Then I attended a panel on the coming elections that was disheartening. I'm sorry to say the Republican party seems to be unraveling just like the democratic party. A couple of the congressmen attacked Tom Tancredo vehemently about his immigration stand. Tancredo had said bluntly "I'm for a wall" [on our southern border] and expressed the opinion that we cannot allow two separate and distinct societies to exist within our nation. To which I would add, we must think not simply about economics in this equation - the other congressmen attacking Tancredo kept talking about how we NEED Mexican workers and how unless we are prepared to expel 11 million illegals (size of the state of Ohio)...blah blah blah, as though that would just be unthinkable. But I can tell you, that thought was not unthinkable to everybody else in the room who are concerned not simply about short-term economics, but the long term character of our nation as well. One can find little Tihuanas all over the country now. Every city has them. It's the price of cheap yard work for one generation. Sorry, I'd rather mow my own yard than have to put up with Mexican graffiti all over the place.
Next, I attended a panel on "The Media and the War" with Andrew Breitbart (formerly with Drudge), Tammy Bruce, Bill Sammon, and Frank Gaffney. It was just sort of a celebration of the decline of the main stream media and the rise of alternative media. Breitbart was the most knowledgeable on Islam.
After that, I attended a briefing on Guantanamo Bay given by Lt. General Paul Vallely and Lt. Colonel Gordon Cucullu. Nothing new, but the army is beginning to get it. I asked, "Since we know that jihad ideology comes directy out of Islam, why are we providing these people with Korans?" Colonel Cucullu jumped on it and said, "That's not all! They have imams and prayer rugs and signs all over pointing toward Mecca!" He understood the inherent contradiction. Maybe he'll be more likely to discuss it with others in the military now that the issue has been raised.
Then I had a wonderful afternoon talking to our new friends from England. One man says whenever he talks to Muslims he tells them straight out - "I will never live as a dhimmi under Islam. I would rather die first." He says most of the time the Muslims look sheepish and ashamed in response.
Brava, Rebecca. I couldn?t agree more. Thanks for the report. It looks like we still have to preach to the choir on a few issues.
The argument is routinely made that the illegals come here to increase their standard of living, and those of their families in Mexico, where money sent by relatives in the US is now said to be a bigger source of national income than oil.
However, the "standard of living" argument is condescending and short-sighted. By allowing alien workers in, whether in law or merely in practice, we do two things:
The first is that we enable Mexico to limp along without addressing the corruption, institutionalized racism, and flawed policies that keep so much of the nation impoverished. In the long run, this does nothing to improve the situation inside Mexico, whereas such improvement would tangibly and permanently raise the "standard of living" for Mexicans living in Mexico. That country is on "welfare," and will not get off of it on its own initiative-- there's no incentive as long as the status quo works for the people in power.
Secondly, allowing the illegal worker in the US under the "standard of living" excuse, actually installs a permanent ceiling on what their standard of living will be. Poorly educated in their native land, and not speaking English, there is no way to rise above the menial jobs that they come into the US to do, and the best hope for a standard of living will sit somewhere just above "miserable."
Build the wall, and name it in Tancredo's honor. The US and Mexico will both be better for it in the long run.