Bachmann fears âpolitically correct re-education camps for young peopleâ By Chris Steller 4/6/09 10:06 AM bachmannU.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann says she fears the Obama administration will create âre-education camps for young people, where young people have to go and get trained in a philosophy that the government puts forward and then they have to go to work in some of these politically correct forums.â Audio after the jump. Hereâs what Bachmann said on Minnesota radio station KTLK-AM (podcast) this weekend (in reference to The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, a proposed expansion of the AmeriCorps program that Obama may sign into law this week): "Itâs under the guise of â quote â volunteerism. But itâs not volunteers at all. Itâs paying people to do work on behalf of government. ⦠I believe that there is a very strong chance that we will see that young people will be put into mandatory service. And the real concerns is that there are provisions for what I would call re-education camps for young people, where young people have to go and get trained in a philosophy that the government puts forward and then they have to go to work in some of these politically correct forums." <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0a1S-ToTwOA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0a1S-ToTwOA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
My perception too. Isn't that how the SA (Brown Shirts) started? We have had VISTA since 1965. Its scope could be expanded to accommodate "American service". But if we "need" a NEW service organization... one proposed, mandated, and run by the DemoCraps... you can bet it will have a heavy political party influence.
Michelle Bachmann is a nut. She authored the following back in 2001: "Government is implementing policies that will lead to poverty, not prosperity, by adopting the failed ideas of a state-planned and managed economy similar to that of the former Soviet Union... This system is based upon a utilitarian worldview that measures human value only in terms of productive capability for the âbest interests of the state". Individual freedom is subservient to a collective society." As I recall, the President of the United States at the time was George Bush, a conservative hero. The VP was Dick Cheney, another conservative hero. And Congress, which had passed the laws that created the new, "un-American" government structure (that Bachmann claimed), was in the hands of the conservative Republican Party. And conservatives dominated the Supreme Court. It's amazing that this conspiracy to overthrow elected democracy succeeded, given the fact that conservatism was firmly in power in Washington, D.C. and had been since the Republican takeover of Congress since 1994. Who would have suspected that a GOP congress would pass a bunch of laws "consolidating all local, state, and federal policies, programs, and funding into a single state-managed economic system." They *did* if you believe Minnesota State Senator Michele Bachmann. That had happened, according to her, by 2001.
Instead of attacking the messenger, why not address the merits of the issue? Anyone who has studied totalitarian movements, of the right or left, knows that one of their essential tools is organized mobs. Closely linked is indoctrination of the young. Combine the two and you have Obama's "service corps." Unemployment among the young and uneducated is already around 25%. Under Obama's economic plan, it will no doubt soon be closer to 50%. Millions of ignorant young people will be desperate for something to do and someone to follow. They will be filled with hate at a system they believe abandoned them. We saw a glimpse of this kind of mass hypnosis during the campaign. Fervent Obama supporters when challenged why they supported him could only mumble about "change" and how "great" he was. Picture millions of them organized loosely under former ACORN thugs and lavsihly funded by Obama. Is it a stretch to imagine them attacking media outlets that oppose the Great Leader? Harrassing opposition candidates? Engaging in even more widespread vote and registration fraud? Invading corporate headquarters or exec's homes to coerce "social justice?" Obama has already effectively nationalized the banking and auto sectors. I look for media, utilities and defense contractors to fall next. Failing newspapers have already started talking about being funded like PBS. It's not like that would be a huge loss for free speech, since most of them already act like the media arms of the DNC.
Here's a much BIGGER question . . . How do YOU make money based on your views? Seriously, do you actually trade for a living or are you a "prop" poster for ET? If you are looking for the media, utility, and defense contractors to become "nationalized" are you short any? If so, which ones? And by the way, how many thousands of shares do you trade per month? Just curious.
Really too funny... A ditto head Rush Fatman and Ann Coulter worshiper in a snit over "attacking the messenger." You are really too funny...
Someone wake me up when a lib here actually makes a coherent argument. All the attacks and name-calling are so boring. Surely you can do better, ZZZ. Do you honestly think a massive corps of ACORN thugs answerable only to Obama and funded by the government is a good idea?
LOL! Too freaking funny... When Rush Fatman, Coulter, Hannity, et. al stop the personal attacks and name calling... Uhhhh, that would be never... AAA, you have become such a clown... You voted for Bush twice and supported him blindly for years, which violates any concept of reasonable judgment that you might have once had... Such a gas watching the party "that can dish it out and not take it" wallow in self pity...