Border Wars

In a world filled with turmoil and chaos, there is at least one thing we can always count on. Namely, the editorial board of the New York Times. Whatever the issue, whatever the crisis, the paper's "thinkers" are absolutely certain to spout the most conventional of conventional liberal wisdom.

This week, as always, the Times did not disappoint. "The besieged border is a myth," its editorial declared, "and the arrival of a few thousand weary refugee children on buses does not make the myth true."

Apparently the tens of thousands of children living in makeshift camps are merely a mirage. And the Border Patrol agents are evidently lying when they lament that things are completely out of control. After all, who are you going to believe? An editorial writer living on Manhattan's Upper West Side, or the lying eyes of people who are actually at the border trying to help tens of thousands of desperate kids?

The Times also describes the illegal aliens as "refugees," thereby implying that they are leaving their homes in Central America to escape violence and the threat of death.

But a far more honest assessment of the situation comes from Fox News intelligence correspondent Catherine Herridge, who has revealed the findings of a report assembled by U.S. authorities at the border. Agents interviewed 230 immigrants who had recently crossed the Rio Grande. 219 of them – 95%! – said their main reason for coming to the USA was their expectation that unaccompanied children will be allowed to stay.

These poor children and their parents are well aware that the United States under President Obama is not likely to deport them. The numbers bear that out: In 2008, President Bush's final year in office, more than 8,000 children were sent home to their native countries; last year fewer than 1,700 were returned. Obviously, parents in El Salvador and Guatemala and Honduras can read the tea leaves – paying a smuggler to get their child to Texas is a pretty good bet.

Something else very interesting happened this week. When mostly white folks in Murrieta, California protested against illegal immigrants being housed in their town, it was easy for liberal outlets to mock them as nativists and Neanderthals. But now there are also protests in mostly black precincts, where locals complain about the billions being spent on foreign children. Meanwhile, comedian Paul Rodriguez, who came here legally from Mexico, shocked a host on CNN when he urged the feds to return the kids to their countries. It does not fit the left-wing playbook when American minorities protest the influx of illegal immigrants.

This entire crisis belongs squarely to President Obama. Just as he should have seen the coming of a terrorist state in the Middle East, he and his advisors should have known that this border crisis was on the southern horizon. There were plenty of warnings from Texas Governor Rick Perry and many others.

So now, while the president vacations, tees it up, and raises millions from fat-cat Democratic donors, we are faced with a bizarre and tragic situation. The federal government is flying frightened and lonely children to various states without even notifying the governors of those states. Legal analysts Kimberly Guilfoyle and Lis Wiehl report that the feds are acting within the law. But forget the law for a moment, what about decency and cooperation? Shouldn't the governors of Iowa and Nebraska be informed that hundreds of children are being settled in their states?

The Central American children must be treated with decency and respect during their time in America, but their stay here should be as brief as possible. President Obama must let Central Americans know that entering the United States illegally will lead to a return trip, post haste.

Democratic Congressman John Lewis sent out this message the other day: "This is America. Our doors are open." No, Congressman, our doors are not open, no more than the doors to your house are open. We expect visitors from other countries to do the right thing. Before barging in and expecting to be housed and fed, they should try knocking first. Just as they would be expected to do at Mr. Lewis's home, or at the swanky townhouse of any of those loons on the New York Times editorial board.

  • Bob Hadley

    OK, correct me if I’m wrong, but Pres. Obama’s policy of not enforcing immigration laws on illegal children immigrant only pertain to children who came here prior to ’08 (or was it ’07).
    It’s entirely possible that parents just South of Mexico listen to the right-wing media’s drumbeat accusing Pres. Obama of favoring amnesty for children, favoring open borders and generally being lax on illegal immigration. This may be one factor in the surge of children immigrating from just South of Mexico. Of course, it’s not a complete explanation.

  • Josh

    There’s compassion, and then there’s political buffoonery displayed by people whose lives aren’t affected whatsoever–at least not yet–by this open-door arrangement.

    It reminds me of a lot of things in America that these smug, elite progressives ignore and/or misrepresent as long as it happens outside of their comfort zones. Chicago, for instance, is ignored wholesale. After all, it’s just blacks killing blacks, and it’s the fault of Republicans, apparently, for not giving unlimited amounts of money to be blindly dropped into the communities to help white progressives appease their guilt. But let the crime start spilling over. Let those rich neighborhoods come up with a few gunshot victims, drug dealers on their corners, etc. National crisis level: 10.

    Or take something that’s unfortunately off of most people’s radar, like genetically engineered food. This is something thoroughly tested by scientists and by three different federal government organizations (EPA, FDA, USDA). But because some well-fed tree-huggers believe in their guts and souls that man isn’t supposed to tamper with nature, organizations like Greenpeace and other nuts run around pushing the panic button, talking entire nations out of accepting the gift of modified crops that would bring an abundance of food to the people who are literally dying by the thousands from starvation.

    (This should be a high-priority issue in American media, but it’s rarely mentioned. These progressives are assisting in the deaths of millions around the globe by obstructing progress.)

    No science behind it. Not even any anecdotal evidence. Just nonsense about nature, and an anti-corporation spin that seeks to keep industrialized civilization out of third-world nations because we’d somehow be hurting dying people by feeding them. Their natural way of life is a superior way of life, according to leftist buffoons who eat regularly, have shelter and have options.

    (Like the immigrant deal, these same people would have no problem allowing them all in America though. Just come on in and live our way of life. But trying to gift our way of life to where they’re at? Oh, that’s oppression. You can’t make this stuff up; it’s too nonsensical.)

    It’s so damn easy to sit smugly in opposition to something based on feel-good fodder when it’s not you who’s being affected.