Posted on 06/19/2014 5:57:41 AM PDT by MamaTexan
Perry is doing what the citizen of Texas are screaming for.
His initial response was to blame the federal gubbamint and tell us how few resources we had here in Texas to deal with the problem.
He is a political animal. He knows full well his chances of gaining the support of Texans during a presidential run would dry up unless he did an about face and began doing something...just something.
I think it would be in Texas’ interest to then ignore such orders...
You are wrong that an invasion always requires an “army” as you mean it; as a uniformed service of a foreign government. An army can also consist of millions of irregulars, and we certainly ARE dealing with an invasion of this sort.
Deny it all you want, it is still a fact; a reality that you deny at the risk of your own connection to reality.
IF it IS an 'enumerated power', then SHOW ME where it is enumerated in the Constitution.
• § 207. XIII. Another rule of interpretation deserves consideration in regard to the constitution. There are certain maxims, which have found their way, not only into judicial discussions, but into the business of common life, as founded in common sense, and common convenience. Thus, it is often said, that in an instrument a specification of particulars is an exclusion of generals; or the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another. Lord Bacon's remark, "that, as exception strengthens the force of a law in cases not excepted, so enumeration weakens it in cases not enumerated," has been perpetually referred to, as a fine illustration.
Justice Joseph Story on Rules of Constitutional Interpretation
-----
and responsibility to protect ALL states from FOREIGN invasion.
I give you the first four legal treatise written after Constitutional Ratification by men known to be involved in Constitutional law and judgments to prove the federal government cannot act without the States approval and all I get is blah, blah, blah...you're wrong?
LOL! I'm not buyin' what you're sellin' there, buddy. There is a REASON the Founders didn't put that clause under Article I, Powers of Congress, but under Article IV... the STATES.
----
BTW - since you can't get your Constitutional authority straight, I'll not bother wading through the rest of that blather in your post.
An 'army' requires arms. Even irregulars are armed. Thus the word ARMy.
This is not an 'invasion', but a mass migration of foreign denizens.
------
Deny it all you want, it is still a fact; a reality that you deny at the risk of your own connection to reality.
Perhaps your reality could withstand some scrutiny if you think unarmed citizens can constitute an 'army'.
Perry is a politician, but he is listening to us and acting accordingly. For whatever reason he is doing this, it will at least slow the invasion. What is baraq doing? He is encouraging this.
Something else to think about here.
What would Wendy Davis do versus what would Greg Abbot do in this same situation?
You may be right, but on the other hand, it is something.
Good morning, my fellow Texan.
Ma’am, I respectfully disagree about this being an invasion. If people come uninvited into your home, it is called a home invasion. If people snoop on you, it’s an invasion of your privacy.
These folks are invading our home. It is an invasion.
It's going to wind up in the laps of the States just by default. I vaguely recall Perry did at one point request assistance from the feds on the matter. I think Arizona did, too.
Of course, it was all ignored by the Chief Parasite and the feral government.
Probably because its a stupid and dangerous idea.
True, but they're charged with trespassing.
-----
If people snoop on you, it’s an invasion of your privacy.
Also true, but this is a violation of an individual Right, not a collective one.
-----
These folks are invading our home.
I understand the sentiment, but legally, they are civilian trespassers.
They can BE nothing else until they are acknowledged as a military force by the federal government. Once they ARE, any charges stemming from an 'invasion' by a foreign force must be dealt with by military tribunal.
Belive me, I'm not saying I want it to be this way, I'm just saying that, IMO, that's the way it is. This is also the catch 22 the feds have be playing the States with for decades. CLAIM they have authority over it, then do nothing about it except create more bureaucracy to fix the 'problem'.
-------
Thank you for the tone of your post, BTW . It was quite gracious.
and a fine morning to you, as well. :-)
It’s important to look at the border from the point of view of ease of crossing. Texas is the easiest.
New Mexico is very hard.
Arizona is second easiest, because of a gigantic Indian reservation of a small tribe that reaches all the way from central Arizona to the border. But “easy” is relative, as a border crosser has to travel a long distance across a very dangerous desert.
Importantly, about 300 crossers die every year because of “bad luck”. That desert is very unforgiving.
Too later Perry! You need to move quicker!
How about a company of black belts with nothing but bare hands?
I’m waiting to see if this is all smoke and mirrors or if it has some meat to it........
A fake symbolic and emotional move or something real and meaningful that Obama will be angry about and oppose....
LOL! I'd settle for a tall fence and a few hundred land mines.
The biggest problem, IMO, is the way the federal government has hog-tied the States in dealing with the problem. To them, being taken into custody is an 'implied consent' for illegals to be here to begin with INSTEAD of it being the proper first step of evicting them back across the border.
Having to return them to their 'home country' is another federal boondoggle. There is no legal reason they cannot go right back across the border they came across in the first place since the country the crossed allowed them through!
Once they are here, the politicians (the democrats and liberal republicans) know they aren’t getting the illegals to leave. Obama has been playing dirty. It is time (long overdue) for these border governors to stand up and to take action. Someone should stand up to the man child (who doesn’t like this country anyway) and don’t relent once you begin. Do it for the right reasons. If Kerry is doing this for political gain, he will be sorely accepted otherwise, the population will rally him. I don’t see DHS agents turning on the population (only a few -most would not) We may have a civil war on our hands. And like most, some will not understand that Texas has the right to defend it’s borders (if things turn ugly). Go, Texas. Do your duty and do it well.
I don't have a single disagreement with your post. A State not only has a Right to protect its People, it has a corresponding Duty to do so as well.
Ma’am your points are noted and I almost agree. But in Texas we do have the Castle law, where we can shoot home invaders.
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.