Skip to comments.
Sources: Bush Plans National Guard on Border..
Drudge Report ^
| May 12, 2006
| Matt Drudge
Posted on 05/12/2006 9:18:12 AM PDT by xjcsa
Headline only so far...
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; US: Arizona; US: California; US: New Mexico; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: aliens; borderenforcement; borderlist; bordersecurity; bush; howlermonkeys; morebushbashing; nationalguard
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260, 261-280, 281-300 ... 1,301-1,319 next last
To: Peach
"See - I knew I'd come here and people would STILL be complaining." No complaints from me. I applaud the president for following Sheriff Arpaio's lead. I hope the Guard will have a presence on the border until a permament barrier is in place. Now let's start deporting illegals.
261
posted on
05/12/2006 10:36:53 AM PDT
by
blaquebyrd
(Allegiance to country before party)
To: SirJohnBarleycorn; EyeGuy
I can almost guarantee the troops will stay deployed on the border until November 4, 2006.
262
posted on
05/12/2006 10:37:13 AM PDT
by
Sender
(“The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names.” – Old Chinese proverb)
To: sheana
That should be the post of the day:
[reposted, with emphasis]
President Bush says there is no way we can deport 12 million people. It is just can't be done.
Mexico did.
--Ted Nugent
263
posted on
05/12/2006 10:37:33 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: areafiftyone
The Pentagon is looking at ways the military can help provide more security along the U.S. southern border, defense officials said Thursday, once again drawing the nation's armed forces into a politically sensitive domestic role. Defending our border with another country isn't a domestic role.
264
posted on
05/12/2006 10:38:45 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(Federal creed: If it moves tax it. If it keeps moving regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it)
To: griswold3
"I hope this is true!! GW would see his ratings go through the roof!!"
Sounds like a trial ballon. We'll find out Monday night. In the words on one, Ronaldus Maximus, "trust, but verify".
265
posted on
05/12/2006 10:39:45 AM PDT
by
teddyballgame
(red man in a blue state)
To: griswold3
"I hope this is true!! GW would see his ratings go through the roof!!"
Sounds like a trial ballon. We'll find out Monday night. In the words on one, Ronaldus Maximus, "trust, but verify".
266
posted on
05/12/2006 10:39:53 AM PDT
by
teddyballgame
(red man in a blue state)
To: xjcsa
Oh PLEASE let it be really true and not just pretty words to put us back to sleep.
267
posted on
05/12/2006 10:40:05 AM PDT
by
VictoryGal
(Never give up, never surrender!)
To: Owen
Sealing the border is a good move by Bush. It is the correct first step.Yep.
To: Howlin
"I've asked him not to post to me because it serves no purpose.
And obviously it's not a rule because he keeps posting to me."
Well, I was hoping for a ruling from someone in charge. I'm still hopeful that one will come along.
Here's the thing, as I see it. I haven't been on FR as long as you have, but it seems to me that public threads and messages are open for discussion. If I write something in a thread, I expect other FReepers to respond to it, if they choose to. Often, those reponses are in disagreement with what I wrote. There it is. I post in a public forum, and others respond.
FReepmail is another matter, of course, and I think you should be able to ask people not to send private messages to you. But, the public forum is just that...public.
As long as the basic Rules of Free Republic aren't violated, such as personal attacks and the like, it just seems off the mark a little to try to insist that people not address posts to you in a thread in which you are participating.
That's just my opinion, of course, and I'll certainly abide by any ruling from the moderator or from Jim. I'm afraid that such a rule, though, would tend to limit debate here, and that's something I think would be unhealthy.
269
posted on
05/12/2006 10:40:09 AM PDT
by
MineralMan
(non-evangelical atheist)
To: Izzy Dunne
That would be Borders Books.
I highly doubt he would jeopardize the hispanic vote.
270
posted on
05/12/2006 10:40:54 AM PDT
by
Bear_Slayer
(When liberty is outlawed only outlaws will have liberty)
Comment #271 Removed by Moderator
To: SirJohnBarleycorn
As soon as there is a budget squeeze the first thing to be cut in DOD will be the resources for the NG on the border.
Then we will be back where we started, no fence and no security.
"But taking steps toward putting the NG on the border will mollify people like O'Reilly and enough conservatives to get the Republican leadership past the next election, then it will be back to business as usual.
BUILD THE FENCE!"
Shouldn't we have some spare troops from Germany coming back on line soon. They were "permanently" deployed in Germany, why not along on southern border.
But, better still, as you said a permanent fence-more effective and cheaper by far in the long run.
272
posted on
05/12/2006 10:41:42 AM PDT
by
EyeGuy
To: clawrence3
you really think it is going to be easy to find and remove by force 20 million? Hitler only got 13 million.You ought to educate yourself on the difference between deportation and genocide before making such comments.
To: Howlin
That is only YOUR interpretation of the facts. OK. What is YOUR interpretation of the facts then, Howlin? Post that and then we can debate it. That is what reasonable discussion is. It is not responding to the facts with, "You just want the Democrats to win!" and other ad hominem attacks and insults.
274
posted on
05/12/2006 10:43:39 AM PDT
by
Spiff
("They start yelling, 'Murderer!' 'Traitor!' They call me by name." - Gael Murphy, Code Pink leader)
To: Oliver Optic
At least among those conservatives he had any chance of winning back to start with
If he uses the military to shut the illegal activity on our border down and then kicks the can of amnesty down the road a piece....he's got my full support.
275
posted on
05/12/2006 10:43:42 AM PDT
by
trubluolyguy
(I love coffee....I love it GOOD!)
To: Bikers4Bush
Sorry Sweetheart, but this "liar" doesn't want open borders. But again, why address issues when you can just call names, right Sweetie?
276
posted on
05/12/2006 10:43:57 AM PDT
by
Coop
(Proud founding member of GCA - Gruntled Conservatives of America)
To: Owen
Rational thought, I like it!
I've noted some National Guard cheap shots here, (i.e. - "Will they be there to escort illegals?" and "Will they be there to keep tabs on the Minutemen?"). I'll take it as simply the result of being misinformed about the Guard or an opportunity to make a "cute" remark. I'm not interested in a flame war.
Some actual information: The National Guard is composed of two parts, the Air National Guard and the Army National Guard. Most states and territories have units of both. The National Guard is what the US Constitution refers to in Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 and 16 as the militia. The name National Guard came about by subsequent legislation. Day to day the National Guard is governed by the provisions of Title 32 of the United States Code and its chain of command is through a state officer known (in most cases) as The Adjutant General to the Governor. This is a difference between the Guard and the active duty forces and the Reserve forces (Army Reserve, Air Force Reserve, Navy and Marine Corp Reserves). Active duty and Reserves are governed under Title 10 of the US Code and the chain of command runs through the Secretary of Defense to the President. The Posse Comitatus act applies to Title 10 forces and generally prevents the use of title 10 forces in domestic law enforcement. There are exceptions and there are provisions for suspension as has been detailed elsewhere.
Most states have entered into an agreement called EMAC that allows states to support one another in times of emergency (most NG troops supported the Katrina effort under EMAC, once some of the bugs got worked out). I noted one poster suggested states call out their Guard units themselves. Here's the deal with the Guard - day-to-day, we're cheap - small full time force, large numbers who are only paid for drill once a month and a couple of weeks a year normally. The last few years haven't been normal, and the Guard is expensive when in full time Federal service in large numbers (such as airports after Sept 11). Most states can't afford to have the Guard on extended duty on their own nickel (even wildfire support, flood relief, etc usually is reimbursed to the states after disaster declarations open the taps on Federal money).
The elegant thing about having the Guard on the borders is that when the rotation of a unit is complete, and its members go back to their civilian lives they are completely free to talk of their experiences in a way that active duty forces may not be. Also citizen soldiers and citizen airmen are politically tuned to their communities and nation, and understand we should not be there to harass law abiding citizens or to be pawns in the internal politics of Federal agencies.
The best thing the FReeper community could do at this point is to support vocally, through Congressional delegations and this forum, passage of legislation now coming up in the House to give the National Guard a seat at the JCS table, and preserve the independence of the Guard.
277
posted on
05/12/2006 10:45:18 AM PDT
by
Wimpy329
(Does that seem right to you? - Jubal Early)
To: All
Forgive the double post.
Is FR acting up, or is it just my computer?
(But it didn't hurt to ask the question twice..............not that I'll get an answer......)
278
posted on
05/12/2006 10:45:43 AM PDT
by
ohioWfan
(PROUD Mom of an Iraqi LIBERATION Vet! THANKS, son!!.)
To: ohioWfan
FR seems awfully slow today (in response time, not content :-)
279
posted on
05/12/2006 10:47:19 AM PDT
by
VictoryGal
(Never give up, never surrender!)
To: ohioWfan
It's FR. I'm having the same problem.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260, 261-280, 281-300 ... 1,301-1,319 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson