OBAMA ESTABLISHES BASIS FOR MARTIAL LAW IN THE U.S. VIA "BI-PARTISAN" PANEL OF TEN GOVERNORS CHOSEN BY THE WHITE HOUSE
From some guy named Pastorius over at the Astute Bloggers:
What the hell is going on here?
From WhiteHouse.gov:
So, if this was required by an Act established in 2008, that means President Bush signed it into law.Obama Signs Executive Order Establishing Council of Governors
Executive Order will Strengthen Further Partnership Between the Federal and State and Local Governments to Better Protect Our Nation
The President today signed an Executive Order (attached) establishing a Council of Governors to strengthen further the partnership between the Federal Government and State Governments to protect our Nation against all types of hazards. When appointed, the Council will be reviewing such matters as involving the National Guard of the various States; homeland defense; civil support; synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities in the United States; and other matters of mutual interest pertaining to National Guard, homeland defense, and civil support activities.
The bipartisan Council will be composed of ten State Governors who will be selected by the President to serve two year terms. In selecting the Governors to the Council, the White House will solicit input from Governors and Governors’ associations. Once chosen, the Council will have no more than five members from the same party and represent the Nation as a whole.
Federal members of the Council include the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, the Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs, the U.S. Northern Command Commander, the Commandant of the Coast Guard, and the Chief of the National Guard Bureau. The Secretary of Defense will designate an Executive Director for the Council.
The Council of Governors will provide an invaluable Senior Administration forum for exchanging views with State and local officials on strengthening our National resilience and the homeland defense and civil support challenges facing our Nation today and in the future.
The formation of the Council of Governors was required by the Fiscal Year 2008 National Defense Authorization Act which stated, “The President shall establish a bipartisan Council of Governors to advise the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the White House Homeland Security Council on matters related to the National Guard and civil support missions.” (NDAA FY2008, Sec 1822)
I understand that the NSA, FBI, and the CIA are legitimately concerned that, were there to be a nuclear, chemical, or particuarly, biological attack on the United States, security issues may involve multiple states at once, and perhaps it might be better to handle such issues at the Federal level.
However, the question here is, why does the White House get to choose this panel of Governors? How could it possibly be truly "Bi-Partisan" if the White House is picking the members?"
10 comments:
Whenever I hear the word 'Bi-Partisan' I immediately know that they're talking about a leftist partisan position!
I mean it's held true in every case for about the last two years at least if not more. It's a fail proof code word at this point. How any sane conscience person would believe otherwise baffles me.
The Order actually reads "no more than five shall be of the same political party."
The L.A. Times ran a bit on this the day after it was signed.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/01/barack-obama-council-of-governors.html
The brown shirts have begun!
Cal
MR,
Yes, but Obama picks them, and there are an awful lot of RINO's out there. For instance, our governor here in California. You think he's a Republican?
Personally, I think Ahhnold is suffering from way too much 'roid withdrawal and, living in the State he does, with the amount of exhaled weed in the air, is probably experiencing on helluva contact high leading to all this peace love and liberalness we've seen from him.
I think this law has good intentions, but I think it is dangerous in the hands of Obama.
That's my opinion. I don't agree that "they can never agree on anything."
From what I can tell, Obama gets to make the decisions under the advisement of the Panel of "Bi-Partisan" Governors PICKED BY HIM.
Am I reading that wrong?
No, you're reading that right. In and of itself this is not a bad idea but, as I said in my email, it needs to be watched very carefully, just like everything this fool does.
As for "they can never agree on anything." what I said was "What are the odds they'll agree on anything? (c'mon, this is the American Federal Government we're talking about)." Bit of sarcasm there but a bit of truth, too, when you think about how this country is now divided on ideological lines I guess.
It sounds like these characters will advise SecDef or DoHS etc who will then advise POS POTUS. Who'll make a decision after a few rounds of golf. . .
I have no doubt that BHO will use this if he can. And his use of it will not be for the good of America.
AOW,
Thus far, it seems it is ncver wise to err on the side of giving Obama the benefit of the doubt.
Van Jones as a Czar is case in point #1.
MR,
What are the odds they will agree on anything?
It seems to me it doesn't matter if they agree. As I wrote before, Obama takes all the advice and then does what HE wants to do.
Right?
Post a Comment