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!
Did
President Barack Obama come into contact with a future
victim of Swine
a.k.a. Mexican Flu on his April 16-17th
visit to Mexico?
Barack Obama 'met man who died of suspected flu' in
Mexico, by Tom Leonard,
Daily Telegraph,
April 28, 2009.)
Well, at least that would be news. The meeting has been hailed (by its
participants) as
"a new era" in U.S.-Mexican relations. But it's not.
Barack Obama himself said that it's a new era:
"I see this visit…as an opportunity to launch a new era of cooperation
and partnership between our two nations…."
Obama's host, Mexican president
Felipe Calderon proclaimed that
"This is an historic event that will inaugurate a new
era, a new relationship between our two
countries…President Obama's visit is just an initial
step, the beginning of a relationship between two
countries that are friends, neighbors, and must also be
partners and
allies."
That all sounds impressive. But remember back eight years, during the
first year of the George W. Bush (George II)
administration. Weren't
we
hearing similar rhetoric?
Yes, we certainly were.
Ben Wattenberg, for example, hosted an episode of
his PBS Think Tank show entitled
"A
New Era in U.S. - Mexico Relations?"
If you want to go back even further, to
1990, President George H. W. Bush (George I) visited
Mexico. And there he proclaimed, guess what, that
"It is an honor to stand with you…at such a promising
moment in our shared history.
For I believe that our two peoples are now on the
eve of an era more cooperative and more prosperous than
ever we have known before."
Maybe every U.S.
president gets to start a
"new era"
with Mexico.
It's just part of the job.
The first president to pay an official visit to Mexico was
William Howard Taft. That was
a century ago, in 1909.
Perhaps Taft also talked about a
"new era" in U.S.-Mexican relations.
Obama was only in Mexico for 20 hours, however, making it essentially a
stopover. From there he flew to the Caribbean island
nation of Trinidad and Tobago for
a big hemispheric summit meeting.
(For a short video of Barack Obama's official reception in Mexico City,
along with footage of Marine One and helicopter
gunships, click
here .)
The U.S. president and his entourage were hosted at a banquet at the
patio of the world-class
Anthropology museum.
For our purposes, the most critical part of the visit is the April 16th
joint
press conference of Obama and Mexican president
Felipe Calderon, held at Los Pinos, the Mexican White
House.
Calderon had this to say about U.S. immigration policy:
"…. we have also agreed that both governments should produce
propositions—proposals for our cooperation so that we
can eventually have reform in the United States with
full respect to the sovereign decisions of both
congresses—of both nations, that is. Our governments
will work in this sense to make migration an orderly,
respectful process of human rights, a process in which
human rights will be respected."
Notice that Calderon says both
governments will make proposals for
U.S.
immigration policy.
Outrageous—but no big surprise.
The
Mexican government has been meddling in U.S,
internal affairs for years.
Obama waxed eloquent over the U.S.-Mexican relationship:
"It's difficult to overstate the depth of the ties between our two nations
or the extraordinary importance of our relationship.
It's obviously a simple fact of geography
that we share a border, and we've always been bound
together because of that geography. But it's not just
that shared border that links us together. It's not only
geography, but it's also culture, it's also
migration patterns that have taken place that have
become so important."
Translation: There are
so many Mexicans in the U.S. that the U.S. is being
Mexicanized.
And check out this
from Obama:
"Our deep economic ties mean that whenever—whatever steps that we're going
to take moving forward have to be taken together. And
that's why we worked hard, hand in hand at the G20
summit. And that's what we will continue to do at the
Summit of the Americas and beyond, so that we can
jumpstart job creation, promote
free
and fair trade, and develop a coordinated response
to this economic crisis."
More
globalism, in other words.
Whatever happened to just letting each country
solve its own domestic problems?
Of course Obama had to talk about immigration:
"We also discussed our shared interest in meeting an immigration
challenge that has serious implications for both the
United States and for Mexico. My country has been
greatly enriched by migration from Mexico. Mexican
Americans form a critical and enduring link between our
nations. And I am committed to fixing our broken
immigration system in a way that upholds our traditions
as a
nation of laws but also as a
nation of immigrants."
Why is it when politicians talk about
"fixing our broken immigration system"
it means they want
amnesty and higher immigration levels?
Another old chestnut—which George II also talked about,
back in his day—was helping Mexico advance economically:
"And I'm committed to working with President Calderón to promote the kind of
bottom-up economic growth here in Mexico that will allow
people to live out their dreams here, and as a
consequence will relieve some of the pressures that
we've seen along the borders."
I've got a better idea. How about
closing the border?
That, more than anything, would help Mexico's economy by
forcing its leaders to look for real reform rather than
using the U.S. as their safety valve.
Obama also talked about the drug war in Mexico:
"But I will not pretend that this is Mexico's responsibility alone. A demand
for these drugs in the United States is what is helping
to keep these cartels in business."
Absolutely! I have to agree with President Obama here.
He's absolutely right about that, and we ought to
seriously consider our own drug prohibition.
But then Obama has to get into the gun issue:
"This war is being waged with guns purchased not here, but in the United
States. More than 90 percent of the guns recovered in
Mexico come from the United States, many from gun shops
that line our shared border."
This is the "90%
Dogma" which has recently been confidently reported
by so many in the media and political world.
It's been
debunked by
Fox News but people still repeat it.
Not only is the 90% argument false, it is being used to
browbeat Americans with their
Second Amendment rights.
The
argument
seems to imply, quite ridiculously, that
murderous Mexican drug barons really want to obey
Mexico's stricter gun laws, but are prevented from doing
so by that Second Amendment
north of the
border!
Of course, Obama wasn't alone when he visited Mexico. In
the press conference, he mentioned some of his entourage
and what they were up to:
"My National Homeland Security Advisor, who is here, General Jim Jones, as
well as my Homeland Security Secretary,
Janet Napolitano, and my top advisor on homeland
security and counterterrorism, John Brennan, are all
meeting with their Mexican counterparts to develop new
ways to cooperate and coordinate their efforts more
effectively."
Hmm, Janet Napolitano. Isn't she the one whose Homeland
Security Department recently sent out a
profile of potential terrorists—returning
war veterans, Second Amendment supporters, opponents
of illegal immigration, etc.
Aren't you encouraged to see her hobnobbing with
Mexican officials?
Also in the press conference, Calderon actually blamed the
lifting of the ban on assault weapons for the increase
of cartel violence in Mexico:
"From the moment that the prohibition on the sale of assault weapons [expired]
a few years ago, we have seen an increase in the power
of organized crime in Mexico."
Calderon actually got into talking about the Second
Amendment:
"We know that it is a politically delicate topic because Americans truly
appreciate their
constitutional rights, and particularly those that
are part of the
Second Amendment. I personally believe that as long
as we are able to explain clearly what our problems in
Mexico are, then we might also be able to seek a
solution respecting the constitutional rights of the
Americans, at the same time will prevent—or rather avoid
that organized crime becomes better armed in our
country."
Wow, did you get that—Calderon says he might actually
allow our constitutional rights to be respected!
But wait, has he cleared that with Janet yet?
One of the reporters asked about immigration, pointing out
that Senator Obama voted for the
border fence in 2006. Obama responded that
"I also voted
twice for comprehensive immigration reform that would
have provided a pathway for legalization [amnesty]…"
Obama did say that the U.S. did have a
"legitimate
concern" in regulating immigration.
However, he also made it clear that he wants
illegal aliens to be
fined but still, in the end, get amnesty:
"What I've also said is that for those immigrants [illegals]
who are already in the United States -for those
immigrants who have put down
roots, may have come there illegally, I think they
need to pay a penalty for having broken the law. They
need to come out of the shadows, and then we have to put
them through a process where, if they want to stay in
the United States, they have an opportunity over time to
earn that opportunity, for a legal status in the United
States."
Obama talked about how amnesty was attempted several years
ago but "became
politicized". What he wants is
"a secure and
safe border so you don't have people who are
dying in the deserts as a consequence of a
disorderly and illegal migration process. I think that's
a
goal that President Calderón and I share and one
that we discussed during our bilateral meeting."
In response to the same reporter, Calderon said that
"…as a Mexican, as President of Mexico, it doesn't make me particularly
happy to see
our people risk their lives going across a border,
because I know that with every migrant that leaves we
have the best of our people leaving—the youngest, the
most courageous, the strongest, the hardest-working—they
are the ones that are leaving. Because I have seen in
many communities here in Mexico, and particularly the
state I come from, where there are phantom towns now,
where there are only the elderly, children, women, and
no one else is left there. So I am working hard to
create in Mexico the conditions, the opportunities of
work, of employment for our people here in Mexico. That
is really the only way out that can put a stop to
migration. I think that is the best way out, to create
opportunities and employment in our country."
It's very noble for Calderon to say such things. So why
doesn't he just tell Mexicans to stop emigrating?
Because, he claims, there is a
"meantime":
"But in the meantime, President Obama is very clear on what the problem
consists of, and it's very important to establish those
instruments that will enable people to come out of the
shadows, as he himself has said, and that our region can
gradually become more orderly, more legal and better
migration flows."
The Same Old Same Old, in other words.
Calderon also wants customs cooperation, going so far as
to suggest that the U.S. and Mexico have a
"single customs form", and he also wants "concrete
measures" in the
"harmonization of standards" of products.
Recall that under the
SPP
(Security and Prosperity Partnership) between the U.S.,
Mexico and Canada, the harmonization of law and
regulation in the three countries are called for.
More globalism, in other words.
Are there any
of the Obama statements I've quoted that Bush
wouldn't have said in a visit to Mexico?
Nevertheless, not everybody in Mexico was satisfied with
Obama's visit. An article in
El Universal,
Mexico's paper of record was entitled
It began thusly
"The president of the United States, Barack Obama,
affirmed that the relationship with Mexico can be even
stronger, but in his discourse he lacked concrete
commitments."
It will be interesting to see, at the end of the next four
(or eight) years, if Barack Obama is still as popular as
he is today in Mexico.
My guess: no.
American citizen Allan Wall (email
him) recently moved back to the