So, this whole civil defense force thing ...

I'm getting a little confused here. When the Lamb of Chicago mentioned in one of his speeches his "civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, [and] just as well-funded" as the military, I did what I had for much of the past year.

I assumed Obama was babbling about another idea that he would have no idea how to execute, thought it was a scary idea if taken seriously, took confidence that he usually reversed himself within days of stating anything remotely concrete, and went about my business. I still think Americans wouldn't stand for it.

But then again, I never thought I'd see a widespread cult of personality carry a preening Chicago politician -- whose strongest attributes are inexperience and the ability to earnestly mouth monosyllabic platitudes -- into the Oval Office. Even more troubling, Ace seems to be taking this one more seriously these days.

Getting to the creepy point: Let us concede that Obama is not Hitler the H-word and has no H-word-like designs. Even so, the idea of a permanent paramilitary for, um, "responding to emergencies" is worrisome. If anyone really believes that 18 year old college students with three months of kinda-bullshitty "civilian defense sleepaway camp" are going to be shoring up the levies the next time the Mississippi overflows its banks, I've got a collapsed bridge to sell you. What they're going to be doing is what they're always doing -- showing up late and getting in the way, smoking pot and trying to get laid.

Why are young military recruits different? Well, they're military, for one thing. For another thing, if they step out of line badly enough they can be court-martialed. Does Obama intend to impose military-style discipline and justice on his Obama Youth?

Obama's devoted cultists have already been caught abusing their jobs in the civil service -- digging dirt on political enemies, bullying a girl whose dad serves in Iraq. Why would we wish to swell the ranks of such hyperpartisan civil servants?

Read it all, and then ask yourself when the MSM will get around to asking these questions posed by Herschel Smith at the Captain's Journal.

UPDATE: Curt at Flopping Aces raises a valid point: "Can you just imagine the sheer hysteria that would spew from the mouth of the left if Bush had even had a fleeting thought about implementing something like this?" Funny how this double standard works.

You don't believe me? Try this one:

[George W. Bush] will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. [Dubya] will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.

Sounds scary, yes? But, of course, Michelle wasn't talking about President Bush. And that makes all the difference in the world. Barack brought a message of Hope. Change. And who would not welcome the requirement -- nay, the privilege -- of mandatory nationwide service under His Benevolent Leadership?