MENACE IN MEXICO

Now I normally like Dick Morris, I do, however this article shows the dangers of seeing everything through the lens of "inside baseball" politics...

Source: NYPost

IN its debate over how to change the U.S. immigration system, Washington neglected the impact in Mexico - which faces a crossroads election this summer.

And Mexico's choice could not be more important to the United States.

On July 2, the Mexican people will decide whether to elect ultra-leftist Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (known as AMLO) as their next president.

Rumors have abounded for months that Lopez Obrador's campaign is getting major funding from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. And last month Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz)., a moderate Republican, told several Mexican legislators that he had intelligence reports detailing revealing support from Hugo Chavez to AMLO's Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD).

Chavez is a firm ally of Cuba's Fidel Castro. Lopez Obrador could be the final piece in their grand plan to bring the United States to its knees before the newly resurgent Latin left.

Will they really "Bring us to our knees?" With all due respect to Mr. Morris this shows a mindset firmly planted in the "go along to get along" thinking of the Clinton administration. Here's why this is nonsense. Okay, these guys get a burr in their butt and try to hurt us, we pull all our money out of their economies starting with remittances and they topple in a matter of weeks.

It is important to remember who has the whip hand.

Think we have security problems now, with Vicente Fox leading Mexico? Just wait until we have a 2,000-mile border with a chum of Chavez and Castro.

The only change I foresee in this arrangement is that the hostility will be on the surface and much, much easier to deal with.

Lopez Obrador has attacked U.S. attempts to restrict Mexican immigration and will benefit tremendously if Congress alienates the Mexican electorate. A recent survey by John Zogby found that two-thirds of Mexicans feel Americans are racist and biased against them. A harsh shift in U.S. immigration policies could fuel a leftist victory in Mexico.

Mexicans are deeply offended by the idea of a wall designed to keep them out. Building a wall on the boarder without also starting a guest-worker program will play badly in Mexico. A wall with a guest-worker program might go down better, particularly if the legislation didn't include punitive provisions making illegal immigration a felony.

Now this is important, pay attention. We must follow a certain course, why? Because Mexicans "feel" a certain way. Is this thing true? I don't think so, so we'll be making policy based on the ephemeral "feelings" of people who alredy feel entitled to cross our border at will. This doesn't even deal with the extreme racism on display in Mexico. One wonders if this might be a little projection?

Of course Mexicans are offended by the wall, so what? Do the "feelings" of Mexicans now take precedence over the "feelings", and more importantly the wishes of American voters?

Considering the language coming out of the Senate these days I think the answer is a resounding yes. And let me just go on record as saying "the hell with that!"

I think Mr. Morris sets the proper tone in the title, though to me it's accurate right this second.

H/T LoneWacko

Technorati Tags: illegal immigration, Dick Morris, appeasement, cowardice, we need two walls