Obama Unveils National ObamaLaw Plan

a reply to: butcherguy

But yet you are talking about it in the post above this one...

It was a loaded question, and I know you are well aware of it.

originally posted by: derfreebie
Is this just another consolidating of policy, or another shot at nationalizing all the local police forces into a more manageable Brownshirt Brigade?

Filtering through the highly creative blather banter of the OP, it seems that this is the real question posted in the thread.

It seems that the answer is neither.

Interim Report

From the Executive Order (Appendix C. Executive Order 13684 of December 18, 2014)

Sec. 3. Mission. (a) The Task Force shall, consistent with applicable law, identify best practices and otherwise make recommendations to the President on how policing practices can promote effectivecrime reduction while building public trust.

(b) The Task Force shall be solely advisory and shall submit a report to the President by March 2, 2015.

The first Counties and Cities to be "Nationalized" will be the ones that a going bankrupt.

This is the plan.

They will be forced to accept federal aid hinged on recommendations and guidelines.

originally posted by: xuenchen
The first Counties and Cities to be "Nationalized" will be the ones that a going bankrupt.

This is the plan.

They will be forced to accept federal aid hinged on recommendations and guidelines.

Fascinating theory!

Evidence?

Anything that ties your theory to anything in the Task Force's charge or report?

originally posted by: derfreebie

Congress won't do anything or they'd hang by the same Constitution.

I've given a considerable amount of thought to this since becoming a posting member of this forum. I think you're 100% correct here.

If I became the POTUS, the backlash against everyone elected or appointed to office would be of historic proportion. Of course, I'd rewrite history too.

S&F for your thoughts.

originally posted by: xuenchen
The first Counties and Cities to be "Nationalized" will be the ones that a going bankrupt.

This is the plan.

They will be forced to accept federal aid hinged on recommendations and guidelines.

Chicago maybe?

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: butcherguy

But yet you are talking about it in the post above this one...

It was a loaded question, and I know you are well aware of it.

I get that you are afraid to answer it honestly.
Why continue to show it?

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: derfreebie

Congress won't do anything or they'd hang by the same Constitution.

I've given a considerable amount of thought to this since becoming a posting member of this forum. I think you're 100% correct here.

If I became the POTUS, the backlash against everyone elected or appointed to office would be of historic proportion. Of course, I'd rewrite history too.

S&F for your thoughts.

Your input up or down is closely noted and highly regarded. My
thanks also for the bump; but it isn't nearly as important as the
dialog. There's a reason this thread got me twice to three times
the hits as anything else, and for a reason other than "it's nothing."
Although I like that pragmatic heretic fine.

This is one issue I hope all the doomsayers are wrong about. Even
as less than a pornskin myself, I hope I'm unfounded in my concerns.

My theory on the Damage Control issue [is] no matter what the
agenda, it's becoming increasingly expensive for TPTB to keep a
proper lid on it. That Henry Ford awareness cautionary is maybe
playing out in the next couple of scenes in this movie. Glad I'm
not one of them right now, the media seems busy as well.

As you are probably well apprised, the Patriot Act in the internal
content had little if anything to do with protecting the GP... and
was more of an Enabling Act in English.
Same deal with the National Security Enhancement Act of 2003...
a contradiction to the innards beyond an oxy.

So finally when I read a loosely worded policy paper turned into an
EO intent on oversight of 'enhanced interaction' between the local
police and general population I kind of perked. The more benign and
vaguely scripted an EO looks on the surface the more devils we can
squeeze into the Volkswagen.

It's happened so often before... and as a face value interpretation of
the vagueness can by a liberal mind dismiss the doomsayer,
"It says only THIS." :
the conservative can take the deliberately vague vernacular and retort,
"The lawyers who wrote it meant to imply ALL THIS!".
Our perpetual loggerheads where indeed somewhere in the middle
the agenda will chug right through the tunnel unimpeded.

Police departments throughout the nation are experiencing financial difficulties. Hell, some departments have been already been disbanded. Pensions are running dry, benefits are going away, pay is not increasing and even decreasing in some cases.

The federal government approaches departments that are on the brink of financial ruin and offers aid in the form of grants and equipment.

In return for the help, the departments have to follow federal guidelines, regulations, oversight etc., or be "cut off" financially. A little quid pro quo.

I am not saying it will result in a federal takeover of law enforcement, or it's Obama's "plan," but to pretend that the possibility doesn't exist, or has never happened before, is ignorant.

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

When has there ever been a Federal takeover of State and local law enforcement in the United States?

Are you seriously claiming that because several folks here have asked for some reasonable logical connection between the outlandish claims of the OP and the actual wording of the EO, mission of the Task Force, or, findings of the Task Force, rather than just rambling on the "possibility" that more partisan political BS actually means something ... is "ignorant"?

Are you sure you're not ignorant of what that word means?

a reply to: derfreebie

So, still no evidence then, just your pearly wisdom?

Fair enough. Should we ask for a move to the HOAX bin?

originally posted by: queenofswords

originally posted by: xuenchen
The first Counties and Cities to be "Nationalized" will be the ones that a going bankrupt.

This is the plan.

They will be forced to accept federal aid hinged on recommendations and guidelines.

Chicago maybe?

Very Very Possible !!!

a reply to: Gryphon66

When has there ever been a Federal takeover of State and local law enforcement in the United States?

The first time will set the precedent.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: xuenchen
The first Counties and Cities to be "Nationalized" will be the ones that a going bankrupt.

This is the plan.

They will be forced to accept federal aid hinged on recommendations and guidelines.

Fascinating theory!

Evidence?

Anything that ties your theory to anything in the Task Force's charge or report?

About the PR.. Chicago would be a prognostication. Besides,
the population there is a tad more street smart than Boston.

For a more possible convincing precedent of a long federalized
city, my money's on New Orleans.

Katrina was as it happened, a gun grab first, while the people in the
Superdome were left to drip dry and just about starve.
The Guard turned away trucks with bottled water, moving toward
the city at gun point. People trying to get OUT were prodded BACK IN.

Ray Nagin himself said "We're going to come and get all your guns"
which went all the way out to unaffected, high/dry and affluent
neighborhoods too. The whole clusterama was designed to maximize
the negative physical effects of the damned hurricane, and central
power focus. "Hell of a job Brownie.." You betcha doopa it was.

Who again, during Katrina's aftermath, were the REAL looters?
Now translate that into the Stasi infrastructure: now much better
geared nationally to 'respond' to public relations challenges.
One could possible empathize with my skepticism in regard to
potential scenarios obviating 'necessity to maintain order'.
Kid gloves or not, the index finger is still next to a select fire's
trigger. You can't mandate harmony any more than legislate trust.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: derfreebie

We have Obamacare, Obamanet, why not Obamalaw?

And while the leftists may publically bemoan the loss of freedoms our dictator-in-chief provide, I'll bet a shiny internet that they are gleefully clapping like seals at meal-time.

Because the loss of freedoms started under George W. Bush. This is not a Left vs. Right problem, therefore it won't be a Left vs. Right solution.

So, I do think it's funny and sad when I see people use ObamaCare and other derogatory terms, like "Libtard." It doesn't bother me, I'm an Independent. But the sad aspect is simply that people are still wrapped up in Left vs. Right. Just wait for the next president and direction the USA takes. It's going to be Awwwwwesome! (sarcasm there)

originally posted by: derfreebie
You can't mandate harmony any more than legislate trust.

Well, that was a way to go to finally get to a somewhat relevant comment to the actual work of the Task Force.

I'm not sure about "legislating trust" either ... but do believe that LEOs have a chance to win back their communities.

Is that your only connection between your OP and the facts of the matter?

a reply to: butcherguy

I already told you that I think there is more to that question then just the way it was asked.

There is no black and white on a question like that.
The terms of the release would have to be known.

A great example of this is Boston. One thing that has always bothered me is during the Boston bombing, the people were told to stay in their houses because one wounded 19 year old was on the loose. The streets were filled with armored trucks with turrets and guns on top and police (?) dressed in military garb...and all of the people obeyed and thought it was a 'good thing'.
One other thought, since he became president, he has had a page on his website that asks you to report those who disagree with him and his policies, you know, so that they can be 'educated'. If all of this, plus what has been stated here, doesn't sound like Hitler, then I don't know what does! We need to wake up NOW!

a reply to: tadlem43

So ... Obama took command of the Boston Police Force and commanded that the city be locked down while a search was conducted for those who are unhappy with him and his policies?

Why not just take over New York and lay siege to Fox News?

The majority of "what has been stated here" is non-factual. Does that matter to you?

a reply to: Gryphon66

I didn't mean it has happened before in America.

I meant there are examples of nationalized/centralized police forces in world history.

I also didn't say that it is, or was going to happen.

I simply stated that one cannot dismiss the idea that it could happen.