ABC This Week
(George Stephanopoulos)
Below are the topics and guests announced for
this program, along with my take on the “memes” that the show is trying to
push. With each guest’s name are a series of links that I found in a web search….

Was it an accident?

What the numbers were

No shot were involved

No attacks were recorded

Seems to be Rob Daniels exaggerating again

A simple google of Rob shows that his fellow Border spokesman on both sides of his sector have greatly disputed his accuracy

http://www.dailytoreador.com/media/storage/paper870/news/2005/04/06/LocalNews/Violence.Calls.For.More.Control.At.Mexican.Border-1280709.shtml?norewrite200701060040&sourcedomain

Hot Air provides a link to a TV News story of an attack on National Guard troops on the U.S. – Mexican Border. The news story was very detailed about the attack and the Guardsmen’s retreat. But Hot Air »……

…a republic, if you can keep it.
–Ben Franklin

Looks like we can’t. What’s option #2?

Uh, huh.

So that whole election and voting thing we did last year?

Total sham.

/

What on earth were their assailants carrying that could have forced an armed Guard unit to retreat?

Don’t under estimate the intimidation and undermining agenda that the U.S. put’s on it’s own citiizens (i.e. national Gaurd in this case). I too would rather just “retreat” and take my chances dodging bullets from an armed illegal than to face the so-called justice system in America facing off with the illegals in court had I shot back!

Study about the fall of the Republic of Rome and that thought will dissolve…on the other hand just watch Star Wars…. LOL!

Yes, a non-democratic military regime would be just what we need.

/

Sheesh.

…a republic, if you can keep it.
–Ben Franklin

Looks like we can’t. What’s option #2?

Wanted: 1 hard assed general to run the country for an indeterminant period. Compensation to be proportional to willingness to employ deadly force against all enemies foreign and domestic. Liberals, milksops, lawyers need not apply.
I’ve effing had it.

Yes, a non-democratic military regime would be just what we need.

/

Sheesh.

Wanted: 1 hard assed general to run the country for an indeterminant period. Compensation to be proportional to willingness to employ deadly force against all enemies foreign and domestic. Liberals, milksops, lawyers need not apply.
I’ve effing had it.

Study about the fall of the Republic of Rome and that thought will dissolve…on the other hand just watch Star Wars…. LOL!

No injuries, thank god….

It’s disturbing that they retreated without injuries.

Sweetie, read what I was replying to: the poster made reference to Reagan in a context that held him up (in a positive manner) as a comparison to Bush. I was actually defending Bush. (Let me catch my breathe here for a second).

I don’t believe in amnesty. I also don’t believe in jumping to conclusions!

honora on January 5, 2007 at 1:03 PM

Perhaps I was a bit hasty there so I apologize, honey pie.

http://www.svherald.com/articles/2006/12/27/local_news/news1.txt

Illegal border crossings are down very significantly according to law enforcement. This article is from last week. NPR ran a similiar story with a national focus a couple weeks ago.

honora on January 5, 2007 at 11:46 AM

Is that what you make of illegal border apprehensions being down? You got more faith in Bush than I have, I read it as the border patrol being instructed to stand back and let more of the invaders through.

He never signed an amnesty bill, amnesty was never part of his immigration bill. Amnesty was never mentioned in his bill.
The immigration reform and control act of 1986. Look it up.

Allow me to add the following: The Immigration Reform & Control Act of 1986

“SEC. 245A. “8 USC 1255a” (a) TEMPORARY RESIDENT STATUS. — The Attorney General shall adjust the status of an alien to that of an alien lawfully admitted for temporary residence if the alien meets the following requirements:

It then goes on to lay out those requirements. Just because it doesn’t use the word doesn’t mean it wasn’t an amnesty program.

Section 201. Look it up.

The foxes are running the hen house…. :-(

Under whose authority was that Guard unit at that listening post? If it was a governor’s, then it is that state’s governor that is responsible for the rules of engagement. If it is the President’s, it is the President’s.

Last I heard, unless we’re talking about the Arizona Guard operating outside the federal program to use Guard troops in a support role, it is Jefe Bush’s responsibility.

Regardless, it is time to at a minimum fully-militarize that border. Of course, since we’re set to hand over what’s left of the Social Security “trust fund” to the Mexicans, I doubt that’s going to happen.

1.) Bush doesn’t have anything to do with this.
2.) it’s first the Governor’s responsibility for their state and not fedgov’s
3.) It was Napolitano’s decision to send our own guard personnel to the border.

Gov. Napolitano could have made a real difference if she had ever wanted too, but she doesn’t and will never be in support of actually doing what is needed and that is putting boot’s on the ground at the border with orders to end the problem permanently.

this will never happen though and it will fall to the citizens at large to put on their boots, pickup their arms and take on the problem themselves.

Me I’ve been stocking up and waiting patiently for the inevitable day of reckoning.

Please point out to us an amnesty bill that Reagan signed.

He never signed an amnesty bill, amnesty was never part of his immigration bill. Amnesty was never mentioned in his bill.
The immigration reform and control act of 1986. Look it up.

right2bright on January 5, 2007 at 1:23 PM

My pleasure. Click the below link to Michelle Malkin’s site.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/005252.htm

It’s amazing how references to Gen. Pershing keep popping up. First in dealing with Islamists, now this. It’s a good thing he has so many monuments around the country. Just don’t expect anyone to reflect to much on them.

Coyote D. on January 5, 2007 at 1:20 PM

It happened to be Pershing then, but it could have been any general. The point is that we as a nation and our leaders had the gumballs to not tolerate this crap. And BTW, Wilson was anything but the ‘war-monger’ President that Bush is made out to be.

honora on January 5, 2007 at 11:49 AM

Please point out to us an amnesty bill that Reagan signed.

He never signed an amnesty bill, amnesty was never part of his immigration bill. Amnesty was never mentioned in his bill.
The immigration reform and control act of 1986. Look it up.

Mr. President,

Don’t try to convince me you’re keeping me secure with a war abroad if you won’t even guard the back door!

Wolves at the door while we say “peace and safety”. . .

The Ritz on January 5, 2007 at 1:13 PM

It makes absolutely no sense to have a hard-line anti terror policy half a world away in Iraq while we roll over and play dead on our own border.

A century ago we did not put up with this kind of BS. Now we’ve been liberal PC wussified. Pancho Villa would be proud.

It’s amazing how references to Gen. Pershing keep popping up. First in dealing with Islamists, now this. It’s a good thing he has so many monuments around the country. Just don’t expect anyone to reflect to much on them.