"Bullrushing", Indeed

Rick Esenberg, a fellow who makes Cool Hand Luke seem peripatetic, has referred to Obama's governance as "bullrushing." The term is wonderfully apt; Esenberg applies it to the GM takeover.

But why limit that descriptor to the GM deal? There are other things going on.

Prelutsky, who does not fall over with admiration for the Pubbies, wrote a piece in which he specifically mentioned PDDD 1404.1, originally a Clinton item regarding overseas operations.

It is scary that this former community organizer and leftist friend and ally of Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, the Chicago Machine and ACORN has revised Bill Clinton's 1992 Defense Department Directive 1404.10, which initially dealt with the overseas deployment of civilian personnel. In its current form, it states that the Civilian Expeditionary Workforce "shall be organized, trained, cleared, equipped and ready to deploy in support of combat operations by the military; contingencies; emergency operations; humanitarian missions; disaster relief; restoration of order; drug interdiction; and stability operations."

A well-armed, highly trained group of Americans to deal with unspecified contingencies, emergencies, stability operations and the restoration of order? It would seem to me that between the armed forces, the National Guard, the FBI, the Coast Guard, the Red Cross, Homeland Security and the various police forces and sheriff's departments, we already have such things pretty well covered. What is Obama so worried about? That one of those future tea parties will get out of hand? That law-abiding citizens who take the Second Amendment seriously might not agree to surrender their firearms? That some conservative writers and commentators might not be willing to knuckle under to the left? That Republicans will have the audacity to actually run against Democrats in the 2010 elections?

Or that the folks waiting for Chevy parts might get restive?

HT: James