Federal Government Ignores Chaos at Southern Border

Thousands of illegals continue to flow into the United States across the Mexican/US border on a daily basis - carrying with them drugs, disease, poverty, and an agenda. The United States, after an uproar in 2005 and 2006 over illegals in the US, is still unresponsive - and promises to complete a border fence simply have not been kept. It seems that the United States Federal Government may also have an agenda - but what and why?

With the murder over the weekend of a US citizen by a Mexican drug trafficker, you would expect a media blitz on illegal immigration... you would expect public outcry over the incident... you would expect a statement from the federal government regarding the sanctity of our borders... However, we are getting none of this. There is a near media black-out on this issue, and the Federal Government is remaining silent on their faults leading up to the murder.

Alas, there is a beacon of hope in the media - FoxNews... better late than never, and again filling an agenda of their own - highlighting the further frustration by the border state governments regarding the lack of assistance from the Feds on the promised border security... Let's take the bait and further this discussion, because it is relevant and important to the general message and tone of this blog.

The Federal Government is a collection of representatives from the multitude of states and territories... when they fail to represent, the states are left to fill the void - independent local authority. The increasing chaos along the US southern border leaves the states in a predicament: ignore the problem and wait for the Feds to finally kick into gear, or defend their STATE SOVEREIGN BORDERS? The answer is clear in my eyes.

The United States Government has become a corrupt and failed entity, failing to poses the basic ability or will to defend her own borders. The failure of the US in this avenue is the surest sign that the United States is failing, has failed, or intends to fail as a sovereign entity.

As such, it is time that the multitude of states declare the ineptitude of the current government, and begin taking actions to protect their own sovereign borders. This can only be accomplished by recalling all State Militia (national guard) troops from overseas, and deploying them as active military units along the international borders. Mexico, her people, and her criminal underground have declared a war against the states of the union, the people of the states, and our sovereignty. When the federal government fails to defend the land, the responsibility rests solely with the people and the states.

Gov. Jan Brewer told Fox News on Wednesday that after repeatedly calling on the
federal government to send in 250 National Guard troops, she hasn't ruled out
making the call herself.

We should support and defend the governments in the states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California to call forward their OWN national Guard Troops (as they are the Commander in Chief of the State Militias), and move to defend their southern borders. It may be an international border, and thus the responsibility of the Federal Government - but it is also a right of each state to defend their borders against invasion.

Let this be yet another testament to the strength of the states and the people, and another shortfall of the out of touch dictators in D.C.

LIFE

The founding fathers, in writing the Declaration of Independence, stated that man was endowed with certain inalienable rights... amongst these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. This is part one of a three part series discussing these three rights specifically mentioned by the founding fathers.

It is most interesting to me that Life is listed as the first of the three mentioned rights... interesting, in that it must be revered with the highest importance. Life, a right Endowed by the Creator of Nature, or simply stated - a Right Inherited from the Creator Himself. To this end, the founding fathers understood that life was a Divine Inheritance not to be wasted.

This understanding of the appreciation of life is evident, and weighs heavy on the minds of any judge or jury responsible for sending a convicted felon to their death. It weighs heavy on the mind of a soldier sent to the battlefield to kill the enemy. It weighs heavy on the minds of those who have been unjustly victimized by a murder of a relative or loved one. The question, then, is who is the beneficiary of this endowment of Life?

The question of life is one that is a heated topic in the political arena, that is, the definition of life. When does life begin? What right does one have to end a life in the womb? Is the endowment only to the strong, or is it our responsibility to protect this blessing, even of the premature or sickly infants and fetuses?

In every discussion involving this topic, one looks at the Supreme Court ruling of Roe v Wade. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) is a controversial United States Supreme Court case that resulted in a landmark decision regarding abortion. According to the Roe decision, most laws against abortion in the United States violated a constitutional right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The amendment reads:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Roe due to the technicality of the first three words of this amendment - "all persons born". Their decision justified the lack of legal protection under the law for the unborn because these fetuses were not considered in the writing of the amendment, and therefore are not entitled to any equal protection from the acts of the mother.

Now, this is legal-ese at it's worst.

The equal protection clause states that States shall not deprive any person of life... So the definition of a person is the requirement of being born. I challenge any individual to reasonably deny that a child of any fetal development age is "not alive". My wife and I had a miscarriage during our first pregnancy at 9 weeks... the hardest punch I ever felt came when the ultrasound showed no heartbeat, and that our child had died within the last 24 hours. Anyone who understands the intent of the Endowment of Life understands that even at 9 weeks, life is life.

So the question I pose is this: If Life is an Inalienable Right Endowed by the Creator of Nature (Yahweh, Jehovah, Elohim, etc...even for atheists you have to admit that there is a natural order to life and the universe that is larger than humanity), what role do individuals have in determining at the fetal level which life is worth living and which not, without due process of law? Should we allow abortions, but only after a legal hearing where the fetus has legal representation? Should the United States reconsider the wording of the 14th amendment to retract the word born and replace with alternative wording to include the unborn life? What legal jurisdiction does a father have over the life of his unborn child? He is the owner of half of the chromosomes, does that give him legal standing to prevent an abortion?

If life in our free society is so precious that we fight to save the lives of murders and other criminals on death row, what justification is there for abortion other than "convenience of life for the mother" (put in quotes because I know that there is nothing morally convenient... the decision weighs on the mother).

To my liberal readers: what is the justification for abortion?

Eurofication of the American Left

The left is afraid to let the United States fight the war that needs to be fought. I have written about my frustration in this war against Islamic Totalitarianism, in that our goal is to make everyone love us instead of doing what is right.

I blame the left. I blame the weak politicians on the right for giving in to the left.

I was at my graduation ceremony last night for the LPR (Leadership Program of the Rockies), and our keynote speaker was Dennis Prager. Mr. Prager said something that inspired my column today: "Instead of learning from the Great Wars that it is our job to Fight Evil, Europeans learned that it is Evil to Fight." (this in response to a report that German soldiers are ordered not to fire on Taliban troops, despite their actions, unless fired upon first)

The Europeans became pacifists in world and internal affairs, in hopes of a unification of Europe. They have their unification, but at the cost of the downfall of all that is and ever was Europe. There is no spine in Europe, no one to stand up for values that have shaped Europe over the last 2000 years... and no desire to act as the same atrocities that occurred in Germany and Poland in the second World War are taking place throughout Africa, Pacific Island Nations, and throughout the Middle East... as such, America is left to do what is right... and be the police to the world.

Prager also said that it is better to do what is right and be hated for it, than to do what is wrong and be loved. If you are loved by all, then you have done something wrong... you have sacrificed your principles... This is true for the military intervention in the case of genocide... Rwanda, Congo, and other African Countries have seen more sheer numbers of dead due to Genocide than all military and civilian deaths in World War Two worldwide... yet the world, and namely Europe, does nothing.

They do nothing because they refuse to be hated as the United States has been seen as being hated around the world... and in their silence, they sin. Their very inaction is a crime against Humanity.

And the American left is under the same spell... it is more important to them to be loved around the world than to stand up and do what is right. Send aid to Darfur, but not the military necessary to stop the Genocide. What good is aid when you are murdered by a machete, raped, and burned in your home with your entire family?

No... the left is more interested in appearing to be doing the right thing... but no action is taken for fear of being hated... because they, much like the European Pacifists, have learned that to Fight is Evil.

Deep in the gut of every man, woman, and child around the world is a feeling... a pinch... you know the difference between right and wrong.

If you see someone committing a crime against humanity, you know it is wrong. And if you get that pinch, but do nothing, you too have committed a crime. You are at fault for not doing all you could to help... to stop the rape, to stop the killing, to stop the violence... even if it means giving your life to save another. That is the American Way... not Pacifism... not sitting by and watching as the world burns around us.

I don't care how the conflicts started... All I care about is how they are ended.

If you went in to a doctor to cure your lung cancer, and instead of curing you he continually blamed you for smoking... you should find another doctor!

So if it is our job to stop genocide in Africa, and prevent it in Iraq by up and leaving, we should do the job, not obsess on how we got there in the first place.

How do we save as many lives as possible?

By doing what is right.

The left, somewhere along the way, have learned that it is evil to fight.

The truth is that it is our duty, our moral authority, to stop killing, raping, and inhumane acts around the world... all things that we can consider evil... it is our obligation as a free and enlightened society to fight evil. That is real change!

Tibet is Burning

Communist China reports that 10 protestors have been killed, meanwhile activists groups report the number to closer to 100 killed. Knowing the oppressive media that exists in China, I am more inclined to believe the higher number. Could this be another “Tiananmen Square”?

The country of Tibet has been under communist China’s rule for over 50 years, stuck behind another iron curtain. China has as much claim to this territory as the Russians had to any one of the Soviet States incorporated into the USSR… zero.

Tibet has existed as an autonomous kingdom, led by the spiritual leaders believed to be the reincarnation of the previous. This is the Dalai Lama… the ruler of Tibet, exiled since 1959 to northern India. A leader that, when he dies, China has claimed that the government will be selecting the successor… hardly who I would want appointing my spiritual leader… but an effective way to control the territory once and for all.

The people of Tibet struggle for nothing more than the founders of America struggled for… the right to exist in peace, and to freely practice their religion. China’s iron fist has come down time and again against students and monks, often leading to massacres of peaceful protestors… blatant human rights violations.

But the protests of the last few days have something more than the protests of the past. They have traction… worldwide traction. Chinese embassies around the world are under siege by protestors who favor a free Tibet. And China, the host of the 2008 Olympics, is under a microscope as we move closer to the opening ceremonies. (We all know that China is one of the worst offenders when it comes to Human Rights Violations.) But the struggle needs one finishing touch to turn into a full scale revolution: The blessing of the Dalai Lama. The Tibetan people worldwide are pushing for his call to arms, as finding the middle ground has led to little more than murder in the past.

What are my thoughts?

I believe that there is one just cause worth fighting and dying in this world we live: freedom.

Fellow blogger KTracy.com has suggested that the struggle of the Tibetan protestors is little more than the terror groups in Iraq fighting the US soldiers… I would caution him that the people of Tibet fight for freedom, where the terror groups in Iraq fight for fascism.

I support the struggle of the people of Tibet. I believe that all men should be free from living in fear and repression. As a believer in liberty, personal property rights, and freedom of religion, I have little patience for repressive regimes like that of the Communist Republic of China.

If it were up to me, as we move forward with this slaughter and manhunt for remaining protestors, I would issue an immediate statement condemning the reaction of the Chinese government, followed by a threat of sanctions of all Chinese products. I know this would send a shockwave through our economy, but that is just a sign of our dependence on foreign goods for sustaining our way of life. As such, we would need to rethink how we conduct ourselves, how we live, and what we need to survive and enjoy life from within our own borders.

Am I proposing, then, the death of a free market in America by not allowing procurement from foreign countries? I would argue that such a global market is harmful for the very reason stated above, and restated here: we become too dependant on foreign goods, and that leaves us with no leverage as the moral authority in issues of freedom and liberty.

So I suggest calling your legislator, calling the local Chinese embassy, or joining a protest speaking out against the atrocities of the Chinese government in Tibet. Our voices can be a part of the roar!

Hillary Clinton No Friend to Natives - Defiles Memory of Genocide Victims in US

Hillary Clinton, in her victory speech in Nevada, made a remark that struck me at my very core. To a group of cheering campaigners, she exclaimed: "This is how the West was won"

Perhaps Hillary Clinton, in all of her re-education, had forgotten that the West was won by a series of broken treaties with Natives, the mass murder of sometimes entire Native tribes including women and children... all under the order of the US Congress and the Presidents of the United States at the time.

A great example:

Hillary. The west was won by murder, thievery, and unconstitutional placement of Natives into "reservations" that have become breeding grounds for sickness, poverty, lack of education, and lack of a means to survive outside of US handouts (and still maintain their original way of life should they so desire).

Hillary - Your lack of sensitivity toward the genocide and bloodshed that occurred while the West was being taken is shocking. As a descendant of Natives, I demand an apology and an explanation for your hostility toward the Native Peoples of this Land!

I would love to hear you tell the Lakota to drop dead... that they lost their land at the hand of US invaders... Say it... please... you are so close!