Linda Ronstadt On The Border, The Fence, & Immigration

(This photo of Linda Ronstadt is from the website called Back To Rockville.)

I have admired Linda Ronstadt for most of my life. She has one of those rare singing voices that is so good it makes you just listen in awe (much like the the awesome voices of the late singers Patsy Cline and Minnie Riperton). But it is not just her voice that is special. She is a special person in general.

She recently appeared on the radio show of Diane Rehm, and here are a few comments from Ms. Ronstadt's appearance on that show.

"Well, the politics were getting so gnarly in Arizona. I just, I mean, I grew up in Arizona, I love it. I'm a part of the desert. I feel like, really, I'm from the Sonoran Desert, which is — extends to both sides of the border. I'm really from that part of Mexico also. And I hate that there's a fence, you know, running through it."

"There wasn't a fence running through the Sonoran Desert when I was growing up. In fact, when I moved back to Tucson, there wasn't even a fence running through it."

"While I was there, it was building; we just turned around and all of a sudden it was there, this horrible thing that destroyed economies on both sides of the line. I know my own father's business was very dependent on the goodwill and business and trade from people in northern Mexico. We knew their families and went to their weddings and baptisms and balls and picnics, and we had a great time with them. Because my dad had a huge hardware store, and they came up to Tucson (to) do their shopping."

"We regularly shopped in Nogales. It was a wonderful place then, and had beautiful things in the stores and had wonderful food. And when they put that fence up, they cut all that commerce off and that's what creates understanding and awareness of each other and good trade relations."

"The place where my grandfather was born is 3½ hours southeast of Tucson, and I love that culture down there — it's beautiful; what lovely, lovely people. The little town that I go to is called Banámichi, a series of farms and ranches that hug the convolutions of the Sonora River and they're farming and ranching with the kind of irrigation that they've done for hundreds of years; it's a very sustainable way of living and people are lovely, quite refined and very well educated."

"There should not be a question of legal or illegal immigration. People came and immigrated to this country from the time of the Indians. No one's illegal. They should just be able to come."

"We allow Cubans to come in and say that they're refugees. Well, in Cuba — I've been there, you know — people are fed, people are housed, people are clothed. There isn't violence in the streets. Here, people are coming from places where there's just terrible violence. Parts of Mexico that are incredibly violent, and Honduras, which is just unspeakably violent right now."

"These children are just fleeing for their lives, their parents are just sending them out because it's the only way that they have of living — into a terrible, dangerous journey and an uncertain future in the United States that is populated with people that seem to hate them — that's how desperate they are."

Border Wall Is Still A Stupid Idea

In an obvious effort to appeal to the anti-immigrant and racist wing of the Republican base, several of the GOP presidential candidates have revived talk of building a wall between the friendly nations of Mexico and the United States. This is especially dumb considering the fact that President Obama's administration has deported more undocumented immigrants than the Bush administration did, and the number of immigrants trying to enter the United States has fallen drastically due to the deplorable American economy.

I have discussed in the past about how the border fence is an unworkable solution to immigration problems, that is an insult to our Mexican neighbors and an environmental and economic disaster for both sides of the border. It now turns out that the fence can cause or exacerbate flooding problems in the border area -- flooding problems that are totally unnecessary. before any more building is done, those wanting the silly fence should read this article by Scott Nicol in the Rio Grande Guardian. Nicol says:

Finally - A Use For The Border Fence

The Bush administration, in its pandering to the racist immigrant-hating base of the Republican Party, wasted billions of dollars building an unnecessary fence on our southern border. The expensive fence has done nothing to curtail either drug smuggling or the entry of undocumented workers. Our weak economy has done more to slow down entry of the undocumented workers than the fence ever could.

What it has done is harm the border environment, economically devastate cities on both sides of the border and harm the relations between the United States and a friendly neighbor. We have simply thrown billions of dollars down the drain building what I have believed is a totally useless fence.

But maybe I was wrong. It seems that some enterprising Mexican nationals have found a use for the fence, or at least the materials used to build it. They think it makes great scrap metal.

The Tijuana Police have arrested at least six men who were dismantling the wall to sell it off as scrap metal. On Monday, they arrested two men they caught cutting sections from the fence, and then apprehended another on Tuesday who had 11 pieces of the fence. The U.S. Border Patrol notified them of three other suspects.

I think we ought to let them dismantle the fence and sell it for scrap metal. At least, the ridiculous fence would be doing some good for someone that way.

Colorado Racist Goes To Brownsville

Eight congressmen came to Brownsville last Monday to discuss the ridiculous border fence. Six of them were reasonable people who saw the difficulties the proposed fence will cause for Texas. The other two were Duncan Hunter (R-California) and Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado).

I don't know what the two racists thought they would accomplish down on the border. Surely they didn't think their immigrant-bashing would go over well down there (and it didn't). Their defense of the border fence proposal was met with boos and catcalls. Tancredo became upset with the "landowners multi-culturist views on the border."

I think he meant that as a slam. He doesn't seem to realize that here in Texas, we're damn proud of our multi-culturalism. There was a Spanish influence in Texas even before Texas became a country and then a state. You can just look at the names of many of our counties and cities to see that we have heroes from both the English and Hispanic cultures, and we like it that way.

Tancredo wants to close our border and cut us off from our southern neighbor. But the border in Texas has always been a two-way street. Many Mexicans shop and party in Texas, and many Texans do the same in Mexico. This arrangement has always been beneficial to both sides of the border.

But Tancredo doesn't understand this. He's too busy pushing his racist immigrant-bashing to his whitebread base (just who are the nuts who keep re-electing this creep?). He finally got so angry at Brownsville's refusal to accept his anti-immigrant ideas that he was ready to give the city to Mexico.

Tancredo said, "If you don't like the idea, maybe you should consider building the fence around the northern part of your city." What an ass!

If we need any fence in Texas, maybe it should be on our northern border to keep jerks like Tancredo out.

Progress Of Fence Held Up In Court

For a while, it looked like the federal government was going to be able to run rough-shod over the Texas landowners on the border. After demanding and being refused access to much of the land on the border, the feds had gone to court claiming the "right of imminent domain" to just seize the land.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen has ordered the government to first try and negotiate access to the land. The government has not tried to negotiate, but has just demanded obedience to their will.

The case in question regards one acre of land owned by Eloisa Tamez. Judge Hanen has given the government two weeks to prove they have negotiated in good faith with Ms. Tamez.

The feds have now offered her $100 for access to the land, but her attorney, Peter Schey, says they will not agree until the government defines what they mean by "access". Is it just some unobtrusive surveying, or will the house on the property have to be torn down?

In the meantime, at least 38 other cases are pending, and the action in the Tamez case may apply to them also. Schey has filed court papers in an effort to turn the Tamez case into a class-action suit. He wants to include the people who have already agreed to the access, saying they were not told they had a right to negotiate.

Richard Stana of the Government Accountability Office recently testified to a House subcommittee that "keeping on schedule will be challenging because of...difficulties in acquiring rights to border lands".

It's still an uphill fight, and the landowners may yet lose. But the feds are learning that it's not that easy to run over a group of Texans.

Chertoff Ready To Go To Court Over Fence

It looks like push is about to come to shove over the ridiculous fence the Republicans want to build on our southern border. Bush and his cohorts wanted the fence to be built by October. They wanted it done before the election so they could solidify the racist base of their party.

But there's a group of landowners standing in their way -- 20 in California, 11 in Arizona and 71 here in Texas. The group is made up of individuals, city and county governments, utilities, businesses and conservation groups. These people and organizations have refused to let the government surveyors on their land to determine where exactly to put the fence.

Chertoff and his minions from Homeland Security gave this group 30 days to comply with his orders. They ignored him. The 30 days are now up and they still refuse to comply.

Chertoff is now saying he'll go to court and use the right of imminent domain to force the landowners to obey his orders or lose their land. That's the kind of sick bastard he is. But he may find this group tougher than he expected.

These people will probably fight the government in court. The Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law believes the government "is trampling on indigenous, water and property rights". They will represent at least some of the landowners.

I wish these landowners luck in their fight against the government. With some good lawyers and a little bit of luck, maybe they can delay the ridiculous fence until after the election. It is up to the rest of us to elect some sane people to help them out.

This fence will do nothing to stop terrorists or illegal immigration. It will only waste billions of dollars, damage our border and cause a rift with Mexico. It needs to be stopped.

Cornyn Is Chertoff's "Messenger Boy"

John Cornyn has always been George Bush's lapdog, but now it looks like he's extending his repertoire. Now he's acting as a "messenger boy" for Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff. It seems that Chertoff is unhappy with the opposition to the Republican's border fence here in Texas, so he's sent Cornyn to deliver a "get tough" message.

There are slightly more than 400 landowners on the Texas border that the federal government must deal with to build the ridiculous fence. The government says 110 of these landowners have refused to respond to government inquiries or have yet to be located. Another 40 have adamantly refused to give the government permission to set foot on their land.

Cornyn, who voted for the fence, is in Texas to threaten those landowners. He says that Chertoff is ready to get tough with the holdouts, and is preparing to go to federal court to force these landowners to comply -- probably by using the government's right of imminent domain. In other words, if these landowners won't give them the rights, they'll take the land by force.

The landowners are upset because in some cases the fence will cut through their land and leave some field's on the wrong side of the fence. In some other cases, the fence will cut them off from the river -- the only source of water for their crops and livestock.

But Chertoff, through Cornyn, makes it clear that he doesn't care about the landowners, or what the fence will do to harm Texas. These men only care about appealing to the racist base of their party. That's the only reason they're building the fence, since it will do nothing to improve the security of Texans or other Americans.

Cornyn does make a good lapdog and messenger boy, but is that really what we want from our senator? Wouldn't it be better to have a senator that will act in the best interests of the people of Texas?

There is a candidate ready to act on behalf of ordinary Texans, instead of the racists or the rich corporations. His name is Rick Noriega. Give him your serious consideration.

Comparing Our Northern And Southern Borders

The inept Republican leadership in Washington want to build a fence costing several billion dollars on our southern border. They say this fence is needed to protect our country against terrorists (even though there is no evidence that a single terrorist has ever entered the United States by illegally crossing our southern border).

This is such a ludicrous idea, that I thought it was time we compared our southern and northern borders and the security of each one. Here are the facts:

The northern border is 4,000 miles long (not counting the border at Alaska).

The southern border is 1,970 miles long.

There are 10 states on our northern border.

There are 4 states on our southern border.

Our southern border is mostly a dangerous desert with soaring temperatures.

Our northern border has much more cover and a temperate climate.

Crossing our southern border at most places requires a long and dangerous walk with few if any roads not covered by border agents.

Crossing our northern border is an easy walk and has hundreds of unwatched roads that merge into our highway system after only a mile or two.

Our northern border is protected by only 1,000 border agents, or one agent for every four miles (one for every 12 miles if you consider they are divided into three working shifts).

Our southern border is protected by 12,000 border agents, or six agents for every mile (two agents for every mile considering the three shifts).

Smuggling of drugs and other items occurs on both border areas.

Considering the above facts, which border would you choose to cross if you were a terrorist? Our northern border would obviously be easier, safer and have much less chance of your being caught. Actually, most terrorists enter our country by airplane or ship with false papers. But if a terrorist somehow couldn't get the necessary paperwork, it would be much better to try crossing our northern border rather than our southern border.

Terrorists are not stupid. That's why there are instances of them trying to enter over the northern border, while there are no verified cases of a terrorist crossing our southern border. The sad fact is that the border fence has nothing to do with terrorism -- only racism.

Most of the people in Canada are white and speak English. Most of the people in Mexico are brown and speak Spanish. This is why there are plans for a southern fence, and no plans for a northern fence. The Republicans are trying to appeal to the innate racist tendencies of many Americans (and doing a pretty good job of it).

There are economic immigrants crossing both borders, but Americans only seem to worry about the poor Hispanic immigrants (who are just trying to feed their families). You'd think a nation built on immigration would be more understanding.

We should be ashamed.

Northern Border More Porous Than Southern Border

Along a 268 mile stretch of the border near El Paso, the Border Patrol has over 2,000 agents. By comparison, they have only 1,000 agents assigned to protect our entire 3,987 mile long border with Canada.

As John Cooney of the General Accounting Office says of our northern border, "That border is so long, frankly, the security on that border has really not increased too much since the French and Indian War."

Our border with Canada is twice as long as our border with Mexico. It has hundreds of small roads (as pictured above), and thousands of places where anyone can just walk across without anyone noticing. And there is no dangerous desert to cross or river to swim or fence to climb over.

This shows just what a lie the Republicans are telling us about our southern border. They want us to believe there is a serious risk of terrorists crossing our southern border, and that is why we must build a fence there. What a lie!

There is not a single instance of a terrorist crossing our southern border. Why would they cross there? It's far more dangerous to cross our southern border, and with the several thousand agents assigned there, it is far more likely they would be caught trying to cross there than the northern border.

On the northern border, they could walk or drive across unseen and then merge into US traffic within a couple of miles. That's much easier!

It just shows us that the proposed southern fence has nothing to do with national security. If it did, they would be proposing an even longer fence for our unguarded northern border. No, the fence is not aimed at terrorists, but at brown-skinned economic immigrants trying to feed their families (who pose no danger to the American populace).

It is simply more evidence of the racism and bigotry in our country, and in the Republican Party.

Environmental Laws Waived For Border Fence

Bush and the Republican Party have never let a few laws get in the way of their accomplishing their political goals. It looks like they still feel that way. And make no mistake about it, the building of the fence along our southern border is pure politics.

No one who is knowledgeable about illegal immigration believes the fence will stop, or even slow down the migration of undocumented workers into this country. The fence is being built to appease the racist base of the Republican Party.

The modern Republican Party achieved their majority largely due to racist reaction to Democrats passing the Civil Rights laws of the mid-sixties. They understand that America still has problems with racism, and now they're wanting to save their party by trying to appeal to these same racist views -- only this time it's aimed at the brown people who cross our southern border to feed their families.

This time, Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff has brushed aside environmental laws to complete building a section of the political fence in Arizona (and threatens to do the same in Texas if those laws get in his way here). The Republicans will build their fence regardless of what it does to the environment.

In Arizona, a federal judge had stopped the building of the fence. She said the government had not fully explored the impact of the fence upon the area's environment. But Chertoff was not about to wait for an environmental study. This fence is too important to his Republican bosses.

It's pretty obvious that the fence will harm the border environment here in Texas if it is built. We can expect Chertoff and his cronies to show the same indifference to our environment that he is showing toward the environment in Arizona.

Now Chertoff is not breaking any laws by brushing aside environmental laws and concerns. That's because the Republican Congress foresaw the legal problems, and gave him the authority to ignore environmental laws back in 2005.

It looks like it's time for Democrats to revisit that 2005 law -- that is, if they can find the backbone to do so.

Van Os Speaks Against Border Fence

Many Texans are against the border fence proposed by Republicans to appeal to their racist base. One of those opposed to the fence is the inimitable David Van Os. Van Os has a way with words, and phrases his opposition to the fence much better than I could. Therefore, I give you the words of David Van Os:

I'm an American and a Texan and proud of both. I live in a free society. The specter of living behind a walled border makes my blood run cold.

To erect a wall along the Rio Grande River is to advertise to the world that we Americans, the heirs of the noblest revolutionary vision ever bequeathed by one people to the rest of humanity, the very people who gave to the world and to all future time the soul-stirring example of a national identity based on freedom and equality, have so degenerated in our self-confidence that we are afraid to face the rest of the world without cowering behind walls.

Is the planned Rio Grande Valley wall a true reflection of the United States of America of Patrick Henry who proclaimed to the British king and the world, "Give me liberty or give me death"? Is it a true reflection of the America of Thomas Jefferson who wrote that all are "endowed with the unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"? Or of the America of Franklin Delano Roosevelt who told us, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself"; or of John Fitzgerald Kennedy who told us, "a rising tide lifts all boats"?

To my Republican friends who loved Ronald Wilson Reagan, does the border wall fit the vision of the President Reagan who told Soviet premier Mikhail Gorbachev to "tear down this wall"?

Will the construction of a Rio Grande border wall be a true reflection of the indomitable Texas spirit exemplified by Lyndon Baines Johnson, who insisted to us and our fellow Americans that we are capable of constructing a Great Society where hunger, poverty, and racism are vanquished forever?

The idea of building a border wall, I respectfully submit, flies in the face of everything dear about the values of the America and the Texas we learned about as children. The prospect of a border wall should wrench our guts.

The typical immigrants who risk life and limb to enter our country without legal authorization do so in the search for a better future for themselves and their posterity. They come in flight from blighted economies that offer them bleak futures. They do so because they know we Americans and Texans, despite our flaws and despite our being stuck with neo-con government leaders who are hostile to humanity, remain at the grassroots level a great, generous and compassionate people who are instinctively hospitable to strangers in need.

This great country of ours knows how to help impoverished neighbors in the world community build themselves out of despair into prosperity. We did it for nations and peoples all over the world after World War II, both for former enemies as well as for allies.

We can do it again. We are spending over a billion dollars a month in the neo-cons' illegal occupation of Iraq, an occupation that makes some of our very finest young Americans nothing other than bulls-eye targets for the multiple opposing factions of a multiple civil war. It is time not only to withdraw from the Iraqi invasion and occupation that never should have happened, but also to propose and negotiate a mutually agreeable but massive economic aid plan, a new Marshall Plan, for our neighbors to the south. It is the only way to stabilize the relationship between our economy and the economy of Mexico, and stabilizing that economic relationship is the only way to find a win-win solution.

As the more enlightened leaders of our nation's history have always shown us, having a prosperous world around us, where human beings live in hope instead of desperation, is always the best route to national security.

David Van Os

173 Miles or 70 Miles or 50 Miles or 40 Miles ?

Does the federal government not know what it is doing, or are they finally beginning to respond to all the criticism they have been getting from Texans over the proposed border fence?

When the Republicans passed their stupid proposal to build a new fence on America's southern border, we were told that at least 173 miles of the fence would be built in Texas. When the Border Patrol and the Army Corps of Engineers released plans last week, it showed plans for only 70 miles of fence along the Texas/Mexico border.

On Monday, Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff said there may be as little as 50, or even 40 miles of the fence built in Texas. What is going on? Are they responding to the criticism of border residents and landowners and environmentalists? Have they finally come to their senses? Chertoff now says most of the fence will be built in California, Arizona and New Mexico.

Texas is not like the other border states. The other three states share a land border with Mexico. But although Texas has the longest border with Mexico, it is composed of the Rio Grande river. A fence in Texas could cut farmers, ranchers and wildlife off from the needed river water.

The fence could also harm relations with Mexico and hurt Texas economically. The fact is that the fence would do nothing to protect Texas, but could easily harm us. Even 40 miles is too much.

We must keep pressing on this issue until we get the number of miles down to 0. It is the only acceptable number.

The Fence Is Still A Stupid Idea !

The right-wing seems convinced that the only way to protect ourselves is to build a fence on the border. Of course no one is talking about building a fence on our northern border (after all, those are white people). It's just those brown people on our southern border that they want to keep out.

Of course the fence idea is ridiculous. As one politician said, if you build a 10-foot high fence, you'll just sell a lot of 12-foot ladders. A fence won't keep people out any better than the wall in Berlin kept people in. Desperate people have always found a way to get around fences, and they always will.

And by the way, there is still not a single verified instance of a terrorist entering our country by illegally crossing our southern border. And why should they? There is no reason to risk such a dangerous journey. All they need is a little paperwork and they can fly in or drive across our northern border (as many have). And they have the money to buy the best paperwork available.

The people crossing our southern border are not terrorists. They are fathers and mothers desperate to find any kind of job so they can feed, clothe and shelter their families. In their situation we would do the same (and if you wouldn't, then you're not much of a parent).

The people crossing our southern borders are also not criminals. Most of them are too afraid of being caught and deported to commit foolish crimes and draw attention to themselves. I have been employed in various aspects of law enforcement in Texas for over 25 years, and I can tell you the vast majority of criminals in Texas are US citizens.

There are drugs crossing our southern border, but anyone with any sense knows these are entering by boat, airplanes or trucks. If the only way to get drugs into our country was to walk them across our southern deserts, our drug problem would have been eradicated a long time ago.

A fence on our southern border will do nothing to protect us from terrorists or criminals. It will only cut off our farmers and ranchers from the river, endanger the area's wildlife and create ill-feelings between the US and Mexico.

The fence was a stupid and racist idea when it was proposed, and it still is.

Bush Lies About Border Fence

After all the lies told by Bush and his cohorts since he took office, I guess I should be getting used to them by now -- but I'm not. Each time I get upset and wonder how America can keep putting up with a president that continually lies to us.

Last week, Bush gave an interview to McClatchy Newspapers. He discussed the proposed border fence to be built in Texas. Bush said he realized that a lot of Texas ranchers thought the fence was a bad idea, and said, "I presume we're not going to build a fence on places where people don't want it."

It took less than a week for Homeland Security director Michael Chertoff to show us Bush was lying again. On friday Chertoff said, "This is a national issue that requires a national decision. This is not a local issue." Chertoff said he would listen to local communities, but the communities would not have a veto on where the fence was going to be built.

In the final analysis, the fence is going to be built whever the Border Patrol wants it to be built. The economic impact on border farmers, ranchers and communities does not matter. The environmental impact on wildlife in the area does not matter. The relationships between Texas and Mexican cities do not matter.

The only thing that does matter is for the Republicans to look good to their bigoted supporters by building a fence. Then without accomplishing a thing, they can claim they've done something about homeland security and immigration.

Why would Bush lie about this? Bush is not very bright, and he gets flustered when he's asked the hard questions. I think he just gives the easiest answer, whether it's even close to the truth does not matter.

He's been getting away with lying to the American people for several years. Why would he change now?