or
Join Now!
|
|
Home/Government/Politics
|
| Forum |
Ask A Question |
Question Board |
FAQs |
Search |
Return to Question Board
| Question Details |
Asked By |
Asked On |
| Crisis on Southern BorderPat Buchanan's Take |
QueenChoux |
08/30/05 |
Time to Impeach Bush per Pat Buchanan: "It is a mark of the cowardice of our leaders that they are so terrified of being called "bigots" they tolerate this criminality(of illegal aliens). The moral rot of political correctness runs deep today in both national parties.
A president like Teddy Roosevelt would have led the Army to the border years ago. And if Fox did not cooperate, T.R. would have gone on to Mexico City. Nor would Ike, who deported all illegal aliens in 1953, have stood still for this being done to the country he had defended in war.
The question of whether America is going to remain one nation, or whether our Southwest will wind up as a giant Kosovo – separated by language and loyalty from the rest of America – is on the table.
Where is Bush? All wrapped up in the issue of whether women in Najaf will have the same rights in divorce and custody cases as women in Nebraska. His legislative agenda for the fall includes a blanket amnesty for illegals, so they can be exploited by businesses who want to hold wages down as they dump the social costs for their employees – health care, schools, courts, cops, prisons – onto taxpayers.
Not only have Richardson(Gov of New Mexico) and Napolitano(Gov of Ariz) awakened – they are on the front lines – so, too, has Hillary Clinton, who has spoken out against illegal immigration with a forthrightness that makes Bush sound like a talking head for La Raza.
Why is a Republican Congress permitting this president to persist in the dereliction of his sworn duty?
George Bush is chief executive of the United States. It is his duty to enforce the laws. Can anyone fairly say he is enforcing the immigration laws? Those laws are clear. People who break in are to be sent back. Yet, more than 10 million have broken in with impunity. Another million attempt to break in every year. Half a million succeed. Border security is homeland security. How, then, can the Department of Homeland Security say America is secure?
Who can guarantee that, of the untold millions of illegals here, and the scores of thousands ordered deported for crimes who have disappeared into our midst, none is a terrorist waiting for orders to blow up a subway or mall and massacre American citizens?
Most of these illegals come to work to send money back to their families. They are not bad people. But because they are predominantly young and male, they commit a disproportionate share of violent crimes.
Why should U.S. citizens be assaulted, robbed, raped and murdered, and have their children molested, because their government will not enforce its own laws?
Is this not an indictment of democracy itself? What dictatorial regime would put up with this?
The Republican Party claims to be a conservative party. But what kind of conservative is it who, to cut a few costs or make a few bucks, will turn his family's home into a neighborhood flop house?
Twice, George Bush has taken an oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Article IV, Section 4 of that Constitution reads, "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion."
Well, we are being invaded, and the president of the United States is not doing his duty to protect the states against that invasion. Some courageous Republican, to get the attention of this White House, should drop into the hopper a bill of impeachment, charging George W. Bush with a conscious refusal to uphold his oath and defend the states of the Union against "invasion."
It may be the only way left to get his attention, before the border vanishes and our beloved country dissolves into MexAmerica, what T.R. called a "polyglot boarding house for the world."
I'd like to get your comments on this incendary column. Thanks, sorry it is too long. Will avoid this in the future.
|
Clarification/Follow-up by kindj on 08/31/05 12:08 pm:
Dang it, I did it again...
ex:
Then how do so many people immigrate here from Mexico legally? I see people EVERY DAY who have their INS cards, duly issued. I talk to them and their parents, who describe exactly how they came here, through the proper channels. Hell, there's a guy working in my office that grew up in Mexico, but moved here in the 60's, with no problem.
But besides all that, there is the security thing to think about.
Who looks more like a Mexican: a blonde-haired Canadian, or a Middle Easterner?
That's not racism, that's biological fact.
It's much easier for Middle Eastern terrorists to come across the southern border than the northern one.
Not that terrorist from the ME are the only terrorists, to be sure. That's why border security is a must.
DK
Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 08/31/05 12:56 pm:
Hello tom:
The solution is simple. We need to change the law to reflect reality, instead of continually harp about CRACKING DOWN on laws that are, ipso fact, meaningless.
No! It is not OK for people to break the law. But when the law flies in the face of reality, one has to rethink the law, instead of continually saying “Stay the Course”
Market forces rule the day here. It’s not OK for the restaurant to hire illegals to wash your dishes, but if they hired legals, the job would go unfilled, and you couldn’t get your favorite beef stew. Most likely, it would go out of business, along with most of the others. If it complied with the law you yell about, the prices you pay for meals would go up substantially. So would your groceries - to prices that you would not pay. And, so would a lot of the goods you buy.
Minimum wage???? As a conservative, you ought to understand the fallacy of wage and price controls. They don’t work. The government may say, with a wink and a nod, that the minimum wage is thus and so, but you and I know different.
So, they’re not given any benefits? The money they make far outweighs what the could make in Mexico, so who needs “benefits”. By the way, you think legal workers in restaurants are given benefits??
So, instead of cracking down on violators of laws that don’t work (marijuana included), we would be much better off changing the law to reflect economic reality, instead of our need to act tough.
excon
|
| |
|
Your Options |
Additional Options are only visible when you login! !
|
|
|
|
