Posted on 04/08/2005 1:46:00 AM PDT by BurbankKarl
President Bush has called the Minutemen, who are now patrolling the U.S.-Mexican border:"vigilantes." I suppose that Bush believes anyone who wishes to help enforce our laws and maintain U.S. sovereignty is a vigilante. If our president had not abdicated his responsibility in this matter, the Minuteman Project would not exist. However, he did and they are doing a great job!
Despite the erroneous propaganda perpetuated by the liberal media, the ACLU, the Mexican government, and even our president, the Minutemen are not a group of wild-eyed racists--with bloodlust in their hearts. They are retired police officers, former military men, laborers, businessmen, moms, and dads, in short--they are a cross section of America. The only difference between these Americans and most of us, is the fact that they are willing to sacrifice their time and are even willing to put themselves in harm's way. They like most of us, are fed up with our government's lack of interest in enforcing our borders.
Much has been made of the fact that many of the Minutemen volunteers carry firearms.They do not chase down illegals with guns drawn. They are carrying weapons for self-defense purposes only. They do not apprehend suspects. They are simply operating as the eyes and ears of the incredibly under-staffed U.S. Border Patrol. The area along the Arizona border with Mexico (where the Minutemen are stationed) has become a very violent sector, filled with Latin American drug smugglers. Perhaps, we should remind the left that we as U.S. citizens, still have the right to bear arms.
The Minutemen have taken on the responsibility of spotting and reporting anyone seen, illegally crossing the border. Period.
The Project's duties were well described by Minuteman spokesman Mike McGarry this weekend, he said : "You observe them, report them, and get out of the way."
This past weekend saw the first patrols of the Minutemen, which yielded several arrests of illegal aliens. On Saturday, volunteers spotted and reported sightings of illegal crossings. Their actions resulted in 18 arrests.
As of Tuesday (three days after patrols began), the Minutemen were responsible for aiding in the arrest of 176 illegal aliens. These numbers will continue to rise and by the end of April, this dedicated group of men and women will have done their country a great service. With every illegal alien who is apprehended, President Bush looks a bit more foolish and impotent.
The current and widening split in the GOP over this issue should be reffered to as Malkinization or becoming heavily Malkinized.
I think the MSM has successfully spun the story into a so what story. Nobody denies the problem, everyone admits there is a problem, and thus they turn the minutemen ito champions of stating the obvious.
I agree with the minutman project. It has succeeded in drawing attention. It has not succeeded because it has not changed any opionions.
Hillary will never get more than 43% of the vote (heck, thats what Bill got in 1992). Hence, the RATs will find another Perot as a 3rd party candidate. The only problem the next go-round, is that the wacky far left of the democratic party might also splinter off if Hillary tries to move to the center.
Hillary won't need to move any farther right - 43% will do if whoevers in charge of formulating Dim strategy in 08 finds a pro-border enforcement version of Perot.
The GOP will have no answer.
Kinda scary!
I had a conversation just the other day with a fellow who was trying to convince me how WONDERFUL open borders were.
Then I found out he was a One World Order type of guy.
All I could do was wonder "What in the HECK are you doing here, then?"
The vast majority of Americans, Republicans and Democrats want illegal immigrations stopped. If President Bush would enforce our borders his popularity would be higher.
In the next election if either a moderate or a conservative Republican campaigned on closing our borders it would be immensely popular. They would probably pick up blue collar Democrat votes and they sure would not be alienating very many Republicans on that issue.
Border control and a tough stance on illegals is a winning issue. Look at Prop 200 and Prop 187. These types of initiatives always win. Virtual unknown candidates in Utah and SoCal almost unseated incumbent Republicans (Cannon and Dreier) despite being outspent 10 to 1 and being attacked by the full weight of the Republican machine.
Very few of us voted for President Bush because we were happy about his position on immigration. Border control is a recipe for Republican victory.
If Texas ever gets it's own version of the Minutemen running, I'll be volunteering some weekend time.
Yes, that's how I read your original post here.
Take a trip to Storm Lake in NW Iowa sometime. It used to be a quiet college town. From what I've heard, after a meat packing plant was built a few years ago -- no doubt with the usual gov't subsidies (e.g. tax relief) that follow every promise of hundreds of new {say it with reverence} JOBS!!! -- crime went way up. Now, guess who filled those new JOBS!!!. That's right. It got to be such a hot-button issue that Iowa Public Television did a fluff piece on the immigrants who live in Storm Lake, in order to portray them all as normal families with normal family values (which, undoubtedly, is true for some of them).
The problem with our Southern border is two fold. One is migrant labor wanting to cross without going through the legal process and jumping back across the border after the get what they came for. Some stay to work the system and leech public resources via identity fraud or through "bleeding heart" social(-ist) programs. the second problem is that due to this porous border, we are wide open to ANY foriegner that can make it to Mexico. This includes Iraqi's, Jordanians, Egyptians, Iranians, and all kinds of folks who don't like us and our President says we are supposedly at war with.
Getting control of our borders does not mean we are anti-immigration. We just want CONTROL of it so that we know WHO is coming here and why. That shouldn't be too much to ask.
GOOD for you!
Alas...I can't go, but I've already started putting some cash aside so I can at LEAST make a decent donation!!
Agreed.
Iowa already has an illegal alien problem, though. In fact, a couple stories made the national news during the past few months. A lot of them protested at the state capitol a few weeks ago because the Iowa Supreme Court denied driver's licenses to illegals.
If they were ID'd as illegals at that protest, then why wasn't the INS on-hand to round them up? Isn't that their fricken job?
Right you are.
Hillary has already gotten to the right of Bush on this issue.
And what does he care? He's not running for re-election.
Astonished... simply astonished....
"What is so "hard line" about enforcing our borders?"
?I'm confused. I think you may have misread my post. I am extremely hard lined myself about this issue, having lived in Texas and S. Cal. I voted for prop. 187 years ago when it overwhelmingly passed. I've refused to give the GOP money lately, sending a note along with their requests stating that Bush's appeasement policy on illegal immigration is the reason and that I'll be sending the money to the MMP instead. I'll also be voting for any candidate (except Hillary and most other democrats) that will have a solid anti-illegal immigration policy, even if it costs the GOP an election. It may get them back on track to what their party-base wants.
So, I believe we are on the same side - and I may even be more to the right on this?
Sloth: Unlike voting for Republicans, which makes you feel vaguely guilty, but still accomplishes nothing.
Good point. And what if touching yourself makes you feel vaguely guilty?
Do you really want to know?
What is the legal definition of ‘legal’, anyway?
From law.com:
legal
adj., adv. according to law, not in violation of law or anything related to the law.
That seems to be pretty straightforward- now look at the legal definition of the opposed word, ‘illegal’-
illegal
1) adj. in violation of statute, regulation or ordinance, which may be criminal or merely not in conformity. Thus, an armed robbery is illegal, and so is an access road which is narrower than the county allows, but the violation is not criminal.
Well of course armed robbery is illegal; it’s a violation of the 8th Commandment. But if a narrow access road is illegal, how can it NOT be criminal?
Because any statute, regulation, ordinance or act that does anything OTHER than describe punishment for violations of Commandments 6 through 10 are not laws that affect the people! They are merely governmental policies, and only governmental entities must ‘conform’ to them!
(That’s how the government gets around the ‘Congress shall make no law’ part of the Constitution.)
Illegals get everything we do and then some precisely BECAUSE they are 'illegal'.... or to put it in simpler terms because THEY are still 'natural persons' (human beings) according to *law*.
Natural persons are NOT under the jurisdiction of ANY governmental entity UNLESS they violate Commandments 6 to 10!
THIS is why our Government kisses Fox's behind!
(Also how the politicians don't have to adhere to the 'law' BTW)
The US government is terrified that the American people will discover that the heritage of freedom bequeathed to us by the Founders has been taken from generations of Americans by the lies and deceit of the very people who were entrusted with guarding it!
(I know this probably sounds confusing. I do know what I'm talking about, even if I don't explain it very well:)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.