Surprise, surprise - Bush wants to nationalize Guard

[professorpan]

<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=1331575&ct=2868325">www.americanprogressactio...ct=2868325</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>ADMINISTRATION -- GOVERNORS OPPOSE ADMINISTRATION PLAN TO NATIONALIZE GUARD: Governors across the nation are banding together in opposition to a Bush administration-backed plan that would enable the president "to take over National Guard troops in case of natural disaster or homeland security threats." The measure, included in the National Defense Authorization Act approved by the House, would "remove the currently required consent of governors for the federalization of the Guard, which is shared between the individual states and the federal government," and give the president expanded authority in a national emergency. However, fierce opposition exists among the nation's governors, Democrats and Republicans alike. Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) blasted the plan, saying it "violates 200 years of American history" and would make states "satellites of the national government." Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack (D) called the plan "one step away from a complete takeover of the National Guard, the end of the Guard as a dual-function force that can respond to both state and national needs." Huckabee and Vilsack were among the two dozen governors who attended the National Governors Association's summer meeting, where the group sent a letter to House leaders stating their opposition to the plan. House and Senate leaders will meet next month to iron out a final bill. <p></p><i></i>

[sunny]

Bush can invoke the <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B2GGGL_enNZ177&q=%22Insurrection+Act%22+federalize+national+guard" target="top">Insurrection Act</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> to nationalize the Guard, and the Governors know it.<br><br>Which tells me this is a smokescreen as well as a smoke signal.The Gov's are covering their asses with constituents, while the Feds are signalling their intentions.<br><br>My take is the Feds are in the homestretch of planning some heretofore unimagined (except in the fevered imaginations of Conspiracy theorists) event that will cause widespread civil disruption. It must be a doozy if the Bushies are expecting <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Americans</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> to get off their asses in protest.<br><br>In other words, hold onto your seats, it's going to be a bumpy night. (or decade or so)<br><br>I'd also like to kiss you, but I just washed my hair. <p></p><i></i>

[Forgetting2]

This also supports, for me, the idea of what the conflict was really about between Bush and Blanco in Katrina. There was the story that Bush was witholding federal aid on purpose as leverage to get Blanco to acquiese and turn over the LA guard to him.<br><br>(Looking for the links.)<br><br>All part of their grand plan, I suppose. They won't stop until they get it... <p></p><i></i>

[bvonahsen]

Boil that frog.<br><br>And no, they won't stop until they have to suffer the consequences, nor do I see anyone trying to make them. That is another reason that I give weight to my "our government is a club for sociopaths" theory. No one has lifted a finger to try to stop these thugs and the only way that makes sense to me is that they either approve or are just waiting their turn.<br><br>Katrina was simple, Bush looked it up on the map and saw all democrats. I doubt he even flinched. I also think that he called (no records, no trail) up Chertof and told him not to answer Brownies' calls which would pretty much explain how the whole fiasco went down. As repugnant as Michael Brown is, I think he was set up to be the patsy from the begining. <p></p><i></i>