Great read, though your catch-and-release simile doesn’t hold. Releasing a trout has little effect on feeding once it recovers. A trout may become more “selective” about what it eats, but it can still be fooled by an artificial fly. It doesn’t learn how to not get caught.
Oh boy. I happen to be one “ranting old man” on a keyboard cheering on the confrontation between 26 governors and the regime illegally sponsoring what is quite obviously an invasion, no matter how “mostly peaceful” it may be, but who certainly doesn’t envision this stand as leading to the carnage of Gettysburg, Antietam, and Shiloh. This is a different time, a different issue, and a different citizenry -- one that is far more cynical and less religious, and consequently lacking anywhere near the level of moral conviction possessed by 19th century abolitionists and states’ rights idealists. Believe me, I do honor that conviction, but don’t entertain any hope or desire of resurrecting either it or the “the last full measure of devotion” that it inspired at Pickett’s Charge and elsewhere.
But this invasion must be opposed vigorously by all those who do honor their identity and heritage, which was consecrated by the blood of all those who have died, not only at Gettysburg, but at Normandy and Chosin Reservoir and Fallujah and a thousand other places. Waiting for the next election, and 3.2 million more migrant invaders on our soil is not an option.
My guess is that the moment Biden federalizes the National Guard against half of the states, his regime will collapse like the house of cards that it is.
The nullification of the West is precisely what is happening in huge swaths of the UK, France, and Germany, thanks to unrestrained Muslim immigration, which is doing what Ottoman sultans of old could never have dreamed of accomplishing. All the British government can think of now is some harebrained scheme shipping its surplus migrants to Rwanda.
Here, the surprising size and virulence of the pro-Palestinian death-to-Israel protests reveals something comparable transpiring on our soil. Sure, the history of the world is that of cultures and populations succumbing to other ones, but usually the vanquished have fought against their conquerors.
I'm no expert (well, my sister in law is Brazilian of Japanese parents) but slavery ended in Brazil maybe 3 decades after our Civil war peacefully, by decree, possibly because the steam engine rendered obsolete a lot of manual labor. There are huge disparities between ethnic groups in Brazil, but relatively little ethnic strife - no Civil war, no reconstruction, no constitutional amendments, no Jim Crow, no Civil rights acts, no affirmative action, no DEI, and NO "anti-racism"
Glenn: Excellent points to ponder, as usual! However, one "nit pick" about your "Pickett's Charge" comment: That "Advance" is properly called the "Trimble-Pettigrew-Pickett Advance." I'm guessing Pickett gets the credit as his brigade was the freshest, BUT, he was at the right of the Confederate line of battle, and moved to his left oblique to attack "The Angle" held by the Union. J. Pettigrew was leading the center assault with Trimble behind Pettigrew's men. I went to college there, and our history profs almost always called it "Pettigrew's Advance!" Just want to give Pettigrew his shot at glory! LOL
WOW! I assume you had Bloom for CC and Bugbee for Civil War? I should've been in class of '68, but Winkelmann gave me an F in Comp. Anatomy---with a 79.55 average, that I KNEW had to "round up" to an 80, meaning a B-. Also, the highest grade in our class, a coed of course, was an 84, so I really was hoping for an A- on a curve. Instead, the Bio Dept. thought I needed to "grow up," I "de-matriculated" and spent 2 years active duty in the Marines, and finished up in the class of 1970! I was a freshman your senior year, and knew a lot of your classmates from the band with E. Douglas Danfelt as our leader!
Small freakin' world---BUT, from your unusually cogent and erudite comments, I should've KNOWN you were a 'Burgian! LOL
Amnesty n. the state’s magnanimity to those offenders whom it would be too expensive to punish
Ambrose Bierce Devil’s Dictionary
You are witnessing the Cloward and Piven strategy coming to fruition but there are solutions.
Not secession but rather CommonSenseCession beginning with 30-31 states controlled by Republicans creating an informal alliance to stand together and nullify unconstitutional neo-Marxist fascist mandates while at the same time passing common sense legislation such as barring men from women’s sports.
Do a search for ‘Adler von Pfingsten Pamphlets’ and you will find Pamphlet No.6 CommonSenseCession and Pamphlet No.7 Kate Steinle IMRA (Illegal Migrant Registration Act) with the details.
Imagine congress chartering the Migrant Conditional Admission Bank migrants would be required to use; a bank that would issue “ATM” cards with biometric identification that would replace SS cards and be connected via camera capable ATM machines for direct communication with the INS among many other uses.
Yes, 'Brandon' backed down from the border, in a direct confrontation sort of way, BUT notice he just cancelled LNG exports in an effort to sock it to Texas economically.
Hopefully Abbott will shout from the rooftops of Biden's economic warfare so all TEXANS know how leftists roll so that TX votes deep RED in Nov.
But beware about hoping for a hot civil war -- They will use that as an EXCUSE for Martial Law and suspend the Nov election, kinda like Ukraine did I think. 🤔
We would have thought that instituting all mail-in voting in 2020 was a bridge too far too, until it happened. Non-leftists are actually working very diligently on eradicating a lot of the avenues that the left used in 2020 so imo if they feel they cannot rig it like they did in 2020 they won't hesitate to declare martial law and suspend elections if that is what it takes. They are the team of "By Any Means Necessary"
If Biden is trying to "sock it to Texas economically" then he's going about it in a funny way. He's locking up oil and gas drilling land in other states, while most of Texas drilling land is on private land that he can't lock up. The end result is that Texas still pumps just as much oil and gas, and gets a higher price for it because the supply from other states is lessened.
No, I don't, and I'm going to take the time to research it.
Because I do know that LNG is only a small fraction of the oil and gas industry of Texas. What Biden is doing with respect to the rest -- the vast majority of the Texas oil and gas industry -- is to drive prices higher by preventing drilling elsewhere.
That directly and dramatically benefits Texas, and hardly qualifies as "socking it to them economically." (And it's at the expense, I might add, of such non-oil-producing Blue states as Minnesota, all of New England, Washington, Oregon, Illinois etc.)
By restricting competing supply and thereby driving up the price of oil and gas, Joe Biden is the best thing that's happened to the Texas oil and gas industry since the invention of the automobile.
That is good to hear that TX drilling is on private lands and so is not subject to being as impacted by the whims of the federal govt. Didn't Biden also institute many new regulatory actions which private drillers also must comply with?
Regarding the LNG, do you think it is a coincidence that he took the action against LNG exports on the day that TX refused to cave to his demands to open the border?
I look forward to what you can share regarding this.
Yes, I do think it's a coincidence, despite the ranting on such places as Legal Insurrection where you might have seen a contrary view.
The fact that the two things occurred on the very same day is pretty strong evidence that it wasn't in retribution. The Biden White House, and probably any White House, cannot make decisions on such a matter that quickly.
I'll agree with you there - they aren't likely competent enough to figure something like that out on the spot.
OTOH, this illegal alien border crossing issue has been building for some time, so I can see the demons in the White House clawing away for a number of weeks (if not months since Abbott started 'exporting' his illegals to blue areas) to think of how to take action against TX in an effort to force them to comply.
There is no prohibition against seceding from the union, but the South did not just secede, they fired on Sumter. It was a horrible war which we must never repeat. But the Dems want abortion to be the issue that determines the election. I think it is important to show that there are several other important policy questions to be decided by our election.
The Confederacy maintained that once they had seceded the Union had no right to station soldiers on Confederate soil. If you accept secession as legally viable, you have to accept that they were legally correct about that. Their decision to open fire may have been unwise, but technically, it made sense.
Actually, it's generally agreed by Constitutional scholars of all stripes that the Constitution prohibits secession, though it does not explicitly state that.
It seems to me there was an AZ case that set the precedent concerning the state constitution and border control years ago that will have to change first. The SCOTUS will have to treat it like R v W.
Interesting article, though I do not see how we are anywhere near a Civil War like our prior Late Unpleasantness. (By the way, George Pickett did not lead that charge, he only led one division out of three. It was overseen by James Longstreet. Finally, Updated figures are that at least 700,000 perished.)
However, YOU WROTE: " . . .whether states can defend themselves against a (mostly) peaceful invasion." I take issue with this, and the earlier comment that they are not armed.
1. The major issue you are missing here is that the people are being brought into the country in violation of existing law. Therefore, the definition of "invasion” and "armed" or "peaceful" is irrelevant.
But we can tease this out a bit. . .
2. Fentanyl is coming over the border through this mass migration exodus from the south and killing upwards of 100,000 Americans a year. They certainly are armed, and they're armed with a poison.
3. They are picking up illegals with knives, pistols, rifles, and other weapons. Ask the Border Patrol. One of my good friends is a 22-year vet. They even had one last year with a hand grenade.
4. Hands and fists and feet are used to kill hundreds of people a year in this country and thousands of people a year around the world. I believe those millions of people coming across the border have hands, fists, and feet.
5. As an attorney I believe the issue of whether they are invited or not is irrelevant constitutionally. These non-citizens are deemed illegal and are supposed to be showing up for court dates. They are not being "welcomed" under a statutory asylum program and properly vetted as they come into the country. They are flooding in, destroying hospitals, communities, generating crime waves, and changing our entire culture. That is an invasion, just like tourists flocking to Palm Beach is described as an "invasion."
6. Finally, none of the states would have signed the Constitution if it gave the power to the executive branch to "invite" or otherwise allow millions of people into the country in violation of existing law and completely change the citizenry of any given state, or the country at large.
The Constitutional language means what it says, and this is about as Black Letter as you can get.
Agree with Glenn. With the loss of life and the derangement of the country, particularly in the old CSA, as a result of that war, only what he refers to as "melodramatic keyboard warriors" want such a conflagration, not realizing the tremendous harm which will ensue. As a former Infantryman whose Father was at Chosin Reservoir in '50, I believe war is the ultimate obscenity and should occur ONLY when absolutely necessary.
Isn't it reasonable to presume that 'the goal of disgruntled conservative tribalists' is to thwart the demonstratively destructive 'goals of disgruntled progressive tribalists?'
The late Charles Krauthammer was the person credited for the intriguing binary observation that “conservatives view the left as stupid,” but “liberals view conservatives as evil.”
Which 'tribalist' is more dangerous to America's 'peace and tranquility'?
You're generally correct that the goals of conservatives, almost by definition, are to thwart the goals of liberals, and vice versa.
The problem arises when emotions take over and it becomes tribal on both sides. The result is that an asinine border policy that Americans disfavor by an 80 to 20 margin (including most democrats) is seized upon to play out a hateful and violent fantasy of a civil war between the 50/50 tribes that could kill millions.
Such fantasies are natural because we are naturally tribal. But that does not make them constructive or right. In a civilization, each individual, especially the smart ones, should not pander to his instinctive tribal emotions, but should control them -- with reason. We do have the tribal instincts of animals -- witness our pack mentalities and our herd instincts -- but we also have a brain that makes us better than that.
Few seriously think that the situation in TX will be settled with violence unless the U.S. Federales make the situation violent. And then it will be over in a day or so. It will be settled in the courts, although the federal court system is presently being operated by the usual suspects who are known to litigate the opposition into giving up their arguments at the threat of lawfare.
This is an important discussion. It seems as though "history" gets rewritten every ten or so years, starting over 500 years ago regarding this nation's roots. Who's version should the pupil rely upon?
There are many very costly problems with illegal immigration. Here are a few costly problems:
Anchor babies: Birthright citizenship is being exploited
Anti-American attitudes are becoming accepted
Anti-Semitic attitudes are becoming accepted
Attacks on Border Patrol and law enforcement agents
Attacks on free speech in America
Animal abuse increases when new cultures are introduced
Census numbers: Negative impact on congressional representation
Civil rights: Devalued by comparison to illegal actions
Child endangerment and child molestation are being excused
Closed and overcrowded hospitals and emergency rooms
Cost of translators
Consulates issuing Matricular Cards (an ID Mexico won't even accept)
Day laborers loitering and creating public hazards
Depreciated wages for Americans and legal immigrants
Deterioration of common American culture
Desecration of the American Flag: Foreign flags displayed aggressively
Disrespect for American laws
Document fraud
Drunk driving injuries and deaths: Hit and runs
Ethnic cleansing and race riots
Farm animals within city limits
Foreign influence on US politics
Gangs, graffiti, drugs, cartels, smugglers, and violence
Gang rape and unreported rapes
High birth rates and overpopulation
Human sex slavery
Identity theft
Increased crime
Increased taxes for Americans
Increased pressures on infrastructure (roads, traffic, water, sewer)
Infectious diseases
Lost American jobs
Loss of American sovereignty
Lost self-governance of American citizens Vs. Globalism and Elitism
Male chauvinism: Gender inequality
Not speaking English, loss of common language
Overcrowded schools with a negative impact on American education
Overcrowded single family homes
Overcrowded jails and prisons
Court system are overburdened
Public sanitation degradation: Trash and human waste in public areas
Remittances: $billions of dollars are transferred out of the US economy
Rule of Law: Fundamental principles of America sacrificed.
Separatist movements: Demands for autonomy
Stolen American taxpayer resources: tuition, welfare, licenses
Taxpayer funds going to special interest groups (example) "LaRaza"
Genuine terrorism threats and loss of national security
Trashing the landscape and negative impacts on the environment
The situation today is unfair to legal immigrants
Unfair business competition for law abiding companies
Unlicensed and uninsured motorists
Untaxed wages and resulting underground economy
Voter fraud (endorsed aggressively by the DNC)
These reasons require taking a firm stand. America’s stand should be to avoid giving the folks south of the border and beyond the illusion that all you need to do is just sneak over the border and all will be forgiven. I endeavor to encourage the peoples of Latin America to take the responsibility and great risk to gain control of their nation's governments so as to cure the ills that make immigrants want to break U.S. law and come here illegally. When you abandon your homeland because of political corruption and mass violence, I understand that action to be cowardly, and those people are subject to do the very same thing in their next country of choice. As for this U.S. citizen, I willfully respect the laws of this land. If the first thing that an illegal immigrant does when they set foot into the United States of America is break federal laws, those are the people that would most likely rationalize breaking other laws meant to protect the citizenry. I would rather not have them as neighbors, legal or illegal.
I agree with all that, Phillip. I think we're on the same page.
My column was simply to urge that violent threats and Civil War reenactments by hateful old men who seem not to have a clue about the horror of war (and would not be the ones to fight a war) are not the appropriate response to this problem, even if such rhetoric might make them feel good.
Instead, the appropriate response is what Governor Abbott is doing, and what we call all do in the voting booth. Vote out the politicians who won't enforce our immigration and border laws! That's the obvious solution, even though it's not nearly as fun to some people as war whoops.
Do you believe that the Biden Administration will permit Governor Abbot to continue to defend Texas? Federal judges have a history of squashing actions taken by leaders of states. Since it's an election year, Biden etal might be inclined to resist pulling the strings on their stable of willing judges in order to interfere too much with pesky conservative governors. They love to play the "innocent bystanders".
I may have more confidence in the federal judiciary than you do, having spent a career practicing law there (though for sure there are a few bad apples).
In any event, as you noted, this is an election year. So let's vote the bad guys out of office. Isn't that what we do in America?
Alternatively, I suppose we can rent and rave and make ourselves look like violent psychopaths spoiling for a fight or maybe even a war. But that's not a very good strategy for persuading America that we're reasonable and in the right. Even if, maybe especially if, it makes us feel good.
Something about 'judge shopping' seems to work for Biden.
So who is looking like violent psychopaths spoiling for a fight or maybe even a war? They're all still locked up because of that kerfuffle on 1/6/21, aren't they?
Great read, though your catch-and-release simile doesn’t hold. Releasing a trout has little effect on feeding once it recovers. A trout may become more “selective” about what it eats, but it can still be fooled by an artificial fly. It doesn’t learn how to not get caught.
Oh boy. I happen to be one “ranting old man” on a keyboard cheering on the confrontation between 26 governors and the regime illegally sponsoring what is quite obviously an invasion, no matter how “mostly peaceful” it may be, but who certainly doesn’t envision this stand as leading to the carnage of Gettysburg, Antietam, and Shiloh. This is a different time, a different issue, and a different citizenry -- one that is far more cynical and less religious, and consequently lacking anywhere near the level of moral conviction possessed by 19th century abolitionists and states’ rights idealists. Believe me, I do honor that conviction, but don’t entertain any hope or desire of resurrecting either it or the “the last full measure of devotion” that it inspired at Pickett’s Charge and elsewhere.
But this invasion must be opposed vigorously by all those who do honor their identity and heritage, which was consecrated by the blood of all those who have died, not only at Gettysburg, but at Normandy and Chosin Reservoir and Fallujah and a thousand other places. Waiting for the next election, and 3.2 million more migrant invaders on our soil is not an option.
My guess is that the moment Biden federalizes the National Guard against half of the states, his regime will collapse like the house of cards that it is.
I thought "Nullification" was settled once and for all by populist icon and southern slave owner Andrew Jackson.
The nullification of the West is precisely what is happening in huge swaths of the UK, France, and Germany, thanks to unrestrained Muslim immigration, which is doing what Ottoman sultans of old could never have dreamed of accomplishing. All the British government can think of now is some harebrained scheme shipping its surplus migrants to Rwanda.
Here, the surprising size and virulence of the pro-Palestinian death-to-Israel protests reveals something comparable transpiring on our soil. Sure, the history of the world is that of cultures and populations succumbing to other ones, but usually the vanquished have fought against their conquerors.
Up in Washington, they are "restoring" the environment by importing Grizzly bears.
It is only environmentally correct to "restore" the Rio Grande environment by importing alligators back.
This achieves 2 goals, but the most important is that now anyone who messes with the alligators is committing an Environmental Crime.
They've never seen the capabilities of an adult grizzly bear.
Once the coroner is called, their response will be "I didn't know!"
I had a friend who was fishing in Alaska. With a good catch he set off on the path to the truck.
He met a grizzly interested in his fish. He shot the Grizzly in the head with a .308; the bullet bounced off his skull.
It gave him a headache and made him very mad.
My friend surrendered the fish and ran back to the truck.
That can of pork n beans tasted really good that evening.
Happy that your fried resolved the confrontation successfully.
Shot placement (2-3) to the lung/heart region works best.
I'm no expert (well, my sister in law is Brazilian of Japanese parents) but slavery ended in Brazil maybe 3 decades after our Civil war peacefully, by decree, possibly because the steam engine rendered obsolete a lot of manual labor. There are huge disparities between ethnic groups in Brazil, but relatively little ethnic strife - no Civil war, no reconstruction, no constitutional amendments, no Jim Crow, no Civil rights acts, no affirmative action, no DEI, and NO "anti-racism"
Glenn: Excellent points to ponder, as usual! However, one "nit pick" about your "Pickett's Charge" comment: That "Advance" is properly called the "Trimble-Pettigrew-Pickett Advance." I'm guessing Pickett gets the credit as his brigade was the freshest, BUT, he was at the right of the Confederate line of battle, and moved to his left oblique to attack "The Angle" held by the Union. J. Pettigrew was leading the center assault with Trimble behind Pettigrew's men. I went to college there, and our history profs almost always called it "Pettigrew's Advance!" Just want to give Pettigrew his shot at glory! LOL
Homer nods
“I went to college THERE” — meaning Gettysburg? Me too — Class of ‘65.
WOW! I assume you had Bloom for CC and Bugbee for Civil War? I should've been in class of '68, but Winkelmann gave me an F in Comp. Anatomy---with a 79.55 average, that I KNEW had to "round up" to an 80, meaning a B-. Also, the highest grade in our class, a coed of course, was an 84, so I really was hoping for an A- on a curve. Instead, the Bio Dept. thought I needed to "grow up," I "de-matriculated" and spent 2 years active duty in the Marines, and finished up in the class of 1970! I was a freshman your senior year, and knew a lot of your classmates from the band with E. Douglas Danfelt as our leader!
Small freakin' world---BUT, from your unusually cogent and erudite comments, I should've KNOWN you were a 'Burgian! LOL
Re your last sentence, back at you!
Amnesty n. the state’s magnanimity to those offenders whom it would be too expensive to punish
Ambrose Bierce Devil’s Dictionary
You are witnessing the Cloward and Piven strategy coming to fruition but there are solutions.
Not secession but rather CommonSenseCession beginning with 30-31 states controlled by Republicans creating an informal alliance to stand together and nullify unconstitutional neo-Marxist fascist mandates while at the same time passing common sense legislation such as barring men from women’s sports.
Do a search for ‘Adler von Pfingsten Pamphlets’ and you will find Pamphlet No.6 CommonSenseCession and Pamphlet No.7 Kate Steinle IMRA (Illegal Migrant Registration Act) with the details.
Imagine congress chartering the Migrant Conditional Admission Bank migrants would be required to use; a bank that would issue “ATM” cards with biometric identification that would replace SS cards and be connected via camera capable ATM machines for direct communication with the INS among many other uses.
Yes, 'Brandon' backed down from the border, in a direct confrontation sort of way, BUT notice he just cancelled LNG exports in an effort to sock it to Texas economically.
Hopefully Abbott will shout from the rooftops of Biden's economic warfare so all TEXANS know how leftists roll so that TX votes deep RED in Nov.
But beware about hoping for a hot civil war -- They will use that as an EXCUSE for Martial Law and suspend the Nov election, kinda like Ukraine did I think. 🤔
Your last sentence strikes me as a bridge too far: This is still America. Besides, why suspend an election when you are able to rig it with such ease?
We would have thought that instituting all mail-in voting in 2020 was a bridge too far too, until it happened. Non-leftists are actually working very diligently on eradicating a lot of the avenues that the left used in 2020 so imo if they feel they cannot rig it like they did in 2020 they won't hesitate to declare martial law and suspend elections if that is what it takes. They are the team of "By Any Means Necessary"
If Biden is trying to "sock it to Texas economically" then he's going about it in a funny way. He's locking up oil and gas drilling land in other states, while most of Texas drilling land is on private land that he can't lock up. The end result is that Texas still pumps just as much oil and gas, and gets a higher price for it because the supply from other states is lessened.
Do you know how his action regarding LNG impacts TX?
No, I don't, and I'm going to take the time to research it.
Because I do know that LNG is only a small fraction of the oil and gas industry of Texas. What Biden is doing with respect to the rest -- the vast majority of the Texas oil and gas industry -- is to drive prices higher by preventing drilling elsewhere.
That directly and dramatically benefits Texas, and hardly qualifies as "socking it to them economically." (And it's at the expense, I might add, of such non-oil-producing Blue states as Minnesota, all of New England, Washington, Oregon, Illinois etc.)
By restricting competing supply and thereby driving up the price of oil and gas, Joe Biden is the best thing that's happened to the Texas oil and gas industry since the invention of the automobile.
That is good to hear that TX drilling is on private lands and so is not subject to being as impacted by the whims of the federal govt. Didn't Biden also institute many new regulatory actions which private drillers also must comply with?
Regarding the LNG, do you think it is a coincidence that he took the action against LNG exports on the day that TX refused to cave to his demands to open the border?
I look forward to what you can share regarding this.
Yes, I do think it's a coincidence, despite the ranting on such places as Legal Insurrection where you might have seen a contrary view.
The fact that the two things occurred on the very same day is pretty strong evidence that it wasn't in retribution. The Biden White House, and probably any White House, cannot make decisions on such a matter that quickly.
I'll agree with you there - they aren't likely competent enough to figure something like that out on the spot.
OTOH, this illegal alien border crossing issue has been building for some time, so I can see the demons in the White House clawing away for a number of weeks (if not months since Abbott started 'exporting' his illegals to blue areas) to think of how to take action against TX in an effort to force them to comply.
There is no prohibition against seceding from the union, but the South did not just secede, they fired on Sumter. It was a horrible war which we must never repeat. But the Dems want abortion to be the issue that determines the election. I think it is important to show that there are several other important policy questions to be decided by our election.
The Confederacy maintained that once they had seceded the Union had no right to station soldiers on Confederate soil. If you accept secession as legally viable, you have to accept that they were legally correct about that. Their decision to open fire may have been unwise, but technically, it made sense.
Actually, it's generally agreed by Constitutional scholars of all stripes that the Constitution prohibits secession, though it does not explicitly state that.
It seems to me there was an AZ case that set the precedent concerning the state constitution and border control years ago that will have to change first. The SCOTUS will have to treat it like R v W.
Interesting article, though I do not see how we are anywhere near a Civil War like our prior Late Unpleasantness. (By the way, George Pickett did not lead that charge, he only led one division out of three. It was overseen by James Longstreet. Finally, Updated figures are that at least 700,000 perished.)
However, YOU WROTE: " . . .whether states can defend themselves against a (mostly) peaceful invasion." I take issue with this, and the earlier comment that they are not armed.
1. The major issue you are missing here is that the people are being brought into the country in violation of existing law. Therefore, the definition of "invasion” and "armed" or "peaceful" is irrelevant.
But we can tease this out a bit. . .
2. Fentanyl is coming over the border through this mass migration exodus from the south and killing upwards of 100,000 Americans a year. They certainly are armed, and they're armed with a poison.
3. They are picking up illegals with knives, pistols, rifles, and other weapons. Ask the Border Patrol. One of my good friends is a 22-year vet. They even had one last year with a hand grenade.
4. Hands and fists and feet are used to kill hundreds of people a year in this country and thousands of people a year around the world. I believe those millions of people coming across the border have hands, fists, and feet.
5. As an attorney I believe the issue of whether they are invited or not is irrelevant constitutionally. These non-citizens are deemed illegal and are supposed to be showing up for court dates. They are not being "welcomed" under a statutory asylum program and properly vetted as they come into the country. They are flooding in, destroying hospitals, communities, generating crime waves, and changing our entire culture. That is an invasion, just like tourists flocking to Palm Beach is described as an "invasion."
6. Finally, none of the states would have signed the Constitution if it gave the power to the executive branch to "invite" or otherwise allow millions of people into the country in violation of existing law and completely change the citizenry of any given state, or the country at large.
The Constitutional language means what it says, and this is about as Black Letter as you can get.
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes!
Agree with Glenn. With the loss of life and the derangement of the country, particularly in the old CSA, as a result of that war, only what he refers to as "melodramatic keyboard warriors" want such a conflagration, not realizing the tremendous harm which will ensue. As a former Infantryman whose Father was at Chosin Reservoir in '50, I believe war is the ultimate obscenity and should occur ONLY when absolutely necessary.
Nice double entendre there - old men - rusty guns - blanks... ;)
Very well said. Keep it up, Glen
Isn't it reasonable to presume that 'the goal of disgruntled conservative tribalists' is to thwart the demonstratively destructive 'goals of disgruntled progressive tribalists?'
The late Charles Krauthammer was the person credited for the intriguing binary observation that “conservatives view the left as stupid,” but “liberals view conservatives as evil.”
Which 'tribalist' is more dangerous to America's 'peace and tranquility'?
Maya Angelou is famous for saying, “When a person shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”
You're generally correct that the goals of conservatives, almost by definition, are to thwart the goals of liberals, and vice versa.
The problem arises when emotions take over and it becomes tribal on both sides. The result is that an asinine border policy that Americans disfavor by an 80 to 20 margin (including most democrats) is seized upon to play out a hateful and violent fantasy of a civil war between the 50/50 tribes that could kill millions.
Such fantasies are natural because we are naturally tribal. But that does not make them constructive or right. In a civilization, each individual, especially the smart ones, should not pander to his instinctive tribal emotions, but should control them -- with reason. We do have the tribal instincts of animals -- witness our pack mentalities and our herd instincts -- but we also have a brain that makes us better than that.
Few seriously think that the situation in TX will be settled with violence unless the U.S. Federales make the situation violent. And then it will be over in a day or so. It will be settled in the courts, although the federal court system is presently being operated by the usual suspects who are known to litigate the opposition into giving up their arguments at the threat of lawfare.
This is an important discussion. It seems as though "history" gets rewritten every ten or so years, starting over 500 years ago regarding this nation's roots. Who's version should the pupil rely upon?
There are many very costly problems with illegal immigration. Here are a few costly problems:
Anchor babies: Birthright citizenship is being exploited
Anti-American attitudes are becoming accepted
Anti-Semitic attitudes are becoming accepted
Attacks on Border Patrol and law enforcement agents
Attacks on free speech in America
Animal abuse increases when new cultures are introduced
Census numbers: Negative impact on congressional representation
Civil rights: Devalued by comparison to illegal actions
Child endangerment and child molestation are being excused
Closed and overcrowded hospitals and emergency rooms
Cost of translators
Consulates issuing Matricular Cards (an ID Mexico won't even accept)
Day laborers loitering and creating public hazards
Depreciated wages for Americans and legal immigrants
Deterioration of common American culture
Desecration of the American Flag: Foreign flags displayed aggressively
Disrespect for American laws
Document fraud
Drunk driving injuries and deaths: Hit and runs
Ethnic cleansing and race riots
Farm animals within city limits
Foreign influence on US politics
Gangs, graffiti, drugs, cartels, smugglers, and violence
Gang rape and unreported rapes
High birth rates and overpopulation
Human sex slavery
Identity theft
Increased crime
Increased taxes for Americans
Increased pressures on infrastructure (roads, traffic, water, sewer)
Infectious diseases
Lost American jobs
Loss of American sovereignty
Lost self-governance of American citizens Vs. Globalism and Elitism
Male chauvinism: Gender inequality
Not speaking English, loss of common language
Overcrowded schools with a negative impact on American education
Overcrowded single family homes
Overcrowded jails and prisons
Court system are overburdened
Public sanitation degradation: Trash and human waste in public areas
Remittances: $billions of dollars are transferred out of the US economy
Rule of Law: Fundamental principles of America sacrificed.
Separatist movements: Demands for autonomy
Stolen American taxpayer resources: tuition, welfare, licenses
Taxpayer funds going to special interest groups (example) "LaRaza"
Genuine terrorism threats and loss of national security
Trashing the landscape and negative impacts on the environment
The situation today is unfair to legal immigrants
Unfair business competition for law abiding companies
Unlicensed and uninsured motorists
Untaxed wages and resulting underground economy
Voter fraud (endorsed aggressively by the DNC)
These reasons require taking a firm stand. America’s stand should be to avoid giving the folks south of the border and beyond the illusion that all you need to do is just sneak over the border and all will be forgiven. I endeavor to encourage the peoples of Latin America to take the responsibility and great risk to gain control of their nation's governments so as to cure the ills that make immigrants want to break U.S. law and come here illegally. When you abandon your homeland because of political corruption and mass violence, I understand that action to be cowardly, and those people are subject to do the very same thing in their next country of choice. As for this U.S. citizen, I willfully respect the laws of this land. If the first thing that an illegal immigrant does when they set foot into the United States of America is break federal laws, those are the people that would most likely rationalize breaking other laws meant to protect the citizenry. I would rather not have them as neighbors, legal or illegal.
I agree with all that, Phillip. I think we're on the same page.
My column was simply to urge that violent threats and Civil War reenactments by hateful old men who seem not to have a clue about the horror of war (and would not be the ones to fight a war) are not the appropriate response to this problem, even if such rhetoric might make them feel good.
Instead, the appropriate response is what Governor Abbott is doing, and what we call all do in the voting booth. Vote out the politicians who won't enforce our immigration and border laws! That's the obvious solution, even though it's not nearly as fun to some people as war whoops.
Do you believe that the Biden Administration will permit Governor Abbot to continue to defend Texas? Federal judges have a history of squashing actions taken by leaders of states. Since it's an election year, Biden etal might be inclined to resist pulling the strings on their stable of willing judges in order to interfere too much with pesky conservative governors. They love to play the "innocent bystanders".
I may have more confidence in the federal judiciary than you do, having spent a career practicing law there (though for sure there are a few bad apples).
In any event, as you noted, this is an election year. So let's vote the bad guys out of office. Isn't that what we do in America?
Alternatively, I suppose we can rent and rave and make ourselves look like violent psychopaths spoiling for a fight or maybe even a war. But that's not a very good strategy for persuading America that we're reasonable and in the right. Even if, maybe especially if, it makes us feel good.
Something about 'judge shopping' seems to work for Biden.
So who is looking like violent psychopaths spoiling for a fight or maybe even a war? They're all still locked up because of that kerfuffle on 1/6/21, aren't they?