General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI wonder if the Jellyspines in the White House are going to send in Federal troops to Ferguson?
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)liberal N proud
(60,347 posts)oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)We start locally.
villager
(26,001 posts)n/t
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)We can't just wait for everyone to do nothing.
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)and email Jay Nixon. I did. We can start something. We each can do something.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)was prayers and reflection.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)which way the wind drifts.
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,869 posts)...
Octafish
(55,745 posts)It's been awfully friendly ever since to New Dixie.
KG
(28,753 posts)TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)Posse Comitatus or some shit like that.
That would give the republicants grounds to impeach President Obama.
villager
(26,001 posts)TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)Looks like you need to hop in the time machine and retake your high school civics class...
villager
(26,001 posts)Looks like you need to hop back online and re-download some new talking points!
TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)A talking point - using federal troops (Army, Marines) to tamp down US CIVIL unrest would give these repukes the impeachable offense they need yo go after President O.
Not to mention the fact that such an action would incite every gun nut in the country to head out to St Louis to fight the gubment!
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)Eisenhower didn't send troops in immediately. It was a full three weeks before he OVERRODE the authority of the STATE (You know, the 10th Amendment?) and usurped control of the guard from the governor. In doing so he triggered a constitutional crisis of state vs. federal authority. It was a controversial decision that Eisenhower took only after extensive negotiations with the governor who refused to abide by Brown v. Board of Education.
The President is encumbered by the constitution, not aristarches who don't know the first thing about the distribution of powers in the country they live in. Give it time. If the governor doesn't get a hold of the situation, he may end up sending in the guard. Then you can complain about how he violated the constitution and further militarized America.
onenote
(42,782 posts)Last edited Fri Aug 15, 2014, 09:40 PM - Edit history (1)
Why, indeed!
mythology
(9,527 posts)Especially since it doesn't actually support their claim in that it wasn't federal troops.
JI7
(89,279 posts)whistler162
(11,155 posts)what's the difference!
Love the 22 minute sitcom solutions from the sofa brigade!
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)The national guard and local cops sure as hell aren't going to be taking action against each other...So the local populace now ends up eating twice as much tear gas and tasers...
If you're really serious, I'm not sure you've thought this through...
villager
(26,001 posts)...on the part of this White House. Some sense that things can, finally, even be too much for the center/right crowd in the Oval Office.
Even if Obama accelerates the FBI investigation, tells the public tomorrow he's been on the phone to the Governor and will get the National Guard in there...
No one expects the Guard to "take action" against police, but perhaps to act as "cooling rods" for this bunch of over-armed bullying sociopaths.
No more of this diffident "I can't be bothered" approach from this White House...
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)and saw on the news that the National Guard was coming to town to "calm" the situation, I'd know damn well it's a euphemism for "Crush the unrest ASAP and restore order at all costs"...And we all know what's going to happen when the first person starts protesting a NG presence in their neighborhood...
And then I'm wondering why a U.S. president who looks like me would ever do such a thing to his own people, since given his background, he must know how we would perceive this; even if his heart was 100% in the right place and he was just trying to "do something"...
I get what you're saying, but you have given ZERO thought on how this looks from the perspective of the black community...If your post was just a piss take and a sideswipe at what you view as inaction from the WH, then fine...If you're serious in thinking the national guard would be some kind of check on police abuses, then god help you...And unless you're DUing from a cloud of tear gas, or are en route to St. Louis, I'd be careful about throwing the "jellyspines" label around, personally...
As an aside, I'm pleasantly surprised to see a near-unanimous DU opinion on the tragic murder of Michael Brown; especially since the forum as a whole was running 60/40 over Trayvon Martin just over a year ago...
villager
(26,001 posts)...and more importantly, Missouri's highway patrol.
They, as it turns out, are the cooling rods.
And I'm glad for that.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)Last edited Thu Aug 14, 2014, 09:37 AM - Edit history (1)
When has a military force ever acted as a "cooling rod"? I don't recall that argument being used for recent events in Iraq or Syria. In fact, there is pretty unanimous view that the military only escalates a conflict.
villager
(26,001 posts)...to diffuse a situation barreling toward atrocity.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)Nor are they military forces.
villager
(26,001 posts)Sometimes stuff like this happens:
http://www.army.mil/article/45029/The_Army_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina/
I'm glad this situation didn't become a version of that.
doxydad
(1,363 posts)Obama, i.e. Federal area...should not have to get involved? RIGHT? As far as 'jellyspines'...I'm saying that was a poor choice of words. Yep. it was.
villager
(26,001 posts)Ultimately
doxydad
(1,363 posts)If we had the feds doing everything...every time a tragedy like this occurs, it would truly be a POLICE STATE. Nobody wants that. Don't send in a missile when a slingshot will do. I agree that this tragedy has caused a LOT of problems, and the Ferguson police has enough weaponry there to be a literal army...but the LAST thing that you would want is to get the Feds involved in this. It's a Missouri problem, and it will probably die down in the next week.
Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)BainsBane
(53,093 posts)Many here imagine an imperial Presidency where one person and one person only is responsible for all problems in the US and around the world. It saves having to actually know civics.
doxydad
(1,363 posts)Smartest kid in the class today!
villager
(26,001 posts)and we've had many such moments -- mostly unfulfilled -- in the last six years, waiting for this Executive to, well, lead.
Today we got some okay statements, on that front.
Surprisingly though, the outside intervention provided by the Governor, and Highway Patrol, seem to be changing the tenor of the situation, which is good.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)Not the President's. Again, the 10th Amendment.
villager
(26,001 posts)Obviously the town is under the governor's authority, at least initially in these circumstances. And I'm glad this didn't become a "Katrina" of political violence, in terms of spiraling out of control (and thus, getting us back to the National Guard aspects).
And Gov. Nixon, surprisingly, did the right thing. So that's good.
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)There is only an insult against Obama because you couldn't wait a day for him to work with the governor, which is the appropriate constitutional action.
Earlier you mentioned Little Rock, if I'm not mistaken. That was under Eisenhower, and I posted a link as to how that transpired. It took more than three weeks for him to send in the guard.
villager
(26,001 posts)And yes, there was a timeline.
I was feeling what John Lewis must've been feeling, when I posted:
http://america.aljazeera.com/blogs/scrutineer/2014/8/14/rep-john-lewis-civilrightsiconcallsfornationalguardinferguson.html
My own feeling is right now is that President Obama should use the authority of his office to declare martial law, federalize the Missouri National Guard to protect people as they protest," Lewis said.
I am glad to see the situation starting to work itself out, incrementally, otherwise.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)in the back of the closet.
Enrique
(27,461 posts)he tends to do things that make some sense. Having the FBI involved makes sense to me.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
ColesCountyDem
(6,943 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Generic Other
(28,979 posts)ms liberty
(8,609 posts)MineralMan
(146,338 posts)but this is not a situation where "Federal troops" are appropriate. The FBI, yes, but what "Federal troops" do you have in mind?
The Governor, however, could call in the National Guard. The result of that, however, would not be what you hoped for, I'm sure.
doxydad
(1,363 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)And my OP spoke to that, and to that JFK moment... of intervening, at an earlier point in history.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)FSogol
(45,555 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)But thanks for the chuckles, villager.
JI7
(89,279 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)Though I will acknowledge a graphic from a larger JFK discussion (on when he Federalized troops) was an Eisenhower front page (from Little Rock)
I guess a bigger mix-up is thinking that such things hadn't happened?
Nonetheless, glad indeed it's working out -- kinda, so far, but we'll see -- otherwise...
akbacchus_BC
(5,704 posts)Please enlighten me!
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)The state highway patrol in Missouri has taken over and it appears to be doing a good job. What would be the point of sending in un-asked for Federal troops?
Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)akbacchus_BC
(5,704 posts)Just could not help myself to welcome you back!
villager
(26,001 posts)All the comforts of home.
(Though I worry about your powers of observation, since I've been posting here steadily?)
akbacchus_BC
(5,704 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)And I'm glad that's what they got today
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)It's a good thing that folks other than "send in troops" types aren't calling the shots.
villager
(26,001 posts)And did it
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)has a deep understanding of people like you so his responses have to be carefully measured. The rest of us feel as though it is such a shame he has to suffer fools like you.
MrScorpio
(73,631 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)I would think that Obama would do the same if the situation required it.
betsuni
(25,690 posts)trumad
(41,692 posts)By the way...looks like it worked out fine when they removed the soldier wanna be' s and put in State Troopers.
So the idea to put the NG in would have been a stupid idea.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)control? From what I have read the Highway Patrol are doing a good job.
bobduca
(1,763 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)My own feeling is right now is that President Obama should use the authority of his office to declare martial law, federalize the Missouri National Guard to protect people as they protest," Lewis said.
I guess that's what I meant with the OP -- the same thing Lewis got around to saying. I was admit, "het up" when I posted, but I meant pretty much... this. So I'm not in such bad company.
Lewis refers to JFK during the Civil Rights era, Federalizing the Guard as well.
Luckily, and surprisingly, the situation seems to be working itself out -- the trial-in-absentia of the dead boy, by the Ferguson police, notwithstanding.