Posted to Facebook —
Landmines on the border, to stop immigrants?
Here he attempts to clarify this a bit — Mullins clarifies land mines comment
Now he said in the KOB interview that he's not advocating this himself, but was suggested by someone he met on the campaign trail.
Still, if you go to the archived audio clip, it does sound at first as though Mullins himself is advocating this very sort of thing —
Now, later on in that clip, he does say that he doesn't actually want to use land mines, and that the National Labs can cook up another low-tech, low-cost means to secure the border, but come on now, how many millions will they spend on developing it?
Am I supposed to believe that some future Administration won't fall back upon the land-mine idea as just the sort of low-cost, low-tech solution? After all, back in 1996, we saw an 18-year-old boy (Esequiel Hernandez) who was herding goats, shot dead by a Marine Corps counter-drug patrol because of the .22-LR rifle that he carried. Between that, the whitewash and coverup investigation of the Waco Massacres of 28 February and 19 April 1993, and plenty of other incidents along those lines, why should anyone trust a Republican of the Lincoln-Roosevelt mold?
We saw just how well the Republican-majority U.S. House members exercised their oversight duties in 1998 looking into the Waco debacle, didn't we? They didn't dig too deeply simply because they knew that they would need the Democrats to return the favor and go easy on their Administrations' . . . indiscretions of using federal power. We saw some of those indiscretions from 2001 through 2009, first at Rainbow Farm, then Afghanistan, then Iraq, the USA-PATRIOT Act of 2001, etc., etc.
What really stymies me is that the clown clique behind Mullins [1] keeps pushing the idea that things will improve "when our people take the reins of power."
The fact remains that they had those reins of power in the Congress from 1995 until 2007, and in the White House from 2001 until 2009. How much did they actually shrink the reach and intrusiveness of Washington DC? How much did they lessen the costs of Washington DC upon us?
NOTES
bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack
Way to go, Tom Mullins!
GOP House Candidate Tom Mullins: Consider Land Mines on Border with Mexico But NOT Canada (Audio)
Landmines on the border, to stop immigrants?
Here he attempts to clarify this a bit — Mullins clarifies land mines comment
Now he said in the KOB interview that he's not advocating this himself, but was suggested by someone he met on the campaign trail.
Still, if you go to the archived audio clip, it does sound at first as though Mullins himself is advocating this very sort of thing —
I think well they need to enforce the law. I actually have a couple of ideas and I received these ideas. We talk about a border fence, and really what we get down to is, it's very difficult to have a fence and have that work. But we have some low-cost, low-tech solutions, and I know it sounds crazy, but we used to have land mines. I know it sounds like a crazy thing, but if we wanted to stop, if we have an attack on the United States, if we have a nuclear attack and we find that they carried the nuclear weapon and the people that harmed us came across the border and we say we have got to secure the border, we could put land mines along the border. I know it sounds crazy, we could put up signs in 23 different languages if necessary . . . .
Now, later on in that clip, he does say that he doesn't actually want to use land mines, and that the National Labs can cook up another low-tech, low-cost means to secure the border, but come on now, how many millions will they spend on developing it?
Am I supposed to believe that some future Administration won't fall back upon the land-mine idea as just the sort of low-cost, low-tech solution? After all, back in 1996, we saw an 18-year-old boy (Esequiel Hernandez) who was herding goats, shot dead by a Marine Corps counter-drug patrol because of the .22-LR rifle that he carried. Between that, the whitewash and coverup investigation of the Waco Massacres of 28 February and 19 April 1993, and plenty of other incidents along those lines, why should anyone trust a Republican of the Lincoln-Roosevelt mold?
We saw just how well the Republican-majority U.S. House members exercised their oversight duties in 1998 looking into the Waco debacle, didn't we? They didn't dig too deeply simply because they knew that they would need the Democrats to return the favor and go easy on their Administrations' . . . indiscretions of using federal power. We saw some of those indiscretions from 2001 through 2009, first at Rainbow Farm, then Afghanistan, then Iraq, the USA-PATRIOT Act of 2001, etc., etc.
What really stymies me is that the clown clique behind Mullins [1] keeps pushing the idea that things will improve "when our people take the reins of power."
The fact remains that they had those reins of power in the Congress from 1995 until 2007, and in the White House from 2001 until 2009. How much did they actually shrink the reach and intrusiveness of Washington DC? How much did they lessen the costs of Washington DC upon us?
NOTES
- I know that Mullins says that he's not part of the GOP Machine, but is the gear in your wind-up alarm clock cognizant of the other gears in the clock, and the other parts that make the hands go around, the alarm go off, and such?
- Reposted —
- Personal blogs — Blogspot / Myspace / New Mexico Liberty / Tumblr / Wordpress
No comments:
Post a Comment