If you did not hear, Obama appealed yesterday, in another one of those speeches, for YOUNG PEOPLE to join the military to ease the pressure on the military, promising to complete President Bush's proposed INCREASE in the military by 65,000 men or so.
You probably laughed at me, when I suggested a few days ago, that Obama was running for President Bush's third term more aggressively than John McCain is. Obama has quckly proven me right again.
Will young people now be disillusioned by this sudden endorsement by Obama of the military, and sudden enthusiasm to see THEM in the military, or in other forms of "national service"? Okay. Let's be honest here.
They really SHOULD be disillusioned because Obama is showing himsself to be one of the most cynically opportunistic, unprincipled politicians to run for President in recent times. Obama repudiated his pledge to accept public financing without even an apparent twinge. Obama has essentially repudiated his previous statements on NAFTA, although with his usual "fuzz" as to exactly where he stands. Obama has said that he is BOTH for the Supreme Court decision that people have an individual right to bear arms AND for the Washington, D.C. ban on handgun ownership that the Court struck down. Obama said he was AGAINST the Supreme Court decision prohibiting the death penalty for child rapists, while still maintaining that he will appoint the kind of judges approved by leftists--jusdges which are sure to strike down the ENTIRE death penalty for ANY cime, including murder, if Obama appoints the same type of Supreme Court justice as Clinton appointed. Obama said he was against gay marriage, but for a STRONG (whatever that means) "civil union" law. At the same time, Obama said he was AGAINST the "Defense of Marriage Act" (in a Freudian slip, I heard Obama describe it as the "Defense AGAINST Marriage Act.". If you don't know what that was, it is the law (supported at the time by most Democrats) which provides that Texas (as well as any other state) does not have to recognize California (or Massachusetts) gay marriages. This exposes that what Obama really wants, and what leftists expect of him, is to appoint Federal judges that will save him from the whole problem, as well as the death penalty problem--judges that will declare bay marriage a "civil right", or at least FORCE all states to recognize gay marriages in ANY state. Obama has "modified" his position on Iraq to be indistinguishable from the Bush position: a GRADUAL and responsible withdrawal, while still SUGGESTING that he will immediately end the Iraq War (for example, saying that funds freed up by ENDING the Iraq War will pay for this "national service" plan). Then there was that promise to EXPAND Bush's "faith based" program--bringing God more prominently into government programs and public discourse. And so on.
Is all of the above what is seems. Of course not. For example, Obama suggested that he wanted to INCREASE the number of soldiers in the military, but suggested he would not USE them. The "faith based" program is already being taken advantage of primarily by LEFTIST organizations whose view of "reiligion" is the leftist view of that Catholic priest who spoke in Revernd Wright's former church. Obama wants to put stong "anti-discrimination" provisions in the program (such as involving gays), which "right" wing religious organizations are not going to like much. Left wing organizatins not only have no problem with that, but LIKE being involved with government programs. Left wing organizatioins, FOREVER, have made a regular habit of being subsidized by the public--from Jesse Jackson to Planned Parenthood. So what this "expansion" of the "faith based" program should be looked at as representing is a further EXPANSION OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, and Federal control. Indeed, that is the very same idea behind this idea of "national service" by all.
I have discussed before Robert Heinlein's idea of requiring a term of military service for full citizenship, which he expressed in his novel, "Starship Troopers" (later made into the movie by that name--although the movie pretty much downplayed the core social theories of Heinlein's novel in favor of the war against the BUGS). Heinlein was called a FASCIST for this kind of idea (I have lived through entirely too much leftist cant in my life--see previous entry, and the description therein about how I lived through the leftist RVISIONIST HISTORY that the United States was responsible for the Cold War).
As I have said Heinlein's idea, and the idea of requiring universal service, are both attactive in a lot of ways. However, there is a big problem. Limiting citizenship when we can only USE so many people in the military is obviously unworkable. And requiring "national service" is even worse. That is because this would represent an ENORMOUS expansion of the expense, power and control of the Federal Government. EVERYONE would have to work for the Federal Government for two years of their life (okay, there might be exceptions for state government service, or certain occupations, but the whole idea is an idea for MASSIVE expansion of GOVERNMENT). In other words, in practice this is leftism at work, on a level that will destory us. You need look no further as to why Barack Obama wants to spend BILLIONS on this.
That is what leftists DO. They expand GOVERNMENT--especially the Federal Government. Barack Obama is as left--or more left--as anyone in the country outside of Arnold Schwarzenegger. Young people are likely to understand this, despite Obama's recent (extremely cynical) change in rhetoric. If they are smart enough, they will realize that this is a DANGEROUS thing. If Barack Obama is this much of a chameleon--even if we can be pretty sure he is a far left chameleon--willing to say and do anything for power without conscience or compunction, how can he be trusted?
Obama is fast exposing himself as a conscienceless sociopath way beyond the truth challenged Bill Clinton, and way beyond the opportunism fo the ordinarly politician.
That should scare you. It sure scares me.