Maryland Conservatarian

Guess the party associated with the following Washington Post headlines:

Some Senators Getting D.C. Tax Break by Mistake (May 2005)

___________ Not Entitled to D.C. Homestead Deduction (September 2005)

N.Y. Congressman _________Incorrectly Got D.C. Tax Break (November 2008)

The "Some Senators" refers to a bi-partisan group so in order to get at the Republicans they’d have had to acknowledge the participation of, among others, liberal stalwart Ted Kennedy. Aside from some back taxes owed, the Post offered no possible other ramifications to the mistaken tax break.

...but if you were so interested in possible additional impacts, you just had to wait a few months when it became apparent that Karl Rove was similarly situated. The story acknowledges his lack of “entitlement” was for the exact same “mistake” that ensnared the Senators but it helpfully then explains how Mr. Rove’s voting rights in Texas could be affected and other legal niceties (although to get a full appreciation of the article, read the erratum that precedes it). No doubt due to space limitations, the Post did not addresss if all their conjecture also applied to Ted Kennedy.

Then there is today’s stop-me-if-you’ve-heard-this-before piece on Democratic stalwart Charles Rangel, who apparently hasn’t seen a tax form he can’t screw up. And I guess it’s not that he wasn’t entitled to the break, he just incorrectly got it.

Unfortunately, I couldn’t find anything from the Post on soon-to-be HHS Secretary Tom Daschle’s and his lobbyist wife’s incorrect/mistakenly received/just-don’t-say-he-wasn’t-entitled DC homestead deduction.

Side Note: When the bit about all the Senators taking a wrong deduction (though you like to believe that the word “Homestead” would have clued them in) came out, the Post noted that the blame was attributed to an 3 year old software program…which would take it back then to 2002. Congressman Rangel’s “incorrectness” however only covers the last half of the 1990’s; the Post displays no curiosity on this matter. (I mean, it’s not like he said “macacca”.)

There is a piece in this Sunday’s Outlook section of the Washington Post that is probably best described as a kind of cultural/political Rorschach Test. My reaction to what I consider the author’s performing an exercise in self-congratulatory sanctimony is of the eye-rolling variety but some of you may actually be impressed with her.

Save Now. Buy Never

In the piece, Judith Levine recounts a year of purchasing “…nothing but necessities: basic groceries, Internet access, insulin for our diabetic cat.” She was inspired to do this by a vision of holiday gifts “dismissed, disliked and discarded -- and moldering in landfills forever.” Like Nancy Pelosi, I guess she was just “trying to save the planet”.

This is one of those articles I would recommend to my lefty friends for insight as to why so many of us don’t take their stated good intentions at face value. While her whole piece is easily mocked, one part deserves special highlighting:

“We had to get out of the apartment. So we walked to free concerts and the Brooklyn Public Library. We took in museums on free nights. We trawled the public sphere with gratitude and glee -- but also with dismay, because the public sphere is in sorry shape.”

…and can you guess a reason for why the public sphere is in such “sorry shape”? (Hint: Judith Levine is a liberal.)

That’s right – Bush.

“We realized that there are only so many dollars, and they can either go to private consumption -- President Bush's concept of an "ownership society" -- or be invested, through taxes, in the public good. The latter can't just be entered as a personal-finance debit. We should see it as an asset, in the form of highways or health clinics, yes, but also in the feeling that we're in this together, a.k.a. community.”

Not sure how not paying a museum admission fee somehow contributes to the public good but the lack of such insight is probably why I’m not a liberal. I’m guessing her point is that if we would just invest in the public good through taxes, we can better build a community.

Now, if only there was someone out there with the necessary community organizational experience to make this happen...

Side Note: Luckily for her, not everyone decided to adopt this attitude. Case in point: Free Press, a book publishing company that gave Ms. Levine a book contract as she embarked on her experiment: Not Buying It: My Year Without Shopping: Judith Levine

In other words, she got paid not to buy. I scanned a couple of the reader reviews:

“Levine and her husband have three (three!) cars, of which she classes petrol as a necessity. She admits that this is excessive, especially for such 'commited environmentalists'! She seems to miss the irony of this statement.”

As they say, you just can’t make this stuff up.

Christopher Barclay, a member of Montgomery County’s Board of Education, had a splendid idea and, accordingly has:

“…introduced a resolution Tuesday to declare [January 20, 2009] a holiday, noting that the inauguration of the first African American president will be "unlike any event that we are likely to witness again in our lifetimes." Official Seeks to Make Inauguration Day a Holiday

This illustrates what I believe will be an ongoing tactic for the foreseeable future: The country gets credit for electing a black when it’s convenient (i.e. a paid holiday) but we will be reminded that he is half-white and not even a descendent of slaves if his skin-color is used to argue against the ongoing necessity of such favored programs as affirmative action.

Side Note: White, liberal guilt being the default emotion here in Montgomery County:

“Board President Nancy Navarro (Northeastern County) said she thinks the measure has majority support on the eight-person board.”

Yep, times are never so tough that we can’t afford another day off. Maybe, if we’re lucky, the new President will forcefully remind us of the importance of education. I’m sure the kids would be properly inspired…assuming they actually bother to witness the event in-person or on TV. I’m guessing more would use the day off to be at a different kind of Mall - Montgomery Mall.

Who can say no to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon? Well, apparently Israel can:

Israel Rebuffs U.N. Calls to Open Gaza Crossings

The UN head had called outgoing Israeli Prime Minister Olmert “and "strongly urged (him) to facilitate the freer movement of urgently needed humanitarian supplies" and U.N. aid workers into the Gaza Strip, the U.N. press office said.”

The free movement had been interrupted because “Israel closed the crossings after Palestinian militants responded with daily rocket salvoes to an Israeli army incursion on November 4 into the Hamas-run territory”.

A reasonable person may ask why the Israeli army “incurred”; Reuters reporter Joe Nasr briefly alludes to this:

“Barak acknowledged in the radio interview that the violence was touched off by the Israeli raid, which the army said destroyed a tunnel at the frontier that Gaza militants dug and could have been used to try to seize Israeli soldiers.”

That kind of reads like Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak accepts that Israel started it all. The Reuters piece doesn’t recreate the actual quote so just how did Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak “acknowledge” that the Israel raid touched this all off? Previous Ehud comments on this matter have me doubting that his “acknowledgement was as Mr. Nasr’s wording would suggest:

“In reference to an IDF cross-border raid on a Hamas tunnel last week, Barak added, "Last week we thwarted a strategic terror attack, in which a tunnel was dug towards Israeli territory for the purpose of kidnapping Israeli troops. And since then we have faced [rocket] fire. “ Israel to allow some fuel into Gaza Strip Israel Jerusalem Post

“The defense minister linked the shelling of southern Israel with the killing of 12 Hamas gunmen by the IDF in two recent IDF incursions into the Strip, raids that were aimed at preventing attacks on troops” Barak: Let's not get carried away Israel Jerusalem Post

To borrow an apt observation, a cease-fire is not a suicide pact. I have yet to read any disavowal by Hamas of the tunnels existence and there can be no denying that the Israelis have some cause to mistrust tunnels coming from that side: Palestinians Use Tunnel To Attack Israeli Post (which directly led to the kidnapping of the still missing “Cpl. Gilad Shalit, 19, from the Galilee region of northern Israel”).

Further highlighting the need for skepticism in this reporting is this dispassionate factoid:

“More than a dozen Palestinian fighters have been killed in the past two weeks. Several Israelis have been slightly wounded by dozens of rockets.”

Israeli army soldiers killed the Palestinian in fighting at the tunnels. That’s unfortunate for the affected Palestinians and their families but there is a certain assumption of risk that goes with engaging in such behavior. The fact that the Palestinians suck at effectively retaliating in their manner doesn’t serve to mitigate the inappropriateness of their response. Nor does it make the Israeli actions “disproportionate”.

In what has become almost a cliché of leftist thinking, we are constantly harangued on the economic benefits of going “green”:

“What is clear from this report is that millions of U.S. workers—across a wide range of familiar occupations, states, and income and skill levels—will all benefit from the project of defeating global warming and transforming the United States into a green economy.” Job Opportunities for the Green Economy: A State-by-State Picture of Occupations that Gain from Green Investments

“Investments in improved energy efficiency in buildings could generate an additional 2-3.5 million green jobs in Europe and the United States alone, with the potential much higher in developing countries.” United Nations Environment Programme

(Would that be a NET “additional 2-3.5 million green jobs” or will there be millions added to the unemployment rolls then turning to those feel-good new job holders for an extension of benefits.)

It is interesting that when economies weaken, it seems that NOBODY with something at immediate risk – be it their own money or political office – actually seems to go the route of full bore ahead for the so-(and likely inaccurately)-called green economy:

“With the global economy at the edge of recession, China appears to be turning away from previous pledges to improve its record on environmental protection. In this, China is hardly alone: A climate-change proposal in Europe that a few months ago seemed like a sure thing has now divided the continent because of its anticipated expense, and worldwide, money for the development of renewable energy sources has been drying up.” As Global Recession Threatens, China Pulls Back on Environmental Efforts

Post writer Ariana Eunjung Cha then goes for the jugular (all the while getting in a de rigueur slam at America):

“Home to some of the planet's most polluted cities, China last year hit a dubious milestone: It surpassed the United States to become the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases. Its factories release so much toxic waste that they have created black clouds thousands of miles away. Its waterways are no better off -- poisoned with industrial runoff ranging from arsenic to acid.”

Greenhouse gases? You mean like Ozone? Water Vapor? Carbon Dioxide? Are they creating the “black clouds” or poisoning the waterways? I’m betting Ms. Cha thinks they are all one and the same. Sadly, I’m betting her editors at the Post also don’t know the difference.

China passing us in “greenhouse gases” is actually a very positive step. With a population 4 times ours, they should be well ahead of us. That they have just finally surpassed us is a testament to their economic progress and a reminder to all at how pathetic state-run economies are in providing what the people want and need.

Over at Soccer Dad, Daled Amos has a post up urging JBloggers to come to the aid of convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard and push for a pardon by President Bush. I re-iterate what I’ve written earlier:

“I yield to no one in my utter contempt for Mr. Pollard and the idea that he may never take another free step causes me no consternation.”

Jonathan Pollard was a U.S. citizen – and only a U.S. citizen – in the employ of the U.S. Navy as an intelligence analyst. He voluntarily betrayed his country by passing massive amounts of intelligence onto Israel in direct violation of the trust and responsibility placed on him. I cannot possibly overemphasize how despicable and unsympathetic a character I find him.

That Israel was and is an important ally is irrelevant. That others of similar crimes may not have received such a harsh penalty is shameful only in that those of similar actions should all rot in jail (among other places).

I have seen nothing out of the President that makes me believe that Jonathan Pollard’s impending freedom is a realistic possibility. Let's hope it remains just a pipedream (heh, heh; pun intended as to Pollard's drug use) of an insignificant few.

And let’s remember, at least on this one call, even Bill Clinton got it right.

Classic modern-day liberalism is that intent – not results – is what matters when it comes to policy. Who better to illustrate this than Richard Cohen?

“Enough Lincoln. More FDR. This is my shorthand advice to Barack Obama, who in several interviews has talked about wanting to emulate Abraham Lincoln….but …high unemployment, a housing crisis, a frozen financial system and no consumer confidence. In that case, a book about Franklin D. Roosevelt would do better.

“… It was his jaunty enthusiasm and his willingness to try almost anything to break the back of the Great Depression that mattered most. It had to -- after all, in the end, nothing worked.

“…The New Deal did not end the Depression. World War II did.” FDR as a Model for Obama

….helped Holy Cross defeat St. Joseph’s at the Hart Center in Worcester, MA. Beating St. Joe’s is always a good win but this one was esp. sweet because it came in front of some of the biggest names ever to play for Holy Cross - Bob Cousy, Tommy Heinsohn, Togo Polazzi and George Kaftan – on the occasion of the retirement of their jersey’s.

Holy Cross Defeats St. Joseph's 73-69 In Overtime :: Four Crusaders score in double-figures.

A perspective on the incredible influence these guys had on the school and the game: Holy Cross honors some of its classiest - The Boston Globe

Side Note: In the it’s-all-about-me category, the Globe article’s author, Dan Shaughnessy, was the sport’s editor at Holy Cross my freshman year. I wrote a few articles for him and when people sometimes ask why I never pursued sports writing (well, a couple have asked) I always point to that experience…which in no way is a knock on Dan. I was (and am) the biggest “homer” when it comes to sports and my biases – esp. against the likes of BC, Duke and all teams with first-names “New York” – would have shone through every writing. He correctly identified that as not a good thing.

I’ve run into Dan a few times in the ensuing years (he covered the Orioles for the Washington Star years ago before hitting the big time with the Globe) and he has always been gracious. I remain thrilled for his success even if he is a bit too friendly towards BC for my taste.

The talk is everywhere about Senator Clinton as a possible Secretary of State for our new president. Does the SoS constitute “a civil Office under the authority of the United States”? In other words, is Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution a problem here?

“No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.” The U.S. Constitution Online


Article II, Section 4 allows for the impeachment (and conviction) of “[t]he President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States”. Cabinet members have long been considered civil officers subject to the impeachment provision. (Ed. Note: The only Cabinet member to have been impeached was Secretary of War William Belknap and he was later acquitted by the Senate.)

And it looks like the “Emoluments” for the position have increased since Senator Clinton was re-elected in 2006. Here’s the Executive Schedule – Level I pay rates for the last few years:

2006: $183,500
2007: $186,600
2008: $191,300

But I’ve never taught Con Law at Chicago so if there is any constitutional wizard out there that can add more to this, I’d appreciate it.

UPDATE: The usually perceptive Simon over at StubbornFacts has a similar observation.

UPDATE II: Follow the comments to a posting at Althouse where Simon provides even more insight into this matter. I am impressed.

See the new Orioles Uniforms.

A nice improvement. (H/T Oriole Post)

Times are getting tough even here in progressive Montgomery County Maryland which is leading to potential cuts. County Executive Ike Leggett is already pushing to curtail expenses:

“Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett recommended $49 million in midyear budget trims yesterday that would affect nearly all aspects of government service -- from a dozen Ride On bus routes to senior centers to after-school activities for teenagers to ambulance transport.”

As others have noted, this is a familiar tact because cutting services that people actually like and use is a sure-fire way to help press the need for even more tax revenues.

My idle daydream is to just once hear a government official sound a dire warning that unless more revenues are made available to the governing entity, then programs like Diversity Training may have to get the ax.

*crickets*

(well, maybe there’d be a chirp out of Takoma Park)

My good friend, E. J. Dionne, has some words of comfort in today’s Washington Post:

“[Obama] argued that "those who believe in choice and those who are opposed to abortion can come together and say, 'We should try to prevent unintended pregnancies by providing appropriate education to our youth, communicating that sexuality is sacred and that they should not be engaged in cavalier activity, and providing options for adoption, and helping single mothers if they want to choose to keep the baby.' " Obama added: "Nobody's pro-abortion."

"Once he assumes office, Obama might be tempted to forget that moment, issue the pro-choice executive orders that the abortion rights movement expects and move back to the sagging economy. But doing this would be both politically foolish and a breach of faith with the pro-life progressives who came to Obama's defense during the campaign. They argued that Obama truly was committed to reducing the number of abortions. He shouldn't turn them into liars.” E. J. Dionne Jr. - Obama's Promise to Pro-Lifers

Nice thought but I’m not holding my breath. Oh sure, I believe Senator Obama would like to see less abortions, if, for no other reason than it would make his life easier. But I am in that apparent minority that thinks him a weak politician – that he just doesn’t have it in him to be politically courageous…esp. against the so-called progressive coalitions that got him elected.

Let us remember that this “brilliant 47 year-old Senator”, a man given to so much introspection that he has already written two autobiographies, couldn’t directly answer the question as to when he thought a life began to merit protection by the state. That exhibits a vapid shallowness and/or political timidity – your call – and pro-lifers shouldn’t realistically ignore that on the basis of Mr. Dionne’s soothing wordplay.

Mr. Dionne also notes:

“Yet a very large number of Americans are simultaneously uneasy with a government ban on abortion and with abortion itself. Substantial majorities would not make abortion illegal but would still like fewer of them.

“One candidate spoke directly to this unease.”

Well that one candidate also spoke directly to a different unease:

“SENATOR OBAMA:..As I understand it, this puts the burden on the attending physician who has determined, since they were performing this procedure, that, in fact, this is a nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child — however way you want to describe it — is now outside the mother’s womb and the doctor continues to think that it’s nonviable but there’s, let’s say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead, that, in fact, they would then have to call a second physician to monitor and check off and make sure that this is not a live child that could be saved. Is that correct?”

I’m sorry but this is not a man who has exhibited any inclinations that he is at all cognizant of the moral dimensions behind the pro-life stance. Instead, the more probable Barack Obama was reported on a few days earlier in that same Washington Post:

“Obama himself has signaled, for example, that he intends to reverse Bush's controversial limit on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research…

“Bush's August 2001 decision pleased religious conservatives who have moral objections to the use of cells from days-old human embryos, which are destroyed in the process…

“The new president is also expected to lift a so-called global gag rule barring international family planning groups that receive U.S. aid from counseling women about the availability of abortion, even in countries where the procedure is legal, said Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, he rescinded the Reagan-era regulation, known as the Mexico City policy, but Bush reimposed it.” Obama Positioned to Quickly Reverse Bush Actions

As a coalition party, the Democrats are stuck with the pro-choice position and all of its ramifications. The rest of the coalition is probably just looking for a Solomon-like compromise but the ardent pro-choicers will obviously only be comfortable with the baby actually split in half.

“My Christmas, Chanukah, Kwanzaa gift came early --President-elect Barack Obama.” D.C. Arts & Travel Examiner]

It should come as no surprise that the author of that line went to Bennington College.

Fully grasping all the fine points of the recently enacted Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) – signed into law by the President on October 3rd - would have been a full-time job and my already suffering fantasy football teams were an obvious higher priority. But from what I read, the program was passed so that the Federal Government would be purchasing “troubled assets” – hence the title, Troubled Asset Relief Program. Today, however, I read that:

“Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. announced a series of moves yesterday that redefine the federal government's $700 billion rescue plan for the financial industry…In recasting the program, the Treasury no longer plans to buy troubled assets from financial firms, the idea initially presented to the country, but instead will offer aid to banks and other firms that issue student, auto and credit card loans in part by jump-starting the market that provides financing for these companies.” Treasury Redefines Its Rescue Program - washingtonpost.com

Now this may very well be a better use of Treasury’s funds but it’s not what Congress voted for and it’s not what the President signed. And I didn’t see any provision for such a change in policy during my quick read of the law. (Please correct me if I’m wrong) Despite the chance it could interfere with holiday plans through January 20th, Congress (and the President) should remind Secretary Paulson that he only implements and enforces policy, not unilaterally sets it.

Campaign misstatements are an ongoing fact of life but their impact usually derives from how the press covers them. Consider:

Barack Obama – recorded in front of a large crowd that included reporters - claims to have visited 57 states;

Joe Biden recollected – on the CBS Evening News - how FDR went on TV after the 1929 stock market crash;

Someone claims to have heard Sarah Palin not realize Africa is a continent.

“And the claim of credit for the Africa anecdote is just the latest ruse by Eisenstadt, who turns out to be a very elaborate hoax that has been going on for months. MSNBC, which quickly corrected the mistake, has plenty of company in being taken in by an Eisenstadt hoax, including The New Republic and The Los Angeles Times.” A Fake Expert Named Martin Eisenstadt and a Phony Think Tank Fool Bloggers and the Mainstream News Media - NYTimes.com

Senators Obama and Biden really did make their mis-statements but which of the three I listed do you think will have the longest shelf life?

(And, for the record, I consider those mis-statements by the Senators to be amusing but of little significance…unlike comments about “spreading the wealth” and kicking Hezbollah out of Lebanon.)

As Vice President, Dick Cheney was an anomaly. You knew as soon as he took office that (unfortunately) he had no designs on the top spot. Obviously, the same cannot be said of his replacement so…what becomes of Joe Biden in 4 years? Presumably, he can’t stay on the ticket (unless the Constitution has been changed to allow Sen. Obama unlimited terms). Should then-President Obama win a second term, his vice-president becomes the probable heir-apparent for the party’s nomination. While I think many on my side of the fence would enjoy facing such a worthy opponent, I’ve got to believe Joe Biden as a ticket-headliner would still strike fear in most Democrats’ hearts.

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton’s second term as Senator will be expiring…

Side Note: A little Identity Politics humor…

“Say it aloud! There was a time when such a thing would be unthinkable, laughable. But, there it is — Joe Biden, a white American male, is our new vice president. As a white American male, my chest is filled with pride.” Yes, He Can! by Dave Konig on NRO

I usually avoid Richard Cohen but the short teaser - “Cohen: My short list for Obama's inner circle starts with Al Gore.” - on the Home Page of washingtonpost.com sucked me in. It gets worse:

“If there is a single appointment Barack Obama could make to signal how dramatically things will change in Washington, it would be to name Albert Gore Jr. -- former House member, former senator, former vice president, former presidential nominee and current Custodian of the Planet -- as secretary of state.” Richard Cohen - Obama's Cabinet: Start With Al Gore

Hey, if you’re not going to take the game seriously…

UPDATE: Damn, Soccer Dad was way ahead of me.

With some 52% of the vote going to Senator Obama, the Washington Post makes this observation:

“Interpreting his mandate will be only one of several critical decisions Obama must make as he prepares to assume the presidency.” Hard Choices And Challenges Follow Triumph

With some 52% of the voters so voting in that hotbed of cultural conservatism that is California, the Washington Post can only conclude that California Voters Narrowly Approve Same-Sex Marriage Ban.

From the ABA Journal:

Obama is the Second US President with a Harvard JD

How an Obama Presidency May Benefit Lawyers

Better Question: Who Isn’t a Lawyer on Obama’s Transition Team?

On my way back from Ohio yesterday, I passed a car with an aged “Dissent is Patriotic” bumper sticker. I think I’m going to need a stack of those…

As I alluded to earlier, I spent the last few days of the election cycle in Cleveland, working directly with, among others, this guy:

“Ecuador has more voting integrity than we have here in East Cleveland today.”

"That is the considered opinion of a Republican attorney who is helping to monitor elections in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. He requested anonymity to avoid drawing attention to his employer. I have known him for years as an honest and very serious patriot and consider his comments reliable. He rang me to discuss the shenanigans that he and other Republican poll watchers have witnessed today in greater Cleveland.” Hijinks Mar Ohio Vote by Deroy Murdock on National Review Online

I’ve done this for several elections, starting with the 2002 Maryland Gubernatorial race. In 2004, I was in Dayton Ohio. It’s necessary but tiresome. You have to show a picture ID card to buy a beer, get on a plane or attend a Barack Obama rally but it is considered voter intimidation to request one at a polling place.

Lax voting law enforcement - which anecdotally seems to be concentrated in big city, heavily Democratic strongholds - is not the reason we lost Ohio but it remains a potent weapon in their arsenal. But nowadays, instead of the strong-armed tactics of a Mayor Daley, they can instead rely on the incompetence of so many election judges as well as the ever-changing softness of election law (i.e, Early Voting, ACORN registrations etc.).

So let’s give thanks once again for the Constitution and the voting fraud firewall of the Electoral College.

I have no doubts that a John McCain presidency will be an infuriating endeavor concerning many matters. But on the single most important responsibility a President has - directing our national security - I trust him to act (and react) with the singular committment to what's best for America. Thus is my vote cast and for which I suffer no angst.

Just because it’s fun:

“So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted.” YouTube - SHOCK Audio Unearthed OBAMA TELLS SAN FRANCISCO HE WILL BANKRUPT THE COAL INDUSTRY

Compare and Contrast that Obama with this one: YouTube - The Coal Miner

Sticking to the Script: YouTube - Obama/Joe Biden "No Coal Plants Here in America"

A Heart Beat Away: YouTube - Biden Says Corn Syrup And Coal More Deadly That Terrorism

No snark intended: What the hell is HE talking about?

"...we cannot continue to rely only on our military...we've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded..." (H/T JP)

…because HE is also talking about EXPANDING the military by 92,000 troops…which would mean, I guess, that that civilan national security force….