« The Word "America" to Be Allowed in Michigan Schools | Main | Mini Molester Followup »
May 26, 2006
Mexican Consultation Required For Border Defense
In case anyone thought the Senate was even remotely interested in defending this country from the Mexican invasion, here's some language from an amendment to its recent immigration reform abomination:
Consultation Requirement.—Federal, State, and local representatives in the United States shall consult with their counterparts in Mexico concerning the construction of additional fencing and related border security structures along the international border between the United States and Mexico, as authorized by this title, before the commencement of any such construction in order to—
(1) solicit the views of affected communities;
(2) lessen tensions; and
(3) foster greater understanding and stronger cooperation on this and other important security issues of mutual concern.
Go ahead and believe your eyes: we have to consult with Mexico before building any walls to prevent Mexicans from invading our country. Imagine if Benedict Arnolds like Specter, Kennedy, McCain, etc. had been running the country during WWII. We would have been required to consult with the Japanese before setting up anti-aircraft batteries.
This amendment was sponsored by Arlen Specter (R-PA) and cosponsored by Ted Kennedy (D-MA). It passed 56-41. You can see who voted for and against it here.
Congratulations to President Bush. He wants the country overrun by penniless Mexicans, and he's getting his way.
Actually, both parties are getting their way. As evidenced by most of its policies, a central objective of the Democratic Party is to raise the percentage of Americans who are poor, because the more people depend on government largesse, the more vote for Democrats. This principle is the only explanation for programs that offer generous financial incentives to women if they remain unemployed and unmarried and keep having children. From the point of view of the Democratic Party, the poor are domesticated animals to be bred for their votes.
But why take the time to breed more poor people through welfare, when you can import them by the millions?
For their part, Republicans serve short-term business interests. Cheap labor is so appealing to some that it doesn't occur to them to wonder what business prospects will be like after uncontrolled immigration has broken the back of our social services and fractured our society. That's for our kids to deal with, not us.
The last issue to face America that was as critical as the Mexican invasion was slavery. In the years before the Civil War, Democrats had no interest in putting an end to slavery. The well-established Whig Party didn't have the guts to address it. So those Whigs who did have the guts formed the Republican Party, which produced Lincoln, and put an end to both slavery and the Whigs.
It's time for history to repeat itself. As before the Civil War, nothing good is going to come out of the Democratic Party. It is diseased down to the tips of its roots. Many Republicans understand that America is worth preserving, not just until we get ours, but until our children get theirs, and on for the next generation, and the next and the next. But there are many other Republicans who do not have the integrity to hold to this view, and with Democratic support, they have the leverage to betray us by refusing to defend the country from foreign invasion.
Unless we are able to get the likes of Specter, McCain, and W out of the driver's seat in the immediate future, it's time to get off the bus and find some other form of transportation — a new party that will serve the country's interests.
Hat tip: Michelle Malkin, on a tip from V the K.
Posted by Van Helsing at May 26, 2006 4:25 PM
Comments
Got a chance to hear a little `bout it on rush.
spector said,"Nobody got their way."
I dont get it.
"Actually, both parties are getting their way."
Posted by: BenSittin at May 26, 2006 5:39 PM
I could see your point if it were an international treaty that imposed this requirement on the US. But its not. Its a bill legislated by the US Congress that can be retracted or revised by another sovereign act of Congress, or even vetoed by the Executive (or in the case of the current President, simply ignored & covered up). Regardless of one's position on the larger question of regulating immigration, if we're going to reinforce the border its only neighborly, as well as practical from a logistics perspective, to do so in coordination with the Mexican authorities.
Posted by: Judah Grunstein at May 27, 2006 5:27 AM
I'm certainly not in favor of this amendment! However, the "consultation clause" is the least of my worries. Captain's Quarters used this analogy to explain it:
"...let me use an example from a movie made about twenty years ago called Sweet Liberty. The film, which starred Alan Alda and Michael Caine, centered on an author (Alda) who sold a historical review of a Revolutionary War diary to a major Hollywood studio -- which wanted to turn the scholarly work into an American Pie of 1776. Alda discovered that he had a clause granting him consultation rights, which he insisted on enforcing with the director of the movie. After airing out all of his complaints, the director asked Alda, "Is that all?" When Alda affirmed he was finished, the director told him, "Okay. You've had your consultation," and proceeded to change absolutely nothing."
Posted by: Barb Dwyer at May 27, 2006 8:18 AM
You guys are forgetting, we are talking about politicians, politicians who never wanted a fence to begin with. "Consultation" will, in effect, give them an excuse to delay construction of any meaningful barriers at the border. "Consultation" is bureaucratese for "endless series of meetings for the purpose of delaying a project."
Posted by: V the K at May 27, 2006 9:29 AM
Because, at the end of the day, it won't be common-sense rational people who want to secure the borders who get to decide if enough "consultation" has taken place for construction to begin, it will be for a liberal activist judge to decide if enough "consultation" has taken place.
Posted by: V the K at May 27, 2006 10:43 AM
As we approach Memorial Day - a day dedicated to remembering those who lost their lives in defense of our great nation - let us vow to remember on future November Election Days those Senators who have betrayed the security of these United States.
Legislative sanity in the Senate has been displaced by crass politics and self serving vote shopping. Senators in both parties - Democrats and many Republicans - simply SUCK.
Posted by: Bergbikr at May 27, 2006 11:55 AM
Of the southern border state voting tally, the only surprise that I see is that Boxer (D-CA) voted "Present". Anyone care to offer an explanation on that one?
Besides that non-vote, it is very telling to see that only Kyl (R-AZ) is willing to say "NO" to unfettered access to the US from Mexico until you get to the Texas senators.
It would seem that New Mexico longs to be part of old Mexico and at the present rate, they might as well be. I understand that McCain has to do whatever he has to do to keep that presidential aspiration alive for himself but I'm not sure what happened to Boxer. "Present?"
Posted by: tfhr at May 27, 2006 2:25 PM
I am so sick of the Mexican government trying to telling us what they want us to do on our borders-they must take us for a bunch of dam fools. Just ask any Mexican that came from Mexico-if they will tell the truth- about their immigration laws and how they protect their borders to their south.Believe me they dont want to talk about that. Because they dont play around like Bush and our foolish government.
Posted by: Alfred Doten at June 6, 2006 2:09 PM
