Bush Stumbles Over Border

Conservative first-lady Phyllis Schlafly has some major complaints about George W. Bush and the Mexican Immigrant/Border problem. We've now made it far easier for them to come here illegally, literally by the truckload, and it's all thanks to George W:

"At 9 p.m. Sept. 6, the Bush administration opened up all U.S. highways and roads to Mexican trucks and drivers. That gave the green light to the first 38 of up to 100 Mexican trucking companies. Nobody knows how many thousands of Mexican trucks will eventually drive on U.S. roads.

Bush thumbed his nose at the U.S. House of Representatives, which voted 411-3 on May 15, and again July 24 by voice vote, to prohibit the entry of Mexican trucks. White House pressure prevented a vote in the U.S. Senate."

and there's more:

"...Sept 14, the first anniversary of the overwhelming, 283-138 passage in the House of the Secure Fence Act. The Senate subsequently passed it 80-19, and President Bush signed it into law on Oct. 26 in front of TV cameras.

This law ordered the government to build an 854-mile fence along our U.S.-Mexico border. After one year, the Bush administration has built only 18 miles.

This failure - or refusal - to obey the law makes us believe that Bush and Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff do not intend to build the fence, and is a prime example of why the U.S. people don't trust their government."

George W., doin' our country proud, on so many fronts. Ironically, Hillary would probably be doing the same thing on these issues.... the Democrats have the best issue to run on (controlling our borders), and yet they're not willing to do anything, either. Are we a country if we don't control our border? Isn't that part of the definition of "country"?

300 Million

We will surpass 300 Million folks here in the USA this month. A couple of interesting facts:

"an analysis of Census Bureau data conducted by the Center for Immigration Studies indicates that the first half of this decade – 2000 to 2005 – has been the highest five-year period of immigration in American history and that nearly half of post-2000 arrivals are illegal."

and this can't be good for Mexico:
"approximately 10 percent of Mexico's population of about 107 million people is now living in the United States, and roughly 15 percent of that country’s labor force is working in America."

Clinton>Bush on Mexican Border?

"Earlier this month, Bush made reference to "doubling the size of the Border Patrol during my administration."

There's just one problem. Not only has the Border Patrol not been doubled during his administration, the White House has fought against significant increases in its budget every year since 2001. Actually, the Border Patrol was growing faster during the Clinton administration – before Sept. 11, 2001 – than it has since 9-11. The Clinton administration increased the Border Patrol from 4,026 in 1993 to 9,078 when they left office in 2001, an increase of 5,052 agents or 125 percent. Bush has increased the manpower from 9,078 to the 11,800 we have today, an increase of 2,722 agents or 30 percent."

These numbers really speak for themselves. And then there's the budget....

Mexamerica

Joseph Farah:

"We are beginning to get a picture of just how big this crisis of illegal immigration has become.

According to statistics that sound very conservative, roughly 10 percent of Mexico's population of just over 100 million is now living in the U.S., representing one of the largest population relocations in modern history. But it gets even worse. About 15 percent of Mexico's labor force is working in the U.S. And one in every seven Mexican workers migrates to the U.S. at some time....

....Listen to these shocking developments south of the border: According to a report in the San Francisco Chronicle, "entire rural communities are nearly bereft of working-age men." The town of Tendeparacua, for instance, had 6,000 residents in 1985. Today there are 600 left. In five Mexican states, the report says, the money migrants send home from the U.S. exceeds the locally generated income.

How could this be good for the U.S.? How could this be good for Mexico? How could this be interpreted as a humanitarian idea? Why does it strike me as the worst form of human exploitation?"

Wasn't NAFTA billed as the solution to this? Help Mexico to build agriculture and industry in Mexico, where Mexicans could build at least a stable economy? Instead, NAFTA has allowed industry to build tent cities around factories that don't have to abide by US environmental regulations. They're exploited so badly in Mexico, that US exploitation looks good in comparison....so good that thousands risk their lives to get here every day. NAFTA was too flawed....not enough protection for worker rights or the environment, it did nothing to stem the invasion tide of aliens immigrants, and that hurt us and Mexico in the long run. We're sucking away their best workers, pillaging their working class. We need a better NAFTA for the long term, but the first thing we need to do is secure the border. We don't need a wall, and it is possible to do it given enough technology and funding. We could have done it already for a tiny fraction of the cost of the Iraq War. Mexico has immense natural resources and a talented population, they should be a beacon to Latin America and South America... instead, populist Socialism is on the march down there, not surprising since they have been victims of a visceral mix of capitalism and corruption for decades. Isn't it in our best interest for Mexico to be successful? How can they improve economically when the best of their workers all come to the US?

March...right this way

"While organizers say a big turnout and a broad diversity at Monday's events will send a signal to politicians in Washington wrangling over immigration reform, others see possible down sides.

"Each time immigrants have these giant rallies, the more they infuriate the rest of the American population with the idea that those who break the law get to march and somehow be rewarded," says Ira Mehlman, L.A. spokesman for Federation for American Immigration Reform. "We have seen in France what happens when you try to bring in millions of people ... in many cases who are hostile. We saw there that it didn't work, and it won't work here.""

I'm all for some immigration reform, we need to let more in legally, but these marches are rediculous. We may not be able to gather up all 11 million "undocumented workers", but it seems to me that these marches would be the perfect place to round up the ones who flaunt their status. They're here illegally, yet are brazen enough to march the streets in public? Being illegal here should not be so easy...

Bordering on Madness

Border family's strange encounters with illegal crossers | csmonitor.com

"Mr. Garner, a carpenter, his wife, and three daughters (age 10, 12, and 15) tell countless stories that are as alarming to outsiders as they are matter-of-fact to them. Theirs is a life dominated by self-defense lessons, family practice drills to huddle in the master bedroom, obligatory two-way radios for kids who walk to school, and a handgun on the hip for mom."

OK, we're going to defend our country, where do we start? Seal the borders first, right? "Nah, let's let people come here illegally and accept that" the politicians say.
We must control our borders, and if our government won't do it's job #1 for national defense, then I am proud to see citizens out there trying to help (within reason). I'm all for legal immigration, but this illegal border crossing must stop....it's our first line of defense as a nation from terrorists. Seems like that's a good place to start, and a place we can make a real difference quickly with not too much money (compared with say, the war in Iraq).