovels instead of guns?  Of course, that's worrisome, too, as it betrays a certain softness in Barack's conception of what "national security" entails.

Candidates who can be trusted with the leadership of the free world don't engage in weird little riffs that leave normal people puzzling over what they meant . . . and with no alternative that doesn't seem either disturbingly creepy or frighteningly naive.  Just another sign that Barack isn't quite ready for prime time?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement