The NY Times blames the US: "Mexico's drug cartels are nourished from outside, by American cash, heavy weapons and addiction; the northward pull of immigrants is fueled by our demand for low-wage labor." Which befuddles O’Reilly, but why? (click to read O'Reillys Article)
To a large degree the New York Times is absolutely correct! The government’s response however becomes even more illogical given the obvious facts and threats to national sovereignty. Perhaps one of Reagan’s greatest mistakes was granting amnesty to illegal aliens in 1986; not so much in the granting of amnesty to almost 3 million illegals, but that it set a precedent which the left has seized upon in the current debate on the issue.
In signing the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, Reagan’s sold the Bill to the public as a crackdown with stiff penalties for employers who hired illegals. Regrettably, the strict sanctions on employers were stripped out of the bill for passage. Equally neglected by this pathway to citizenship is that it was not intended to be automatic. Indeed, the legislation stipulated several conditions: immigrants had to pay application fees, learn to speak English, understand American civics, pass a medical exam and register for military selective service. Those with convictions for a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible.
In the twenty years hence all of these stipulations have fallen to the wayside with the Open Borders crowd largely controlling the debate. Until 1986; George Bush signed the Secure Fence Act of 2006 granting the secretary of Homeland Security 18 months to get "operational control over U.S. international land and maritime borders" by improving surveillance through personnel and technology as well as "physical infrastructure enhancements to prevent unlawful border entry and facilitate border access by U.S. Customs and Border Protection."
To date only 34 miles of the fence has been built with the project largely gutted by the Janet Napolitano Homeland Security Department under the Barack Obama administration. Janet Napolitano opposes any physical fencing with the promise of 1200 additional border security agents only rhetorical as the promised agents are to be administrative and not physical posted at the border. The Guard troops will not be involved in law enforcement activities such as arrests of illegal immigrants, but will assist border patrol officers looking for the illegal border crossers and smugglers as well as in intelligence gathering. The airmen and soldiers will be armed, but they will be limited by rules of engagement that allow them to shoot only to defend themselves.
As a result of the feckless efforts by the Napolitano Homeland Security Department, border states have been left to fend for themselves and as in the case of Arizona’s passage of SB 1070 are met with swift rebuke from the Obama Administration without ever reading the Bill.
Additionally, immediately after passage Arizona was threatened with boycott by the Open Borders sycophants emblematic in passage of the resolution against Arizona by the Los Angeles City Council. The Los Angeles Resolution seeks to cut off official travel to Arizona and instructs the city’s attorney to review the almost $58 million in contracts with Arizona companies, in an act which is unconstitutional. The Constitution’s commerce clause reserves the regulation of interstate and foreign commerce to the federal government, and the Supreme Court has held that state and local interference in such areas is prohibited.
Nonetheless instead of remanding the unconstitutional boycotts to the DOJ for tortious interference in interstate business under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause, Eric Holder with the blessing of the Barack Obama administration has chosen to challenge Arizona’s SB 1070 in federal court. The irony is that had the federal government but done its job enforcing immigration laws neither the passage of Arizona’s SB 1070 nor the suit by the DOJ would have been necessary.
The Barack Obama Administration’s position since the inception of this debate has been anti-American and pro-Open Borders, continually pandering to the Illegal population to the detriment of the nation. The political 'Can' which has become the Illegal Immigration debate can no longer be kicked down the road, only don’t look to this President to act in the interest of the Legal Taxpaying American Citizens; neither expect the Republicans to go anywhere near this politically charged third rail in an election year. Until that time when America has an Administration willing to uphold their Constitutional obligations the onus is upon the individual citizen and the States to defend themselves against illegal intrusion and an overbearing Federal Government.
Source material (click links below to read source material):
http://ndn.org/blog/2010/07/doj-sues-arizona-over-sb1070-news-roundup
Posted by Michael from IL - Town Hall commentator
9/4/2010. 
No comments:
Post a Comment