Friday, January 23, 2015

Patrick Henry

Via comment by Anonymous on Patrick Henry


 
 
Praise the Lord for creating West Virginia even if it was a Yankee stronghold in the 19th century.

A bill introduced in the West Virginia House of Delegates this week would block unconstitutional foreign deployments of the state’s national guard troops, effectively restoring the Founders’ framework for state-federal balance on the Guard.

House Bill 2168 (HB2168), the Defend the Guard Act, was introduced by Del. Pat McGeehan (R-Hancock, 1), a former Air Force intelligence officer who did tours in Afghanistan and the Middle East, and cosponsored by ten other delegates. If passed, the bill would block the federal government from deploying West Virginia Guard troops overseas unless there is a declaration of war from Congress, as required by the Constitution.

“This bill essentially says, ‘If you don’t follow the highest law of the land, then we will withhold our Guard troops.’ The language and intent of the Constitution is so clear on this one issue,” McGeehan told the Wheeling News-Register.
 
 

12 comments:

  1. A certain veto from Obama.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He can't veto a state bill, of course that wouldn't stop him for making something up.

      Delete
  2. Will be great to see this pass.

    Fully expect a law suit by fed.gov by the dept. of injustice the minute it does.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't see how it would succeed, famous last words. :)

      Delete
    2. Hope McGeehan doesn't mysteriously wind up in a car accident like Noveske or a strange "murder/suicide" like that director.... Or the Commander in Chief could write up some bullish*t executive order overriding state powers in time(s) of war. I'm sure there's enough traitor judges to OK it if it goes to court.

      Delete
    3. Nothing would surprise me these days.

      Delete
  3. We're supposed to have a national defense that's based on the citizen soldier, and decentralized as a result. What the federal government has done, and what states have allowed it to do, is it has transformed the National Guard into the reserve for an expanded military and for a policy of empire building. The courts could not refute
    who is in charge of the National Guard, it is as plain as mud; the courts only interpret
    laws already in place. Not much to interpret here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. transformed the National Guard into the reserve for an expanded military and for a policy of empire building. The courts could not refute who is in charge of the National Guard, it is as plain as mud; the courts only interpret laws already in place.

      Well said and agreed.

      Delete
  4. Just wondering if you recall this happening while in Nam. I have heard of it before
    and just curious on your take.
    http://www.thetruthdenied.com/news/2014/12/15/connecting-the-dots-on-weather-mod-and-china-lake-part-ii/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, I scanned this and will read in detail later. I was in Vietnam during those years, but don't recollect this story. I see no reason to doubt this, but trying to stop the use of the Ho Chi Minh Trail using this method would have been a waste. No way would it stop the men pushing their bikes down and the equivalent amount of bombing would have produced more results. Thanks.

      Delete
    2. My point is if it could be made to rain in Vietnam at their choosing
      why could they not make it rain in California during the severe drought.
      The capability seems to have been around for awhile. And what does
      the myth of global warming have to do with national security as Obama
      addressed in his State of the Union speech?

      Delete
    3. A myth it is, most assuredly.

      http://www.namsouth.com/viewtopic.php?t=2219&highlight=global+waming

      Delete