The Latest Immigration Disaster: More Questions Than Answers

This week, we have watched the unfolding story of the thousands of "unaccompanied children" who have been flooding our borders. Without a doubt, this is a human tragedy. Is it a tragedy that could have been avoided? Probably. Our immigration policy, never truly defined, has been rendered completely ineffective by one and one only fact: This administration has steadfastly refused to secure our southern border. Beyond that, the President's former spokes-minion, Jay Carney, actually stood in the press room and lied (again) in his statement that our "...border is more secure than it has ever been."

Just yesterday, the President proposed spending (depending upon whose report you read) either 3.8  or 4.3 billion dollars to help solve the current dilemma. Yet, NOT ONE DOLLAR of this proposed expenditure does anything to stem the flow of this overwhelming attack on our border. No money for a fence, no money for increased enforcement, no LONG TERM solution. Once again, we "lead from behind." Once again, we are reactive rather than proactive.

By the administration's own acknowledgement, many of these latest border crossers will eventually be sent back from whence they came. At least, that is, those who don't "disappear" prior to their hearing dates. Which brings me to question: Do we really have as much control on these visitors as we are being led to believe? We've already heard the story of one who was sent to Maryland and claimed by someone who gave a bogus address and who never showed up for their scheduled hearing. Gone into the hinterlands of America. Probably soon to be found at an emergency room near you, or maybe in your child's school this fall.

And, with all the mass confusion along our border, creating mass distraction for our border control agents, how many of the really BAD characters have we missed? Sadly, we won't know until it's too late. We can reasonably suspect that much of this influx of unaccompanied children at our border is the work of the many Central American drug cartel types. Isn't it also reasonable to assume that this is being done for their benefit in some way?

The next and most burning question I have is "Why all the secrecy when it comes to these children?"Congressman Jim Bridenstine was denied access to one of the facilities where these children are being kept. When he inquired as to what was happening, he was told to email questions  to HHS (Health and Human Services).

Meantime, HHS is willing to schedule tours of these centers with the following restrictions: No pictures, no questions of the children, no real contact. This truly sounds like something out of the former Soviet Union. Why HHS being so secretive? At a time when this administration desperately needs someplace where they can show some transparency, they run in exactly the opposite direction. Look, I understand the idea of protecting the privacy of these children, but we first should be damned certain that these folks aren't bringing MORE uninvited "guests" with them in the form of diseases, parasites, lice, and whatever else with which they may be afflicted.

Personally, I would have no problem with these guests being totally quarantined until their health status is ascertained; yet, HHS has seen fit to transport these people all over the damned country, and schedule "tours" of their detention facilities. That doesn't seem real healthy to me, at least in the present tense. Once that status is established, they should be returned from whence they came.

At the very least, since we, the taxpayers are being "volunteered" to pay this bill, we deserve some semblance of an accounting. Not only that, but if these kids are allowed to stay, our tax dollars will be further spent to educate and care for them, a burden which our already overtaxed educational system cannot afford.

Bottom line: This whole crisis could have been avoided had not the Obama Administration essentially implied that "If you get to America, you can stay." We have essentially obliterated our border at a time when it should be reinforced and closed.

At a time when everyone seems to clamor for "immigration reform," we've been handed a set of circumstances that shows we need to clearly demand that before ANY reform can be considered, we need to STOP the flow of illegal immigrants and control our own borders. Obviously, we cannot trust the current administration to do this, as they have shown no inclination to do so. Without that step, "immigration reform" cannot be considered.

The Misinterpretation of Hobby Lobby

This week, the United States Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, held that Hobby Lobby did not have to provide coverage for four specific drug protocols which are designed to cause a woman to spontaneously abort a fetus.

Almost immediately, the feminists and other leftist types took to the streets, proclaiming that this decision denied employees of the closely held company the right to contraception coverage. (It did no such thing.) Equally immediately, conservatives were arguing that, (for once) religious freedom had prevailed.

Before we settle that weighty issue, we all should take a breath and consider what health insurance is really all about. I have a brother who is CEO of an insurance consulting firm. While his area of expertise is property and casualty insurance, he pointed out in a Facebook posting a (perhaps forgotten) universal truth of insurance in general. Insurance in any form is not designed to cover everything; rather it is designed to protect the insured from the type of catastrophic loss that can bankrupt an individual or company.

Think about that for a moment. If you were to file a claim for every scratch and parking lot "ding" that happens to your car, what would you expect to happen to your premiums? That's right, before long, you'd be either paying through the nose, or cancelled. Accordingly, when we get one of those little  "cart marks," we often ignore it, or if we have it repaired, we PAY for the repair, leaving our insurance company to cover that untimely mating between your Buick and someone else's Ford. Works pretty well for car insurance, doesn't it?

When it comes to health insurance, however, our perspective changes. We seem to want to pay NOTHING for every little visit to the doctor, for every prescription, regardless of how inexpensive.
Now, to be perfectly honest, birth control pills cost $9 per month. But, if our health insurance doesn't cover it, some feel that they're being denied a human right. So, in order to cover that benefit for females of child bearing age, we ALL have to pony up a little more premium whether we are male or female, child bearing or not.

Since it has been decided that this benefit is necessary,  let's add in the next variable. When the PPACA (also known as Obamacare) was being considered, one of the "sticking points" that had to be dealt with was government (tax payer dollars) paying for abortion. In order to secure passage of the bill, it was agreed that there would be no Federal funding of abortion. This assuaged the concerns of many Christians, such as the Green family who own Hobby Lobby.

However, many feminists we not happy with this, demanding that among the contraceptive protocols that be covered would be the "morning after" pill and other pharmaceuticals that cause a woman to abort a conceived embryo. While the Greens were willing to accept coverage of 16 contraceptive drugs, their religious convictions dictated that they not allow the four drugs which cause spontaneous abortion.

The President and his minions have granted many exemptions to the PPACA for political friends and allies; for that matter, they've essentially changed the PPACA 38 times without bringing it back before the Congress, something MANY feel is a blatant example of executive overreach.

So, the Greens sought relief through the courts. And that brings us to this week. And this is where the madness begins. The whole of the left's representation is that this decision somehow limits the rights of Hobby Lobby associates to birth control. Nothing could be further from the truth and THEY KNOW IT. The left is counting on the fact that no one will pay attention to the actual DECISION of the SCOTUS, but will listen to the false brayings of the feminist lobby which is telling outright LIES. Certainly the media won't point out the falsehoods; they're already in the tank protecting their pals on the left.

Even Hillary Clinton has jumped into this deception, saying that she is "deeply disturbed that the associates at Hobby Lobby are being denied contraception," knowing FULL WELL  that it is UNTRUE. Anything to perpetuate the phony "war on women" that has become the main talking point of the left. Not only that, but her cries of foul run against the Religious Freedom Protection Act which her own husband signed.

They are depending on the stupidity of the American public to hold this against conservatives at the ballot box. Considering some of the truly remarkably ignorant things I have heard recently in "man on the street" interviews, this may work. If it does, God help us all.

A Tale of Two Soldiers

The master of distraction is  at it again. Just when we start to ask questions and begin to break apart the Veteran's Administration  mess, our attention is pulled away by the prisoner exchange whereby we return 5 of the Taliban's top guys who were vacationing at Club Gitmo for one misguided Army private who seemed to  be predisposed to going on walkabout (without leave) and seeking the company of  the Taliban. Oh , by the way, we're supposed to be FIGHTING the Taliban, not trying to find their camp so we can join them for s'mores.

At  some point, the Army will determine whether Bowe Bergdahl was, in fact incredibly stupid, a deserter, mentally ill or what. So far, according to his American compatriots, informed opinion is that then-Private (now Sergeant) Bergdahl deserted his post and (possibly willingly) sought out the enemy.

All of which leaves most of us mortals with many more questions than answers.  I fully acknowledge that part of the mission of the brave men and women who man  the front lines to keep us safe is to "leave no man (or woman) behind." But, what price are we, as a nation, to pay for the return  of an Army private who seemed to have no allegiance to his country. According to the President and his minions, we were going to let these guys out of Gitmo anyway. But, if that's the case, why did the President find it so urgent to strike this deal as to (once again) circumvent Congress.

In truth, Congress, given a mere briefing or "heads up," might well have approved this trade. Their reputation is only slightly less "squirrely" than that of the President. Who knows what deals  might have been struck behind closed doors.

The fact remains, however, that the Chief Executive, went around the Constitution yet again. And
the timing of the whole thing is rather questionable when you consider the VA scandal on the front burner until this trade.

Plus, this trade stinks. Those of you who follow auto racing will understand that this trade is something akin to trading A.J. Foyt, Mario Andretti, Rick Mears, Dario Franchitti and Helio Castroneves for that scion of IndyCar non-performance, Dr. Jack Miller, the racing dentist.

The five Taliban leaders released will almost certainly return to bite us in the proverbial ass at some future time.

In the meantime, we have another Sergeant in custody in a foreign jail. This individual, Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi remains held in a Mexican jail for what appears to be a "wrong turn" which led him back into Mexico by mistake. Unfortunately, Tahmooressi was in possession of three firearms which, while legally owned in the U. S., are a violation of Mexican law. The return of Tahmooressi to the U. S.. should require nothing more than a high-level phone call; Mexico, after all, is supposedly our ally, (unlike the Taliban.) This should be an easy one for the President, if it even had to go that high up the food chain.

Although this  would seem to be an easy way for President Obama to put "points on the board," (a phrase the administration used to describe the trade for Bergdahl,) . we have heard NOTHING about Sgt. Thamooressi aside from crickets. If not for FoxNews Greta VanSusteren, we might not know of Thamooressi at all.

Time will tell how all of this will be resolved. I strongly suspect that Bergdahl will face court martial once he is returned to health; Of course, President Obama could compound his own felony and pardon the alleged deserter. Yet while Bergdahl remains in the headlines, Sgt. Thamooressi remains jailed in Mexico.  It is indeed a bizarro world.