Hussein has evidently lost touch with reality.
Rick Perry admitted at the RGA today that he was very troubled by Obama’s tone today addressing the National Governors Association:
I don’t mind telling you I was a bit troubled today by the tone of the president. …For the president of the United States to look Democrat and Republican governors in the eye and to say ‘I do not trust you to make decisions in your state about issues of education, about transportation infrastructure…’ – that is really troubling.Perry went on to say that Obama was going to hollow out the National Guard and warned the state governors not to push back against it or they would hear from him:
More @ The Right Scoop
Welcome to the party, pal.
ReplyDeleteEvidently he's going for broke.
ReplyDelete“Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.”
Per Obama---" we need to create a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded (as the U.S. military)” before he was elected,
ReplyDeleteSo pray tell Gov. Perry---what the hell do you propose to do about it??? The Govenors all bowed down to the Lord and Master Fed Gov at the Civil War, WWI and WW2, stood by while their states were invaded by Fed Gov all thru the 50's and 60's....and sat on their hands for bull$hit wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq---twice and pussy footing around in the "Stans" and God knows how many little skirmishes for rich basterd's interests around the world....all ending up in the slaughter of their states citizens.
Troubling indeed!
Perry should have raised his hand at the end and said the states are the sole arbitrator of their laws, they will use their National Guard as they see fit and DC does spend a hell of a lot too much money. I was surprised at his milk-toast comments.
DeleteBrock. National Guard Falls under Obama- I had the conversation with gohmert 3 years ago. State guard will follow under Governors.
ReplyDeleteLittle do I know, I guess. :) Well, let him do wants he wants, then the states should just increase the state guard and of course the citizen's militia will be spurred on by this tyrant.
DeleteNational Guard came up in a question about border security. That was when Louis mentioned that Perry couldn't send the National Guard to the border that it would be Obama to call them up. Louis is my rep.
DeleteI see.
DeleteGohmert is not entirely correct. The individual states' NG units belong to the state, to use as the governors see fit (within the law, of course)...they only become federalized when the President signs an order making it so. Thus, Perry and other border-state governors SHOULD call their respective NG units to the border, and force the Obamination to publicly call them back.
ReplyDeleteThen next step in this chess game is to replace those units with State Guard units when Obama does this. No federal authority there, and I'd recommend that Perry and others tell Obama to suck an egg until such time as he actually takes concrete steps to ensure the security of our borders.. In Texas, it would require a change in the law to put some teeth in the state guard, as I believe (though will accept correction if wrong) that the TX State Guard is only set up to help with disaster relief (i.e. it isn't armed).
Obama's next step might be to assert federal authority over the 5 or 10 miles next to the borders, and he'd order the state guard to leave (with army and/or NG units telling the state guard to do so at gunpoint), and that'd end up in court. OK, fine, here's the ultimate countermove:
Texas passes a law making every person with a CHL a member of the state guard by default, lets anyone else who wants to join do so with a simple test and no record of violent felonies (because there are so many non-violent ones that shouldn't properly be felonies) and further allows members of the state guard to possess - even AND ESPECIALLY when off duty - fully authomatic weapons. I believe that one or more specifically designated firearms would have to be named, but it is easy to fill a few pages with various models of full autos, or semis converted to full auto. This will get around the Section 922(o) ban on newly manufactured full autos getting into civilian hands, and will make the libtards apoplectic. Oh, and the state provides no weapons or ammo - so no cost except administration. Further legal changes would be to authorized state guard members to detain, and to forcibly respond to resistance to such detention, those reasonably thought to be present in the state illegally. Said detention must, of course, be humane and the allegation of a person being here illegally must be resolved within 24 hours - the purpose of such being to not merely be decent about it, but to resist any court challenges.
The individual states' NG units belong to the state,
DeleteThat's what I thought. I remember it was a big deal when some were bought up to serve in Vietnam. Ought to post your comment.
Brock,
ReplyDeleteThe deciding case regarding the NG was Perpich v U.S.(?), around 1990. Perpich was the MN governor, and challenged Reagan's authority to send MN NG troops to El Salvador. He lost, proving forevermore that the NG is not the "militia" referred to in the 2nd Amendment or the body of the Constitution.
The thing that needs to be done is the repeal of the 17th amendment which would
ReplyDeletetake us back to the senate being appointed by the legislatures of the states. The senators then would be answerable only to their state. Then we could get some changes made in DC. The first change is that all income taxes should be paid to the states and the states should decide how much would be remitted to the Feds.
Those two actions would in effect restore the 10th amendment and put control of the country back in the hands of the several states.
If only, but with so much of the country on the dole, I don't see that happening in the present atmosphere.
DeleteYou are unfortunately correct.
Delete:(
Delete