November 16, 2007

Time To Get Mexico Out Of Our Hair!

By Joe Guzzardi

Last weekend, I became aware of an alarming new development in the war for immigration sanity: the anchor dog!

I was at the local feed store talking with Stacy, a freshly scrubbed young woman in a "Cowgirl" tee shirt. Stacy was helping me make a new tag for my Australian Shepherd, Sparkle.

We got to talking about our pets. Stacy said: "I have a Chihuahua puppy and she’s the real thing. Her mother was born in Mexico."

I asked Stacy to explain. "Well," she said, "the dog’s owner arranged for the mom to come to the U.S. so that her puppies could have a better life!"

Then Stacy added, "You know, kind of like the people do."

We had a pretty good laugh about that.

In reality, of course, I don’t think much of "anchor dogs." As a board member of the local animal shelter, I know firsthand how many homeless animals we have to place.

Stacy’s dog story is another amazing example of the one-sided relationship between the U.S. and Mexico—whatever its needs are, and they’re multiple, we’re right here to bail the country out.

The time is now for the U.S. to demonstrate tough love toward Mexico by demanding that, before we do anything more on its behalf—like fork over $1.4 billion under the Marshall Plan/Merida Initiative as Brenda Walker outlined last night in her column here—it visibly demonstrate that its taking steps to helping itself.

Here are two recent examples of how Mexico uses its financial and intellectual resources to improve conditions for Mexicans living in the U.S. instead its own citizens.

On September 10th Mexico’s Foreign Relations Secretariat announced that the budget for Mexican consulate offices in the U.S would be doubled from the 2006 level to $830 million pesos (slightly more than $76 million or about $1.75 million per Mexican consulate office). The La Jornada story by reporter José Antonio Román is here but in Spanish only: Duplica la SRE recursos para la red consular en Estados Unidos.  

The story conveys the impression that the Mexican consulate offices exist for the benign purpose of providing "military registrations and birth certificates" or general help and guidance for Mexicans residing "abroad."

But for more than five years, the main mission of Mexican consulate offices and their temporary sub- stations that they have set up in suburban areas has been to distribute matricula consular cards to aliens.

The story, in fact, acknowledges that by issuing matricula consular cards, consulate offices are directly intervening in U.S. domestic policy: "Currently it is estimated that there are 4 million Mexicans with high security Consular ID which are accepted at various public and private institutions in the United States."

Stated another way, the matricula consular card enables Mexicans to get checking accounts and home mortgages—with the considerable help of greedy bankers—even though it is illegal for aliens to have commercial banking accounts of any kind or for banks to accept non-secure identification. (Comprehensive background on Mexican consulate offices and the matricula consular card is in the  Center for Immigration Studies report IDs for Illegals The 'Matricula Consular' Advances Mexico's Immigration Agenda January 2003)

The final, inescapable conclusion: Mexico’s doubling of its consular budget means that the country is willing to spend twice the money in its reconquista efforts.

Here’s an even more egregious example of how Mexico sees itself vis-à-vis the U.S.

In another story from La Jornada  "Seeking To Make Migration An Issue in the 2008 US elections," also written by reporter Román [Buscan que la migración sea tema en comicios de 2008 en EU - La Jornada, November 6, 2007; sorry, still Spanish only] reveals that a group that calls itself the "First Parliament of Mexican Immigration Leaders"[“Primer Parlamento de Líderes Migrantes Mexicanos que viven en Estados Unidos de America”] who are 150 strong and who live in the U.S. will convene with like-minded Mexican officials in San Lázaro on November 16th and 17th.

"…Pointed out that the ideal is that the Mexican community in that country [America] would register between one and two million more new voters for 2008, in order to exert pressure over the presidential aspirants, and eventually make a ‘strategic alliance’ with the Afro-American community,[afroestadunidense is the Mexican word] which also faces problems of racism."

Jacques Medina, who is described in the story as "having a long history in defense of immigrants in the U.S."  but who is better known to us as a reigning reconquista, said his goal is to ensure that Mexicans:

"Recover our forgotten sense of belonging and preparing ourselves to give battle for our legitimate rights that exist, even when one is an undocumented immigrant. It is necessary to change the passive attitude with which we've traditionally accepted our destiny as immigrants".

At its meeting this week end, the "Parliament" will, "in the face of a terrible wave of anti-immigrant measures in the United States," address three "principal" issues: 

I’m breathless at the scope of our offenses against Mexico! And nary a word of thanks—in this "Parliament" or anywhere else at any time—to America for doing for Mexicans what Mexico will not do: provide education, employment, free medical care and legal advice as well as a host of other social services.

And to think that those La Raza types traveling from the U.S. to attend the "Parliament" are mostly American citizens dedicated to subverting our country. [VDARE.COM Note: the "parliament’s web page is available in English, in case anyone has assimilated.]

If only Mexico paid as much attention to its own country as it does to the U.S. it could, eventually, pull itself out of the pit it has been in for an eternity.

Imagine, if you can, a marriage  in which one partner is always saying, "I demand my rights!" "I do all the work around here!" "You’d be nothing without me!"

Before long, the offending spouse would be gone.

And that’s what Mexico should be—gone and out of our hair,

Mexico’s internal problems—crime, traffic, pollution, housing, jobs and Indians’ rights, did not originate in the U.S or evolve from our policies. The "First Parliament of Mexican Immigration Leaders" won’t solve the Mexico’s problems.

The U.S can apply a simple guideline to Mexico. When Mexico has put in place changes that make the country a more livable place for its citizens, then (maybe) we’ll talk.

When and if the happy day comes that Mexico decides to clean up its own house, then the "Parliament" will be able to disband because the country will be, for Mexicans at least, a better place to live than the U.S.