Living in Texas, most of us don't have an issue with our neighbor to the south. I feel that most have just accepted the way cultures spread through geographic locations and have decided to put our focus elsewhere rather than get pulled into another Border Security debate, but it seems that the rules change when violence becomes an issue. As you may know, we here in texas (especially in border towns) have seen an increase in violence tied to drug cartels. According to Off the Kuff, outsourcing border security to the private sector may not be the best choice.

With millions of Federal dollars pouring into border states to promote "border security" after 9/11, I can see the concern author Charles Kuffner presents. He brings up in his blog that so much money coming to the state of Texas should be allocated by the state of Texas and not outsourced to a private organization regarding security. The company that the money went to was ALIS which was founded by Gen. John Abrams, who was a Military Analyst in 2002 during the invasion of Iraq. The money went to the organization to develop a "public and media outreach campaign" (Kuffner)  to raise border awareness. Kuffner presents the idea that if selling the war is this Generals game, and he does it well, he will undoubtedly be able to score more contracts with the success of his campaign.

(Gen. John Abrams)

The author has been writing for years and clearly has an internet following. The intended audience for the majority of his blogs are definitely Democrats, yet in his article, other than contextually categorizing Gen. Abrams as a war monger, the article is written quite fairly, and he does point out good points. It's nothing but logical to assume that a private security contractor is going to aim to score more contracts while on the job, but if it has to be done through "misinformation" through a wide spread public and media campaign then maybe they aren't the best boys for the job. Just remember that there are some things that the private sector handles better than government.

The locks on my doors are made by Brink, not the Federal Government, but then again my locks don't lie to stay on my door...

If one has followed the news in the past 12 months, I'm sure they have heard about fracking. If you have not, visit my link here, but if you have, you may like to hear that it has been considered to have "minimal impact on ground water" according to tests done by University of Texas Energy Institute. At least, that's what the Houston Chronicle would like us to think. According to their editorial here, it has been deemed safe, and  will "be a cornerstone for the state's economy for decades to come." This piece is clearly written to be on the defense against scrutiny from the "highly urbanized Northeast" who are claiming that studies taken from the same UT tests bear a different conclusion. 
This editorial is clearly written with the intent to reinforce the idea of an economic boom from the shale fracturing industry. His target audience is most likely those who are living in the Houston area working in an industry with some type of tie to the natural gas industry. The editorial goes as far at times to appeal to ethos in it's accusation of other media sources of giving the shale fracturing a horrible name. Houston is one of the largest in the country, and with a lot of the economy riding on oil and gas, the chronicle's stance on the topic is far from surprising. Who can blame them?

The truth of the matter is that one cannot just say Shale Fracturing is safe because one found the words "minimal impact on ground water" in a 78 page report. It seems that at this point UT has made efficient steps to break the mystery behind "fracking," but it is still a sensitive issue and should not be taken lightly for ecological reasons.

Thank the deity of your choice for the rain, because the truth is we needed it. With the state of Texas in what some are calling a 100 year drought, last weekend brought the rain so many so desperately needed. In San Marcos, the city decided to lift Stage 1 water restrictions which had been in effect since the early summer. With noticeable changes in the water pumps after the restrictions had gone into effect, it is simple enough to say that they were a huge success. But, a little rain never hurts either. The Edwards Aquifer Authority set the restrictions into effect after certain pump stations read well bellow 660 feet above sea level for longer than 10 days. With these drought quenching storms comes the ability for individuals to now water their lawns in the 10pm to 8am time range. It's as if they want to use it as fast as they can before it's gone again.

KXAN