What Is The Federal Government Doing About Our Common Defense

A National Guard unit retreated from confronting an armed probe of our territory by an unknown group as per orders from the federal government. The unknown group then returned to Mexico. There are suspicions that this unknown group is related to drugs though no real evidence seems to exist to back that suspicion up.

This article claims that patrolling the border has made it more difficult to get drugs into the United States. This claim sound very interesting since supposedly we are spending millions and maybe billions to fight the war on drugs and no one seemed to have though of toughening the border before this.

National Guard Sgt. Edward Balaban claims the unit does not know how many individuals were involved because it was dark. This claim opens up a new can of worms since you would think a unit that was intended to observe illegal crossings would have the needed equipment to observe those crossings even in the dark.

The question I have now is why does the federal government spent so much money on the war on drugs while leaving such an obvious hole in our defense as the border and are our military and law enforcement personal stationed there equipped to handle the mission they are assigned.

In other news a California National Guard helicopter crashes injuring several individuals. The cause of the accident are still under investigation but considering that the helicopter was moving personal to secure a remote area and the prior event I question if maybe enemy action was the cause. My suspicions do not have enough support to be anything else but a weak maybe.

Two Mexican states are proposing giving GPS trackers to those individuals attempting to invade the United States but due to treaty obligation they have to get the consent of the U.S. Since giving the trackers to those individuals would be an act of war I can see the sense of the treaty in question. The Mexican states say that giving the trackers to those invaders is a human rights issue but the invader are proposing to violate the rights of the people of the United States to have secure border. These invaders are making a choice to risk their life in order to violate the rights of others and the government of Mexico or United States should not condone or encourage such behavior.

Source 1 is about National Guard retreating from armed group.

Source 2 is about National Guard helicopter crash.

Source 3 is about Mexican states proposing to give GPS trackers to those intending to invade the United States.

Fraud In The Marketplace

Buyer beware seems to be the message of the week as two articles come out about products that are either advertised to be more effective than they are or don’t meet performance standards.

The Federal Trade Commission is the federal government that handles consumer products. It is a unconstitutional department of the federal government since the U.S. Constitution limit’s the power of the federal government to just regulating “commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;”. It is obvious from this the federal government was not intended to regulate commerce within a state since if they were the clause would have been “to regulate commerce” without all the added description of jurisdiction. There is no reason that state governments could not do the job as good or better than the federal government.

Never the less the FTC fined companies 25 million that made exaggerated claims of the effectiveness of their diet pills in their advertising. The products will remain on the shelf but the exaggerated claims are to stop. The companies made 160 million dollars on those products last year and are expected to return the fines to the customers who brought the products. I have heard of a television manufacturer who paid off a lawsuit by giving a coupon for money off the next purchase of one of their televisions to the claimants and I wonder if this when end up similarly.

Consumer reports tested twelve car seats to the standard crash tests required of cars and nine of them failed and one of the remaining ones could not be fitted into several cars they tried. The car companies called foul since the car seats were mandated to be tested at lower speeds as the legislature does not have the same standards for both. The only two seats that passed all the tests were the Baby Trend Flex-Loc and the Graco SnugRide with EPS.

Source 1 is about false diet pill advertising.

Source 2 is about car seats failing automobile crash test standards.

Massachusetts Legislators Reluctantly Vote To Let The People Decide

Sixty one of the Massachusetts legislation voted to advance the amendment to place a ban on homosexual marriage within the state of Massachusetts. This concerned the gay marriage supporters they asked for a recess then returned and voted 117-75 to reconsider the vote. In response Democratic state Rep. Philip Travis a gay marriage opponent scolded them for neglecting their “constitutional duties”.

The governor elect stated that the amendment was being used to "consider reinserting discrimination into the constitution.". I have no idea what discrimination he believed was previously removed from the Massachusetts state constitution but his argument is foolish since the privileges accounted to marriage come through the legislation and not through the state constitution even if this proposed amendment is passed.

In addition privileges for one thing or another are excepted in our society as we are not a socialistic society that seeks complete equality in everything. Minors for instance do not have the privilege to vote or to drink alcohol. Individuals who are blind do not have the privilege of driving. Should these “discriminatory” practices be done away with then laws intended to encourage behavior that is beneficial to our society would also be done away with. That is a foolish idea and I do not know what the people of Massachusetts were thinking when they when they chose to elect Deval Patrick for governor.

There was an exchange between two individuals on opposite side about who was acting Christians. The bottom line is that homosexual behavior is self destructive behavior and so a Christian supporting it would violate the command love your neighbor as yourself. On the other hand a Christian might have a noble reason for choosing to tolerate its existence though I can not think of it. True Patriots who cleave to the U.S. Declaration of Independence would oppose it because it encourages the violation of the inalienable right to life and health without a noble cause.

Source 1 is yahoo news article about legislation voting on gay marriage ban.

Source 2 is a second news article about Massachusetts state legislators voting to forward amendment process.