Black Panthers: Is This the National Civilian Security Force Obama Speaks About?

One a few rare occasions during his campaign, Barack Obama has talked about the need for a "civilian national-security force" to bolster the U.S. military.

“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,” he said.

The problem is, no one (including Obama himself) seems to know what that means.

We are now hearing reports of Black Panther "uh...security" details "with billy-clubs" stationed outside some voting places in Philadelphia. No indication of why they are there nor who asked them to be there.

Whom are they trying to keep out?

Is this the type of civilian national-security force that Obama wants to institute? Or maybe, he can get the Nation of Islam to help out; they are already experienced from guarding Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan.

We all know how well things went at that Rolling Stones concert at Altamont Speedway in 1969 when the Hells Angels were enlisted to do security.

Let's hope we don't have to find out.

Massachusetts is Suppressing Military Voters

According to WTKK FM talk show host, Michael Graham, officials in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are engaged in knowing and intentional voter suppression.

Reports Graham: Secretary of State, Bill Galvin, has been ignoring federal law designed to protect the voting rights of uniformed military personnel deployed to Iraq and elsewhere.

According to a news release from the U.S. Department of Justice, Galvin's office has been in violation of the Uniformed Overseas Citizen Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) since its inception in 2002.

This violation, Graham challenges, indicates that Galvin refused to obey the law and make sure Massachusetts military members got their ballots and had their votes counted.

While no such assertion was stated in the DoJ complaint, the DoJ did state that: Without (UOCAVA compliance), Congress and the public cannot determine whether states are fulfilling their obligations to let uniformed service members and overseas citizens fully participate in our elections.

Galvin, it appears, is not reporting accurate and complete information about whether our uniformed service members and overseas citizens are being given an effective opportunity to have their votes counted.

While we cannot prove that Galvin is truly suppressing military votes, his office cannot prove that they were not.

This transgression seems odd from someone who lobbied for ballots in Boston to be translated into Chinese to protect the rights of Chinese-speaking voters.

Could Galvin, a Democrat, have reason to prevent the military from voting in the fact that the large majority of soldiers are planning to vote for Sen. John McCain? Recall that Al Gore and the Democrats tried to suppress military votes in Florida during the 2000 election.

He won't say.

When confronted by Graham, who called Galvin's office, Galvin's spokesperson refused comment. Later, the spokesperson called Graham's producer, demanding that the talk-master stop talking about the subject. According to Graham's blog, The Secretary was filing a complaint against me with the Federal Communications Commission because he didn't like what I was saying.

Not unusual that a Democrat would try to shut down dissent.

Could it be that Galvin would not allow the people defending our democracy participate in our democracy?