Joe Biden vs. U.S. Border Patrol Council, Greg Abbott and the Texas National Guard
The tweet continues, saying "TX NG members realize that rank-and-file BP agents have their orders as well. Lawful orders, no matter how unpopular or distasteful amongst rank-and-file agents, must be followed. Unlawful orders (as determined by competent legal counsel and not what some outhouse lawyer behind a keyboard says) will not be followed."
Then the NBPC dropped the hammer:
Rank-and-file BP agents appreciate and respect what TX has been doing to defend their state in the midst of this catastrophe that the Biden Admin has unleashed on America.Here's the NBPC tweet:We want to be perfectly clear, there is no fight between rank-and-file BP agents and the TX NG, Gov. Abott, or TX DPS. It may make flashy headlines, but it simply isn't true.
CBS provides insight into the situation in this report: Apparently, Border Patrol agents don't like Biden's border security policies. That's proof that they're sane. Border Patrol agents live in the same towns and attend the same churches as Texas National Guardsmen and Texas DPS agents. Their kids attend the same schools. That means that there's a comradery between families. They often share the same priorities professionally.Rank-and-file BP agents are not going to start arresting TX NG members for following their LAWFUL orders. That's fake news.
— Border Patrol Union - NBPC (@BPUnion) January 26, 2024
TX NG and rank-and-file BP agents work together and respect each other's jobs. Period. If TX NG members have LAWFUL orders, then they have to carry out…
To BP agents and Texas National Guardsmen, Biden is the interloper. They don't see each other as anything other than families and neighbors. That's because they're part of the same strong communities. They likely see each other as part of the same law enforcement family.
This is a major setback (defeat?) for Biden. If this lawsuit returns to the Supreme Court to be tried on the merits, which hasn't happened yet, it's quite possible there won't be a happy outcome for the Biden administration. Biden looks weak, thanks to the Border Patrol's defiance of him. This wasn't a good week for Biden on border security issues, thanks in part to the collapse of another failed amnesty bill in the Senate.
Of course, Democrats are criticizing 'extreme MAGA Republicans' in the House for sabotaging the "good work" that a bipartisan group of senators were working on. That bill had technology funding, funding for additional border patrol agents to help process illegal immigrants and make sandwiches for illegal immigrants. Frankly, the bill was a joke. I'm ashamed that it got any support from Senate Republicans.
The problem with most legislation is that there is some good and some bad, and legislators can say they voted for or against it because the good outweighed the bad. And what is wrong with that is that mixing the good and bad is a compromise and that is BAD. Not to mention the Democrat definition of compromise is "we get everything we want and you get nothing." In most cases, there is one side of the issue that is the right side and the other is wrong or "left" (usually). Nothing wrong with the Republicans except for the inability to tell the voters what's right, and that they are holding fast to it.
ReplyDeleteThere was a time when there were enough Blue Dog Democrats that you could find a partner to get things done. The DSA (Democrat-Socialists of America) aren't interested in compromise.
DeleteThe problem isn't that Republicans are unwilling to compromise. It's that Democrats are rigid ideologues that preach the gospel of Cancel Culture.
"rigid ideologues" is an excellent description of the situation. The follow-on question is: How do these morons/idiots/whackjobs/reality-deniers keep getting elected?
DeleteThat's because we pull our punches too often. Republicans aren't leaders often enough. If we want great results, we need to put Democrats on the spot whenever the opportunity presents itself.
DeleteMaybe that's why Trump is so popular, he's a street brawler at heart, with easy communication skills, and entertaining. You are right, wish we had more like him, and Sen. Kennedy.
ReplyDeleteTrump rambles too often & he doesn't get specific enough often enough. There's no doubt that he connects with people though. He isn't Reagan, though.
ReplyDeleteMy own local congressional candidates describe the Triceratops of the dilemma. If all they do is (rightfully) criticize their opponents on specific issues they are accused of being "too negative." If all they do is speak in platitudes, (I.e. not specific enough) the Democrats will call them "extreme MAGA" racist sexist, genocidal dictators. And if they do offer specifics, like the FAIRTAX or Social Security reform that would leave us all richer, the DEMOCRATS will tell us all of the terrible things that will happen if we dare even listen.
ReplyDeleteI think Trump has room, after South Carolina, to be specific about his own plans, and to roundly criticize Joe Biden on /his/ Manifold failures. And maybe even poke fun at the TDS-afflicted along the way.
It is certainly valid criticism that he is no Reagan. Reagan was an ideologue and solved problems by starting from a conservative viewpoint. Trump is a problem solver who generally arrives at conservative solutions. Trump just needs to win "beyond the margin of fraud."
The key is laying out a specific agenda, then have the spine to counterattack the DFL. If all we do is offer platitudes, we deserve to lose. If all we do is criticize the DFL, we deserve to lose, too.
DeleteAs for SocSec, the best way to extend solvency is by producing a robust economy and running surpluses. It takes a spine to run against the DFL. It's time our candidates showed one.
You are correct as to strategy – specific details and then "let no lie go unchallenged and let know truth go untold." The trick is you must be believable and you must be able to get that message out. Newt Gingrich was the master of jujitsu-ing the media into helping him do that.
DeleteYou are also wrong about Social Security. I can 1990, Sen. Rod Grams posed a plan that not only would make Social Security solvent forever, but would grow the economy and pay down the national debt. I recently did the exhausting math necessary to prove that, believe it or not, plan still works! Problem is, as you point out, finding enough Republicans with spines to stand up against the outrageously vicious attacks from the Democrats against any common sense proposal.
We need to stand with them when the DFL attacks. (Notice I said WHEN. I didn't say if.) There's strength in numbers. The Alinsky book Rules for Radicals talks about isolating the weak animal, then attacking it. If we stick together & there's a large number of us, they can't isolate one of us.
DeleteAs I see it, the problem is that Republicans are not herd animals. We don't all fall in line even when we agree with Reagan's "80% rule." Look how many anti-Trump people we still have, even when the alternative is continued, unmitigated disaster. For "independent thinkers" we sure seem a gullible lot.
Delete