Obama Gives Dishonest And Divisive Speech On The Border

How left wing was his audience in El Paso? When he mentioned the border fence (3:30), they booed. This was an open border crowd, so I don’t know why Obama felt the need to lie about the fence being “basically complete.”

In what world is 5% basically complete”?

Five years ago, legislation was passed to build a 700-mile double-layer border fence along the southwest border. This is a promise that has not been kept.

Today, according to staff at the Department of Homeland Security, just 5 percent of the double-layer fencing is complete, only 36.3 miles.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congress’s investigative arm, reported in early 2009 that only 32 miles of double-layer fencing had been built. That means under President Obama, only 4.3 miles of double layer fencing has been built. This is woefully inadequate.

Obama also took credit for continuing a border patrol buildup started by Bush:

“Under Secretary Napolitano’s leadership, we have strengthened border security beyond what many believed was possible,” Obama said. “They wanted more agents on the border. Well, we now have more boots on the ground on the southwest border than at any time in our history. The Border Patrol has 20,000 agents –- more than twice as many as there were in 2004, a buildup that began under President Bush and that we have continued.”

Politifact rates that “mostly true”, but stipulates that  of the 20,745 border patrol agents as of April 9, 2011; 17,659 of them are stationed along the southwest border with Mexico.

That’s up from 17,499 border patrol agents at the end of September 2008, four months before Obama took office (an 18 percent increase).

Singling out just the border patrol agents along the U.S.-Mexico border, the number has increased from 15,422 to 17,659 (a 14 percent increase).


In March 2011, the U.S. Government Accountability Office released a report, “Border Security: DHS Progress and Challenges in Securing the U.S. Southwest and Northern Borders,” in conjunction with testimony from GAO Director Richard Stana.

The report confirmed that personnel and other resources to stop illegal crossings of the U.S.-Mexico border have increased dramatically in recent years. In 2004, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security was created, reorganizing several federal agencies under a single roof. That year, the agency had 10,500 agents to patrol land borders.  That number now stands at nearly 21,000.

Politifact notes that Obama’s proposed 2011 budget requested a reduction of 181 Border Patrol agents.

Then, out came Obama’s notorious strawmen:

“I suspect there will be those who will try to move the goal posts one more time,” Obama said. “They’ll say we need to triple the border patrol.  Or quadruple the border patrol

Oh, who could he possibly be talking about? Those wascally wepublicans, again? Moving goalposts? Why are there goalposts when it comes to keeping the border secure, and Americans safe?

The Washington Times reported  on the escalating violence on the border, back in March:

For more than two years, U.S. intelligence and law enforcement officials have been warning that the dramatic rise in violence along the southwest border could spread and eventually target U.S. citizens.

The violence posed what the officials called a “serious threat” to law enforcement officers, first responders and residents along the 1,951-mile border.


“It is time for the political games to stop for fear of insulting the government of Mexico,” the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) said in a statement. “U.S. citizens are being kidnapped and killed while our Border Patrol agents fight a war at home that no one will allow them to win.

“Not one more Border Patrol agent should fall or citizen be victimized because our government fails to act,” the NBPC said. “Mexico is hemorrhaging violence and we are being hit with the splatter.”

Obama mocked Republicans with his hilarious moat with alligators joke, and yet —-

The United States Attorney’s Annual Statistical Report for Fiscal Year 2009 stated that “violence along the border of the United States and Mexico has increased dramatically in recent years.” Citing a National Drug Intelligence Center report, it continued, “Mexican drug trafficking organizations represent the greatest organized crime threat to the United States and the influence of Mexican drug trafficking organizations over domestic drug trafficking is unrivaled.”

Last month, officials in Brownsville, Texas, found a homemade, improvised explosive device on Highway 77 that resembled the bombs used against U.S. troops in the Middle East and by Mexican drug cartels.

The government has even warned Americans not to travel in certain areas of the southwest because of crime. In June 2010, the U.S. Department of Interior posted signs near the Sonoran Desert National Monument that read, “travel not recommended,” warning the public that it was considered an “active drug and human smuggling area.”

And three border patrol agents have been killed near the border in the past three years.

See also:

Pundit and Pundette: Obama: “That fence is now basically complete; They’ll never be satisfied.”

The law requires two layers of new reinforced steel fencing along five segments of the 1,952-mile border, including the entire Arizona border and about 200 miles of the border in southern Texas.

Then, there will be those who call Obama’s speech in El Paso “pathetic” , “purely political”,  and “cynical, partisan politics”:

Bryan Preston at PJ Tatler: Obama’s pathetic El Paso speech (Update: Video link added):

Perhaps the worst line in the president’s speech came when, in pushing for the DREAM Act, called for the US to “stop punishing children for the sins of their parents.” He is referring to parents who travel to the US illegally, bringing their children with them. But for the most pro-abortion president in American history to utter that line, and not realize how it boomerangs back on his own stance favoring partial birth abortion, is repugnant. This president seems to have little moral sense about him.

The president’s speech was an exercise in cynical, partisan politics. He was really in Texas just to raise money for his re-election, and to enjoy some quality time in the sunshine with his teleprompter. The nation is dealing with 9% unemployment, falling home prices and skyrocketing energy and food prices. There is never a good time to abrogate the rule of law for the sake of politics, but Obama may have chosen the worst time possible for his immigration initiative.

Ace of Spades HQ: Fact-Check On Obama’s Speech Determines… Well, He Did Produce a Birth Certificate, So There Is That

Slim pickings past that, though, as Jake Tapper notes Obama basically gets two facts right:

1. There is a country called “Mexico,” and

2. It has a border.

A little tidbit I didn’t realize:

He claims the “border fence” is “almost” complete, which might suggest, to the ignorant, that we almost have a fence all the way across our border. Not even close. He means the tiny amount of fence mandated by Congress has almost been built… and that covers about 650 miles of our nearly 2000 mile border with Mexico.

And Jake Tapper maintains that what the president is referring to when he says “basically complete” is the fact that 649 miles of fencing have been completed out of 652…but the law requires two layers of reinforced steel on that, and only 5% of it has been done.

See also:

Michelle Malkin: The Amnesty Bandwagon Rides Again:

If, as widely expected, Obama fails to deliver amnesty through the legislative process, there’s always amnesty by executive fiat. White House insiders first floated the idea in June 2010 to unilaterally extend either deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens in the United States. This administration has accomplished its major policy agenda items through force, fiat, and fraud. Immigration will be no different.

Linked by Michelle Malkin in Buzzworthy, thanks

Hat tip: Gateway Pundit

Charges Against ND-88 Dismissed

The arrest of Tracy and Jean Chase, two of the “ND 88″ at Notre Dame, May 17, 2009

[Photo by Citizens for a Pro-Life Society]

Some great news from last week that was lost in the midst of  the Bin Laden  story, via Sycamore Trust:

Counsel for Notre Dame and for the ND88 announced today a settlement pursuant to which the criminal charges against the ND88 have been dismissed.

Under the agreement, the ND88 agreed not to sue the University for damages and the University in return agreed to ask the prosecutor to dismiss the charges, which he has done.

This is a notable victory for the defendants, who refused to take an easy way out, and a prudent backing off by the University.  Defendants had filed notice of their intention to sue the University for discriminatory arrest and the time period for filing their suits was about to expire. Presumably the complaints would have been filed within a few days if a settlement had not been reached.

By securing the defendants’ promise not to sue, the University has not merely avoided possible monetary liability but has also protected its officers and agents from potentially troublesome examination by defense counsel in both criminal and civil cases.

University officials, for example, would doubtless have been called upon to explain why the University has let go pro-gay and anti-war demonstrators who were arrested for trespass while it has supported the prosecution of these pro-life demonstrators – an uncomfortable fact uncovered by Sycamore Trust that contradicted Father Jenkins’s assertion that the University was treating the ND 88 like everyone else.

Of course, it would have been far better had the University taken this action some two years ago out of Christian compassion and a solidarity of interest with these pro-life defendants. There is no way now for the University to erase the damage these prosecutions have caused to its pro-life standing through the drumbeat of criticism from pro-life forces. While one hopes there has been even at this late date a change not only of mind but also of heart on the part of the University, this “Agreement Not To Sue” appears on the face of it to be essentially a lawyer’s move to cut losses and avoid risks.

Notre Dame’s reputation has perhaps been irreparably sullied  in the wake of Notre Dame President, Father Jenkins’ scandalous decision to invite  the most viciously pro-abort President in our nation’s history to give the school’s 2009 Commencement Address.

Which of course, is why the ND-88 was protesting  on that fateful day.

Hat tip: Infidel Joe.

Linked by Ace Of Spades HQ in Headlines, and Theo Spark, thanks!


Video: A Professor, a Priest, and Counsel Denounce as Discriminatory and Discreditable Notre Dame’s Treatment of Pro-Life Demonstrators

Notre Dame Sees Drop In Donations Since Hosting Obama

Obama Administration Dishonors Catholic College’s freedom Of Conscience

Bishop Finn:Dialogue Came To A Screeching Halt At Notre Dame

Video: Laura Ingraham Blasts Notre Dame On O’Reilly

Notre Dame PWNAGE

Obama Receives His Honorary Degree At Notre Dame Commencement

Catholics Rip Obama And Notre Dame University

Notre Dame Scandal Heating Up

Pro Life March Set For Notre Dame

Pro-Obama “We Support Notre Dame” Website Is Launched

Bishop of Phoenix sends Letter Of Rebuke to Notre Dame President

Notre Dame “Stop The Scandal” Petition Update

Stop The Scandal: Obama Invited To Notre Dame Commencement

Video: 2003 Miss USA, Susie Castillo Molested By TSA

Is “molested”  too strong a word? Watch, and you tell me:

Until I saw this, I hadn’t told anyone – not even my husband –  about my recent experience at DC’s Dulles Airport, (note to self: always use Reagan Airport!)  I had spent a fun weekend with my daughter who was attending a (totally non-political) conference in Crystal City. After Palm Sunday Mass at St. Patrick’s Church,  she flew back to college from Reagan International. I had to take the expensive cab ride back to Dulles for my trip home.

By now, we’re all used to the no bottles, or drinks, shoes off, laptops out of the case,  and walk through the metal detector rigamarole. This was my first experience with the naked body scanner, however.   I guess I hadn’t been paying attention, because when it was my turn, I was startled, and disturbed to find myself being told to put my bare feet in the appointed spots on the floor, (spread eagle), and put my outstretched arms above my head. At that moment, you come to the  realization that someone, somewhere, is staring at your naked body – a very jarring and demeaning feeling. Does the naked body scanner pick up on increased heart rates? Because my scan tripped something off, and I had to endure the pat down, as well. My TSA agent was a pimply faced kid, and was all business. I can’t remember if she used a wand, or gloved hands… I was feeling pretty offended and insulted by this point. I suppose my experience was closer to what Miss USA,  Susie Castillo experienced at LAX. Not too terrible. Just ridiculous and offensive, and I went away feeling  shaken, and insulted.

Does this really keep us safe? No profiling, but babies (yes, babies!), and toddlers, Miss USAs, and moms of six being scanned and/or pat down like common criminals? Why are ordinary citizens being singled out by TSA agents, while people like this are getting through? How much longer are we going to put up with this?

I want those naked body scanners gone, and no American should ever leave an airport feeling like she was molested. There is something very, very wrong here.

I don’t want to sound trite, but when a country’s security policies become this invasive and demeaning to its citizens…the terrorists have won.

Susie Castillo is channeling her outrage into action:

Susie’s TSA Petition to Congress

I feel lucky to have a voice in this matter, and I’m using it so that you can have one too! Here’s your chance! I’m gathering as many of your TSA stories as I possibly can, and will be partnering with grassroots organizations in DC that are working tirelessly to change the TSA’s unacceptable screening techniques in an effort to restore our 4th amendment rights. Even if you haven’t had a pat down but still agree with me, please sign in support.

I signed the petition. You should, too.


More McCotter For Prez Talk

I’ve already mentioned Michigan Republican, Thaddeus McCotter as a possible dark horse candidate for 2012. The Washington Times’ Kerry Picket,  now says sources around DC are chatting up the idea:

Conservative Republican donors and grassroots activists, who have raised concerns that there is not yet a true Reagan conservative in the GOP presidential primary are privately encouraging Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, Michigan Republican, to look at a potential entry.

McCotter showed off his foreign policy chops in this Fox News appearance, Sunday, where he discussed aid to Pakistan, which some Congressmen say should be cut off:

See also:

The Lonely Conservative:  Thaddeus McCotter for President?


Why Not? McCotter For President

Linked by Hyscience, thanks!