Show your support by purchasing VDARE.com merchandise. 
VDARE.com's Amazon connection has been restored! Remember to enter Amazon via the VDARE.com link and we get a commission on any purchases you make—at no cost to you!
Like a Roman
emperor visiting a province,
Mexican President Felipe Calderon paid a visit to
his subjects in Washington, D.C. last week.
He was received
with pomp and circumstance, told his subjects what he
wanted done, and returned home a conquering hero.
Would we tolerate
such arrogant behavior from
Russia or
China?
Yet the president of Mexico is allowed to insult our
laws and treat us with contempt.
The biggest thing
that displeased Calderon was Arizona's
SB
1070 law, which allows Arizona police, during the
normal course of their duties, to enforce
immigration law.
As I have pointed
out before, in Mexico, local police in all states and at all
levels are required to enforce
Mexican immigration law. So Mexico already has an
"Arizona law".
But Calderon came
to Washington prepared to lambast the Arizona law
anyway. And President Obama was
only too happy to help him.
They wasted no
time. On the Mexican president's arrival, in the
Rose Garden press conference in front of the White
House, Obama actually started it, saying:
"We also discussed the new
law in Arizona, which is a misdirected effort—a
misdirected expression of frustration over our broken
immigration system, and which has raised concerns in
both our countries. …And I want everyone, American and
Mexican, to know my administration is taking a very
close look at the Arizona law.
[Sounds like a threat.] We're examining any
implications, especially for
civil rights. Because in the United States of
America, no law-abiding person—be they an
American citizen, a legal immigrant, or a visitor or
tourist from Mexico—should ever be subject to suspicion
simply because of what they look like."
Of course,
the point of Arizona's law is that only individuals
suspected of not
being "law-abiding" will be subject to questioning about their immigration
status.
When it was
Calderon's
turn to speak, he chimed in with this:
"In Mexico, we are and will continue being respectful of the internal
policies of the United States and its legitimate right
to establish in accordance to its Constitution whatever
laws it approves. [That´s a tipoff that he´s about to meddle.]
But we will
retain our firm rejection to criminalize migration so
that people that work and provide things to this nation
will be treated as criminals. And we oppose firmly the
S.B. 1070 Arizona law which derives from unjust, partial
and discriminatory principles."
[Translated from the Spanish]
That night Obama
treated Calderon and the Mexican
First Lady to a big party on the White House lawn,
featuring expensive cuisine and decor, with
entertainment by
pop star Beyoncé (photos and description
here).
On the next day,
May 20th, Calderon delivered his
now-notorious speech to a joint session of the U.S.
Congress, arrogantly attacking Arizona:
"I strongly disagree with the
recently-adopted law in Arizona.
[Applause
begins] It is a law that not only ignores a reality that cannot be erased by
decree [=
Don't dare even try to keep Mexicans out.] but also introduces a terrible idea of using racial profiling as the
basis for law enforcement."
Video:
Calderon Gets Standing Ovation from Dems for Criticizing
AZ Immigration Crackdown
Calderon´s
solution:
"…what we need today is to
fix a broken and inefficient system. We favor the
establishment of laws that work and work well for all." [White
House, Democrats, Applaud Mexican President Slamming
Arizona Law,
Fox News, May 20th, 2010]
Oh really? Guess
what, Presidente?
You're talking about our laws. Not Mexico's laws, but
our laws.
Not content to
bash our immigration law, Calderon
also told us how to run our
gun laws,
calling for a
reinstatement of the
"Assault Weapons
Ban" (which only covered
semi-automatic weapons anyway).
But, a lot of
rhetoric to the contrary, it's just
not true
that the majority of the weapons entering Mexico are
from the U.S. In fact, the Mexican underworld has access
to a veritable international arms bazaar, with weapons
from many countries.
Besides, how does
Calderon expect us to keep the border open for
Mexican illegal aliens traveling north while closing
it up to weapons traveling south?
According to the
Mexican presidential
website, Calderon also
"…. met this morning [May 20th]
with leaders of Hispanic organizations. During the
meeting, they interchanged points of view over the
principal topics of interests of the Mexican communities
in the United States, such as migratory reform
[a.k.a. amnesty],
human rights, education, health and labor, as well as
their
[Hispanics´]
important economic contribution to the country.
[Calderon]
reiterated his rejection of the SB1070 Law …..it commits
an outrage against the inalienable rights of the
migrants
[inalienable
right to enter illegally?].
Besides, it can affect Mexicans and American citizens
alike, since it opens the door to an application
based on racial perceptions.
"….[Calderon]
recalled that the
consular network in Arizona would provide assistance
and protection to the victims of abuse on the part of
local authorities…"
And one of
Calderon's traveling partners, Carlos Navarrete, head of
the Mexican senate,
openly
called on U.S. Hispanics to
vote
for the Democrats.
As far as I can
tell, the Main Stream Media simply ignored this
outrageous meddling in our affairs. (I found out about
it by reading the Mexican press.)
Of course, the
Obama Administration ignored it too.
As VDARE.COM's
Brenda Walker has
pointed out, even Calderon's visit to lay a wreath
at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, the first-ever by a
Mexican president, was part of the Reconquista agenda.
Mexican ambassador to the U.S.
Arturo Sarukhan said the Arlington visit
"…is a symbol of
a much more modern relationship between both our
countries. More importantly, it is also a recognition of
the role Mexican Americans and Latinos in general are
playing in the Armed forces of the United States."
But note that, although Calderon used the Arlington visit as another Latino Moment, the very fact that he went there was offensive to some Mexicans. A May 21 editorial in the leftist Jornada newspaper was entitled Soberanía :Claudicación Creciente ("Sovereignty : Increased Yielding [to the U.S.]")
"Yesterday, in the context of his
official visit to the U.S., President Calderon placed a
wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, in the
cemetery of Arlington, Virginia, in honor of the
Mexican-American soldiers who have died in U.S.
military campaigns. [Calderon] thus broke a tacit
prohibition, maintained throughout the previous
administrations, that prevented the Mexican president
from visiting there [Arlington]. The reason… in Arlington there are buried American military personnel
who participated in various
armed aggressions perpetrated by our northern neighbor
against ours, including those by which Washington took
from Mexico more
than
half her territory…..Although geography and economy
make pertinent and necessary, in the present time, the
construction of a fluid bilateral relationship, it
should not for that reason be forgotten that the U.S.
has been, for two centuries, the principal threat to the
[Mexican]
national security and the most responsible for wrongs
committed against Mexican sovereignty and integrity ….
it is inevitable to see in Calderon's presence in
Arlington one episode more of the yielding of the
[Mexican] sovereignty…."
La Jornada is still angry because the U.S. has fought Mexico in the past, and took
half her territory (a
long time ago).
But if many
Mexicans (despite the fact that they weren't even alive
then) are still hurt by the loss of the U.S. Southwest,
and if most Americans want to keep the Southwest, then I
don't really see a way to compromise on that issue.
U.S. nationalism
and Mexican nationalism are, in a word, incompatible.
But hey, isn't
that the purpose of having separate countries?
And did any
intrepid reporter take up my
invitation to confront Calderon over Mexico's
hypocrisy?
Well, there
actually was one—to his credit, CNN's
Wolf Blitzer (!).
In a one –on-one
interview
conducted in English, Wolf asked Calderon about
Mexican immigration policy.
Here is the meat
of it:
BLITZER: So if people want to come
from Guatemala or Honduras or El Salvador or Nicaragua,
they want to just come into Mexico, they can just walk
in?
CALDERON: No. They need to fulfill
a form. They need to establish their right name. We
analyze if they have not a criminal precedent. ……
BLITZER: Do Mexican police go
around asking for papers of people they suspect are
illegal immigrants?
CALDERON: Of course. Of course,
in the border, we are asking the people, who are
you?...
…. BLITZER: But once they're in...
CALDERON: But not—but not
in—if—once they are inside the—inside the country, what
the Mexican police do is, of course, enforce the law……
….. BLITZER:……, if somebody sneaks
in from
Nicaragua or some other country in Central America,
through the southern border of Mexico, they wind up in
Mexico, they can go get a job...
CALDERON: No, no.
BLITZER: They can work.
CALDERON: If—if somebody do that
without permission, we send back—we
send
back them.
BLITZER: You
find them and you send them back?
CALDERON: Yes. …[THE
SITUATION ROOM--Interview with Mexican President Felipe
Calderon, Aired May 19, 2010]
Amazing! Calderon
frankly describes Mexico's non-Open Borders treatment of
Central American illegal aliens from countries that are
even poorer than Mexico. Yet
the very next day,
he had no problem whatsoever lambasting Arizona, in the
U.S. Congress, for a law that's not even as strict as
Mexico's immigration law.
That's real
chutzpah. That's arrogance. But Calderon got away with
it.
The bottom line,
however: Calderon would never be able to do all this if
we didn't allow it.
President Obama,
after all, is on the
same sheet of music as the
Mexican government. And congressional Democrats gave
standing ovations to Calderon's comments.
My suggestion: any
candidate running against any of these
"applauders"
ought to bring that standing ovation up frequently and
feature it in campaign ads.
But what about the
Republicans in Congress?
At least they
didn't applaud. However, they were just quiet. A few
complained later.
Why didn't they do
more—like boo or walk out or something noticeable?
It works. Don't
they remember the lesson of
Joe Wilson?
American citizen Allan Wall (email
him) recently moved back to the