Be vigilant, Governor! Next, Obama will be coming after your precious bodily fluids…
I was preparing to comment on Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s absurd, embarrassing and recklessly divisive action of calling on the State Guard to monitor a U.S. military training exercise in the state juuuuust in case that sneaky, fake American Commie dictator Barack Obama is getting ready to put the Lone Star State under bayonet and martial law, as some local wackadoodles are claiming from under their ten gallon tin-foil hats. I decided that it was too obviously stupid to criticize before I read the approving comments by unhinged Texans on the governor’s Facebook post announcing the order.
It received more than 25,000 likes and thousands of comments. Among them (My reactions in bold):
- “Thank you, Mr. Abbott, but I doubt they listen to you or anyone, Obama will soon demand Marshall law, We need to keep them totally out of Texas. The devil is breathing down our necks right now. Everyone better pray.” Now Marshall law, I have no problem with…
- “Here comes Martial law Folks… get ready! ALL Texans need to be armed. It’s our right! I pray our Military will do what’s right! Not want the Commander and chief ( and I use that term loosely) wants them to do! STAND UP AMERICA… IF we don’t GOD HELP US ALL! If you look at the map that was posted.. Texas is listed as a hostile state, along with other repub. states!” THEY’RE HERE! THEY’RE HERE!!!! Oh, wait, I was thinking of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers”…
- Thank you sir I have no trust in our current goverment. Your actions on a day to day basis are giving me hope for our state goverment. If that’s how you’re spelling “government,” I have no hope at all…
- “Governor Abbott’s got a pair, and he will not let them mess with Texas!” Well, thank God for that! If he let’s his pair mess with Texas, it would be the worst sex crime in history. Also: Ewww.
Luckily, a Republican, a Texan, and former state House member did it for me. Here is Todd Smith’s letter to the Governor.
Well said, sir.
The text:
Let me apologize in advance that your letter pandering to idiots who believe that US Navy Seals and other US military personnel are somehow a threat to be watched has left me livid. As a 16 year Republican member of the Texas House and a patriotic AMERICAN, I am horrified that I have to choose between the possibility that my Governor actually believes this stuff and the possibility that my Governor doesn’t have the backbone to stand up to those who do. I’m not sure which is worse. As one of the remaining Republicans who actually believes in making decisions based on facts and evidence—you used to be a judge?—I am appalled that you would give credence to the nonsense mouthed by those who instead make decisions based on internet or radio shock driven hysteria. Is there ANYBODY who is going to stand up to this radical nonsense that is cancer on our State and Party? It is alarming that our State Republican leadership is such that we must choose between DEGREES of demagoguery. I know that in many cases you are the better of the two demagogues (see the Lieutenant Governor driven nut job rant regarding your Pre-K program as a recent example). Having been there, I also know that politicians are not always able to speak their mind because they represent large groups of people and not just themselves. But this bone that you have thrown to those who believe that the U.S. Military is a threat to the State of Texas is an embarrassing distance beyond the pale. You are Governor of Texas! This is an open request—from a ghost of our State’s recent Republican past—that you act like it. Enough is enough. You have embarrassed and disappointed all Texans who are also informed, patriotic Americans. And it is important to rational governance that thinking Republicans call you out on it.
_________________________
Pointer: Fred
Ethics Alarms 
They may indeed be idiots and they may be undereducated, but the Elites too often do a smug spell check to demean people who may have personal feelings but not be able to express them well. That sort of crap just puts me off.
I usually feel the same way. But 1) if someone is going to rage about government, they better spell it right 2) it wasn’t a typo, since it was that way twice, and 3) the spelling was the least stupid thing about the comment, so I’m not going to be respectful about cretinism.
And the more I think about your rebuke, the more it annoys me. I make tons of typos, especially in comments. “Goverment” twice isn’t a typo, it’s illiteracy. The word is in the paper every damn day. It is in textbooks in school. The word is based on the root “govern” It’s not “elite” to pay attention—knowing how to spell and pronounce a basic civics staple like “government” isn’t some sign of being rich, white and going to Harvard, it’s a sign of paying attention, knowing what you’re talking about before you publish dumb opinions to the world, and being a responsible American. Nobody who doesn’t know how to spell “government” should pollute discussions of public policy and national concerns with their civic illiteracy, and if they do, they deserve to be called on it.
First, you need to know some small history of what is being called the “Texas Guard”. Because of the unique circumstances of Texas entering the Union, Texas is the only State allowed to keep and maintain a standing Army. This is NOT the Texas National Guard. It IS the Texas STATE Guard. It is not subject to call-up by the President, not is it in any way answerable to the Federal Government, except by the direction on the Governor of the State of Texas. At present, the State Guard consists of a Company of MP’s, and their related CID. My guess is that Gregg Abbott was asking the CID to RULE OUT any possibility that the Fed was going to declare Martial Law (not the correct spelling). In the unlikely event that the Fed, under Barrack Obama who is at best an untrustworthy soul, was planning a Martial Law decree (without any observable reason, I might add) I suspect Gregg wanted to stay ahead of the curve. I seriously doubt he saw such a decree coming, nor did he expect to have to call out the Texas National Guard. It was a purely political decision, likely geared to stopping the idiots in Bastrop from doing something really stupid during this exercise. I do not see in any way that this attempt is unethical, as it was an attempt to stop some ding-bats from doing something stupid and starting something that very few people want to see happen.
So? It’s still an insult, it still fuels divisive disloyalty, it still impugns both the President and the national government as well as the Constitution, and the armed forces themselves, which, I am certain, would absolutely refuse to wage wage against any state no matter who ordered it. Ahead of what curve? There is no chance of this happening, none, zero. Suggesting there is such a chance, and that’s what Abbott is doing, is outrageous
And there is no law against any state having its own army that I can find. It’s just redundant and a waste of money, that’s all. And presents a temptation to engage is dumb stunts…like this one.
As someone who’s grown up in a military family going back a few generations, I don’t get why the wingnuts think the military would ever follow orders to attack their fellow countrymen – unless they’re planning an open, armed revolt?
Thank you. I just wrote that in my comment as you were writing yours. Exactly.
Why would anyone ever question the motives of Obama and the MOST TRANSPARENT ADMINISTRATION in HISTORY? Rubes, probably racist too.
You got it, buddy. Racist as they come.
This is a quote from Todd’s Facebook page.
“The league of the Republican women, some of them are too stupid to realize it, and it’s pissing me off, so bye.”
Hero, huh? Don’t often disagree, but in this case, I must.
Don’t be absurd. I yield to no one in my lack of regard for this President, but insane paranoia insults the office, the nation and the Constitution. The guy is misguided, inept, arrogant and routinely wrong, but that does not justify casting him as some kind of South American dictator. Conservatives and Republican undermine their function as the opposition when they indulge just crap, and it is crap.
“Republican undermine their function as the opposition when they indulge just crap, and it is crap.”
See “crying wolf”. Same reason Clinton is so powerful, their indulgence of anti-Clinton lunacy taints legitimate character criticism for the rest of us who aren’t in the Clinton Cult.
As a conservative I don’t believe in evolution, so you are going to have to explain Obama and the Left’s continually evolving statements and positions to me. I’m never quite sure what the next stage of evolution will be. Can you explain why you believe so strongly that the next stage of the Left’s evolution will be benign? Trust and legitimacy are earned, so has Obama and the Left earned the trust of conservatives or undermined it?
1. “As a conservative I don’t believe in evolution” is like saying “as a New Yorker I think Bigfoot is God.” There’s nothing conservative about not believing in scientific facts.
2. There’s no reason to trust Obama beyond the basic trust any American public servant deserves, which is to say, he’s not a traitor, he’s a patriot, he’s doing the best he can,and he’s not out to destroy the country. That’s a pretty low bar…it applies to Donald Trunp, Bill Maher, Al Gore and Cliven Bundy.
Actually I can give you a few reasons why Obama isn’t deserving of basic trust.
-He passed his signature legislation, Obamacare, based on blatant lies, “if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor.”
-His views have views and statements have evolved with no credible explanations on issues like; gay marriage, Iran’s nuclear program and illegal immigration.
-His administration has politicized government agencies (IRS) to punish political opponents.
-He is subverting immigration law in a cynical attempt to gain a permanent Democrat majority.
I am sure he believes that all his actions are noble and patriotic. So what. Why should someone who has lied so frequently be trusted on anything, let alone moving troops into places where people, how did he say it, “cling bitterly to their religion and their guns”?
None of that even slightly suggests the proclivity or desire.to take over the sovereignty of a state by force. He can’t be trusted to tell the truth; he can’t be trusted to do his job competently. Check. That’ doesn’t mean he can’t be trusted not to sell out the human race to invaders from Mars, to cite an equally plausible fear.
If conservatives and critic of Obama can’t present themselves without sounding like they belong in restraints, nobody in the middle will want to have anything to do with them. If critics of Democrats sound deranged, a lot of people will believe that it’s deranged to criticize Democrats.
Please explain to me why you personally believe conservatives should take the President’s word that his intentions are benign? I am not sure why I am supposed to be reassured by your claim that he has no intention to “take over the sovereignty of a state by force.” Because you can subvert the hell out of a state’s sovereignty with just the threat of force, its called Finlandisation. Texas is well within its rights to demand oversight and they would be fools to just take the administration at their word.
Because, as you might have gleaned from the Presidents Day opus, I’ve studied these guys my whole life, and my honors thesis, 225 pages, was about the forces that winnow out the men who have become President. There have been crazies and sociopaths and dummies and fools; there have been liars and racists and cowards and drunks; and truly great men and human beings, but not one became President who was not genuinely dedicated to the ideals of the nation, and determined to sacrifice for the best interests of the people as he saw them to be. There is no evidence that Obama is any different in this respect from the rest, and one major reason to believe he shares that quality: he got to be President. We don’t elect traitors and despots, because people who would behave like that don’t get that far.
What you are peddling is demonization—partyism—and it is more dangerous to the survival of the US than anything Obama could do or has done.
Your the expert on this so I ask you, did Obama go through the full winnowing process? Was he fully vetted and tested before he was elected or even reelected? One of the first things he did was lie about taking public financing for his campaign, destroying the bipartisan compromise on spending. Has he ever answered tough questions about destroying a longstanding political compromise? The reaction of Texans is a natural response to a guy who chronically lies for political advantage. If Obama was a real leader he would defuse the situation by canceling the exercise and thinking seriously about how his actions have undermined public trust in him. Or he could insist he gets his way and tramples the opposition no matter the consequences. What do you think is more likely?
You claim I’m demonizing the President. I’m pointing out that it is rational to not trust the guy who lies all the time. I’m pointing out that constant lies have consequences, like people don’t trust you even if your intentions are pure. I’m also trying to point out that you have no basis to claim you know what actions Obama considers beyond the pale. A few years ago I would have never believed the President would empower a guy like Al Sharpton to defuse tense racial situations, I completely misjudged him. Please explain why you are so sure you understand him and what he will or won’t do?
Seriously??!! Finlandization refers to the political response of Finland to an extremely aggressive (as in Stalin’s USSR) foreign nation next door.
Using “Finlandization” to describe US/Texas relationships is like a Silicon Valley billionaire using “Nazism” to describe animosity toward the wealthy. Grossly, grotesquely overstated.
I withdraw my comment in favor of Jack’s – far more eloquent.
“As a conservative I don’t believe in evolution.”
Seriously?
When did that stop becoming an insult, and start becoming a self-professed badge of pride?
Are you actually serious? Or was that just a rhetorical flourish?
Well, to be fair, he is a walrus…
You know charlesgreen, people like you bear some responsibility for the distrust of the President and the Left among conservatives. In particular your response to the IRS scandal on this website had a great effect on my thinking. You don’t think using the IRS to target conservatives is a big deal. I suspect you would think it was a big deal, if a Republican President used the IRS to target “progressive” groups. So, what is the basis for trust and cooperation between you and I? Seems my treatment as part of the loyal opposition is quite different than your.
Have you ever read Urkel’s book, “Dreams From My Father”? I believe it does a good job of revealing hit true attitude towards the US. Here’s a quick synapse:
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/politics-socialism-capitalism-private-enterprises-obama-business-problem.html
Joe,
You present such a target-rich environment, it’s hard to know where to begin.
Oh wait I know – get yourself a dictionary and look up the difference between a synapse and a synopsis, for starters.
The fact that you would serve up drivel from such a discredited right-wing panderer is telling. And when I say “discredited,” I mean first the following:
“Conservative author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza avoided prison on Tuesday when a U.S. judge sentenced him to serve eight months in a community confinement center after he pleaded guilty to violating campaign finance law.”
Second, I mean this tiny piece of a blistering review of his work from Ryun Chittum, a former Wall Street Journal reporter, and deputy editor of The Audit, the business section of the Columbia Journalism Review:
“So it’s come to this: Forbes cover story on “How Obama Thinks” is a gross piece of innuendo—a fact-twisting, error-laden piece of paranoia. This is the worst kind of smear journalism—a singularly disgusting work.
Forbes for some reason gives Dinesh D’Souza the cover and lots of space to froth about the notion popular in the right-wing fever swamps that Obama is an “other”; that he doesn’t think like “an American,” that his actions benefit foreigners rather than Amurricans. It’s too kind to call this innuendo. It’s far too overt for that….Forbes has shamed itself with this one.”
http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/forbes_shameful_obama_dinesh_dsouza.php
Don’t like Columbia Journalism Review? Let’s try the Economist, a slightly right of center publication with impeccable capitalist credentials:
“DINESH D’SOUZA’S cover story on President Obama in the latest Forbes, “How Obama Thinks”, is a disgrace, an excresence, and a crude exercise in McCarthyism. Forbes should be ashamed of itself for providing Mr D’Souza with a platform for this.”
And that’s just jacks for openers, from a British magazine normally given to conservative language. More at http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2010/09/dinesh_dsouza_disgraces_himself
Joed, you have lost all credibility on this one.
Well, OK; I didn’t do my homework on this guy. Never read his book, or the article in question before, but I did read “Dreams”, and to me, it’s telling, especially in light of his performance as President. As far as synapse, I’m a med student; honest slip. You’re being petty with that.
I was looking to see if anyone had done a quick synopsis on the book. I was more interested in finding something that I felt summarized the book, as I saw it. I think it’s more subtle than he indicated, but reading it I got the sense that him and his father saw America as a neocolonialist oppressor, and definitely that he came to the conclusion that he must help the black man. Nothing wrong with that on its face, but when you show the sort of bias that he does, it starts looking more like overt racism.
Oh shit…
Walrus, if you go back and read the news reports, you’ll find that the IRS used overtly political phrases to quickly sort out the obvious crooks from the thousands of non-profit applications submitted by BOTH right and left groups who were supposed to be tax-exempt but were in fact misusing their tax exempt status for political purposes.
It’s not too hard to guess that a non-profit with a name like “All-America Pro Liberty Fight Obama Socialism” might have a political angle. And, as it happens, there were more ignorant people on the right wing foolish enough to name their groups in such obvious ways than there were on the left.
If excesses occurred, it was in disproportionate follow through, and that should be condemned by anyone. But I don’t think anyone has shown there was any ‘targeting’ in the initial outreach. The IRS took a first shot at finding tax-evaders, and it turned out the frequency of right-wing stupidly named groups was higher than the frequency of left-wing stupidly named groups. Period.
Yes, I would think it was a big deal if a republican president used the IRS to ‘target” progressive groups stupid enough to seek tax-exemption for political gain. Just as I would think it was a big deal if a Democratic president used the IRS to target right wing group stupid enough to seek tax-exemption for political gain. Can you show me a president who did so? Has anyone even ever suggested (other than you) that Obama actually had anything to do with this? Or that the frequency of Tea Party-inspired groups was actually the same as, say, Occupy Wall Street-inspired groups? Come on.
Charles, this is the Democratic spin, but it just isn’t true, and even the mainstream media reported it. Stats from the IRS itself:
Yes, the “smoking gun” showing that this was an election warping political hit is missing. That’s in part because that gun is Lois Lerner, who has been allowed to refuse to testify…you know, like Barry Bonds’ trainer, and Whitewater figure Susan McDougal. No Oval office tapes,
The rightish groups were treated differently than the leftish groups (and big Democratic supporters like the NAACP, which blatantly violates it obligation top be non-political, is left alone.) I follow this ongoing story every day. The fact that Justice didn’t appoint an independent prosecutor is disgusting, as is its reluctance to prosecute Lois Lerner for contempt. The politicizing of Justice and the IRS is very serious. It doesn’t point to armed take-overs, but Walrus is right: the same facts under the Bushes or Reagan would have been a government-toppling scandal—the media would have made sure of it. The public just hasn’t been informed…it’s a cover-up.
I agree with you about the different treatment – but not your initial claim about differential scanning.
Here’s just one counter-example: FarmProgress.com, for the prairie farmer, all kinds of info about crop management, soil insecticide, etc.
Would you seriously count an organization with “progress” in its name like that one, one for one against an organization with “Tea Party” in its name as having equal likelihood of being tax evaders?
“Progress” just doesn’t come anywhere near evoking the political flavor that “Tea Party” or “9/12” do.
Can you point to a single non-profit counter-example like the one I provided above? Because that was just a quick hit, I’m sure I can find many more of the benign variety of “progress.”
–For example, Progressive Community Health centers in Milwaukee. A hotbed of liberalism? I doubt it.
–How about the Progressive Agriculture Foundation? Trying to sneak one by the IRS? I don’t think so.
The comparison of “progress” yielding only 30% and “Tea Party” et al yielding 100% doesn’t need a political explanation – just google them yourself.
That said, there was clearly some wrong done in the execution, and I have to agree with you about the lack of an independent prosecutor and the treatment of Lerner. At the very least, the optics aren’t good, and as you persuasively pointed out elsewhere, optics in government are substantive.
I have progressive lenses in my glasses. You people are everywhere!
Credit where credit’s due – that one made me laugh!
See? THAT’s a conspiracy FACT!
Oh and synapse? Yeah I, Um, meant to do that, for laughs and all.
I would also suggest that anyone who thinks Todd Smith is a hero of ANY sort needs to learn a great deal of Texas history (since he has not) and should investigate him just a bit. He has been a …um…let’s say critic of Abbott for some years. He is, in fact a RINO, and could best be described as an opportunist. Actually, I would several other words to describe him, but I’ll leave that to somebody less reserved than I.
Look, D-D, you know what Ethics Hero criteria is, or do I have to explain it yet again? It has never been a verdict on general character or career virtue, Bill Clinton has been an Ethics Hero, you know. It relates to single incidents. The letter was dead on, and his objections to a fellow Republican took it out of the partisan sniping category. He’s been critical of Abbott? Well, I guess I know why now. He’s obviously an ass.
Jade Helm just looks like a very large SERE exersize for SOCOM; unusually large, but not a direct prelude to martial law. I do think its an inevitability at some point, and I think we’re being desensitized to a martial presence. I don’t jump on conspiracy bandwagon, but I don’t dismiss them out of turn, either. Lots of things that were theories up until recently have proven to be facts, and there’s some unusual stuff going on lately that warrant keeping your ear to the ground, at least. Hope for the best, but brace for the worst. Call me crazy. I can definitely sympathize with people who don’t trust the government, or Obama. I trust neither, and I don’t for a minute think obama has America’s best interests in mind. He certainly could give a rat’s ass for the average peasant. Too much evidence to the contrary for me.
With all due respect, you’re crazy. There are too many sinister ways to gain power in the US pseudo-legitimately that could work…trying to take over Texas, of all places, by force? Nobody’s that stupid. The last state I’d try that with.
I think you mis-read my post. I said that that wasn’t what I thought was going on. What I AM saying is that I think, at some point, we will have some sort of martial law or at least an overt police state. My primary concern is scenarios ranging from an economic collapse, to Iran (or some other country run by the death cult) detonating an EMP. Tensions are definitely running high all over the world.
My money would be on the economic meltdown.
We do seem to be following the Fatal Sequence.
Okay, I yield. My belief is that Todd is an idiot, but, as you point out, that does not preclude being an Ethics Hero once, even if by accident. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. And, for the record, the folks in Bastrop who believe this is a prelude to a Federal takeover are Looney-tunes. The Southwest has been a play-ground for the military for years, simply because so much of it is empty and open. So far, we’re still electing people (sometimes like Abbott) in free elections.
Well, he was clearly the best choice in that race, since the alternative was the ridiculous Wendy Davis.
There’s that. Abbott actually SOUNDED OK, when he was running. And he had a reasonable record in the AG’s office. I gotta admit, I never saw this one coming. Also for the record, the folks in Bastrop, some years back, thought that a National Guard equipment yard was a secret FEMA prison camp, for dissidents when the Second Revolution came about. You can’t make this stuff up.
This has to be one of the more curious EthicsAlarms columns in some time.
On the face of it, Jack’s to the “left” of 80% of the commenters here (Chase being the lone exception). Far to the left, it would appear.
But it also strikes me as a great example of how, when you get too far out to the left or right, those labels begin to lose their validity. The governor of a major state is indeed pandering to idiots – that’s being said out loud by an 18-year GOP legislator in a conservative state. If anyone has a right to cry wingnut, it’s someone like him.
“Left” and “right” aren’t useful when you’ve got basic disrespect of institutions, bizarre conspiracy theories, and reckless threats of turning state militias against the feds.
Is there rampant suspicion of the Feds, particularly out west? Yes, and it’s a legitimate cause for concern. But the concern is not about taking fevered visions seriously – it’s about doing something regarding the prevalence of fevered visions. In that regard, it’s on a par with taking social legislation advice from looters in Baltimore.
The fact that wack jobs exist on the fringes of the right and left is pretty scary; I think you’re quite right to call them out as you see them, on each fringe.
Some rants just leave me wondering just what was in their breakfast cereal. Millennium fears I kinda hoped would have settled a bit by now. The future is never as bad as we feared or as good as we hoped, and that counterbalancing is what the conspiracy people like to forget.
Who are the ranting “conspiracy people” on this post?
Abbott and the 25k who think there’s a federal/national conspiracy for invading Texas and is likely enough to start grandstanding and run in circles like chicken little. That many is even scarier than the spokesman.
I think it’s possible that, as mentioned above, he did that to get ahead of anyone thinking of engaging the govt.
Once a week on Monday mornings Alan Weiss puts out a newsletter. Weiss is an extremely successful author and consultant (Million Dollar Consulting, The Consulting Bible) whose opinions are decidedly Republican, pro-capitalism, and hard-edged. I don’t always agree with him, but he’s smart as a whip and very insightful.
I thought his note of today was worth quoting here:
“Conspiracy theories are based on the blind belief that a covert yet powerful plan is in place to cause harm. They usually fly against fact, scientific method, rationality, and consensus opinion. For example, one claim is that the government has been covering up aliens that crash landed in the US 60 years ago, yet the government can’t even keep its own data secret from hackers! Some people want to believe that we never landed on the moon, that 9/11 was the work of the US government, that the Holocaust never happened.
Now, some people in Texas believe that announced Army amphibious exercises are an excuse to take over the government of Texas. I find almost all conspiracy advocates are paranoid, refusing to believe in accidents, others’ deliberate actions, or their own lack of information and rationality. Such irrational belief can’t be “disproven” in the minds of those who want to believe. The Loch Ness Monster is funny, but telling your kids that the federal government is going to invade the state borders on child abuse.”
I believe none of the above that you listed, but given how many theories are out there, and that some are quite a bit more grounded, in terms of likelihood or potential usefulness, is it any wiser to just summarily dismiss all as the products of overactive imaginations or paranoia? If you wanted to, for example, set up an all-encompassing data collection point in, let’s just say Utah, and store every piece of electronic data to peruse at your leisure, wouldn’t it be useful to propagate a lot of really crazy stuff as a smokescreen? Maybe make the “conspiracy theory” part of it, coupled with the inevitable whack-jobs that are sure to discredit everything, the common theme, so that not only can you hide in plain sight, but when you’re discovered, the sheeple will continue to categorize all “theories” equally, no matter how much more plausible some are than others? It’s not as if that’s a common propaganda tool or anything. Anybody that believed in the “fusion center” theory was mocked. When it turned out to be true, it seems few people stopped and thought “I wonder if there’s any other “theories” out there that might hold some water?”, and continued to mock, like dumb beasts. There are other examples. At the same time, I pity people who spend an inordinate amount of time or energy sweating this stuff. Life is going by quickly, and if even half of all theories turned out to be true, preserving your life is pointless if you’re miserable, and not attending to the things that really matter.
One reason that I’m not entirely dismissive, but skeptical of conspiracy theories that involve large-scale use of government force, is that I’ve seen too many epic small-scale government clusterfucks to believe they’d even THINK of just deciding to impose martial law one day. When that day comes (and come it probably will, hopefully not in my kids’ lifetimes), it will be because the people are BEGGING for it. On that Godforsaken day, the troops will be welcomed with open arms, and hailed as liberators. I also don’t think it will be as most people imagine, with the sound of marching in the streets, kicking in doors, hauling people off en-masse to some unknown destination. It will have a friendlier face. Another thing worth considering is that the executive has amassed quite a bit of ’emergency’ power in recent decades, especially since 9/11,and the circumstances under which they may be used are pretty vaguely defined.
Going to work on my bunker for a bit. Se y’all later.
Sorry, Jack. I know there are a lot of crazies in Texas, and a lot of rubes/illerates as well. But frankly, this “exercise” should be of some concern. First, why through all these states? Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, and Colorado. With the exception of California and Boulder/Denver in Colorado, these are basically conservative states, aren’t they? Why pick them? Why not New York, Massachusetts, Maine, Vermont, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania? All basically liberal, Democratic states. Guess the terrain is just better in the southwest, right? Maybe so. But I wouldn’t like the prospect of the military traipsing through Virginia at their pleasure for “training.”
People don’t trust Obama — Obamacare, the IRS, the NSA, etc., etc. — because of his ideology and his complete failure in the much-vaunted “transparency” arena. And though one commenter said that our own military wouldn’t fire on its own co-citizens, Obama is commander-in-chief. In Texas they’re talking frantically about a political take-over, which I don’t buy. But others — outside of Texas — are also talking about the major, major, major stock market crash that’s coming (and I can see that, with the US printing billions of dollar bills each day with nothing to support it, with the US dollar losing its place as the primary safe currency in the world, with major brokers starting to buy foreign currency instead of US stocks), and what might happen if we suddenly have a 1929 type crash… and the imposition of martial law, the closing of banks, etc. could be part of it.
Frankly, it goes well beyond the Obama administration. The Tuskeegee syphilis experiments on black men (major scandal) was government funded; the CIA “testing” LSD and other psychotropic drugs on unsuspecting citizens (even Clinton apologized for that), doesn’t make me trust any of the Feds too much. Mostly they are reigned in. Good. But when suddenly a mass “training exercise” is announced on U.S. soil, the other horrors perpetrated by the Feds in the past — on its own citizens — could give one pause. Forget the Texas nuts… this is a new, very big, and very odd government “exercise.” And considering the government’s history of “testing” and “exercises” why should anyone take those reassuring us at their word?
I have great respect for the military, and for all those who choose to serve their country through that avenue. I also trust the military. But even they may not know what they’re training for. Anyone who understands chain of command, decisions made by the Allies in WWII, and the need for secrecy in time of war (or any other situation requiring action by the military) would have to at least think about the highest echelons of government and what its true purpose is here.
I think you’re missing the bigger issue and picking on the nuts and illiterates who have been most vocal about it.
Elizabeth, you undercut the anti-conspiracy theory with some of your own.
1. How is it that you are so much smarter about the “major major major stock market crash that’s coming” than all the Wall Street short sharpies, who don’t appear to be shorting the market in any major way?
2. As far as “US printing billions of dollar bills each day with nothing to support it,” can you point to any significant country in the world that prints currency with “something to support it?” That’s pretty much how national currencies work, post mid-20th century.
3. Can you explain why “the US dollar losing its place as the primary safe currency in the world” when at the same time the US dollar is at an all time high against major currencies? What definition of “high” and “low” and “primary” are you using?
When you start proposing that you and a few other unnamed select people have insights that somehow evade global equities traders and global currency markets, then you’re sounding an awful lot like just another conspiracy apologist.
IRT point #1, as I recall, virtually none of the sharp Wall Street types saw the 2007/2008 meltdown coming. (At the very least, the people whose job it is to tell us what the Wall Street sharpies are thinking did a terrible job of conveying it.)
Many of the people who are now predicting another, worse meltdown predicted the last one. I hope they’re wrong and things will be okay forever, but if they say they’re seeing the same conditions building up again, then I’m inclined to believe them.
“Many of the people who are now predicting another, worse meltdown predicted the last one.”
And who would that be? Steve Eisman? Meredith Whitman? They both got it right in the last crash. What are they doing now…hmm….
From an article of this past September: “Eisman’s track record at Emrys. Investors who were expecting Eisman to repeat the stellar track record he had at FrontPoint must have been bitterly disappointed. In stark contrast to the 81 percent return he achieved at FrontPoint in 2007, Emrys badly underperformed broad market indexes in 2012, returning only 2.6 percent according to a FINalternatives article. In 2013, Emrys returned 10.8 percent, again lagging the broader markets. The fund was in negative territory this year.
And Ms. Whitney? From a few months ago, see
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-01-12/how-meredith-whitney-s-american-revival-sputtered-in-debut-year
Barry Ritholz is someone I’d listen to, and to your point, he’s being cautious, but also hedging his bets.
But I’m curious: who is it that got it right last time that’s calling it again now?
I’m going to disregard your two strawmen. Their current struggles don’t say anything about the past, current, or future health of the economy.
The people I’m aware of are listed on this website: http://www.economicpredictions.org/who-predicted-the-financial-crisis.htm The same three who verifiably did predict the crash aren’t sanguine about our chances of avoiding another one, since the global financial system is probably even more brittle now than it was in 2007.
The two people I read regularly are David Stockman and Robert Gore; they both see the same type of conditions building up again (and there are more, but this is only an occasional foray for me, not an area of expertise or deep reading, so I don’t have names right at hand).
Seems like more than a few economists are predicting this, except those with a vested interest in saying the opposite.
Buy gold, or pistol powder or .22 lr. Rarer than hens’ teeth. People are selling $22 1-lb cans for 4-6x that, and getting it. The Obama effect. Unscrupulous to do at this point, but after a crash, it could feed your family.
You’re kidding, right? Why the Western states and not the northeast? Seriously? Especially since we’re talking about desert combat? Hey, why are naval exercises always in oceans? What are they trying to hide? Why not in, say, Lake Tahoe?
“War Of The Rowboats?”
Alaska for its lower population density and open land is too far away and lacks roads for a practice.
While I’m not suspicious of the decision to use these states, I do agree that things like a derivatives bubble that is 8 times the GDP of the entire planet, and the fact that so many countries are maneuvering out from under the IMF and the dollar, are cause for concern. If a crash like 1929 or worse happened to present-day America, we would be thoroughly screwed. At least in 1929, people knew how to get along without modern conveniences, and how to pool resources and talent. I also am skeptical of the “troops would never engage our citizens”. True, some wouldn’t, but lots would. Katrina, anyone? If they could violate the Bill of Rights at a moment’s notice in a small-scale situation, it wouldn’t be a huge broach to pull triggers. Something that me and other old-timers I know find disturbing is a marked difference between how we were when we were in, and the new breed. Hard to find words to describe it, but you get the sense that there’s more potential for blind allegiance and unquestioning obedience.
My take is in line with this piece on Slate. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/05/jade_helm_conspiracy_theories_they_re_nutty_but_they_ve_also_got_a_bit_of.html
Same here.
Yes. Here’s an excerpt from the article’s conclusion:
Finally, while this particular conspiracy theory is very stupid, most of the people scoffing at its adherents would likely admit that, under the Obama administration, federal security forces have engaged in plenty of unrighteous activity. You shouldn’t trust the Pentagon to respect Americans’ civil liberties. The federal government does keep secrets from its citizens, and if it finds the antics of the lunatic fringe tiresome, well, it should try being more transparent and direct in its governance, and perhaps refrain from the sorts of real-life rights violations that lend credence to the more outlandish theories.
Pretty well said, I think.
Second.