This is not to say that Fox's successor will be any better. Nevertheless, on July 2, 2006 Mexico will elect a new president to replace the unpopular (at least in Mexico, and throughout Latin America) Fox.
The beleaguered Fox is catching heavy heat from every corner—except from where it would be most appropriate: the White House.
Recently, President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and Nestor Kirchner of Argentina publicly berated Fox for promoting a planned Americas-wide trade pact known as the FTAA, which, they complained, will be slanted to benefit the United States.
Chavez refused to apologize for labeling Fox a U.S lap dog and warned the Mexican president not to:
"Mess with me, mister, or you'll get stung."
Don't we all wish we had the chance to say a few words face to face to the insufferable Fox?
[Fox Obtains Little from Bush," Alistair Bell, Reuters, November 19, 2005
In fact, Fox's abysmal six-year term is such a weight on his party that the PAN candidate, Felipe Calderon, is running a distant third in the polls with only 25 percent support.
The current leaders are Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador of the Party of the Democratic Revolution and Roberto Madrazo Pintado of the Institutional Revolutionary Party with 38 and 29 percent respectively.
PAN is given so little chance to retain the presidency that observers are urging the Fox administration to negotiate an "exit pact" with both opposing parties to assure what would be a rarity in Mexican politics— a government transition that would be "politically safe and dignified."
Such an agreement, if it were ever reached, would be the only "dignified" thing about Fox since he became president.
Fox's immigration misdeeds and double-talking have been chronicled at VDARE.COM from day one. For a good primer on that subject, see Allan Wall's "Memo from Mexico" archive. Or check either the Steve Sailer or Sam Francis archives.
(I say primer because a complete accounting of Fox's phoniness would make a book as thick as the Mexico City telephone directory).
But the supreme irritation is Fox's continued references to the "human rights of migrants" and his none too thinly veiled suggestion that the U.S. government and its citizens do not treat Mexicans fairly.
Fox's charge is so patently absurd on the face of it that it is hard to imagine that he can speak the words with a straight face.
The corker comes when you compare Fox's hot air to the realities of "human rights" in Mexico. Only then can you fully you understand the depths of his Fox's duplicity.
Doyle's report, posted on the National Security Archive, found among other things, that Mexican
"Government agents abducted, tortured and murdered hundreds of Mexicans during the sexenios (six year presidential terms) of Luis Echeverría and José López Portillo."
During the period from 1974-78, Amnesty International documented more 350 cases involving the use of "systematic beatings, near drowning and electric shocks" by Mexican police against government political enemies.
Of course, observers might say, "Well the Dirty War was 30 years ago. Surely the practice of torture and beating ended with Fox's 'Government of Change.'"
It didn't. Although Fox paid more lip service to human rights than previous presidents, abuses continued.
And last week, confirming an on-going pattern of brutal behavior, the Associated Press reported that according to Mexico's National Human Rights Commission its police force:
"Still uses torture to extract confessions and information from suspects, but have developed new, more sophisticated ways of doing so that are harder to detect."
Mexico must have an odd definition of "sophisticated" since the techniques for extracting information included:
"Near-asphyxiation using plastic bags pulled over a victim's head or the pouring of water or gasoline into victims' mouths, noses or ears and the use of electric shocks, cigarette burns and sexual violence." [Mexican Human Rights Commission Investigating 12 Torture Complaints So Far in 2005," Associated Press, November 22, 2005]
Most ironically, Mexico routinely violates the human rights of Central American migrants who cross into Mexico.
Earlier this year, while Fox was at Baylor University threatening to use international courts to prevent the Minutemen—who he termed "migrant-hunting groups"— from patrolling the border, the State Department, in its Human Rights Practices report, cited abuses at all levels of the Mexican government including police and immigration officials. The report also accused Mexico of trafficking in illegal aliens.
Professor George Grayson of the College of William and Mary and an expert on Mexican immigration issues, refuted Fox's disingenuous remarks by saying that Mexico does
"Very little to protect the welfare of Central Americans who cross into Mexico…they are ripped off six ways until sundown." [Mexico Accused of Abusing Its Illegals, Jerry Seper, Washington Times, March 24, 2005]
According to the Human Rights Watch, after Fox's election:
"Foreigners continued to face restrictions in obtaining visas for human rights work in Mexico. Applicants were required to describe their plans to consular officers in copious detail, including all destinations to be visited."
Others who have been mistreated during Fox's term are the unfortunate Mexicans who have not been able to escape to the north. Their lot has not improved one iota during Fox's six years.
As inept as Fox has been, he has luck on his side. This is because Mexico's past presidents have been so corrupt —most notably Carlos Salinas Gortari— that just being a hypocrite makes him look good by comparison.
Both Mexico and the U.S. are better off without Fox. Let's keep our fingers crossed for more integrity from the next guy…whoever he may be.
Joe Guzzardi [email him], an instructor in English at the Lodi Adult School, has been writing a weekly newspaper column since 1988. This column is exclusive to VDARE.COM.