The Blame-Game and Lies About the Border Immigration Crisis

The explosion of unaccompanied children crossing our southern border -- up 92% just this year under Obama's watch -- has caused the President and the Democrats to find anyway possible to blame the Republicans -- and even George W. Bush -- for this crisis.

Obama blames the Republicans for not passing immigration reform. However, there isn't a single,  change in the proposed policies -- from either the Democrats or the Republicans -- that would have prevented or stopped this current wave of children from asking for asylum from violent countries like El Salvador, Honduras, or Guatemala.

They are coming here because they are aware of an existing law --  the Trafficking Victims and Violence Protection Act -- which mandates that border agents must accept any child into this country who is seeking asylum from violence in their own country.  And, they can't be deported without having  a legal hearing as to whether or not they were truly endangered. Even if we added 700 miles of new fencing, any of these children could go to a cross-border checkpoint, and our agents must accept them.

Now, with regard to the Trafficking Victims and Violence Protection Act, there are those who are attempting to blame George W. Bush for its reauthorization in 2008. But, there are three facts that aren't being told about the 2008 law.  First, it was originally signed by Bill Clinton in 2000 and had to be renewed several times because it always carried an automatic sunset date.  The 2008 renewal not only pertained to human trafficking, but also included a new amendment covering asylum for unaccompanied alien children fleeing violence. That amendment was written and promoted by a Democrat, Senator Dianne Feinstein, in her role as the Chairperson of the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee.  Bush may have signed it into law but the "unaccompanied rule" was a Democrat-led initiative. Secondly, it expired in 2011 and had to be reauthorized and signed by President Barack Obama in 2013.  This 2013 reauthorization seems to have been the impetus for the current wave of children exploding into the crisis we are now seeing.

So, it's pretty simple.  If the Trafficking Victims and Violence Protection Act is repealed or amended, the problem would, in all probability, go away.  However, none of our politicians -- on either side of the political aisle -- are going to put their name on a law that would heartlessly return children to a life of violence and possible death.  Personally I don't see any way of ever stopping this.

However, what I am afraid of, is that many politicians will push for reuniting these children with their parents in "this" country and not their own.  If this does happen, it will create a new method for immigrants to gain legal access into the U.S. by simply sending their kids to the border.  Thus, they will succeed in bypassing our existing legal immigration laws.  And, the surge of aliens into our country will only be amplified.

References:

Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victims_of_Trafficking_and_Violence_Protection_Act

Surge in unaccompanied child immigrants spurs White House reaction: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/surge-in-unaccompanied-child-immigrants-spurs-white-house-reaction/

Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Feinstein Amendment to Protect Unaccompanied Alien Children: http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=7b292e44-b306-86d0-a0b4-981389abaf5d

U.S. State Department Guide on Trafficking Laws: http://www.state.gov/j/tip/laws/

On Honduras: Castro, Chavez, Ortega & Barack Stand Together!

Contrary to some reports, Honduras is not necessarily on the brink of civil collapse (See Full Story).

What happened in Honduras has all to do with a leftist President, Mel Zelaya, who thought he could circumvent the Honduras Constitution and give himself extraordinary, Chavez-like powers to remain in power on an indefinite basis and control many other aspects of Honduran life. According to their Constitution, only the Congress of Honduras could, by majority Congressional vote, set up general elections for the people to vote to modify their own Constitution.

However, Zelaya, unable to get the required Congressional approval, decided to do an end-around to the Constitution and print up his own ballots -- vis-a-vis help from his dictatorial left-wing buddy, Hugo Chavez, in Venezuela -- and take the vote directly to the people; bypassing both Congress and the Constitution. The Honduran Supreme Court nullified Zelaya's actions by declaring them unconstitutional and illegal. The Honduran military enforced that illegality by arresting Zelaya and seizing all the ballots. The Honduran Congress has since appointed an interim President (as per their Constitution) and declared that a new, permanent President would be elected in fall elections (again, as directed by the Constitution).

All that was done in Honduras was to enforce the laws of their country as outlined in their own Constitution. Now, our own leftist President, Barack Obama, seems to think that this was done illegally; completely ignoring Zelaya's attempted power-grab. This is the same President who thought, initially, that Iran's election was all on the up-and-up and who was totally reluctant to decry the violence in that country that stemmed from what was obviously a bogus election to keep Ahmadinejad in power. Obama said that he didn't want to meddle. Now, with a leftist and possible dictator being removed for violations of the Honduran law, Obama has decided to "meddle" by declaring those actions, certified by the Honduran Supreme Court, as being "illegal" (See Full Story).

Does anyone see a pattern here? Which side does Obama always seem to take in these international situations? Just think back to last year when the then-campaigning Obama called for "restraint" on the part of both Russians and the Republic of Georgia when, in fact, Russia was both the invader and the aggressor in that international situation (See Full Story). In doing so, Obama, as in the case, now, sided with the anti-democracy Russia and completely ignored their aggression and violation of international law.

In this hemisphere, the loudest voices against what has happened in Honduras are: Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega and Barack Obama. Need I say anymore?