Lott backs use of troops to protect U.S. borders

Denver Post ^ | November 13, 2002 | Michael Riley

[grania]

The incoming majority leader of the Senate said that he now supports sending troops to protect U.S. borders, an indication the Republican Party may harden its stance on immigration after last week's sweep in midterm elections. Speaking last week on the "O'Reilly Factor," a conservative talk show on the Fox News Network, Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., said the troops could not only shut down traffic of illegal immigrants but also help stop drug trafficking and cross-border crime.

"Most politicians run around worried about civil libertarians and being sued by the ACLU," Lott said on the Thursday night broadcast, according to a transcript of the interview posted on the Fox News website. "This is not only a porous border in terms of illegal aliens, it's also a porous border with regard to crime and drugs."

A hot-button issue in the national immigration debate, militarizing the border would reverse a long-standing commitment to civilian enforcement, opponents say. Supporters - including U.S. Rep Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., an outspoken opponent of current immigration policy - say it's the only effective way to stem a tide of terrorists and illegal immigrants.

Tancredo, who until now has found little support on the issue among top Republicans, seemed as surprised as anyone at the change of attitude of the Senate's most powerful Republican.

"I hope this strong stance by the Senate majority leader will garner a shift in the administration's approach to securing our borders," Tancredo, who chairs the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus, said in a statement.

Lott's office said he hasn't drafted legislation to authorize the deployment of troops.

Tancredo hasn't sponsored such a bill either, but he repeatedly has called on Bush to deploy troops by executive order.

Angela Kelly, assistant director of the National Immigration Forum in Washington, said placing troops on the border is unlikely to stop the flow of illegal immigrants, but it could increase violations of human rights.

"What the military is trained to do and what the border patrol is trained to do are very different missions," Kelly said. "You risk some terrible mistakes if you don't have people properly trained to enforce our immigration laws."

[Joe Hadenuf]

Excellent post!

[I_Love_My_Husband]

pingy

[WRhine]

But will we keep the republic? As George Washington said.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Our Republic form of government as well as our great heritage is most definitely under attack on many fronts. Will we preserve our republic for future generations like our forefathers did? The events of recent times doesn't encourage much optimism but somehow, someway, I think we will. But the challenge is in the here and now. We can't put off our problems any longer because they are politically charged.

[Intolerant in NJ]

That said, I think that we can expect some further fall out, now that the Left has successfully flexed their muscle...Interesting passage from A.Coulter's Slander I ran across today:
"An annoying typical Republican response to liberal hate speech is to attack one's friends in order to appease one's enemies. Democrats still hate the Republican appeasers, they just hate them a little less. And when it comes time for the left to tear down the conciliators, these Republican "moderates" won't have many friends left willing to defend them. As Winston Chruchill said, appeasment reflects the hope that the crocodile will eat you last. With some portion of (admittedly craven) Republicans casually acknowledging the liberal premise that conservatives are mean and hateful, the left is emboldened to carry on with ever greater insolence."
Prescient.....

[PatrioticAmerican]

I support troops on the border, but only in a temporary capacity and only under authority and rule of the border patrol. With any luck, the two could cooperate and limit the flow of illegals. Alll this is useless, of course, unless we enforce the laws on the books that ban giving welfare to illegals, giving them jobs, and providing housing.

[Mr. Mojo]

What do you think the primary reason is for the administration's adamant open-borders policy? Is it about securing cheap labor for companies that donate heavily to the GOP? Is it about attempting to buy votes? Is it about political correctness? Is it about some NWO fantasy? Whatever the reason, this (and past) administrations have thought open-borders to be important enough to actual risk a terrorist attack on our nations that could simultaneously destroy our economy and kill millions of citizens. One would think that watching a 747 fly directly over the WH and minutes later smash into the Pentagon would've set their priorites straight, but alas, their resolve to keep the status quo actually seems to have strenghened!

[Ohioan]

Ann is a very bright young woman.

The passage you quote is right on the money!

William Flax

[SwordofTruth]

It's nice to know that there are some freepers who get it.

Lott was not only put on the sidelines because of his new stand on border security, but also because of his commitment to pass the ban on partial-birth abortion.

[Centurion2000]

I was looking at some back posts, and found this gem. What a coincidence...Senator Lott supports using the military on the border, and soon after he lacks support as Senate Majority Leader. Hmmmm........

Perhaps that FBI file hanging over his head is expired now ?

[SwordofTruth]

As is known, the US has been experiencing a shortage of qualified healthcare professionals.

There is not a shortage of Americans applying to medical school. This so called shortage is being manufactured by a policy of having a very low cap on the number of Americans that can be accepted into US medical schools. Looks like Indians will start replacing more than just American IT workers, US doctors appear to be next in line for mass layoffs.

[Intolerant in NJ]

Lott was not only put on the sidelines because of his new stand on border security, but also because of his commitment to pass the ban on partial-birth abortion......and he failed to get Clinton convicted in the Senate after impeachment (even though there were never enough votes to get that accomplished and if it had happened, Gore would have been an incumbent president going into 2000 and Bush would not be in the White House now), and because he tried to be nice to the 'rats with a deadlocked Senate after 2000 (in accordance with Bush's wish for a kinder, gentler, bipartisan spirit in DC), and......the list of inevitable grievance against an ML trying to compromise and accommodate a group as evenly split as the Senate to try to get something done can go on and on - it'll be interesting to see how people feel about Frist in a year or two.......

[WRhine]

One would think that watching a 747 fly directly over the WH and minutes later smash into the Pentagon would've set their priorites straight, but alas, their resolve to keep the status quo actually seems to have strenghened!

Incredible, isn't it? Bush's answer seems to be to spend umpteen billions on creating a police state for the citizens of America while leaving our borders wide open and continuing the policy of importing hundreds of thousands of middle easterners into this country every year. Meanwhile Bush can't seem to find enough new enemies and wars for America to engage itself in while the WOT is put on the back burner.

It's a conflicting rat's nest of misguided policies doomed to failure.

Regarding your questions my take is that Bush wants to merge Mexico with the U.S. for all intents and purposes for whatever wacky NWO impulse that drives him, his dad and their One World buddies. IMO, it’s more than cheap labor and votes they will never get but that is certainly part of it.

[GrandMoM]

bump

[Sabertooth]

I was looking at some back posts, and found this gem. What a coincidence...Senator Lott supports using the military on the border, and soon after he lacks support as Senate Majority Leader. Hmmmm........

You're looking too hard in the wrong direction.

This was just Trent Lott in pander mode. After this comment on O'Reilly, his office revealed that there was no "troops on the border" legislation in the works. Trent Lott was no hardliner on the borders or Illegal Aliens, hagiographers notwithstanding.

Did you ever hear of James "no mass deportations" Ziglar? He's the outgoing INS Chief. Wanna know how he got the job?

He's a childhood chum of Trent Lott. Pure political patronage.

Lott lost his job as Senate Majority Leader because he shot his mouth off one too many times sounding sympathetic to the Dixiecrats and the Old South. Even if he'd turned over a new leaf on Illegal Aliens, he was damaged goods, and could never have gotten anything effective done.

This is not an endorsement of Bill Frist's positions on Illegals. He'll have to be watched very closely.

[AFCdt]

Give me a break! They are trained to DEFEND this country. Bring them home to do THEIR JOBS. I bet the great American servicemen and women would much happier guarding the United States than they would guarding a bunch of Moslem Kosovars who use the shield of the NATO forces to destroy churches and murder Serbian Christians.

What we are trained to do is KILL America's enemies through over-whelming force.

When we aren't deployed, fighting our country's wars, we should be training. You can't train someone to fight if they are patrolling the border and rounding up illegals.

In my opinion, the only rational solution is to bolster the Border Patrol. That's what they are there for.

[RnMomof7]

He didn't mean it..it was a political statement..nothing more,they are almost all on the same page and it ain't in the book we are reading

[RnMomof7]

Ping to that truth saber

[WRhine]

This is not an endorsement of Bill Frist's positions on Illegals. He'll have to be watched very closely.

Since you got what you wanted you better watch this guy closely. If Frist's past record on immigration legislation is any indication, he will rubber stamp every Bush initiative to compounded the twin crisis of illegal and legal immigration into a greater nightmare for America. Lott, despite your propaganda, had a much better record on immigration reform than Frist.

Didn't you once say that you were a libertarian? I think you still are.

[Sabertooth]

Lott, despite your propaganda, had a much better record on immigration reform than Frist.

Section 245(i) was extended twice with Trent Lott as SML.

[A CA Guy]

The border is the issue of our time and remains just below the radar due to the war on terror.