We Are Losing Territory In The Invasion From The South

About 3500 acres of Arizona have been declared off limits to US citizens because of ongoing violence from illegal entry into our country by drug smugglers, The area is also a path into the US for illegals who sneak in. Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu said that the violence is out of control as law enforcement officers and citizens are attacked by the invaders.

The border is the responsibility of the federal government and the feds are failing miserably in their duties.

Arizona called for 3000 national guard troops to be deployed and the regime responded with 1200. As federalized military, the soldiers will not be allowed to perform law enforcement duties and there is question as to whether they will even have weapons.

We are giving away our territory by allowing the illegal thugs to cross into our country unabated. Instead of any meaningful action Obama spends his time assuring Mexican President Calderon that the guardsmen will not cause problems for poor little Mexicans looking for a better way of life.

Why are these troops federalized? The National Guard belongs to the governors of each state until called to active duty by the president. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer should stop waiting for the federal government to do its duty and call her guardsmen to duty and give them the responsibility of securing the border. She should send soldiers to the border area where the problems exist, arm them to the teeth and give them instructions to keep the invaders out of her state. Of course Obama could call them all to active duty (as Eisenhower did in Arkansas) to keep her from using them but this would be a risky move that would show where his allegiances actually lie.

We cannot allow the criminals from Mexico to dictate where we are and are not allowed to travel in our country and this is exactly what is happening as Obama dithers.

Brewer needs to declare a state of emergency and call her heavily armed guard to duty to defend our country against the invaders. They can post notices that anyone trespassing will be shot on sight and then start taking out the invaders. It will not be long before they stop crossing because they will either decide it is too dangerous or they will all be dead.

Either way is OK with me.

And so it should be with Governor Brewer and the state of Arizona.

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

I Thought The Feds Handled The Border

The Arizona law has a lot of people in a snit. The opponents of the law that allows police officers to check the immigration status of anyone who has some interaction with police (a traffic stop, etc) continually mischaracterize the law and spread fear that it might lead to racial profiling.

This is hogwash but it has not stopped groups who advocate illegal activity from spreading the lies and the fear anyway. The Attorney General of the US, Eric Holder, is looking into challenging the Arizona law in court on Constitutional grounds. Holder, who did not read the law before condemning it (a common trait in the Obama regime), believes that enforcement of immigration laws is a federal government job and that states do not have the authority to enforce federal laws. As an aside, Arizona’s laws is a state law that makes it a crime to be in the state illegally. The only way to establish that is to check and see if people are in the country illegally.

This position is somewhat ridiculous. State and local police officers enforce federal laws all the time. Bank robbery is a federal crime but if a bank in any state is robbed the local police respond and have the authority to arrest the bank robbers. Can you imagine what would happen if FBI agents showed up and were told that the criminals were there with the police but they had no authority to enforce federal laws by arresting them so they let them go?

Kidnapping is a federal crime but state and local police respond to that crime. The same holds true for a number of crimes and no one seems to care that local officers are involved. For some reason though, people get uptight when the law deals with securing our borders or illegal immigration.

Surprisingly, Barack Obama has ordered 1200 National Guard troops to the border in Arizona (looks like the law is working) but has ignored a similar request from Texas. I don’t understand why Obama needs to give the order. If he takes charge of them they are not allowed to perform police functions. The NG belongs to the states so the governor of the state is in charge of them. If Texas or Arizona need Guardsmen on the borders then they should just deploy them. States have the right to keep people from crossing their borders illegally and if the governors deployed the NG then the soldiers could perform law enforcement functions. They could detain illegal entrants.

The federal government has been bellowing about the federal functions and how the security of the border is their job blah, blah. But an interesting thing happened today.

Texas was warned about the possibility of terrorists trying to enter the country illegally across the Mexico-Texas border. If stopping these illegal entrants is a federal job and the feds are the ones who should be enforcing their laws, why alert the local police? Why not send federal agents to guard the border and look for the terrorists?

One could make the argument that the state has the right to stop people at the border but that once they are here illegally the states have no authority to check immigration status or to detain people for being here illegally. Immigration being a federal job and all.

So if one of these terrorists crosses the border unseen but two days later an officer recognizes him from a photo, is the officer allowed to confront the guy and ask for identification? Can the officer check the immigration status of the terrorist?

If the answer is no then why alert Texas law enforcement and ask them to be on the lookout? If the answer is yes then why is the Arizona law wrong?

I have been thinking about the Arizona law and even though I have no problem I have a solution that will guarantee that no one is profiled. It will not please the left or any of the illegal immigrant groups who are aiding and abetting the criminals but it will work.

They should have immigration checkpoints. These would be just like sobriety checkpoints, would be random, would move from place to place and would require all people in every car that passes through the checkpoint to provide proof that they are here legally. Children would be considered legal if the adults in the car are legal.

The police could have cruisers set up to look for people who turn around to avoid the checkpoint. That would be probable cause to check their status.

The people who do not like Arizona’s law will not like the checkpoints but the courts have ruled sobriety checkpoints legal so long as they are random or everyone is checked. Illegal immigrant checkpoints are a great way to go. The law says that to check for immigration status the people have to make contact with police for some other reason first. No problem, just say the checkpoints are sobriety checkpoints and then ask everyone, and that is the key, for proof of status.

This could obviously be tweaked to work without violating the law or the Constitution.

The stops could also serve another purpose. Police could hand out literature explaining that there are sanctuary cities not far from Arizona and include a list of those cities and directions to get to them.

Arizona would be happy to send its illegals to California. Hell, the federal government will probably not take any referrals to ICE so Arizona might as well send the illegals where they are wanted.

As for Texas. It should tell the federal government to come look for the terrorist so that the state does not run afoul of federal immigration laws…

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

The World Of Liberal Lunacy And Other News

Voting linked to taxes…

Walter Williams has made a bold statement but it is something I have said for some time. He does a great job of explaining it:

I’m not proposing that we take voting rights away from those who do not pay taxes. What I’m suggesting is that every American gets one vote in every federal election, plus another vote for each $20,000 he pays in federal taxes. With such a system, there’d be a modicum of linkage between one’s financial stake in our country and his decision-making right. Of course, unequal voting power could be reduced by legislating lower taxes.

This is not a far-out idea. The founders worried about it. James Madison’s concern about class warfare between the rich and the poor led him to favor the House of Representatives being elected by the people at large and the Senate elected by property owners. He said, “It is nevertheless certain, that there are various ways in which the rich may oppress the poor; in which property may oppress liberty; and that the world is filled with examples. It is necessary that the poor should have a defense against the danger. On the other hand, the danger to the holders of property cannot be disguised, if they be undefended against a majority without property.” Jewish World Review

Makes perfectly good sense. If you have more skin in the game (or as Biden would put it, if you are more patriotic) then you should have more of a say in how things are run. It would force politicians to new ways of thinking. One way might be to lower taxes so we all only have one vote…

Obama and state run media incite black man to commit violence

A white supremacist was beaten to death by a black guy. How ironic is that? According to the article, the white guy kept to himself in his neighborhood and had protested different things but never amounted to much in the supremacist movement and the black guy was a criminal who served time in jail for assaulting a police officer.

The police found the supremacist, Richard Barrett, after he was stabbed and beaten to death and then set on fire. Police arrested a neighbor, Vincent McGee, (who had done work for Barrett) and charged him with the murder. Here is the interesting part:

[Sheriff Ron] Pennington did not disclose a motive but said neighbour (sic) Vincent McGee, 22, was charged with murder on Thursday and deputies charged three other people in the case on Friday. Daily Mail UK

I can tell you the motive, McGee is a racist and he was incited by the rhetoric of Barack Obama (if they bring a knife, you bring a gun) and the state run media. For some time now Obama and his state run media have told us that anyone who opposes them is a racist and that they are dangerous and could commit violent acts. After hearing all this rhetoric from Obama and the state run media, McGee decided that he needed to get the racist before the racist got him. This is a direct result of Obama and the state run media using inflammatory language and causing the fringe elements to go berserk.

And since it was a black guy killing a white guy it had to be racism. We all know that if this white supremacist had killed the black guy Clinton, Obama and the state run media would be talking about Beck, Limbaugh, and Palin inciting him to violence and how this is an act of racism.

Well, the truth must be the same when the roles are reversed.

What to do about violence?

Two lawmakers in Illinois want the governor to activate the National Guard and have them perform police duties because of all the crime and gun violence in Chicago. Officials are even more concerned that since warm weather is upon us the number of murders will increase. Seems that Chicago has more death and violence than an actual war zone and the police are unable to do anything about the violence.

It must be an election year because these bozos are trying to show their concern for the citizens. They are at wit’s end with the problem they created and now they want to activate a military force to handle it. Not a wise idea. Let the police handle it, let the politicians handle it but keep the military out. I would love to see the military go in to neighborhoods and wipe out gangs but that is not their job and they will be set up for failure. The minute they kill some thug in a shootout the same politicians who put them there will scream about what they did and then yell torture and Abu Ghraib and then blame it all on George Bush.

Besides, how credible is this information concerning violence? Chicago has one of the most stringent gun laws in the country so no one is using guns to kill people. They can’t be because they cannot buy guns, they cannot carry guns, and they have a hard time keeping guns in the home. The only people who can carry guns are politicians who tell the rest of us that they are not necessary and others who have greased the correct political palms. No one is buying guns elsewhere and bringing them in because there are laws against that as well. Laws always work because criminals have a lot of respect for the law and law enforcement. They would never consider buying guns illegally or carrying them illegally or importing them illegally because there are laws against that and liberals tell us that gun laws work.

Nope, Chicago has no gun crime and no murders by gun because guns are practically banned there. This must be some election year stunt to get the National Guard on all the streets to make people feel safer and have them believe that their government is there for them.

I wonder what would happen in Chicago if the state of Illinois allowed law abiding citizens to carry concealed firearms. They should probably give that a try since the way they are doing it seems not to be working. Seems to me it would be a lot cheaper than calling out the Guard.

Crime would go down fast.

One other thing they might consider and that is letting gangs have shootouts with each other. Put them all in an abandoned part of town and let them have gun battles with each other. If they are hell bent on killing each other then why stop it? We do not need them and putting them in jail does not seem to curb gang violence so just let them kill each other off.

Keep the people of Mississippi in your prayers

A number of people were killed and many more impacted by a tornado that touched down in the Yazoo County area. Keep these folks in your prayers.

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

Memorial Day

On this day, I thought I might speak about our Armed Forces- it is a day for honoring and remembering those who have laid their lives on the line and sacrificed themselves so that we might remain free. Our armed forces have a storied history, and for any naysayers who are keeping count, there have been far fewer negative incidents than the positive and uplifting stories of bravery and compassion from our men and women.

My personal experience is not first- hand, as I missed out on being drafted in 1970 by one lottery number- I was, I had thought at the time, lucky- and perhaps I was. A person can wonder about what never was forever, and not get an answer. I was prepared to go if called, but I wasn’t happy about it. I was eighteen, and had other things on my mind at the time.

Many friends of mine went, and some didn’t return. Of those that did, they returned different. War does that- killing someone makes people think, and being scared 24/7 will do that also, because even on leave, the feeling doesn’t quite leave you, or so I have been told.

Other friends chose the National Guard, because those were your choices, join or be drafted, and as our Army Generals found out, a draft doesn’t work. People have to be of the right mindset to join, and those that do make better soldiers in the long run. I find it amusing that all through the Iraq war, one friend of mine, who had grown up at the same time as me was concerned about Bush reinstating the draft. I told him repeatedly that it wouldn’t happen, but he was worried about his son, who clearly isn’t Army material.

I have friends who went into the Navy- one still can’t tell me anything about his tours in a sub. Others went Air Force, and one was a Marine who was a LRRP for two tours- now he was scary, despite the fact that he weighed 145 pounds soaking wet. I once saw him take out three people at a pool table who were harassing him. Him I did not want for an opponent. We became fast friends, however- and a truer friend I have never had.

So the Draft Army became the Volunteer Army, and since has gone through several stages of shrinkage and growth, as politicians diddle with the Armed Forces, and, depending on the politician’s beliefs and prejudices, our Armed Forces have prospered or learned to do with less, but all the time have endured and protected us wherever they have been sent.

This is a magnificent force, one that has accomplished many positive things, and when you include the National Guard in the mix (as you must), these men and women have helped us at the cost to their lives and indeed at times, their families. They have been there to fight our battles, and they have been there to help in our disasters.

They are, indeed, our national treasure, one without whom we would be nothing.

Today, we should all feel pride, as well as humility, as we honor those who have fallen in all of our wars, as well as those who have come home to help make this country the best it can be.

Even though many of us disagree in the direction of this country, we should not disagree about the worth of the men and women in uniform, nor of their rightful place in our society.

Take a moment today and say thanks to a vet.

Blake

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

Veteran’s Day 2007

Eagle

Today we celebrate Veteran’s Day though tomorrow is the day it will be observed. The United States is a great country because it has a history of fighting for what is right and for joining others in fights for what is right. Leading the charge throughout history is the American Military and the great men and women who serve in the armed forces.

There is no draft today and yet men and women step up to the plate to fight the war on terror and to prosecute our actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. These men and women are unsung heroes who are often forgotten until some crisis comes up requiring tough people to do violence on behalf of the protected.

Soldier

We have the greatest military in the world and, unlike other nations we do not go around conquering countries and taking what they have for our selves. We help them out in their fight and we help them rebuild. Japan and Germany were conquered and yet they prosper today as allies of the US. Many others have us to thank that they still have a native language and that they have not become the property of another, stronger, nation.

Today we thank the men and women who give all for people they do not know in order to make this world a better place. We honor those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for their fellow countrymen. I read this definition of a Veteran at a site this morning: (Big Dog Salute to GM Roper)

“A veteran – whether active duty, retired, national guard, or reserve – is someone who, at one point in his or her life, wrote a blank check made payable to The ‘United States of America’, for an amount of ‘up to and including my life.’” (Author unknown) Right in a Left World

Thank you veterans. May God bless you and keep you safe.

Big Dog

Others with similar posts:
Stop the ACLU, Perri Nelson’s Website, Rosemary’s Thoughts, A Blog For All, 123beta, Stix Blog, Right Truth, The Populist, Grizzly Groundswell, Stuck On Stupid, , Adeline and Hazel, Nuke’s, The Uncooperative Radio Show!, The World According to Carl, The Pink Flamingo, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.