The The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act would dramatically increase funding for AmeriCorps.

AmeriCorps and "security" of the type suggested by "military" and "law-enforcement" is a stretch.

However, since the words were pulled from publications after Obama said "security force" (to my knowledge, he's never addressed it directly) remains troubling for many libertarians and not without some justification.

The idea though that this GIVE Act is to create Nazi "Brown Shirts" in the U.S. is fear-mongering worthy of the neocons.

The Brown Shirts were openly rallied to violence and racism, etc. We don't hear or see that anywhere associated with this bill. Of course, things can and do morph in a hurry. What the neocons did under George W. Bush proves that, and Obama certainly is doing his job not keeping his campaign promises. What's new?

It would be wrong to suggest that there are not totalitarian bents within the Democratic Party. We should though confine ourselves to criticizing such legislation that is clearly directed to the promotion of thugs. AmeriCorps is not my choice, but it hasn't earned a deserved reputation for creating thugs.

Hello Real Politics,

I believe you that you don't want to be a liar or to be considered as one.

Peace, love, and truth,

Tom Usher

Originally Posted By Quakerdave
Works for me.

Peace, friend.

Glad to hear it from you, Dave.

You're coming across here as one who tries to be a straight shooter (no violence intended, for those unfamiliar with the expression).

Peace to you too my friend,

Tom Usher

Peace, friend.

Well, I just made the mistake of reading all of the comments over at Media Matters. I was wondering whether anyone addressed the issue of the Obama-AmeriCorps quote having been deleted anywhere. As of right now, there are no comments touching on that. I was intending on leaving a comment, but the level of discourse, if one may call it that, is so immature that I was glad to get away from it as rapidly as possible. It reminded me a great deal of some of the most aggressive neocon forums I've read only perhaps even worse. It's like one-upmanship. Who can be the most obnoxious? If that's Barack Obama's base, no wonder I don't feel confident.

I'm not saying that I disagree with every last point (I used the term advisedly) over there. It's just that so much of the comments are just prattle, and that's being generous. It was the Democrats have done nothing wrong since before any of the commentators were born and any problems that came up during Clinton's administration were really the doing of the Republicans. One comment actually blames George W. Bush for what happened at Waco and several blamed his father. Listen, those two did enough wrong for real without blaming them for things that Clinton's team was in charge of doing.

I won't go on here much longer, but I will at least say something about the Waco disaster. The fact is that David Koresh and other leaders of that group would have come out of that compound for shopping or whatever had no one attempted to serve a warrant at the compound. The Feds could very easily have arrested him offsite by walking right up next to him at the store or by being parked next to his vehicle and catching him by surprise. Who doesn't know this?

The whole thing with the bright lights and loud music and the rest was as dumb as dumb can get. It was straight out of the same play book that gave us Abu Ghraib actually. Understand here that I totally disagree with David Koresh's ideas. The guns were nuts. They had nothing to do with Christianity. As for all the other allegations against him, that's what they remain. As far as I'm aware, there wasn't any hard evidence against him concerning all the child molestation talk, etc.

God bless all,

Tom Usher

To use your expression: "Ummmm... yeah," what's your take on why the Obama Campaign saw to it that the words in question:

We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that 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. — Barack Obama July, 2008

...we're taken out all over the place?

Is this an error? Were the words not removed? If they were removed but were harmless, as you suggest, why were they removed? Does the removal give you pause about Obama's basic honesty and instincts he's developed? I know "instincts" and "developed" don't seem to fit together, but I'm one of those who doesn't believe in the people can't change idea. That applies to homosexuals, as I assume you're intelligent and knowledgeable enough to have gathered without my pointing that out. I've changed concerning all sorts of things, and I'm very glad I have even though I still have a long way to go.

I believe that the thrust of this post and the comments so far other than yours is that the rest of us are not confident the way you seem to be that Barack Obama is nearly as benign as your position suggest you might trust that he is. I should think that the consensus might be that you are engaging too much in wishful thinking without much upon which to base that thinking yet. Of course, the power of prayer cannot be set aside.

Also of course, I don't know what the others hold in terms of their views about Bush-43's domestic spying and the torture at the dark sites and all the rest of the terrible things that have transpired. I'm completely against them. Therefore, I believe I'm being consistent in applying the light toward both major political parties.

Are you simply hoping for the lesser of evils, as you see evil? I don't want to settle for that even though I don't want to coerce anyone.

Let us know what you think about all of this, will you.

Thanks.

Tom Usher

Hello P Alfonso,

I'm sorry it took so long to get to your comment. I was writing my follow-up post the whole time and didn't read your linked posts until after I had posted my follow-up.

The thing about it now is that I remember seeing reference to this story once back in July. I had forgotten about it. After reading your posts though, the part about the deletion came back to me too.

Obviously, the deletion was made because the wording is extremely poor. They figured it would be easier to weather the storm of deletion rather than trying to explain exactly what he meant.

As I mentioned in my own follow-up, we don't know how whatever he creates will be used. I don't hold with all the covert, violent ops going on around the world. I don't hold with Christian missionaries being recruited as CIA operatives, and they most certainly have been. Of course, that's not what worries the more Libertarian leaning Americans. They are more concerned about a domestic CIA developing over the dead body of the already questionable FBI.

I will say though that many Libertarians do hate the international interventionism going on. That's one major place they part company with the neocons.

My concern is with coercion and deception no matter who's doing it or where. I don't like it when America does it, and I don't like it when any other nation does it. All the lying in the world (so-called Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and all other religions and ideologies) needs to come to an end or the human race will be cut off. Fortunately, I believe in the promise that we will as a species overcome all the evil that is infesting the race.

Anyway, I believe you are genuinely concerned, albeit knowingly to a point falling short of what Jesus is calling upon you to believe.

I imagine you consider me a bleeding-heart, hopeless, clueless idealist. I will say that I am definitely a bleeding heart and it is all I can do to live in this hardhearted world. I am also definitely an idealist. What I am not is hopeless or clueless. I am under no illusions about evil on the right and left and below and above and all around, in fact. The only thing I'm certain I can count on is God. I want to join God more than anything else. I want others to join too.

God bless you, and thank you for using your real name and even having a website that doesn't conceal your identity.

Tom Usher

http://www.readwhatisee.com/in.....1&more

http://www.readwhatisee.com/in.....8&more

Hi Dave,

Please read the corrected post above.

Thanks.

God bless all,

Tom Usher

Read the ENTIRE quote in context.

He's talking about organizations like the peace Corps and AmeriCorps. Organizations that spread around the good things about America without using guns and cluster bombs and such.

I know you folks hate the man, but at least try to be somewhat accurate when you rant about what he says, okay?

Namaste.