Profile

unixronin: Galen the technomage, from Babylon 5: Crusade (Default)
Unixronin

December 2012

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Tuesday, November 7th, 2006 11:01 am

Those of you who are voting today, you might want to consider this proposed rule change, just in case it might change your mind on who's a good idea to vote for.  It has been pointed out that this proposed rule change from the Department of Homeland Security "will change the basic nature of international travel to essentially require every US citizen to get advance permission from Homeland Security before leaving or entering the country."

That may be an alarmist interpretation, but ... did you know that Congress just granted the President the authority to unilaterally declare martial law?  You heard all about the Military Commissions Act that, among other things, de facto legalized US use of torture.  What you may not have heard about was that on the same day, Congress also passed H.R. 5122, the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007".  A little-noticed rider slipped in at the last moment amends the Insurrection Act to give the President direct command authority to deploy state National Guard units for domestic law enforcement purposes, without the consent or approval of the state legislatures or governors:

Public Law 109-364, or the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122) (2), which was signed by the commander in chief on October 17th, 2006, in a private Oval Office ceremony, allows the President to declare a "public emergency" and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to "suppress public disorder."

See the exact amendment here; Library of Congress Thomas reference here.  This change to the Insurrection Act amounts to de facto repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of military force for domestic law enforcement.

There's a reason the state National Guard detachments were placed under the command and control of state governors, and not of the President.  It appears most of Congress has forgotten it.

Those of you who aren't planning to vote, probably deserve whatever you get.

Tags:
Tuesday, November 7th, 2006 06:59 pm (UTC)
not directly related, but:

In my vast experience (http://danjite.livejournal.com/370526.html?nc=6), most poll workers are right leaning or hard right, over 65, non technically savvy people who do not understand the process or the new technology.

Please, please, as an act of patriotism, work the polls and seduce all your friends into doing the same.

It will give you a warm glow of patriotism, no matter how awful it winds up being.

Please. Do it.
Wednesday, November 8th, 2006 01:49 am (UTC)
I dunno where you've worked the polls, but in 12 years, I've never met an honest democrat.

The ONLY completely honest polling station I saw was run be Republicans, the Dems at that facility having called in sick. And as long as Detroit, Shicago, LA, NYC, DC, Indianapolis and Youngstown exist, the Dems have no moral high ground of their own.

The National Guard has always been a federal entity that the states can recall under STATE orders when needed. The president has NEVER needed state authority to recall them. There was even a SCOTUS case to this effect around 1988, IIRC. Perspich vs US.

Stationing activated troops stateside is legal and happens all the time. However, using them for civil disorder would violate posse commitatus.

Of course, the howler monkeys demanded MORE federal authority after Katrina, where the DEMOCRAT mayor and governor refused to allow fed troops and Guard troops from other states on scene. This is clearly a response to that.

So, they want the government to do more, but don't want it to have more authority and power...

And you're encouraging those idiots to vote?