Tuesday, January 31


President Bush spoke with undiluted candor in his "State of the Union" address -- indeed, so much so that it is fair to call it the "State of the Addiction" address. The president underscored that America is addicted to foreign sources of oil; and the president unabashedly affirmed that America is addicted to cheap, undocumented labor. For the former, he proposed broad new initiatives to reduce this country's dependency on Middle East oil and to develop innovative, alternative energy sources; for the latter, however, he proposed more of the same, calling on Congress to pass a Guest Worker Program, while eschewing any reference to the 12 - 20 million illegal aliens already in our country, preferring instead the euphemistic "immigrant" designation. To the president's way of thinking, oil dependency is an Achilles Heel, but cheap labor (cheap labor subsidized by American taxpayers) is an engine of the economy. In that view, of course, Mexico becomes the "Hopeful Society," not America -- hopeful that it can continue to export its poor, uneducated, and lawless to its northern neighbor, while receiving $16 - $18 billion annually in remittances from the hapless citizens both countries exploit.

Interesting, is it not, that the president emphasized the need for Americans to be better educated in math and the sciences to keep our country on the cutting edge of the global economy. Someone should remind him that scientists and mathematicians are not jumping our borders.

And interesting, is it not, that in an address largely devoted to international terrorism and the war in Iraq, the president refused to suggest there was any linkage between the war on terror and the need to secure our porous borders. Someone should show him that tunnel recently discovered between Tijuana and San Diego County and explain that, for all we know, it may have been the well-lighted, well-ventilated transportation conveyance for a nuclear device or canisters of nerve gas.

If eavesdropping on telephone calls between al Qaeda operatives and American citizens is essential to our nation's national security, then so too may be eavesdropping on telephone calls between the corrupt Vicente Fox government and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.


I'll be succinct (how unlike me): I want the President of the United States to devote a significant portion of tonight's speech to border security and a commitment to enforce immigration laws already on the books. I don't want to hear about immigration reform or his fascination with a Guest Worker Program.

Fact is, the "State of the Union" is more than suspect when 12 - 20 million illegal aliens -- lawbreakers one and all -- reside here, plunder our treasury, healthcare and educational systems, tear the fabric of our culture, fill our jails and prisons, and send billions in remittances back to their homelands, for whom they refuse to revoke their allegiance.

This country has been suffering from a massive, long-standing invasion from the south that, arguably, pre-dated the Bush '43 presidency, but has gone on unchecked and unrestrained during his watch.


Samuel Alito's confirmation today by the Senate's Republican majority (and subsequent swearing in) is a victory in many respects: 1) the kind of nominee that a re-elected President Bush had committed to to his base during his campaign has been placed on the SCOTUS, and on the heels of John Roberts' confirmation as Chief Justice and in the wake of an efficacious uprising of conservatives over the misguided Harriet Miers' nomination; 2) the power center of an effete, Left-controlled political party -- the Democratic Party -- has been soundly defeated, both in national elections and on the floor of the Senate, and the idiocy of its liberal icons shown in bold relief before the nation; 3) the United States Constitution has been and will be reaffirmed, and the Democrats' affinity for "legislation from the bench" debunked; 4) Senator John Kerry's failed fillibuster attempt showed him for the egregious loser and thorough buffoon he is; 5) Leftie polibloggers proved themselves yet again as more squall line than powerful persuaders and the voices of reason; and, 6) it's two down and, hopefully, at least one more strict constructionist nominee to go in the Bush '43 era!

My heartiest congratulations to Justice Alito and his family, and to President Bush and Senate Republicans (save for one miserable RINO, Lincoln Chafee)!

Sunday, January 29


In keeping with my blogging friend Frank Laughter's well-expressed sentiments vis-a-vis Google's regrettably misguided politics (example), I have removed Google's search engine link from my site's sidebar and replaced it with Yahoo's. It's only a small gesture, but imagine if everyone followed Frank's lead?

FOLLOW-UP: More on this issue.

FOLLOW-UP II: As Frank Laughter alluded to, Michelle Malkin weighs in on this issue.

FOLLOW-UP III: Patterico asks his readers for alternatives to Google and his readers' comments are very interesting.

Friday, January 27


A 2,400 foot tunnel discovered running from a location near the Tijuana Airport, under the U.S.-Mexico border, and on to a warehouse in Otay Mesa, California, is no "Tom," "Dick," or "Harry" of "The Great Escape" fame. No, this threat to U.S national security is sophisticated beyond anything found to date in Mexico's purposeful invasion of America.

Reuters reports:

The tunnel has cement walls and supporting planks, is no less than five feet (1.2 meter) tall and wide, and runs as far as 60 feet underground, Unzueta said. It has lighting and ventilation, and a pumping system to drain groundwater.

The U.S. entrance has a cement ramp with a washboard pattern for better footing. "We believe this tunnel is, in fact, the largest tunnel ever found on the Southwest border," he said.

And here's the money quote:

We know it's been used for drug traffic but this really illustrates the dangers and risks of security to Americans," said John Fernandez, special agent at the DEA in San Diego.

It will be interesting listening to President Bush's upcoming "State of the Union" address to see if he points to the fact that our country is being invaded from the south by Mexican nationals and OTMs ("Other Than Mexicans") and that our porous borders, the tunnel systems being uncovered, the numerous incursions by Mexico's federal troops, and the presence of the notorious MS-13 gang in 33 states, constitute "a clear and present danger" to this country's national security in an age of international terrorism.

I suspect we'll not hear a word to that effect; but, we may well hear about the attributes of his Guest Worker Program.

The war in Iraq is not President Bush's Achilles Heel. No, it is the persistent invasion from the south and the fact that 11 million to 20 million patent lawbreakers are afoot in our land and the president wants for them what Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO) terms "Amnesty-Lite."

Read about this tunnel and tell me that our nation is not vulnerable. Read about this tunnel and tell me you're comfortable that the Department of Homeland Security is doing its job.

FOLLOW-UP: Here's the Los Angeles Times story on the tunnel.

FOLLOW-UP II: here's the San Diego Union-Tribune account.

Wednesday, January 25


You'd think Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's slip-sliding away from Republican principles of fiscal restraint and his political degeneration into a walking-talking facsimile of the big-spending democrat he replaced -- Gray Davis -- would be sufficient waywardness to draw the attention of right-of-center bloggers, but to date the silence has been deafening. I've commented to this effect previously. And back on January 8th I wrote:

Even the Left Coast's pre-eminently Left-leaning, MSM-propaganda mill, The Los Angeles Times, which vehemently opposed Arnold Schwarzenegger's ascendancy to the governorship of California in the 2003 recall election, now mocks him as a laughingstock for his all too transparent transmogrification this week into a spendthrift liberal democrat.

And rightfully so! Schwarzenegger is deserving of scorn. The man clearly has no core political beliefs. He is a political chameleon -- a proponent of expediency over principal. Reagan he is not. It didn't take long for California's powerful special interests to bend The Terminator to their will and extinguish his short-lived commitment to Republican principles of fiscal restraint and limited government. Pumping iron can transform the body, but not the heart.

The powerful public employees unions and well-entrenched, Democrats-dominated state bureaucracy have had their way with The Arnold, turning him into the kind of "Girlie Man" he claims to disdain. And if this capricious, self-serving shift to the Left effects his election to a second term, than no doubt Governor Schwarzenegger may well become for the Democratic Party the Zell Miller equivalent of 2008 -- i.e., the keynote speaker at the Democratic Party's national convention.

Now comes this piece on Schwarzenegger by Dan Walters of the Sacramento Bee and I feel vindicated. Walters writes:

The irony of Davis' political undoing is being compounded three years later by Arnold Schwarzenegger, the bodybuilder-turned-actor to whom California voters turned on his promise of "action, action, action, action." As he begins his third year in the governorship, Schwarzenegger is retreating from confronting the Capitol's dysfunctional status quo and is, in a sense, channeling Davis.

Schwarzenegger's annual appearance Tuesday before the Sacramento Press Club was vintage Davis, advocating only policies that he knows will find favor with the voters (infrastructure investment), sidestepping questions on controversial issues (the Iraq war, assisted suicide) and paying homage to the legislative leaders he was trying to kneecap last year.

Schwarzenegger, it would appear, has convinced himself that avoiding risk and telling voters about the highways and other goodies he wants to deliver to them will overcome his less-than-stellar popularity and gain him another stint in the Capitol this year. "It is all about the quality of life," he told the Press Club as he pitched his plan to spend $222 billion on transportation, waterworks, schools and other public facilities over the next decade without raising taxes, while insisting, with a straight face, that "we won't win votes with this proposal."

And he comes to the key observation:

The governor clearly will bend almost any direction to please Democrats, but the more he caters to them, the more he alienates himself from Republicans, especially conservative Republicans, who are leery about massive spending of any kind and who are insisting that there should be reforms to streamline projects, the kinds of reforms that environmentalists and unions intensely oppose.

Conservatives are already complaining that Schwarzenegger is leaning too far to the left on spending. Some want to strip him of the Republican Party's re-election endorsement at next month's state convention, citing his appointment of long-time Democratic Party activist Susan Kennedy as his chief of staff.

So I continue to ask: why is the Republican governor of America's most populated state getting a pass from conservative bloggers?


It's not enough that the corrupt, Vicente Fox-led government of Mexico has published a guide, euphemistically entitled "The Guide for the Mexican Migrant," to encourage Mexican nationals to emigrate illegally to America. Now the Mexican government's National Human Rights Commission has joined in such complicity by publishing 70,000 maps to aid illegal border jumpers in entering Arizona safely and crossing its desolate desert regions.

The Los Angeles Times reports today (excerpts follow):

Mexico's National Human Rights Commission will print and distribute at least 70,000 maps showing immigrants the safest routes to cross the border into Arizona, officials said Tuesday.

The project, which immediately drew fire from groups organized against illegal immigration, is aimed at reducing the number of people who die trying to cross 50 miles of Sonoran Desert to reach highways in southern Arizona, according to Humane Borders, the Tucson-based humanitarian group that created the maps.

The new maps will show spots where people have died — presumably discouraging some prospective migrants — as well as main roads, rescue beacons and the locations of water stations maintained by Humane Borders.

While such patriotic organizations as The Minuteman Project draw the ire of President Bush, misguided, open borders' apologists such as Humane Borders aids and abetts the Mexican government in its purposeful invasion of the United States of America.

The Arizona Star reports (excerpts follow):

Four maps have been prepared, each one centering on a different migration corridor along the Arizona-Sonora border including Douglas, Nogales, Sasabe and Lukeville. The maps show the locations where deaths have occurred and also show where Humane Borders water stations have been set up and Border Patrol rescue beacons have been installed. The maps also indicate how far would-be illegal entrants can expect to walk in one to three days.

Mauricio Farah, one of the commission's national inspectors, said about 70,000 maps will be distributed throughout Mexico starting in March.

But some critics say the map, much like a controversial comic-style guide that Mexico distributed last year, will serve only to push more migrants north.

Jim Nixon, who belongs to Tucson's Arizonans for Immigration Control, said he had no doubt the map would encourage more border-crossers to make the trip.

"The map tells them where to go and where not to go," he said. "Humane Borders is aiding and abetting, there's no question in my mind."

What's at stake for Mexico? Why does it encourage massive illegal emigration to the United States? Simple. As the San Bernardino Sun reports:

Mexicans working in the United States are a huge source of revenue for Mexico, sending home more than $16 billion in remittances in 2004, Mexico's second largest source of foreign currency after oil exports according to the country's central bank.

FOLLOW-UP: I've written previously on the Humane Borders' leader, Rev. Robin Hoover.

FOLLOW-UP II: Debbie Schlussel weighs in on Fox, Bush, and the idiocy of the Humane Borders' folks who are co-conspiring with Mexico to facilitate the invasion of the United States by Mexican nationals.

IMPORTANT UPDATE (01//27/06): The Dan Stein Report advises that Mexico has decided not to distribute the maps! Now if the Humane Borders' folks will migrate to Mexico and take their misguided humaneness with them.

Tuesday, January 24


The Houston Chronicle carries the following Associated Press (AP) story in today's edition (excerpts follow):

Men dressed as Mexican Army soldiers, apparent drug suspects and Texas law enforcement officers faced off Monday on the U.S. side of the Rio Grande, an FBI spokeswoman said today.

Simmons said the FBI was not involved and referred requests for further details to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin similarly reports (excerpts follow):

Mexican soldiers and civilian smugglers had an armed standoff with nearly 30 U.S. law enforcement officials on the Rio Grande in Texas on Monday afternoon, according to Texas police and the FBI.

Mexican military Humvees were towing what appeared to be thousands of pounds of marijuana across the border into the United States, said Chief Deputy Mike Doyal, of the Hudspeth County Sheriff's Department.

Mexican Army troops had several mounted machine guns on the ground more than 200 yards inside the U.S. border -- near Neely's Crossing, about 50 miles east of El Paso -- when Border Patrol agents called for backup. Hudspeth County deputies and Texas Highway patrol officers arrived shortly afterward, Doyal said.

"It's been so bred into everyone not to start an international incident with Mexico that it's been going on for years," Doyal said. "When you're up against mounted machine guns, what can you do? Who wants to pull the trigger first? Certainly not us."

An FBI spokeswoman confirmed the incident happened at 2:15 p.m. Pacific Time.

If, after reading these newspaper accounts, you still agree with President Bush and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that increased border security must be linked in comprehensive immigration reform legislation with a "Guest Workers Program," then you, too, are insisting that the invasion from the south and armed incursions by the Mexican Army should be tolerated in the interest of so-called "cheap labor."

This incident renews my call for the president to place troops on the border and to bolster the ranks of the U.S. Border Patrol. It's high time the Bush administration hold the government of Mexico accountable for its actions!

FOLLOW-UP: No wonder only 25% of Americans in a recent Gallup poll approved of President Bush's immigration policies! H/T: The Dan Stein Report." Porous borders defies common sense, particularly in an age of international, Islamofascist terrorism.

FOLLOW-UP II: A reader of The Dan Stein Report left a "comment" at the site's post regarding this armed incursion that I feel compelled to quote in part, because the outrage expressed is so on point and indicative of how I feel:

This story should hit Michael Chertoff and President Bush up side the head like a bag of hammers! How can they continue to turn a blind eye to these constant incursions by the Mexican military!

FOLLOW-UP III (01/25/06): The Dallas Morning News reports the following:

U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., a frequent critic of the administration's border security efforts, called Tuesday for the federal government and the governments of southern border states to immediately deploy troops to the U.S.-Mexico border in light of what he termed "recent armed assistance Mexico's military has given to drug smugglers."

"Our border has literally turned into a war zone with foreign military personnel challenging our laws and our sovereignty," Mr. Tancredo said.

"The only way to deal with this dangerous situation is to tap the resources of our own military," Mr. Tancredo said. "I call on President Bush and the governors of border states to immediately deploy military personnel to defend our borders against the Mexican military."

FOLLOW-UP IV (01/25/06): The El Paso Times reports the following:

The Mexican government will not allow its soldiers within 3.2 miles of the U.S.-Mexican border as a result of a standoff Monday near Sierra Blanca between Texas law enforcement officers and men dressed in military uniforms.

In response to Monday's incident, the Mexican government has ordered its military to create an alert zone, extending 3.2 miles from the border, and not to allow soldiers in the alert zone unless they have authorization, Foncerrada Berumen said.


The Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on SCOTUS nominee Samuel Alito are again underway and California's Senator Dianne Feinstein is presently rationalizing her Pavolvian "Nay" vote on Alito. She's such a pompous ass. The Golden State, long since tarnished by the impact of liberal democrats and the Gray Davis era, deserves her, as it does Barbara Boxer.

But on one score she is absolutely right this morning: Samuel Alito is, as President Bush promised his faithful, a future SCOTUS justice in the strict constructionist, originalist, Scalia-Thomas bolt of cloth mold.

That's why Bush is in the Oval Office and John Kerry is not, Ms. Feinstein.

What is the far Left cabal of the Democratic Party all about? Simple answer: upholding Roe v. Wade and the right to choose that (since 1973) 46 million unborn babies be aborted and cast in bio-waste receptacles. How does such an unconscionable genocide of the innocent constitute a woman's "right to privacy" and her "reproductive rights?" Sick euphemisms, one and all.

PS: I have "grave" concerns about you and others of your political-moral ilk, Senator!

FOLLOW-UP: This "Daily Breeze" editorial says it all:

This week the Senate is expected to vote on the Supreme Court nomination of federal appeals Judge Samuel Alito, a former prosecutor and Justice Department attorney who won the American Bar Association's highest recommendation. Months of digging by journalists, Democratic operatives and Senate investigators turned up near-uniform testimonials from people of all ages and backgrounds who swear by Alito's brilliance, kind temperament, work ethic and devotion to the law. Attempts to smear Alito on extenuated guilt-by-association grounds and with wafer-thin conflict-of-interest allegations went nowhere.

Yet only a handful of the Senate's 44 Democrats are expected to vote to confirm Alito. If this occurs, it will be unprecedented, outrageous and unfortunate.

FOLLOW-UP II: Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has done himself and the Republican Party proud during the Alito confirmation hearings. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to make a mad dash to the bathroom, as Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has begun bloviating and the nausea is already beginning to sweep over me.

FOLLOW-UP III: More obstructionist antics from the Dems.

FOLLOW-UP IV (@11:21am CST): Vote out of committee was 10-8 in favor of Alito.

FOLLOW-UP VI: Kudos to Polipundit for this post and the observations made.

FOLLOW-UP VII: Bravo, Don Surber! If there were a Howard Cosell Award in the blogosphere for "telling it like it is, " you'd win for your post-Senate Judiciary Committee vote post on the Dems. What a sorry bunch they are. All those hateful questions, all of that boorish posturing, and a pre-ordained vote the predictable outcome. What crap!


ProLifeBlogs provides photographs of the mightly successful "March For Life" in Washington D.C.

While not in attendance yesterday, President Bush nonetheless addressed Pro-Life forces assembled in the nation's capitol, and, in his stirring, from-the-heart remarks, underscored the principal reasons I voted for him in 2000 and again in 2004 -- his commitment to the sanctity of life and his promise to place strict constructionists in the Scalia-Thomas mold on the SCOTUS.

I appreciate so very much your work toward building a culture of life-- (applause) -- a culture that will protect the most innocent among us and the voiceless. We are working to promote a culture of life, to promote compassion for women and their unborn babies. (Applause.) We know -- we know that in a culture that does not protect the most dependent, the handicapped, the elderly, the unloved, or simply inconvenient become increasingly vulnerable.

The America of our dreams, where every child is welcomed in law -- in life, and protected in law may still be some ways away, but even from the far side of the river, Nellie, we can see its glimmerings. (Applause.) We're making progress in Washington. I've been working with members of the Congress to pass good, solid legislation that protects the vulnerable and promotes the culture of life. I signed into law a ban on partial birth abortion. (Applause.) Infants who are born despite an attempted abortion are now protected by law. (Applause.) So are nurses and doctors who refused to be any part of an abortion. (Applause.) And prosecutors can now charge those who harm or kill a pregnant woman with harming or killing her unborn child. (Applause.)

This is precisely why I still support this president. I have my issues with him -- profound issues -- on fiscal responsibility and border security, but his advocacy of the culture of life places him head and shoulders above the Pro-Choice, progressive-secularists that the Democratic Party would place in the Oval Office if Red State America would permit.

I applaud you, Mr. President. I deplore you, Mr. Kerry, and the liberal cabal that runs the Democratic Party and has no compunction about 46 million dead.


Conservative Party leader Stephen Harper prevailed in Canada's national election, turning Prime Minister Paul Martin out of office and erasing the Liberals' 12+ year hold on Ottawa, albeit with insufficient gains in the legislature to give Harper and the Conservative Party the kind of strong mandate needed to push our northern neighbor genuinely to the right in law, rather than simply in spirit. Harper is from Calgary, Alberta, which, if you've traveled in Canada, is the difference between day and night in political thinking from that found in the eastern provinces. And Harper, to his credit, is pro-life and opposed to gay marriage. That's the good news ...

The bad news: conservatives in Canada are not conservatives as we know them in America. Newspaper headlines today trumpeting a "Conservative" victory in Canada may wrongly suggest to many Americans that a Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan equivalent will be riding into Ottawa on horseback ready to restore political order to North America's version of effete France. Well, don't hold your breath. Canada is a country that anytime it tacks to the Right politically, finds the Left wanting out of the regatta altogether and threatening to secede.

Meanwhile, the Left-dominated MSM in America has wasted no time in turning its guns on Harper, terming his politics extremist, as Frank Laughter perceptively notes in pointing to an Associated Press piece on the election.

FOLLOW-UP: The inimitable Mark Steyn on Canada's election results!

FOLLOW-UP II: Speaking of "inimitable," don't miss Bulldogpundit's observations on our northern neighbor's election results.

FOLLOW-UP III: Peter Brimelow reminds readers of his prescience and offers insights on what the Canada election results may usher in in time.

FOLLOW-UP IV: Human Events looks at what defines conservatism in Canada (H/T: Free Republic).

Canada today is more liberal (in the American sense) than the United States: with no laws regulating abortion, legal same-sex marriage, no death penalty, high income taxes and a federal sales tax, a financially-strapped military and a deep reverence for the United Nations.

But the problem with defining Canadian conservatism exclusively in the above terms is that it overlooks the fundamental issue plaguing Canada since the 1960s: the separation movement in the French-speaking province of Quebec.

Saturday, January 21


The Washington Times reports what the VDARE folks (and others of us opposed to porous borders, illegal immigration, and amnesty for illegals) feared would happen:

The Republican National Committee voted yesterday to back President Bush's call for a guest-worker program.

"The question is not 'Is there an issue?' -- the question is 'How you deal with it?' and I think we have to deal with it in a comprehensive way -- we don't have to deal with it in a way that's anti-immigrant," said party Chairman Ken Mehlman, who said the resolution "reflected where the president was."

The resolution, adopted by voice vote, was a major victory for Mr. Mehlman and headed off a divisive vote on an alternate resolution that would have put the party on record as opposing a guest-worker program, thus at odds with Mr. Bush.

Now it becomes highly likely that GOP Senators will take the teeth out of the "Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act" that passed in the House of Representatives last December.

This is one long-standing Republican who is now seriously considering re-registering as an "Independent."

"National Security" and "Amnesty-Lite" (i.e., Guest Worker programs for the 11+ million illegal alien lawbreakers already in the country) are mutually exclusive. If the GOP under Bush's leadership is intent on integrating the two, then I have a problem. They have already integrated so-called "national security" with "porous borders" for the first five years of Bush's two-term presidency.

The borders must be secured first -- secured before any forms of immigration reform are discussed in the halls of Congress.

If the Republican Party has, as Karl Rove asserts, a "post-9/11 worldview," then why in Mr. Rove's important speech at the RNC's Winter Meeting this week -- a speech setting the GOP's tone and tactics for the upcoming 2006 elections -- are the issues of porous borders and illegal immigration not prominently mentioned? Take the time as I did, and read the entire speech and tell me how many times these issues came up? Read the speech and you'll know that the Bush administration's position vis-a-vis border security is more of the same and that in the president's mind there is no linkage between national security and border enforcement.

FOLLOW-UP: Do read Bryanna Bevins' piece at the VDARE blog in reaction to the RNC vote. Her post includes a quote from Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), who promises a continuing fight.


Don't you love these periodic pronouncements from the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security to the effect that al Qaeda may have terrorist cells operating in the United States?

"We have to assume that there are persons out there that want to attack us," said FBI director Robert Mueller.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said police chiefs have been told to review all the intelligence the federal government has given them in the last two years about al Qaeda tactics.

Chertoff told ABC News: "We've seen them attack in London, for example. We've seen them attack in Spain. We've seen them attack elsewhere, so I think we have to operate on the assumption that they do have some capability and they certainly have the intent."

This, coming from an administration that has allowed millions of illegal aliens to jump this country's borders and live and work here with impunity -- lawbreakers without proper documentation in an era of international terrorism.

This, coming from an administration that has allowed one country in particular -- Mexico -- to encourage an invasion of our country and to make armed incursions into our land.

Chertoff insisted that the country has made security upgrades since the attacks of 9/11. He admitted though that a number of vulnerabilities remain.

Right, Mr. Chertoff -- two such "vulnerabilities" being our porous contiguous border with Canada and our porous contiguous border with Mexico. And a third "vulnerability" being President Bush's determination to install a "Guest Worker Program," tantamount to blanket amnesty, that will permit anywhere from 11 million to 20 million illegal aliens (lawbreakers, one and all) to live and work in this country, and become citizens.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the GWOT is a contradiction in terms when 4 years and 5 months later, after the horrific "9/11" Islamofascist terrorists' attacks on the U.S. homeland, our country's borders have not been secured. Fact is, the Bush administration put too few troops on the ground to secure Iraq's borders (with deadly consequences for our troops and the Iraqi people) and has put no troops on the ground (and too few U.S. Border Patrol agents) to secure our contiguous border with Mexico to repell an invasion that continues largely unabated.

The president has patronized the American people in telling them time and again that America is fighting terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan so that it does not have to fight them here at home.

Meanwhile, our borders can be virtually breeched at will. We see that; we read about it; we know the Bush administration is sucking and blowing on national security. We're not fools.

After all, if our lack of border security has led to a ruthless illegal immigrant gang -- MS-13 -- establishing itself in 33 states, than is it any leap in logic to presume that al Qaeda operatives are here and poised to hurt us, owing to unsecured borders?

FOLLOW-UP: If you challenge my comment to the effect that the Bush administration is talking out of both sides of its mouth vis-a-vis enhanced border security, then gain some clarity by reading this important post at The Dan Stein Report. OTMs ("Other Than Mexicans") pose a serious threat to national security. According to Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), 48,000 OTMs from "countries of interest" were interdicted in 2005, which statistically suggests that around 240,000 entered our country undetected.

FOLLOW-UP II: Yet another post that reinforces what I'm talking about.

FOLLOW-UP III: Don't miss this eye-opening post from Lone Wacko!

Friday, January 20


It appears that the Washington Post has answered the question posed by Ann Coulter in the title of one of her books -- "How To Talk To A Liberal (If You Must)."

The answer: you don't. Or, maybe better put: you can't.

This story explains the genesis of WaPo's epiphany!

The Washington Post shut down one of its blogs Thursday after the newspaper's ombudsman raised the ire of readers by writing that lobbyist Jack Abramoff gave money to the Democrats as well as to Republicans.

In her Sunday column, ombudsman Deborah Howell wrote that Abramoff "had made substantial campaign contributions to both major parties," prompting a wave of nasty reader postings on post.blog.

There were so many personal attacks that the newspaper's staff could not "keep the board clean, there was some pretty filthy stuff," and so the Post shut down comments on the blog, or Web log, said Jim Brady, executive editor of washingtonpost.com.

"We're not giving up on the concept of having a healthy public dialogue with our readers, but this experience shows that we need to think more carefully about how we do it," Brady wrote on the newspaper's Web site.

Progress? Maybe so. While the Washington Post rethinks how to have a "healthy public dialogue" with the left side of the blogosphere (good luck), maybe the Democratic Party could similarly do some soul-searching. Its liberal figureheads, after all, sound more like chatting Harry Bellefonte dolls these days than the party's statesmen of old.

Thursday, January 19


"Blogger" has been acting up this week and my frustration level is spiraling. For reasons I don't understand and that the "Blogger" Help Desk has yet to resolve, I cannot append Technorati tags to my posts. I wrote to the Help Desk and received back one of those customary auto-replies that asks you to do the obvious while you cool your blogging heels waiting for some bona fide assistance. Earlier this week I experienced an HTML meltdown in my site's template and had to reload my template with a copy I had saved at the end of last year. It certainly was my fault for not doing at least weekly copying of the template and dutifully saving those copies in Notepad; but, that said, I lost in the process a number of new links I had loaded into my sidebar since the first of the year. As if this were not enough, there have been frequent episodes this week of my blog not entirely loading banners and photos. This has occurred with Microsoft and with Mozilla Firefox. One minute, ACSOL loads just fine; another minute later, it does not.

I apologize to my regular readers and to those who have visited this week for the first time. I'm trying to get these issues resolved, but I'm afraid I'm hamstrung at the moment by a Help Desk that hasn't gotten to me yet.

Wednesday, January 18


Imagine, just for a minute, if Samuel Alito were already on the United States Supreme Court and had written the SCOTUS decision upholding New Hampshire's parental notification law, rather than retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Conner.

And imagine if Sandra Day O'Conner were instead President George Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court and the Senate Judiciary Committee's confirmation hearings were beginning next Monday.

I wonder what kinds of questions Ted Kennedy and Chuck Schumer would put to her in attempting to draw her out on her views of the New Hampshire statute and Alito's majority opinion? Would she get hammered or get the kid's gloves treatment?


Much has been made of Senator Ted Kennedy's belated (some 50 years after joining) withdrawal from the all-white, males-only, Owl Club -- a club long ago disavowed by and chased from the Harvard University campus. We have The Washington Times to thank for that bit of investigative reporting in the wake of Kennedy's persistent grilling of SCOTUS nominee Samuel Alito over his membership in Princeton University's Concerned Alumni of Princeton ("CAP").

But what about a new rumor swirling about in Boston and Washington D.C. political circles -- namely, that the senior senator from Massachusetts has had a long-standing stand-in maintaining his membership in Harvard's Spanish Club and that dues' money was routed through this individual to the campus?

"Film at 11:00!"

FOLLOW-UP: Wizbang! reports that the plot thickens.


Hillary Clinton, the shrill, "It Takes A Village," left-of-Left Liberal camouflaged by her handlers as a wayward democratic centrist (which is laughable), popped off on the occassion of the anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday to use the race card and equate the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives with a "plantation."

Well, leave it to ACE to come up with a piece of well-honed brilliance.


FOLLOW-UP: The MSM, of course, is rationalizing Hillary's race-baiting. Big surprise, right?

FOLLOW-UP II: Don't miss reading Michelle Malkin's townhall.com column, linked at La Shawn Barber's Corner.

Tuesday, January 17


Mayor Ray Nagin of New Orleans is no better at proselytizing, than he is at employing under-utilized school buses and outfitting "shelters of last resort" in a crisis. The man is incompetent and two quarts low on intelligence.

And someone ought to break the news to him: New Orleans is fast-becoming a Mexican settlement.

NO MATTER WHAT ALL the politicians and activists want, African Americans and impoverished white Cajuns will not be first in line to rebuild the Katrina-ravaged Gulf Coast and New Orleans. Latino immigrants, many of them undocumented, will. And when they're done, they're going to stay, making New Orleans look like Los Angeles. It's the federal government that will have made the transformation possible, further exposing the hollowness of the immigration debate.

After all, I tried to tell him.

FOLLOW-UP: Priceless!

FOLLOW-UP II: The inevitable Robertson-style, post-inflammatory-remarks apology has been issued by Mayor Nagin (linked by Michelle Malkin).


On January 7th, in a post entitled, "Isn't It About Time America Holds Mexico Accountable?," I wrote:

Assaults on U.S. Border Patrol agents, including shootings, increased dramatically in 2005 and included not only rock-throwing, but automatic weapons fire. Mexican soldiers have even crossed into the United States illegally and fired on Border Patrol agents! That's right: the Mexican military poses a clear and present threat to the U.S. Border Patrol. And, fact is, you can go back as far as 1999 and still find a record of 341 assaults on Border Patrol agents. It's disgraceful and it continues unabated.

President Bush must stop mollycoddling Vicente Fox and allowing Mexico to interfere in U.S. domestic and international policy. Mexico poses, through its actions and inactions vis-a-vis the illegal alien invasion of the United States, a significant threat to America's national security.

Troops should be placed on the border to complement and bolster the efforts of U.S. Border Patrol agents, and to protect them. If Mexican military troops, federal police, and/or paramilitary elements hereafter illegally cross into the United States, the United States should respond by taking out illegal alien staging areas in northern Mexico.

Today, "Mark In Mexico" makes the following statements in this post of his:

The last time the United States was invaded by a foreign army, in uniform, was 2005, and it may have happened again this year, we just don't know about it, yet. This shocking report and graphic relates that the Mexican Army has repeatedly violated our sovereignty - 9 times in 2005 and many more times in the previous years, totaling 216 incursions since 1996. These incursions into United States territory are to protect drug smugglers. These Mexican incursions have been met on more than one occasion by lightly armed US Border Patrol officers who have had to withdraw.

Read the whole thing and then write to your congressman!

FOLLOW-UP: Peter Brimelow of the VDARE blog provides the names of some RNC members deserving of kudos. More from VDARE's Bryanna Bevins on the MSM amazingly getting the story out on the Mexican Army's incursions into the United States.

FOLLOW-UP II: Do read The Washington Times' piece on the brazenness of Vicente Fox's government and its armed forces. Why does President Bush not act?

FOLLOW-UP III: And don't forget we also have the issue of Mexico's consulates in the United States insinuating themselves into America's domestic policies!

FOLLOW-UP IV: The U.S. Ambassador to Mexico, Tony Garza, is apparently getting religion and issued a hard-hitting, five-page "newsletter" last Friday to the Vicente Fox government in Mexico. That's the good news. The bad news is that it's been appropriately termed a "stealth" press release in that it cannot be found on the U.S. State Department Web site, nor anywhere else that I can tell. I wish it had landed an endorsement from President Bush. As with similar hard-hitting pronouncements from the DHS' Michael Chertoff, the proof will be in the pudding.


I have flown extensively on business most of my adult life and, for a time, flew in and out of Ontario Airport in Ontario, California, back when it more resembled a distended farmer's market than a modern-day commercial airport, and only a good bout of smog, common to the area, could obscure its harsher, dissonant attributes. I was reminded in the riveting, tension-filled, 4-hours', season-5 opener of Fox's "24" of all of the ramshackle airports I have killed time in (White Plains Airport is another that comes to mind) in my lifetime and the thought occurred to me: "What ungodly places to die in!"

In watching, along with some 16+ million other inveterate fans of "24" the Sunday-Monday night, 4-episode, season kick-off, I still don't know which was more disheartening: the death of TCU's (Counter Terrorist Unit) comely Michelle Dessler (played by Reiko Aylesworth) in a car bomb explosion in the opening minutes of the first segment or the memory of dreary Ontario Airport in the old days and the dreadful thought of being a terrified hostage held there in a nondescript terminal, forced face down on a dirty tile floor by hooded fanatics. It's a fate worse than a center seat on a filled-to-the-gills 737.

Sean Astin of "Rudy" fame joined the "24" cast in last night's episodes and, in recognizing Jack Bauer's "duress code," saved the day and should have been carried out of Los Angeles' CTU offices on Chloe's shoulders. These heroics aside, one is not sure at this point whether or not his character will prove to be a team-player or a White House-placed nemesis. "24" has an inimitable way of keeping its faithful guessing and, in part, that's the allure of the show.

But what "24" is really all about is tantamount to comic book heroics and what's wrong with that? Jack Bauer (played by Kiefer Sutherland) may not run into phone booths and strip down to his Superman costume before fending off terrorists, but "here he comes to save the day" would be a thoroughly apropos theme song lyric for the show. He's to the GWOT what Charles Bronson's character, Paul Kersey, in "Death Wish" was to street crime -- a well-armed, single-minded Ubermensch who rids the world of rank undesirables with impunity.

I know this: I'd rather watch four hours of Jack Bauer fending off terrorists at Ontario Airport than two gay cowboys herding sheep in Wyoming.

FOLLOW-UP: RightWingNuthouse provides "24" fans with plot summaries!

FOLLOW-UP II: One of the Houston Chronicle's resident bloggers, Kyrie O'Conner (author of the "MeMo" blog), has decided to pull an indignant arrow from her quiver and take a cheap shot at me (a "Houston Chronicle" subscriber no less!) for my uninterest in watching two gay "sheepboys" fall in love on the big screen. That, of course, leads to her testiness in thinking that I'm trying to prove I have testes. I'm comfortable in my manhood, Kyrie, and, as information, only really enjoyed one movie that John Wayne made -- "Red River" -- which had as its principal supporting actor a marvelous actor, Montgomery Clift, who was gay in his private life and preferred men over Elizabeth Taylor. Since I've watched that movie on Turner Classic Movies at least a dozen or more times I hope you'll let me off the hook and not infer that I'm a "homophobe" for having no interest in supporting Hollywood's Leftie agenda. You strike me as being more than "cranky and feverish" today. You must be hallucinating on ground portobello mushrooms to characterize the Jack Bauer character on "24" as a "homoerotic figure." Just what kind of magazines do you keep by your sick bed?

Filed in:


This line from the Associated Press (AP) story on last night's Golden Globe awards says it all: why I didn't watch and why my wife can seldom drag me to the movie theatre.

Homosexual and transsexual themes dominated Monday's Golden Globes with the key wins by "Brokeback Mountain," plus acting honors for the film biography "Capote" and the gender-bending "Transamerica."

FOLLOW-UP: Hurrah for blogger-journalist Debbie Schlussel; I couldn't agree more!

Monday, January 16


An editorial published in today's edition of the Houston Chronicle -- hyperbolically entitled "Dickensian America" -- is yet another example of its editorial board's hard-wired, open borders', pro-sanctuary city agenda on illegal immigration; but today's portion of undiluted propaganda is a super-sized helping of Pablum and begs a response, just as another of its quantum leaps in sophistry deserved a reply recently.

It is the Chronicle's position that there is a striking, incontrovertible parallel between today's treatment in America of children illegally migrating here alone and the "horrendous cruelty of the Industrial Revolution," in which "small children" were forced into "factories and debtors' jails as if they were adults" -- a Dickensesque landscape of unimaginable horrors in which "globalization" and "free trade incentives" become, for the Chronicle's hand-wringing editorialist, the modern-day antecedents of a horrific fate for unaccompanied, adolescent border-jumpers. That fate here in the States, suggests the Chronicle, is no better than the one found in the children's homelands: a fate of "persecution, abuse, and other (forms of) hardship."

This gloom and doom scenario is predicated on a three-year-old Amnesty International report, "Why Am I Here?," which describes, according to the Chronicle, "what these child migrants must endure" -- namely, the slings and arrows of an indifferent country (i.e., the United States of America) which "punishes child refugees and illegal migrants like adults." Need I go into the percentage of children who cross the border eluding interdiction, who make up a goodly portion of the 11 - 12 million illegals already here in this country (some say it's more like 18 - 20 million) or of the 350,000 - 400,000 right here in Houston? Need I go into the amount of taxpayers' money expended to provide education, healthcare, and a variety of social services to these minors?

But having painted such a grim picture and pulled at the heartstrings of its readers, the Houston Chronicle offers no prescriptions (or corroboration to support the "AI" report), other than to say the obvious, if indeed the picture it limns is truly so bleak:

Whatever Americans decide about illegal immigration policy, unprotected, solitary child migrants cannot serve as pawns. Citizens should insist that whatever legislation is passed include the Unaccompanied Child Act. Any minor who migrates here alone has been propelled by adult failures. It is the duty of all who find child refugees and child migrants to protect them.

No mention is made, of course, of the U.S. Border Patrol's BORSTAR program, which engages in search and rescue missions along the contiguous U.S.-Mexico border, helping illegals, including children, suffering medical emergencies, or, for that matter, of its humanitarian work to train Mexico's Beta Group and Civil Protection force in search and rescue techniques. No mention is made of ICE's successful "Operation Predator" -- a program targeting "foreign nationals who have previously been convicted of sex crimes against children -- including rape, statutory assault on a child, aggravated sexual battery, sexual abuse, and indecent liberties." Nor is there any mention in this stilted editorial of Amnesty International's issues with the government of Mexico. Nor, to be sure, is there any mention of how the Mexican government turns its back on its hapless, under-privileged children. Why does the Chronicle point its finger of scorn at the United States, rather than at the government of Mexico?

Well, I'll provide a prescription: border fencing, state-of-the-art electronic surveillance, sufficient U.S. Border Patrol agents, National Guardsmen, and, if necessary, U.S. Armed Forces personnel staged along the border to complement and protect the Border Patrol. That's for starters. There's also the issue of the Vicente Fox regime encouraging Mexican nationals to emigrate illegally to the United States.

Fact is, if adolescent border-jumpers cannot get into this country, then our government can devote itself to helping American citizens, under the age of 18, who need humanitarian assistance, such as those children impacted by hurricanes Katrina and Rita, who have been dispossessed of homes and, in many instances, lost one or both parents in these natural disasters. Let's do some hand-wringing over the plight of American citizens and reinforce that it is the obligation of Mexico and other Central America governments to help their own, rather than export them illegally.

Moreover, let's remind ourselves that our own country's children are impacted by the illegal alien problem and this nation's porous borders. This blogger, for example, has written extensively about the notorious MS-13 gang and one of its alleged victims -- Houston-area toddler, Aiden Naquin. How about a Chronicle editorial on the impact to American citizens -- men, women, and children -- of illegal alien crime?

Saturday, January 14


That's a quote of Arizona State Representative Russell Pearce's -- a recipient of the "Medal of Valor" award -- who made that statement in an interview on border security and illegal immigration, published in FrontPageMagazine.com on January 9, 2006.

I encourage ACSOL readers to find the time to read Russell Pearce's thoughts and observations, among them:

We must secure our borders (yes, build a wall, even the Governor of Colorado called for a wall) and enforce our laws now! Currently, local law enforcement has the authority to enforce immigration laws without prior permission. Our citizens deserve it, our Constitution demands it, and our Oath of Office requires us. We have the ability, the technology, the resources we just need honest and dedicated servants to honor the Rule of Law and the will of this great nation, before any talk about a Guest Worker program.

I do believe there is hope. We must, with compassion, but without apology enforce our immigration laws. I believe this is the number one issue/crises facing America. Illegal immigration is our Trojan Horse. Today in Arizona (and the nation mirrors this) 91% of those polled want more done on immigration. I don't believe there has ever been such a disconnect between the "elite" and the people, as there is on this issue. Yet we continue to have those in Washington and in the state legislatures pander for alternatives to enforcing the law.

You can't just "want more done," Folks. You have to do something about it. Call or write to your government representatives at the city, state, and federal level. Write a "Letter to the Editor" of your local newspaper. Post about border security and the illegal alien problem, if you're a blogger, as I regularly do. Get behind, as I did this week, elected officials who have the guts to stand tall and fight for strict border enforcement and immigation reform that does NOT include amnesty for lawbreakers. And use your votes to defeat elected public officials who countenance porous borders and are apologists for so-called "cheap labor" and the illegal alien invasion of this country.

And do scroll down my blog's right sidebar to the heading, "Vincent Omnia Veritas," where you will find a number of links to outstanding sites that will provide information on the hydra-headed problem of porous borders and provide guidance on how to join and support efforts to secure our borders and deport illegal aliens back to their countries of origin.



Recall back in October of last year New York's and the federal government's overarching response to intelligence that later proved to be a hoax that terrorists were going to blow up portions of the subway system of America's largest city? The major television network and cable news outlets were abuzz and the nation was truly gripped by the threat that New York City might be struck yet again. Not only were extra New York City policemen -- uniformed and undercover agents -- put on duty to patrol New York's subway system, but hundreds of New York State national guardsmen were also brought in to thwart the expected attacks.

But now that the woefully under-staffed and out-gunned U.S. Border Patrol may be the target of MS-13 for-hire assassins, where is the federal government, its glaringly inept Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and this country's chief law enforcement officer and the DHS' secretary when U.S. Border Patrol agents come under the threat of America's most notoriously violent, illegal immigrant gang?

It's pretty lame, don't you think, for the Department of Homeland Security merely to issue a confidential memorandum (i.e., an "officer safety alert") when its Border Patrol agents may now be at grave risk of death or serious injury at the hands of paid, MS-13 hit men? In point of fact, few Border Patrol agents were even aware of the memorandum or the threat to them until the news media picked up the scent. How would you like to work for an employer who cared so little about your personal, on-the-job safety?

So why haven't federal troops and state national guardsmen been moved to the border to beef up border security in a demonstrable show of force that would put MS-13 gang members, their Mexican drug cartel employers, and the corrupt government of Mexico on notice that America has the will to protect its border agents and to defeat a deadly gang that now operates in 33 states in our country?

MS-13's insidious reach is but one of many terrible consequences of three administrations' (Bush-41's, Clinton's, and Bush-43's) indifference to the human invasion that crosses our southern border, largely unimpeded, each and every day of the week. That's why we have, by conservative estimates, 11 -12 million illegal aliens afoot in our land right now, and why a gang composed largely of illegal aliens can threaten with impunity a law enforcement agency of the federal government.

Chertoff has proven to be no Elliott Ness. And President Bush talks about the national security implications of the terrorists' threat in Iraq, but looks askance at our country's porous borders and the fact that some 40,000 to 50,000 "Other Than Mexicans" (OTMs) were interdicted at our southern border in 2005 (approximately 60,000 in 2004) coming from "countries of interest" (i.e., countries that recruit, train, support, and export terrorists), which means that as many as 250,000 OTMs actually made it across undetected and now pose a material threat to our nation's homeland security! Why? Because for every interdicted illegal alien, 3-5 more enter the country undetected and unapprehended.

This blogger has reported countless times on the MS-13 threat, as well as the threat posed right here in Texas by the Zetas -- trained, Mexican para-military, for-hire assassins, working in collusion with the Mexican drug cartels. But until American voters demonstrate their concern at the voting booth not much good will come from the advocacy of strict border enforcement and immigration reform sans amnesty. The voting booth is where the rubber will meet the road. And don't look for the mainstream media in this country to keep you informed.

FOLLOW-UP: I encourage my readers to take the time to read Jerry Seper's comprehensive piece, published yesterday in "The Washington Times," on the MS-13 threat to U.S. Border Patrol agents. Apart from that threat, do understand that American citizens are regularly being murdered, raped, robbed, and assaulted by these "undocumented aliens" who have come to America, as the liberals would have us believe, seeking a better life for themselves and their families. Right!

Friday, January 13


I subscribe and lend my name -- Bernard Higgins of "A Certain Slant Of Light" -- to N.Z. Bear's appeal from center-right bloggers to the leadership of the House of Representatives: to wit ...

The new leadership in the House of Representatives needs to be thoroughly and transparently free of the taint of the Jack Abramoff scandals, and beyond that, of undue influence of K Street.

H/T: Lorie Byrd of Polipundit


I wish there were a better term than the over-used, ubiquitous "must-read," but this post of The Anchoress' falls neatly into that category and if I have any cachet with my readers, trust me that hers is an important read that will impact you. And kindly don't insult great writing by skimming through the piece. Read every last word of it.


The nationally-recognized and, in some quarters, controversial Republican congressman from Colorado, Tom Tancredo, was in the Houston area yesterday, as this blogger reported last evening, to address a "Secure America" town hall-style meeting in Conroe, Texas, on his hot button issues: border security and illegal immigration.

Conroe, Texas, is about a 40 minutes' drive north of the George Bush International Airport and easily within reach of the mainstream media: e.g., the Houston Chronicle, Local 2 News, and Channel 11 News. But, a review of area MSM outlets reveals no coverage today of a meeting that attracted easily 150 Houston-area citizens yesterday keenly interested in Congressman Tancredo's prescriptions for this country's porous borders, the national security threat they pose, and the thorny problem of illegal immigration and its impact on our nation's culture, treasure, health, and national identity.

Houston is America's 4th largest city and is the southcentral United States' equivalent of sprawling, concrete-ridden Los Angeles. It is also home to 350,000 to 400,000 illegal aliens and a city government and major metropolitan newspaper that endorse Houston's "sanctuary city" laws. And, to be sure, its geographical proximity to the contiguous Mexico-U.S. border and a major south Texas' corridor for illegal aliens -- the Rio Grande Valley -- make the topics Tancredo addressed as important locally, as they are nationally among concerned Americans.

So why do you think the MSM was absent? I didn't see a single news truck at the venue -- you know, the big straight trucks that appear at news scenes. I didn't see television and newspaper reporters gathered to record Tancredo's observations and recommendations and to pepper him with questions after his address. There were no television cameras or bank of microphones. What there was there was nada -- the MSM ignored the man and ignored 150 or so citizens who thought Congressman Tancredo's viewpoints deserved a fair hearing.

I did, however, find a story this morning that the Wendy's hamburger chain is no longer putting tomato slices on its burgers unless the customer specifically requests them. That, of course, is need-to-know information. The threats posed by the MS-13 gang, Mexican Zetas, illegal drugs, and serious diseases reappearing in our country pale by comparison.


Blogger John Hawkins' of Right Wing News published an interview he did of Congressman Tancredo and I heartily recommend it to you for the insights it provides into Mr. Tancredo's viewpoints on homeland security, porous borders, illegal immigration, and terrorism. I encourage you to read it, as the elite, Left-leaning MSM is too busy for this sort of thing.

FOLLOW-UP: This report in American Chronicle gives you a good sense of Congressman Tancredo's backbone. I only wish President Bush would see Mexico's Vicente Fox for what he is and put Mexico on notice! He needs to take a page out of Tom Tancredo's book.

FOLLOW-UP II: Here's a piece by William F. Jasper, published in "The New American," which points to the MSM's purposeful lack of coverage of newsworthy items related to dealing with border security and illegal immigration. Writes Jasper:

Completely unnoticed by many Americans - because it went largely unreported - were some important Christmas presents delivered by the House of Representatives in the closing hours of the 2005 congressional session. Thanks to the unyielding persistence of Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) and two dozen members of his House Immigration Reform Caucus, aided by a growing public outcry, the House took long-overdue action to address our escalating immigration crisis. Here are the big-ticket presents that made it through the House in hard-fought battles during the final hours before the Christmas break: adoption of important new border security and immigration enforcement legislation; defeat of dangerous amnesty/guest worker proposals; and stripping from the year-end omnibus spending bill an outrageous Senate provision to vastly increase the number of H-1B visas for foreign professionals and IT workers.

All of these House actions were major victories for middle America and major defeats for the combined big government/big business/big media/big labor forces that comprise the imposing "open borders" lobby.

FOLLOW-UP III: If you'd like an opportunity to hear Congressman Tancredo speak, here's a press release issued today that lists dates and venues for his "Secure America Now" speaking tour. I found the experience yesterday worthwhile and he certainly is deserving of your support and a writing campaign aimed at all levels of government.

FOLLOW-UP IV: Businesses bail on contributing to Tom Tancredo because of his tough, no-nonsense call for strict border security and amnesty-free immigration reform. The man has integrity.

Thursday, January 12


Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), Chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus and a nationally-recognized advocate of heightened border security and amnesty-free immigration reform, spoke today to a standing-room-only audience of approximately 150 people at a "Secure America" town hall meeting at the Lonestar Convention Center in Conroe, Texas (up I-45, north of Houston).

This blogger was in attendance and met briefly with Congressman Tancredo following his address -- an informal, but passionate address interrupted any number of times by strong applause (including a standing ovation at its conclusion) and loud vocal support for his prescriptions for remedying this nation's porous borders and thorny illegal alien problem.

Central to Tom Tancredo's remarks were the themes that "borders matter" and that patriotic, well-informed citizens must resist the "Balkinization of America" and help reverse the harmful impact of what he terms the growing "cult of multiculturalism" in this country that has so many of our school-age children thinking "America is a continent," rather than "the country in which we live" -- the best nation on the planet and one to which "we owe our allegiance, not our ethnicity." And, alluding to H.R. 4437 and the "Tancredo Wall," (which the "Wall Street Journal" and U.S. Chamber of Commerce vigorously oppose) he opined that "good fences make for good neighbors!"

The Congressman went on to say that we find ourselves today "in a clash of civilizations" -- a veritable "war to preserve Western Civilization." The United States of America is being so overrun by illegal immigrants (which conservative estimates peg at 11 - 12 million), most of whom do not speak English, resist assimilation, and steadfastly maintain their political allegiance to their homelands, that we're fast becoming a people who no longer know who we are and who our enemies are.

"I don't want to hear another language spoken in this country other than English," said Tancredo. "Language must become the common denominator of our culture." And he went on to argue strongly and with emotion in his voice: "I expect immigrants to this country to be legal immigrants; and I expect them to become Americans." On this note, he spoke of his own immigrant roots and charged that his detractors' use of epithets such as "racist" and "zenophobe" to describe him were but mean-spirited smoke screens to disarm American patriots from insisting that immigrants come to this country through legal channels and become proud, patriotic Americans.

Congressman Tancredo believes most Americans "sense something is wrong with the immigration situation" in this country and that their concerns about border security and the millions of illegals afoot in our land predated (as happens with most issues) Congressional awareness and certainly Congressional action. In other words, most Americans have their finger on the pulse and see the situation on this country's southern border for what it is. And on that subject he further engaged his audience by eschewing the fashionable political correctness that fails to see "Islamofascism" as America's true enemy. "Terrorism is not our enemy; Islamofacist terrorism is."

Tom Tancredo has been at this -- decrying the lack of border security and advocating solutions to stem the tide of illegal immigration -- for 9+ years now and admits to having been a lone voice crying in the wilderness years ago until the tragedy that was September 11, 2001, began changing Americans' views of what homeland security ought to mean. He told his audience today that he knew he had finally begun resonating with his constituency and Americans nationwide when his "special sessions" speeches, given alone, after-hours, in the House Chamber, before C-SPAN cameras, began setting his fax machine purring and his telephone extensions lighting up like a Christmas tree. People were getting it and they wanted action. They rallied to him and their effect rallied him.

Throughout his town hall address in Conroe, Congressman Tancredo provided his audience with hard facts, along with anecdotal information, to reinforce his observations and give legitimacy to his prescriptions. Among them:

  • Illegal immigration has enormous implications for this country and huge costs for its taxpayers -- costs in healthcare, education, criminal justice, etc.;
  • "Cheap labor" is only cheap for employers who hire illegals, as taxpayers subsidize those wages by subsidizing the social safety net of services that illegals avail themselves of;
  • 27% of those incarcerated in our federal prison system are illegal aliens;
  • over 3,000 murder warrants are outstanding for illegal alien suspects;
  • for every illegal alien the U.S. Border patrol interdicts, 3-5 additional border-jumpers enter the United States undetected;
  • there were 1, 180,000 interdictions in 2005, so as many as 5+ million illegals made it in without apprehension;
  • 48,000 OTMs ("Other Than Mexicans") came to the U.S. in 2005 from "countries of interest" -- i.e., countries that recruit, train, support, and export terrorists; accordingly, as many as 240,000 OTMs from "countries of interest" entered the U.S. without being interdicted;
  • 30,000 members of the notorious MS-13 gang, comprised of illegal aliens, are now in this country and the problem is so bad that the FBI has had to set up a special task force;
  • 45% of today's population of illegal aliens originally entered this country legally and not across its southern border, but have over-stayed their visas;
  • "Sanctuary City" laws that preclude local police authorities from challenging the citizenship of suspected illegals are "ridiculous" and thwart better "interior enforcement" of immigration law; and, sadly, lead to unnecessary violence, including homicides.
  • ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is under-manned at the borders and so grossly under-staffed that interior enforcement of immigration laws is virtually impossible or so slow-acting as to be rendered useless;
  • businesses must be mandated to perform Social Security checks on employees and prospective employees through a national database.

Rep. Tancredo urged members of the audience to write to "all levels of government" and insist that our borders be secured and that meaningful immigration reform not include blanket amnesty or a "Guest Worker Program" designed to be tantamount to amnesty -- what, with a wry smile, he referred to as "Amnesty-Lite."

Congressman Tancredo was joined on the speakers' dais by: Curtis Collier, co-founder and president, U.S. Border Watch; Louise Whiteford of Texans for Immigration Reform, Inc.; and, Dave Kleimann, a local businessman and candidate for the Texas Senate from District #3. There were also representatives on hand from The Minutemen, who, I should add, are presently doing surveillance of illegal alien day labor sites in the greater Houston area. There were no protesters in the meeting room or at the entrance to the Lonestar Convention Center that I could see.


I became aware of this meeting via a flier left in my mailbox from the Dave Kleimann campaign. My wife and I know Mr. Kleimann and have done business with him previously. I checked the "Houston Chronicle's" print edition today and there was no mention of
today's Town Hall meeting in Conroe, TX -- not even in the "Conroe" supplement of the newspaper! Of course, the Houston Chronicle opposes much of what Congressman Tancredo stands for vis-a-vis border security and immigration reform. The Chronicle, as an example, endorses Houston's misguided "Sanctuary City" policy. I find it interesting that a town hall meeting lacking MSM publicity drew such a solid crowd today -- more people, really, than the room could comfortably accomodate. Many people stood along the walls of the meeting room; and more people were actually outside of the room in the hallway. To me this size crowd belies the leap in logic the Houston Chronicle's editorial board made earlier this week in pointing to scant attendance at "Stop The Invasion" rallies held across the country last Saturday. If the Houston Chronicle had a reporter at today's Conroe meeting, it will be interesting to see how the crowd's size is described or the meaning of such obvious interest is depicted. As an aside, I thank my wife for attending with me and taking the digital photograph of Congressman Tancredo at work.