Do You Think Biden Would Really Close the Border?

An interesting article appeared on Microsoft Bing’s web browser today.  It reported that President Biden has pledged to close our border with Mexico when it is “overwhelmed” if the current bill being negotiated by congress is passed.  The article said that the bill grants President Biden “extraordinary powers” to close the border when it is overwhelmed, and that Biden has promised to use those powers immediately. [1] 

Americans have good reasons to be skeptical, even cynical.  A few of them include: 

·         President Biden has a record of playing fast and loose with the truth.  For example, he said he was not involved in his family’s business dealings. [2] He dissembled about the border with Mexico being secure, being present at ground zero in New Youk City on 9/11, the withdrawal from Afghanistan being a success, being arrested by South African police for trying to visit Nelson Mandela in prison, and much more.[3] 

·         It is a well-known tactic of the radical left to create a crisis so they can be granted extra ordinary powers to deal with it.  Everything the Democrats do regarding illegal migration is calculated to give them more power … one way or another. 

·         From one conservative’s point of view, President Biden’s “pledge” appears to be a poorly disguised attempt to help expedite the so-called bipartisan border legislation that the Democrats and RINO Republicans are attempting to rush through congress.  No one yet knows fully what the bill provides for, and Senators Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell do not want conservative legislators to have time to find out.  Most assuredly, it is another example of the RINO Republicans giving the Democrats everything they want.  Furthermore, it is an attempt to fix the blame for inaction at the border on the Republicans if they block passage.  That’s a double bind, and just one more instance of dirty politics from our friends in Washington DC. 

·         According to an opinion published by Jonathan P. Reidel on the New York University Law Review website, the president already has the authority to order “very brief or geographically limited” border closures.  Donald Trump has asserted that he would consider closing the border if reelected. [4] The question is, if the president already has the authority to close the border, why is President Biden saying that he needs new legislation to do it? 

It is clear that the Biden Administration’s policies have created a crisis at the border with Mexico that is threatening our national security and has made a temporary border closure appear to be the only way to get illegal migration into the United States back under control.  It also seems clear that the only way the American people can have confidence that effective border control will happen is to vote the Democrats out of office in November.

---

[1] Biden pledges to 'close the border' with 'strictest restrictions' in history if Congress approves immigration reform (msn.com) 

[2] https://oversight.house.gov/blog/joe-biden-lied-at-least-15-times-about-his-familys-business-schemes/ 

[3] https://nypost.com/2023/09/18/president-pinocchio-joe-is-a-truly-terrible-liar/ 

[4] https://www.nyulawreview.org/online-features/closing-the-border/

 

Consumer Loyalty

I try to shop locally when I can.  We live in a small farm town, but we have a couple of hardware stores, a small “supermarket,” two auto parts stores, a good auto repair shop, and a small drug store.  Often, however, I find it necessary to go to a nearby small city to get the things we need.  Even then finding items that are not in demand can be challenging. 

When things are not available locally, I do what people in rural areas have always done.  I order them.  They used to call it mail order.  I remember that my grandmother used to get things from the Montgomery Ward or Sears catalogues.  Now we call it online shopping.  To tell the truth, it is a pretty good thing.  You can get what you want, and the prices are competitive if you shop from a vendor that has “free” shipping. 

No matter where you shop, the biggest problem is trying to find products that are American made.  A lot of sporting equipment is “proudly made in the USA,” but even then the pickings are slim.  I needed a new telescopic sight for my deer rifle because my eyesight is getting worse with age.  I could only find two manufacturers, Leupold and Trijicon, that make all their scopes in the USA. 

The last time I bought a computer, every single one available at the national chain electronics store was made in China.  I asked the salesperson if they had anything that was not made in China, and he just shrugged his shoulders.  He was young, and I think he thought I was weird or something. 

Last month, our coffee maker gave up the ghost.  Why does it always happen at Christmastime?  I went to the nearest leading discount superstore to get a new one.  Due to the holidays, their stock of coffee makers was kind of low, but they still had about a half dozen to choose from.  With one exception they were all made in China.  The exception was made in Vietnam … another country with an autocratic, oppressive communist government that has found it necessary to move to a market driven economy. 

The same thing happened last fall when my cell phone quit on me.  Everything my wireless network outlet store had was made in China except for one that was made in Vietnam. 

Try and find a pair of boots or shoes that is made in America.  It’s difficult if not impossible. 

Tonight, I was trying to find a freestanding hat tree online – the kind you keep by the front door to hang your coat or hat on.  I quit after looking at about a dozen of them.  The website didn’t indicate where three of them were made, but they looked exactly like the other nine that were made in China.  All of the manufacturers had alphabet names, or American sounding names that didn’t really sound American. 

Some say that all boycotts do is put people out of work.  Boycotts by individuals have no real impact at all.  Nevertheless, it is a death by a thousand cuts if everything we buy comes from China.  My conscience stabs me every time I buy Chinese goods.  The Chinese Communist Government makes money when we do, and a lot of it goes to build a military that is rapidly eclipsing the power of our own.  What will happen if China invades Taiwan?  Can we come to Taiwan’s aid when we are funding their invaders?  If we stop trading with China the way we recently did with Russia, the shelves will be empty in our stores. 

I have made this point before, but I must say it again.  Buy goods that are made in the USA whenever possible.  Take the trouble to search for them.  Our consumer goods are often made in countries whose governments oppose us and have bad human rights records, but if you can’t find an American product that meets your needs buy one that is made anywhere but in China.  If we let Chinese government (aka the Chinese Communist Party) get a boot on our throat, we will never be able to get up off our backs again.

Use Them or Remove Them

Caution is needed when discussing situations where the United States military has forces deployed.  The last thing any of us want to do is to say something that would put our military personnel at greater risk than they already are. 

We are, therefore, conflicted when we notice situations that expose our troops, airmen, and sailors to greater risk than they need to be.  It seems that the responsible thing to do is to try to speak out, while being careful not to put our people in jeopardy. 

Our military personnel are exposed and under fire in the Middle East.  In Iraq and Syria, they have been under attack from groups that are funded, supplied and operationally controlled by Iran.  In the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, Houthi terrorists are attacking our naval vessels and the merchant ships of various nations attempting to use recognized commercial sea lanes. 

The Biden Administration has finally begun to launch retaliatory air and missile strikes.  These appear to be too little and too late.  In fact, they are perfunctory, face-saving measures that have not been successful in stopping the attacks on Americans.  In short, President Biden’s response has fallen far, far short of “shock and awe.” 

If we are not going to protect our forces in Iraq and Syria, it would seem to make sense to remove them to areas where they are not subject to hostile fire almost daily.  They were originally deployed to stop ISIS from taking over.  In 2018, President Trump declared that mission had been accomplished.  Apparently, President Trump very reluctantly agreed to keep some of our military there to thwart efforts by Iran to become the dominant power in the region. [1]  Whether that has been successful is open to question.  Perhaps it is time to find different ways to contain Iran. 

The ongoing conflict in Syria and Iraq has been made worse by land-based attacks on shipping by the Houthi terrorists in Yemen.  Of course, the Houthis are also an Iranian proxy.  To date, our navy and coalition warships have been very successful in shooting down the Houthi’s missiles and drones.  No defensive system is foolproof.  Sooner or later a US Navy ship will be hit.  Are you confident that President Biden will respond in a meaningful way then? 

The government has not disclosed the number of US Navy vessels stationed in the Red Sea.  The warships of nations participating in an American led coalition are on station as well and participate in defensive operations.  It is a matter of grave concern that, at times, a lot of surface warships and elements of a US Marines expeditionary force have been concentrated in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea. 

The Red Sea in particular is a confined area that has limited egress.  On the north end, the Suez Canal is a choke point; as is the Bab al-Mandab strait at the southern end.  Surface ships are vulnerable to various kinds of attack and could find themselves trapped between choke points.  Although it may be necessary to have a limited number of ships stationed where they are close enough to protect merchant vessels from Houthi missiles and drones, the more warships on station in that area the greater the chance that one of them will be hit.  It may be prudent to move excess forces to less vulnerable positions. 

Pointing this out should not expose our naval forces to greater risk than they are in already.  The problem sticks out like a sore thumb.  Our adversaries can’t have failed to notice it. 

From the George W. Bush Administration until the present, we have taken the finest military in the world and deployed it to dangerous and desolate places where we have let every underhanded terrorist with a gun or IED use them for target practice.  It has been frustrating to watch.  One reason for our limited success is that we keep making the same mistake over and over.  That is, we use limited responses with strict rules of engagement, or we allow our enemy a safe sanctuary in neighboring countries … for fear of starting a bigger war.  Thus, we fail to deal with the source of their ability to fight.  We failed in Vietnam for the same reason.  We were afraid of starting a wider war. 

It is incumbent upon our leaders not to put our military in harm's way unless they are willing to do whatever is necessary to resolve the conflict in our favor.  If we are so afraid of expanding the hostilities in the Middle East that we can’t use our power effectively, then we need to get our people out of exposed and indefensible areas.  It would be best to fight and get it over with, but all our leaders in Washington DC seem to be able to do is dither, wring their hands, and argue over money. 

Iran is sponsoring attacks on Americans in the Middle East.  It is well past the time when the Ayatollahs should be made to pay for it. 

---

[1] https://www.cato.org/commentary/why-are-american-troops-still-iraq-syria