Conquer Mexico Next?

I have a theory I like tho' it may not withstand historical analysis: the British Empire conquered and grew because the Brits were searching for edible food. Indeed, they stopped with India because there they found really great curry. When they had to surrender India as a colony, the Brits compensated by passing a law that required an Indian restaurant at every major intersection in England.

I trust a similarly sane motive underlies what otherwise is utter madness on the part of WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah who advocates the conquest of Mexico in today's edition of WND.

He writes,"A top-ranking Mexican official last week virtually declared war on the United States. Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez said in a radio interview that an international strategy would be used if other attempts to reverse Arizona's Proposition 200 fail. In other words, the equivalent of the U.S. secretary of state is advocating meddling in the internal affairs not only of our country, but one of our 50 independent, sovereign states."

(Prop. 200 went into effect last week. Among other things, it denies most taxpayer benefits to illegal aliens and requires those who wrongly apply for such benefits to be reported to officials.)

Farah's subsequent logic may be correct: if it is proper for the US to jump an Ocean to bring"democracy" to Iraq and greater security to the America, then why it is wrong to truck a few miles southward to accomplish the same goals? If you buy the premise, you've bought the package. But the premises are drek. And the hypocritical chutzpah of his complaining about one nation bringing"international power to bear" on another is astounding.

I strongly dislike the"international tribunals" to which Derbez is"threatening" to appeal Prop. 200 but the correct response is for members to withdraw and for the world in general to treat the tribunals with contemptuous disregard.

For more commentary, please see McBlog.