Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt and Newsmax host Carl Higbie mused Thursday about a potential “force-on-force” conflict between Texas and the Biden Administration after the Supreme Court ruled against the state’s Republican governor by declaring that federal agents can remove razor wire laid along the border with Mexico.
Higbie began by telling Stitt that “there’s rumblings that Joe Biden should or may actually federalize the National Guard—take that power away from Greg Abbott.”
…
Stitt called the situation, which has so far seen several migrant deaths,“very weird”—while adding that clash is currently a “powder keg of tension.”
“We certainly stand with Texas on the right to defend themselves,” he said. “But Biden is going to be in a tough situation. So in other words, he’s going to try to federalize these troops—in other words, put them on federal orders. And so now, their allegiance technically goes to the president of the United States instead of the governor.”
The dispute between Texas and the federal government has been compared to the situation that led President Dwight Eisenhower to federalize the Arkansas National Guard—part of his bid to allow Black students to attend a Little Rock public high school against the wishes of the then-segregationist governor.
I disagree. The people funding the party would lose too much money if there were a civil war. Well, not the military industrial complex, but they’re not the only ones with their fingers in the pie. No one is buying the latest doodad if they’re fighting for their life.
They need to be mad enough to keep them rage watching, but not mad enough to try shooting their neighbors all at once.
I think this is a good point. Stirring up the base to the idea of a civil war is very profitable to religion leaders. Actually conducting said war is not.
Hard disagree.
Arms manufacturers would be high level targets in any version of a civil war, not just by any sect of us, but foreign subversive agents would be keen to initiate as well. The MI complex has just about everything to lose.
And 6our other point, the rich have too much to lose, again HARD HARD Disagree. Fascism is rising…who do you think is paying for it?
Once you have more money than you can ever spend the only thing left to buy is power. They’ve captured almost every means of production. They control a disproportionate amount of our foreign policy. Apple activity threatens economic warfare whenever any talk of regulation comes up. WHY ELSE would a company hold onto a TRILLION dollars? (To threaten security of a currency, that’s why). The Billionaires are a national security threat. And they almost have the final nail, total, complete information control. They’re trying to regulate the internet, with their multiple “think of the children” campaigns. Their wet dream is us having to scan our license to log in, then everything we do is tracked, every question asked, every dissent in a forum met moments later with a real life knock on the door. Thought police.
Monopolies are the logical conclusion of capitalism. Once wealth is attained, all effort is spent securing that wealth. They’ll sacrifice any and all of us. They chair multinational companies, it’s naive to think they have any kind of national patriotism (unless it’s them that’s in charge). They’re a tumor to our species.
Rome survived for almost 2000 years and they had 5 benevolent dictators. That’s one every 400 years. We don’t have time to spare like that. I don’t think authoritarianism is the answer, and for those who do, I question your rational capabilities.
I’d like to remind everyone that the protagonists in 1984, fahrenheit, brave new world…they don’t live thru the story. And the machines they’re raging against keep on keeping on. Our job is to end the hate BEFORE it starts building bases.