Posted on 02/07/2007 5:16:42 PM PST by Ladycalif
This may rank as one of the most foolish, inadvisable statements ever made by anyone let alone a politician. He will live to regret it. Retraction and apolgies need to be offered.
"In fact, the current configuration of our land borders didn't come into existence until February 14, 1912, when Arizona became the last of the 48 contiguous states to join the union. Oklahoma had joined in 1907, and New Mexico January 6, 1912."
The borders of those then-US territories were no different than the borders of the US states now. As far as people flowing freely, criminals were pursued. I'm sure you've heard of Pancho Villa and Pershing's "Punitive Expedition."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancho_Villa_Expedition
Capitalism dependant on business models based on breaking the law? Damn straight. I suppose you are all for loan sharking and protection rackets as well; good capitalist enterprises that they are.
Oh, you've hurt my feelings with that witty, albeit nonsensical, remark.
As far as the substance of your reply,
--Your link merely showed that the President can in fact fire Sutton (and see 28 USC 541(c): "Each United States attorney is subject to removal by the President.")
--He can pardon the border agents immediately. A review of the case doesn't require him to wait years for a transcript to be released while innocent men have their lives ruined. He's a "compassionate conservative," remember?
I don't think Sutton's half-truths would pass the muster with Poe.
I'd pay to see that hearing. :-)
He may as well have. It's his open border policy and nonsensical amnesty program for illegals that is fueling the increasing trafic across the border.
Ya might wanna check what part of that post TT wrote,
and what part was written by the person he was responding to. :-)
Oops, thanks! My bad.
Nice of you to completely ignore the main point while trying to steer the discussion into a useless sidebar. The stone cold fact is that our borders have been wide open throughout our history. To point out this fact does not equate with wanting out-of-control illegal immigration to contiue. However, we are a nation with no historical precedent for having closed, heavily fenced borders, so agitating for such is like spitting into the teeth of a hurricane. Can be done, but not without a lot of unpleasant blowback.
FYI, I have always been a square peg trying to fit in a round hole.. all because I do ask questions and think for myself.
Oh, BTW...the borders of the United States most certainly did not extend to their present configuration before the various territories became states. The citizens of the territories could just as easily have voted to become independent nations as to join the union.
The use of a pardon is in no way a discarding of the separation of powers. It is a Constitutional exercise of a specific power given to the Executive as a check on a corrupt or incompetent judiciary. It is also not, as you indicated earlier, a tacit admission of guilt, but is actually a tacit reproof of a miscarriage of justice. That certain recent Democrat-ick Administrations used the power a a Crackerjacks prize, notwithstanding.
You're the one who raised the issue, so don't go getting all snippy if I point out a few details that don't quite mesh with the direction you prefer to go yourself. The choice for these US territories, in the early nineteen hundreds, was to remain a territory or to become a state. Nationhood was never really on the table. The borders of these respective territories were the same then as they are now, as states. Actual, limited warfare was fought over incursions into US territory, by Mexico. This is hardly a "useless sidebar."
The president would seemingly be delighted with totally open borders, unrestricted immigration, and a unified North American Union to replace the current United States.
At least, that's the conclusion I've reached from observing him these past few years.
I shudder when I think of our future here in America.
You can quarrel all you want, but the central point I made remains. The United States has never had closed land borders. Our borders have not even been conrolled in the modern sense until the 2nd half of the 20th century. Stating this in no way argues in favor of the current state of affairs. However, it is important to the current debate to understand that we have no historical tradition of closed land borders, and that makes closing them now all the more difficult.
"You can quarrel all you want"
LOL, you're being argumentative but I'm "quarreling." You Delphi adherents are a hoot.
What the heck is a "Delphi adherent?" Quarrel, argue, debate...all different ways to say the same thing.
Well DUH! I gave a few examples. If you can't see that our American culture is being shredded, then you must either live in a Stone Mountain...or you are unfortunately blind. It really is not arguable that the culture is now becoming aztlan norte.
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.