03 April, 2006

National Guard

The percentage of National Guard and reserve soldiers deployed to the war zones has decreased from 60% in 2004 to 20% in 2005.
Now maybe we can deploy them to the northern and southern borders of the USA and stop this illegal alien invasion and occupation. I remember several Democratic congressmen demanding just this a year ago. Time for them to put their votes where their mouths were.
I suspect that once again, their words will not match their actions.


Blogger Michael Reese said...

Has illegal immagration just suddenly .......increased greatly over the last year? Or has it been like normal? Why is this just now getting so much attention?

Blogger he who is known as sefton said...

first off, Chief, I want to thank you very much for appending a comment to the post that displays my version of a "historically corrected" Confederate Battle Banner.

Now, let's get back to your specific post. For a second there, I was a tad puzzled by whom you had in mind with the initials "M L K". Had the "jr" also been adjoined to those initials, I'm sure I would've hit upon Martin Luther King jr immediately.

Tends to make me chuckle. When he was alive and, ostensibly, solely in charge of the "civil rights" movement, the loony fringe of the right wing was going ballistic. They were indefatigable in their opprobrium, referring to him, time and again, not so affectionately as "Martin Luther Koon". As for the so-called responsible chunk of the right wing, with practically no noteworthy exception, they were restricting their comments to, pretty much . . . and I quote, "tsk, tsk".

About the only noteworthy exception that comes to mind, during that period, was one of your likely heroes, specifically, Charlton Heston. By the bye, my favorite role for him was in the movie ARROW, which also starred Jack Palance. Yeah, I kind of have a fondness for mavericks such as Cortez, the conqueror of the Aztecs and founder of modern Mexico.

Now that the man with the now notorious initials has been in his grave for about thirty years, time and time again, this or that right wing cynosure invokes the former's name, hoping to bathe nakedly in reflected glory. That's excusable, I suppose . . . after all, "politics ain't bean bag". I could . . . maybe, I even should . . . develop this particular theme a little more.

However, I would much rather tackle your "Pro-Communist" dart. I hope I'm right in surmising you read a couple of my posts about the very recent "eminent domain" decision by the Supreme Court of the United States. It is true that I PROGNOSTICATE that decision has set this country on the road to a Marxist state.

Whether I celebrate or denounce that decision makes, so far as I'm concerned, absolutely no difference. Lemme give'ya an example of what I mean.

Try to recall some of the newscasts about the approach of hurricane Katrina. For a few days before it reached the Gulf Coast, storm experts were projecting its probable path. Here I make a straw man of myself.

Let's suppose, sometime before Katrina reached New Orleans, I was trudging up and down that city's Bourbon Street, and I was holding aloft a placard. Inscribed on that placard was the following text:

. . . . SAY NO TO KATRINA!! . . . .

Likely enough, that would give on-lookers pause, if not cause to question my intellectual competence.

Let me make absolutely clear that never ever have I visited New Orleans. What's more, never ever did I hold aloft such a placard. More than just folly, such conduct could be regarded as ridiculing the misery, about to befall the people of the Gulf Coast.

Now then, let me talk a bit about the consequences, sure to follow from that recent Supreme Court decision. I'm starting by mentioning that I have, with some justification, a reputation for being brighter than average. What's more, I think I have more than the average amount of horse sense. Relying on all that, I'm venturing this rather startling opinion, which I'm stating like so.

. . . oh, yeah, the Supreme Court can reverse themselves . . . maybe, they should.

To that, I say "whatever" . . . the cat is out of the bag, the toothpaste is out of the tube, the jig is up.

Talk about irony! In time, our intelligentsia will comprehend the consequences of the recent "eminent domain" decision. Naturally, the right wing sector will work indefatigably to forestall the arrival of the Marxist state. And all that effort will be all for naught.

Nobody saw me trudging up and down Bourbon Street and holding aloft the "say no to katrina!!" placard. And for exactly the same reasons, nobody saw me trudging up and down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington (D C.), and holding aloft a placard, inscribed with "say no to the marxist state!!"

anyway, chief, before I sign off, I do want to thank you for the comment you left in my blog, along with the invitation to leave a response in yours . . . I welcome the opportunity to better explain my feelings about the future of our governance.

.he who is known as sefton

Blogger T.L. Stanley said...

Good point. I doubt if you will see the Democrats suggest that the National Guard be stationed along our borders. Because, Democrats were not serious in the first place. It is just like starting the military draft again. They are not serious about these issues. It is just politics. However, the Republicans should call them on it.

Blogger Chief RZ said...

Michael, same name as my youngest son, thanks for the post. I just visited your blog. Thanks for the age correction, by the way !

Illegal immigration has just begun to be an issue and may become a determining factor in this year's elections. The latest "protests" seem to be coordinated just like the communists' Vietnam Protests of the 60s and 70s. They have taken this time to put it in our fact and call our bluff on enforcing rules. If we don't we might as well shut down the congress and our government.

Blogger Chief RZ said...

I await your post on MLK, jr, Ph.D. if you wish. I see many street signs that say simply, Martin Luther King. I will refrain from using his given birth name. Martin Luther is one of my heroes--He stood before the establishment and said what he believed after reading the Bible.
I tried to understand the bulk of your post, but I would not fit in the category of "looney" right wing. Let's try to keep this civil. The borders must be secured just like the doors of our houses -- castle defense in Florida. We are a country of laws rather than men. I await your reply to MLK for President on that post which would be more appropriate. Our National Guard is trained, motivated, ready and able to do whatever job the CINC calls us to do.

Blogger Chief RZ said...

t.l. -- This is one of the reasons I started this blog: To raise the consciousness to the evils of communism and expose the bias and lies of the media and the left, social-democrats. They are blatant liars. I will never forget "Tip O'Neil and that other speaker of the house when the Democrats were in power saying, "bring us a budget bill and we will pass it". The next day a bill was presented and he did not bring it up. What a liar.

Blogger Jeff Parks said...


Let's use some sensible politics here. First of all, what is going on at the border is a problem. I think we all realize that. However, do you really want to deploy the National Guard to protect our borders?

As we have seen by what has happened in Iraq, our nation heavily relies on our National Guard to protect us. If we start seeing a huge buildup of the National Guard along our nation's borders, what do you think is going to happen to enlistment in the National Guard? Probably the same trend we have seen with the rest of the military in the last two years.

Let's look for other sensible alternatives.

Blogger Chief RZ said...

sensible jeff,
Yes, this would not only be sensible, but legal. Because of the Posse Comitatus act, federal troops can not be used. This issue came up during the hurricane in the US gulf coast last year. Now, federal troops could be used if Mexican troops invaded our country.
Be sure you understand my numbers. It does not mean that 60% of guardsmen were deployed. Only about 25% were mobilized at any one time in 2004. For 2005 the percentage would be about 10%. A border mission would entail only about 5% and these could easily be tasked with volunteers from the Guard. The other benefit would be excellent training and a real-world mission.
Securing our borders is one of the requirements of our government.
Without this integrity, we are not safe physically and can not operate morally.

Blogger Michael Reese said...

Sorry I'm kinda late chiming back in, but... t.l. stanley and chief rz, i'm not trying to argue with you or anyhting, I'm just curious....why do you think the democrats a year or so ago were not serious about this? I mean, I would like to think that they were.

Blogger Brooke said...

Just as we have a Coast Guard, I think we should have a branch of the military specifically devoted to our land boarders: a Boarder Guard. Just start it up and watch enlistment soar!

For what we pay to care for illegals every year, ($65 billion in social programs and jailing) we could easily afford to guard our boarders.

Every minute, 2 illegals cross the boarder. That's 113 per hour, and 2,700 per day; 1.3 million every year.

Mexico's second largest source of income after oil exportation is the money that Mexican illegals send back to family/friends. It is a 17.5 billion dollar per year industry!

It has to stop; either protect the boarders or annex Mexico altoghther!

Blogger Chief RZ said...

They are great deceivers.
1. That request was coupled with, "we need to bring our _____ state National Guard troops back from Iraq so they can help guard our border! (note, not Afghanistan, etc.


2. Where are they now that many have returned? They are hoping to get votes from illegal aliens in return for free welfare, etc, just like the last "minority". It is called vote buying.

Blogger Chief RZ said...

brooke-- We already have more than enough National Guard troops to do the job twice over. All they need is permission.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home