Obama to send troops to Mexico border

This should absolutely thrill some of you — you know, those who think Mexican laborers are the greatest threat to the nation.

Yes, finally, the president has decided to send Gen. “Black Jack” Pershing after that foul bandido Pancho Villa…

… no, wait… wrong century. Oh, well, just to make this easier, here’s the latest news:

President Obama will deploy an additional 1,200 National Guard troops to the southern border and request $500 million in extra money for border security, according to an administration official. The decision comes as the White House is seeking Republican support for broad immigration reform this year.

The official said the new resources would provide “immediate enhancement” to the border even as the Obama administration continues to “work with Congress to fix our broken immigration system through comprehensive reform, which would provide lasting and dedicated resources by which to secure our borders and make our communities safer.”

The 1,200 troops will join about 340 already working in the border region, the official said. They would provide support to law enforcement efforts against drug trafficking by increasing monitoring of border crossings and performing intelligence analysis.

Feel better, folks? Feel safer?

17 thoughts on “Obama to send troops to Mexico border

  1. Michael P.

    It’s not exactly the workers who are a threat, it’s the 12 family members who come with each worker. Who pays for those children to go to school? Who pays for their free breakfast and school? Who pays when they get hurt on the job? Do I need to go on?

  2. martin

    I saw your buddy David Frum on MSNBC this PM. He said fine the employers $25,000 per day per illegal, whether they know their status or not; put an end to the demand.

    There appears to be some serious violent crime going on with illegal crossings by drug dealers and human traffickers on the Arizona border. Our neighbor to the south is a failed state. We have Somalia next door. If it’s coming across, we might need to do something. The people in Arizona seem very concerned, but I don’t know as much as you and your church.

  3. Kathryn Fenner

    Oh yeah, we need armed forces to defend us from some Mexican children. Great use of limited resources.

  4. Doug Ross

    They are no more threat than any other lawbreakers. They are a cost and burden to society just like any other low-income, unskilled group. Plus they are in the country illegally. Glad to see Obama deciding to enforce the laws.

    Oh, and your buddy McCain thinks the government should send 6000 troops. Is that a sign of senility or hypocrisy? Too bad America didn’t heed The State’s endorsement.

    “In a speech Tuesday on the Senate floor, McCain said the situation on the U.S.-Mexico border has “greatly deteriorated.” He called for 6,000 National Guard troops to be sent, and he asked for $250 million more to pay for them.

    “I appreciate the additional 1,200 being sent … as well as an additional $500 million, but it’s simply not enough,” McCain said.”


  5. Kathryn Fenner

    Well, actually, Doug-I’ll take my chances in a dark alley with some little Mexican children before some of my former clients–all lawbreakers are not created equally dangerous or “threatening.”

  6. Doug Ross


    As long as you can hold onto the fantasy that it’s just little Mexican children crossing the border, you’ll never have to address the reality.

    I’m not afraid of little Mexican children. I’m afraid of an economy that cannot support paying for them and their parents. I’m afraid of the impact that importing millions of uneducated people who do not speak English will have on our society. There’s little evidence to suggest that America becomes a better nation by allowing the expansion of the lowest class. It hasn’t worked and it can’t work.

  7. Michael P.

    Kathryn, do you really think we need to be supporting illegal workers and their families? Why should we support them and make the people trying to become citizens through the correct channels wait? Sure they all want to be here, they get services for free here that they have to pay for or aren’t available in Mexico.

    There comes a point where you have to plug the hole in the boat. I have a very difficult time understanding how some people (Kathryn) do not understand this simple problem. Putting troops on the border is a start, the next step is to put the fear of God in employers who hire these people.

  8. Michael P.

    Burl doesn’t have a dog in this fight… I don’t see many illegals swimming or rowing to Hawaii to work. When the problem is in his backyard, he can speak.

  9. bud

    This is an ongoing meme with anti-immigration types that we hard working taxpayers support all these illegals with our tax dollars. Fact is most of the people coming in are working folks who perform difficult and sometimes dangerous work for low wages. I would suggest these folks make a huge contribution to the welfare of the USA. Of course none of this is new. We had Chinese labores who built the transcontinental RR. Then there were the Poles, Irish and Europeans Jewish emigrants who toiled for low wages to help built our great nation during the first half of the last century. Heck go back far enough and we had English settlers who came across the Atlantic to build the country in the first place.

    It’s time to put a stop to all this anti-immigrant racism and work toward a solution that will allow immigration in without all the so-called burdens that seem to bother people so much. I believe the costs are vastly overstated but at the end of the day these issues need to be addressed. But let’s do so in a thoughtful, honest manner, not in the phony world of conservative hypocrisy.

  10. Bart

    Actually, Burl has a better perspective on native racism than most of us do. And, I like his humor and references to the obscure. Wonder how many actually know who Black Jack Pershing is or was?

    Hawaii is one of the most racist states of all 57, nope, 50, sorry. But, this time, it is native Hawaiians (sp?) who are prejudiced against houles (sp?). It just doesn’t make national headlines on the mainland as it would if it were South Carolina.

  11. bud

    What’s interesting about Pershing’s raid into Mexico to capture Pancho Villa was that the mission failed. Yet we uphold that as an example of America at it’s finest. Not sure I quite get the reasoning.

  12. Brad

    The word is “haoles,” Bart.

    And Bud, you beat me to the punch. I was about to say, the reason we can’t communicate meaningfully with the folks who are all worked up over the Mexicans is that they see the absolute OPPOSITE of what we’re seeing. We’re seeing thousands of people crossing the border to come here and work their nalgas off doing construction, picking crops and processing chickens — and more often than not, coming alone or in groups of workers who send all the money they EARN by the sweat of their brows back home to their families. For some bizarre reason, a lot of people see the opposite — freeloaders coming here to sit around and soak up public services. Do they really not see the work these people are doing? Do they really not see that that’s WHY THEY’RE HERE?

    This is coming from people who have a worldview that I don’t share. It comes from people who have a hair-trigger response that makes them explode at the slightest suggestion that anyone — from Reagan’s welfare queens to these supposed Mexican freeloaders — might be GETTING SOMETHING at the expense of the taxes they so hate to pay.

    These are people who, when they were kids, were always complaining to the teacher about what Johnny at the next desk was doing, and the teacher would say, “What Johnny does is none of your concern; concern yourself with what YOU do.” Only they didn’t listen.

    Anyway, this fundamental disconnect between folks who see the world that way and those of us who don’t (and who see hard workers, not freeloaders) prevents us from addressing the real problems inherent in illegal immigration. And there ARE real problems. It IS unfair that some people play by the rules and can’t get into this country, or stay once they get here. It IS a problem that we have millions of undocumented people in this country that we can’t keep track of, especially in a time when there are a lot of people from OTHER parts of the world who would love to sneak in for purposes of terrorism. It is a HUGE problem that we’ve got a drug war practically causing the government of Mexico to collapes (a war caused by demand on THIS side of the border), and occasionally that violence spills over.(For that matter, even if it doesn’t spill over, the fact that it’s happening right on our border is a problem for us, if only because it stimulates more illegal immigration.)

    These are all things we need to deal with. But we can’t have a rational conversation with those who are just furious that any of those people are here at all.

  13. Brad

    Bud and I just crossed paths… Bud, I didn’t know the Pancho Villa episode was a point of pride. I always thought it was an embarrassing episode.

    I had a distant cousin — he was a little older than my grandparents — who told me when I was a kid that he had been with Pershing in Mexico, and that on at least one occasion, Pershing dined at a cantina and later learned that while he had been there, Villa had been eating back in the kitchen.

  14. Brad

    … a great case of what would be termed, in military intelligence circles, “local knowledge” effectively employed to the disadvantage of an adversary.

    By the way, folks, I’ve continued this immigration discussion in a new post.

  15. bud

    Pershing was the man promoted to lead the AEF in France. At the time the Pancho Villa incident must have impressed someone.

    I’ve heard conservatives use the episode as an example of how we used to do things. We didn’t worry about political correctness or diplomacy. If there was a scoundrel doing mischieve we went after him, no matter where he fled.

  16. Michael P.

    Brad, you don’t get the point or it appears do not understand the law. These people are not entering this country legally and can not work here legally, yet you admittedly support them doing both.

    I grew up in an area where we didn’t have migrant or illegal workers. Buildings got constructed, crops got harvested and livestock got processed. Are you saying here in Columbia that all of these activities would come to a grinding halt if the illegals were rounded up and deported?

    Who pays for the schools that are having to be built or trailers hauled in because these workers children are now adding seats to the classes. Many of these children do not speak English so schools have to hire additional employees to help these student stay up to speed with the rest of the class while also learning English. Who pays for the reduced or free lunches and breakfasts these students receive? Schools budgets are tight enough without having to put the burden these people are adding to the situation.

    Yet when it’s all said and done, you’re the one standing on the border with your welcome sign. Maybe you can get your buddy Ariail to draw up a cartoon of you standing at the Rio Grande holding a welcome mat.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *