Thread: Immigration dance: the Texas side-step

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kovach/060513

No border = no country


Tom Kovach Tom Kovach
May 13, 2006

I grew up in south Texas, before moving to Upstate NY as a teenager. I learned to dance the "Cotton-Eyed Joe" long before I learned that it had ethnic roots in the mountains of eastern Europe. (That's where my grandparents came from — as legal immigrants.) And, one doesn't need to grow up in Texas to learn how to dance the "Texas two-step." But, this coming Monday (15 May 2006), y'all better get ready for a new political dance: the "Texas side-step."

(How I wish that I could take credit for that concept. But, for those that aren't old enough to remember, it comes from the Broadway musical, and later movie, "The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas." Charles Durning's version of the side-step was absolutely side-splitting.)

My campaign for Congress is based upon many conservative principles. I have never been a single-issue voter, and am not a single-issue candidate. But, there is one issue that has voters totally focused right now. To condense the argument down to a sound bite that might actually make it into the broadcast news, I've learned to simply say, "No border equals no country."

Illegal immigration is the number-one hot-button issue in American politics today. News reports that our own government has leaked the locations of Minuteman volunteers to the Mexican government has made the situation far worse for President Bush than he seems to realize. Now, he plans to address the nation with his "plans" to deal with this issue. Get ready for the Texas side-step! And, this time, there's nothing funny about it.

In an apparent trial balloon, the Bush administration has recently "leaked" the idea that perhaps the president would consider putting the military along our borders. Oddly, both the news media and even members of Congress have echoed the mantra that it is "currently illegal" to put the military along the borders. Thus, these "experts" claim, new legislation would be necessary to "allow" troops to be stationed along the borders. Hello?! Doesn't anyone read the Constitution anymore?

Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 14 of the Constitution empowers the Congress for "calling forth the Militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions." Only an idiot can convert that into "currently illegal" to put troops along our borders! And, the term "idiot" would also apply to anyone that doesn't view 15 to 20 million people sneaking into our country as an "invasion." Minuteman co-founder Jim Gilchrist refers to it as a "stealth invasion."

As I've written before, if invoked in its purest sense, "calling forth the Militia" would mean that our Congress would actually provide money to the states to pay the Minutemen that currently volunteer "to do the jobs that our government won't do." Although the purest sense would also be the best sense, I'll settle for active duty troops from our Regular branches of the Armed Forces, supplemented by Guard and Reserve forces, stationed full-time along the entire length of our borders. And, let's put some troops at all of our ports of entry, including international airports, while we're at it.

Would such a program be expensive? Yes. Would it be cheaper than another "9-11"? Definitely. And, if we can afford to secure the border between South Korea and North Korea, then why can't we seem to afford to secure our own borders? If we can afford to send troops into the Balkans to defend the Muslims in a religious war (so that they can attack us), then why can't we seem to afford to secure our own borders? If we can afford to send troops into Haiti, to install and support a Leftist madman, then why can't we seem to afford to secure our own borders? If we can send our Special Operations Forces to train with those of Communist China (a nation that wants to destroy America), then why can't we seem to afford to secure our own borders? If we can send our troops for recurring training exercises with the Egyptian military, which then bombs and burns ancient churches, then why can't we seem to afford to secure our own borders? So, if anyone says that we don't have enough troops to do the job, then I can quickly suggest some locations where we can find some. (Of the above, the only location where keeping our troops might be justified is the Korean Peninsula. The DMZ between the North and the South is the most heavily guarded border in the world. Doesn't it make sense to train our troops for foreign border service by first guarding our own borders?)

I try to take my task of writing very seriously. And, I'm regularly disappointed with the coarseness of discussions in modern America. Thus, I know that we (and I) should avoid using naughty words. In several years of published columns, I think that I've only done it once before. But, if any elected official — especially the President of the United States — comes before the public to tell us that it is "illegal" to station troops on our borders, or that waves of invaders are our "guests," then there is only one proper reply left. "Don't piss on my shoes and then tell me it's raining!"

Our military is half the size that it was at the end of Desert Storm in 1991. At the start of Desert Storm, it was half the size that it was at the end of the Vietnam War in 1975. And, at that time, it was half the size that it was in 1961, when our own US State Department published a little pamphlet called "Freedom From War." That pamphlet contained the concept of a plan, which has been followed by both Democrats and Republicans, to shrink our American military, while expanding the power and "authority" of the United Nations. Too many of our citizens have sat idly by and let it happen. But, now that our very security — perhaps even our existence as a nation — is being threatened, perhaps more people will wake up. Globalism is a real threat to American sovereignty and security. And, many of our elected officials are globalists. The issue of border security is a watershed issue. Any elected official that will not strongly support border security, and put the "boots on the ground" to enforce it, is someone that has sold out America to a globalist agenda. The agenda has been around a long time. But, it has never been so close to success as it is right now. What will we do about it?

If the answer is "nothing," then enjoy watching, and dancing, the side-step ... all the way to the sheep pen. And, if you don't have a dance partner, then there are tens of millions of illegal aliens that will be happy to escort you.

This paints the issue in black and white for all to see. Enough said.

AI_BOT