Mexican Radio

You've been reading the endless spin on Mexican drug cartels...that they're on the verge of overwhelming the Mexican government — such as it is —  with hardware its soldiers picked up from the Wal-Mart in Galveston. If you're still have trouble gasping this, here's a quick, antigun round-up from the wire: 

Tom Diaz, an analyst at the Violence Policy Center, a gun control group, said cartels use military-style weapons such as the Armalite AR-50, a .50-caliber sniper rifle.

He brought one to a recent congressional hearing — with the help of two police officers — and said he found the weapon on the Internet, bought it for $3,200 from a Maryland "kitchen table" dealer and had it registered in the District of Columbia, all in about six hours.

Semiautomatic rifles used by the cartels are imported legally into the U.S. as "sporting" weapons, a policy that was stopped for years but revived under President George W. Bush. The government could stop importation of those weapons under the 1968 Gun Control Act and thus keep them from winding up in Mexico, Diaz said.

Rep. John Tierney, D-Mass., who chaired a hearing on guns going to Mexico, said he is not seeking widespread gun control but Congress must do something.

Of course, it's all a lie...the cartels are, indeed, an army with real, full-auto "assault" weapons, antitank rockets, grenades, etc. which, unless the Galveston Wal-Mart is one of heck of a place they got from the usual suspects, the military arms bazaars that dot the Third World like pockmarks on El Generale's face.

The point of the exercise is spin, trying to find something — anything — the antigun lobby can get traction on. Tom Diaz would appear before Congress dragging his grandmother's entrails if he thought it would allow him to continue to be a "player" and making the big bucks in D.C.

But maybe let's think about Mexico for a moment. In fact, here's a quiz...how many rights should Americans be willing to give up to help protect a neighbor state? Okay, how about a different example than Our Friends to the South, maybe Our Friends to the North? 

If you've been following the news over the last year or so, Canada's not crazy about this wild-and-crazy free speech stuff, especially if it offends Muslims, which is why best-selling author Mark Steyn got charged with "hate speech" in Canada for his wildly poplar book AMERICA ALONE, which speculated that Europe, including England, would be Islamic countries within 20 years if for no other reason that demographics. So the Canadians, tired of the endless, unregulated speech pouring over the border from the south, petition the United States government to place strict regulation on speech, lest it slip over the border and annoy the LeBatts crowd, maybe licensing and strictly monitoring connections to the Internet, prior restraint of radio and television broadcasts to give the U.S. government a chance to make sure the content is Canada A-Okay, etc.

Should we do that to help our Poor Cold Brothers and Sisters?

Sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it? In fact, the answer to both Mexico and our hypothetical Canadian situation is the same: Tough nuggies (or, perhaps for the Montrealers, touche nougat).