Obama Considers Using Military At Border
Mar 12, 2009 Political
Barack Obama is considering using the military to secure the violent region known as the Texas-Mexico border. Obama is said to be looking at a tipping point for action. Americans have been killed down there as a result of the drug war going on. My question is, does not the murder of Americans constitute a tipping point?
I am also don’t think that Obama has much say in this because he is not talking about using active duty troops:
“We’re going to examine whether and if National Guard deployments would make sense and under what circumstances they would make sense,” Obama said during an interview with journalists for regional papers, including a McClatchy reporter.
“I don’t have a particular tipping point in mind,” he said. “I think it’s unacceptable if you’ve got drug gangs crossing our borders and killing U.S. citizens.”
Unless Obama plans on calling the National Guard to active duty, he has no control over them. He is not the Commander in Chief of the National Guard unless they are called to federal service.
Until that time they belong to the governor of the state and he should be ignoring Obama’s “tipping point” and sending the troops down to squash the violence.
It would make no sense to federalize the Texas National Guard to perform a mission in Texas. The National Guard is capable of handling the unrest and it has the authority to detain Americans who might be breaking the law. The active duty is forbidden by law from performing police actions.
Governor Perry has called for 1000 troops to secure the border but Obama said it is a big border and he is not sure he wants to militarize it.
Perry should just call up his Guard and send them and their combat equipment to the border to protect his state. The border might be an issue that belongs to the feds but the state belongs to Perry and the citizens of Texas. They have every right to defend their state.
He needs to ensure they are safe while Obama twiddles his thumbs looking for the tipping point.
Source:
McClatchy
[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]
Tags: drug war, Mexico, Military, Obama, perry, texas, troops
Why Can States Delay Your Refunds?
Feb 16, 2009 Political
First it was the state of California and now it is Kansas. These states are issuing IOUs for taxpayer refunds because they are out of money. A refund means that the taxpayer paid too much in and if that is the case why does the state not have the money? It is quite simple to answer. The states spend the money when it comes in and they have little regard for the budgetary process.
It is interesting to note that states with problems are run by Democrats either as the governor or as a majority in the legislature or both as in the state of Maryland whose fiscal mismanagement has led the politicians to depend on pork from the stimulus bill to avoid laying off employees.
Yes, the governor of California is a registered Republican and that is as far as he goes. He is a RINO and the state is run by Democrats who turn a blind eye to illegal immigration and tax residents and businesses so heavily that they pack up and leave. California is on the verge of financial collapse and it is mostly due to unsound fiscal policy and burdensome taxation.
I want to know what gives the state the right to delay paying you YOUR money? If you owe taxes they want them right away. Delay in paying your fair share will result in penalties and interest. Will these states pay penalties and interest to the people who are owed money?
Interestingly, a report from July 2008 discussed states with looming financial problems and several were noted as being financially strong:
States where the housing market is in a slump also are facing severe financial challenges, including California, Delaware, Florida and Massachusetts. To address the issue, many states have reduced their current-year revenue forecasts, in some cases several times.
However, says National Conference of State Legislatures Executive Director William “Bill” Pound, energy producing states appear to have a strong fiscal situation and a good outlook for fiscal year 2009.
This, Pound says, is the case for states like Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota, Louisiana and Texas — though those states have no personal income tax or corporate income tax. San Antonio Business Journal
Several things come into play. The states doing well are energy producers. In addition, they have no personal or corporate income tax. States without energy production facilities would still benefit if they reduced personal and corporate taxes. Texas has done well for quite some time and a recent report indicates that even though the state feels the economic distress it is doing well because of sound fiscal policy.
States like Kansas and California would do well to pay attention. Imagine how well California could be doing if it allowed offshore drilling for the abundance of oil under its property. It would also do the state well to reduce taxes on its citizens and the businesses that remain there. Tax cuts always increase revenue. If the revenue is not spent recklessly then the result is good. Unfortunately, most politicians have not grasped that concept.
The federal government would have done well to follow the model of Texas and the others. Instead of canceling the oil exploration and drilling leases the feds should have gone ahead with it. That industry would produce plenty of jobs and it would help the economy. The stimulus should have included a reduction in the corporate tax rate. I think it should have been suspended for a year and then brought back to half of what it is now.
This would have stimulated the economy. However, the goal of the bill was not so much to stimulate the economy as it was to put special projects into place and to pay off political supporters. Very little in the bill will stimulate and certainly not nearly as much as cutting taxes and increasing domestic energy exploration and production.
Just ask Texas.
[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]
Tags: california, fiscal, kansas, liberals, refunds, states, taxes, texas
Let’s Give Texas Back to Mexico and Be Done with it
Dec 31, 2007 Immigration
The Mexicans have been invading America and they want to take Texas back. They are coming in here and sucking up resources and our Congress shows how impotent it is by ignoring the problem or by trying to reward lawbreakers. I think it is the right time to just give Texas back to Mexico and be done with it. It is obvious that the Texans don’t want to do anything to solve the problem so they can be part of Mexico or move before we seal off the border.
I originally thought that we might be able to solve the problem and still keep Texas but it now appears that Texas has decided it likes the ILLEGALS and wants them around. Those of us who don’t are xenophobes and our opinions don’t count. The Dallas Morning News has named the ILLEGAL immigrant as its person of the year. According to the DMN, the ILLEGALS do work Americans will not (at least not for the same wages) and they are such hard workers. Of course they do work for low wages. They make it up by taking millions of dollars in taxpayer money to which they are not entitled and by having jackpot babies so they can lay claim to this country.
If the DMN is so enamored with the ILLEGALS and thinks they should be the person of the year than that is fine. Let’s just give Texas back to Mexico and forbid entry from the northern Texas border. Texas can deal with the poverty, the social problems, the crime, the jackpot babies (well, they would be Mexican citizens by then) and they can figure a way to pay for it all without the money from US taxpayers.
Then, maybe the DMN would see how life really is. As long as someone else pays it is fine but when they have to foot the bill I imagine they would not be too happy.
BTW, if you want to see jobs that most Americans will not do look at any member of our Armed Forces. Now those are jobs most Americans will not do for any wage. Most ILLEGALS have no interest in doing that job.
Tags: ILLEGAL immigration, Mexico, texas