This is another one of my dispatches from the war zone along the Mexican border. I live in El Paso, across the Rio Grande from Juarez, Mexico. The El Paso City Hall, of course, was recently reported to have been hit by "stray" bullets from a gun fight across the border. Here is the readio news report I heard on Friday (not word for word, but sbustantively accurate):

"Just when you thought that violence in Juarez could not get any worse, it did. Two Mexican police officers--one federal offficer and one municipal officer--were killed in Juarez when attacked with HAND GRENADES last night. A number of other people were injured--several critically injured"

HAND GRENADES? You could not make this stuff up. Tanks will be next. Yes, I know that hand grenades are not any nikd of super weapon. I threw one in basic training (in the U.S. Army, those many years ago during the Vietnam War, although I was never in Vietnam). Assault rifles have much more range (illustrated by the bullet holes in the El Paso City Hall). The radio report did not indcate that these were rifle grenades or mortars, but those will probably be next (if not here already). The point is that grenades are a weapon of WAR--a military weapon. That is what we now have on the Mexican border--still, at least in El Paso, mainly on the Mexican side. There is a WAR going on. It is like the days of Pancho Villa, except that these "bandits" are probably worse than Pancho Villa.

I have lived in the general Mexican border region for 50 years--most of that time in El Paso. Mexico has always been a CORRUPT country, but this kind of violence, and really total breakdown of order, has occurred only in the last three years or so (unless you go back to those days of Pancho Villa). My two daughters--lno more than a decade ago--used to go to Juarez without fear (albeit withut my approval, and those evil hypocrites at CNN have the nerve to criticize Sarah Palin's parenting as if any parent can control his or her teenage daughters). My law firm--way back when---used to have frim dinners in Juarez restaurants. Now the restaurants are moving to El Paso, along with every Mexican who can.

What is the reaction of the Obama Administration to all of this? Oh, you know tthe answer to this one!!!!! "The only problem we see is that terrible Arizona law." (quoting the Obama Administatraton, almost verbatim). You just can't get any more clueless than that. Grenades are falling withint earshot of El Paso, and our government thinks that the problem is the POTENTIAL for "racial profiling"? Give me a greak. No attitude is likely to make it more certain that grenades start blowing up in El Pas, Phoenix and Los Angeles. Most--including most Hispanics I know---worry more about the violence they can almost see and hear than about "political correctness". A little "potential" for racial profiling may be a LOT better than a lot of grenades blowing you up.

Then there are the Democrats in Congress. How did they make sure you appreciate THIER concern about the Mexican border? No, I can't make this up either. They introduced some sort of bill to try to keep GAY LOVERS from being separated, if one of them is an illeal immigrant (or maybe giving them preference equal to or better than spouses of American citizens) I say "btter", because INS (I was at the meeting) said they had the "right" to deport my sister-in-law (married to my brother and the adopted daughter of a U.S. military man, who came here legally at the age of 7) because she had thought her adoption (at 17) made her a citizen (leading her to register to vote, at my brother's urging). After all, El Paso judge Pena (squiggle over the "n")--who I knew fairly well---had declared her t be a citizen in the adoption decree, and she had what amounted to a Texas birth certificate. (This is why I have some sympathy for those kooks who question the Hawaii "certificate of birth" for President Obama, even though I correctly label them as kooks. It is not impossible--just a KOOKY allegaton that is not true. Hohn McCain, by the way--and I did not support McCain before this--failed to even respond (his office even failed to respond) to my brother's complaint's about how his wife was being treated. I digress (not realy). Swhould gays have more rights than my sister-in-law, and just what does it say about your priorities if you are worried more about (a few) gay lovers being possibly separated than you are about grenades being dropped on American citizens (inlcuding gay lovers)?

I know. These Democrats don't want to deport ANYONE. This whole thing about gay lovers, just like the crocodile tears about children, is all really about making it IMPOSSIBLE to deport anyone. That is thoe wholeDemocrat goal here. You should know it. I do know it.

But what does it say about your prioriteis when you are worried more about not separating gay lovers, and about a tame Arizona attempt to actually protect its citizens, than you are about the terrible situation along the Mexican border? No wonder polls are showing that people are tired of Democrats already (although I don't believe in polls). All that surpirses me is that even 1/3 of the country is willing to vote for ANY Democrat this Novermber. I only go that high becasue I am willing to believe that 1/3 of the country is INSANE (or, more accurately, so stuck in political mud that they are "Yellow Dog Democrats"--who vote Democrat even if the candidate is a yellow dog).