SwiftVets.com

[SBD]

I thought this was worth mentioning since most of us focused on Powder Puff Barbara's attack on Rice. Apparently, Powder Puff Barbara just made Rice's job more difficult in regards to Mexico by blurting out several references to internal political issues regarding the next Mexican Presidential Election.

Monday, January 24, 2005

Is Barbara Boxer giving out secrets on Mexico?
By Barnard R. Thompson

During the confirmation hearing of Condoleezza Rice to become U.S. Secretary of State, before the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee, lost in the hue and cry of questions by Senator Barbara Boxer (Democrat, California) were some brief references to Mexico. And one of Boxer’s comments in particular, about Mexican politics, deserves examination to see if it was mountain or molehill.

Associating herself with earlier hearing comments by Rhode Island Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee (who extolled the democratic virtues of President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela), Boxer lectured Rice that the U.S. must be more consistent in Latin America.

“For example, in Mexico, where the PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party) is coming back, we've got to pay attention to Mexico,” Boxer said. “And I hope that will be a priority because I know they're very distressed and disappointed that they don't feel they were a priority. We've got immigration issues in my state that I know you're very aware of, coming — being a resident there. And we've got to deal with these issues.”

Next the Senator affirmed: “And we have a situation where the PRI now is trying to disqualify someone who wants to run. So we've got a lot of democracy issues there, and I think we need to be evenhanded.”

“And we have a situation where the PRI now is trying to disqualify someone who wants to run.”

While this particular statement may be factual, to be precise it is also in error. Which is part of a problem because the comment was made by a member of the Foreign Relations Committee of the U.S. Senate who is presumably briefed with confidential intelligence data and analyses on a regular basis.

Was she wrong? Has she misinterpreted what she was told? Was it spin? Or if she had been mislead who is responsible?

More fearful, if the source is within the intelligence community did Senator Boxer thus divulge classified or privileged information — even if it may have been inadvertent? Could she also be giving others a heads-up as to what the U.S. knows and from whom or where the information originally came?

The comment undoubtedly refers to pro tem populist Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the Democratic Revolution Party (PRD) mayor of Mexico City who so far is a frontrunner in the 2006 race for the presidency of Mexico.

López Obrador currently faces possible loss of his constitutional immunity from prosecution, a privilege enjoyed by elected officials in Mexico. This due to charges that his office ignored a federal court order regarding the misappropriation of a parcel of land by his government. Should he be stripped of that immunity the mayor could be subject to prosecution, and individuals under criminal indictment in Mexico may not register to run for office.

However authorization to strip an elected official of his or her immunity is the purview of the federal Chamber of Deputies, which would subsequently ask Mexico’s Attorney General to proceed with a criminal complaint against whomever. It is not, per se, done by a political party.

Boxer is technically wrong.

Most certainly the 223 members of the PRI delegation in the 500 total Chamber of Deputies reflect their party’s wish and goal to move López Obrador out of the picture. But the same things can be said about the 150 National Action Party deputies and their PAN party.

Yes those partisan politicians have the authority, through their democratic vote that prevails in the Chamber (barring factional stonewalling), to strip the mayor’s immunity. And yes the PRI is a resurging powerhouse, however the effort to disqualify López Obrador is not exclusive to the PRI — and for Boxer to suggest otherwise is irresponsible.

Unless she knows things the rest of us do not? And if that is the case she probably has no business revealing them to either side, especially if the information resulted from classified briefings.

So the question becomes, are we making a mountain out of a molehill (or might there be a mole in the mountain)?

Whatever the case, someone in Barbara Boxer’s position must understand that seemingly innocuous remarks regarding politics in other nations can also have consequences, especially when there are those who can get so much out of even a few words.

This assuming of course that the Senator knows what she’s talking about.

_____________

Barnard Thompson is Editor of MexiData.info. He can be reached via e-mail at mexidata@ix.netcom.com.

SBD

[MSeeger]

Mexican politics is a complex issue, being as how Mexico has more political parties than you can shake a stick at.

PRI has been the top dog for years, until this last election. I think the opposing party that won had the initials PAN...(don't ask me what the acronym stands for, I don't remember).

I have a feeling Ms. Boxer didn't reveal anything that you couldn't read in a Mexican newspaper or get from watching Telemundo or Univision. The ins and outs of Mexican politics aren't exactly a state secret, I should think.

Maria
_________________
Be not deceived, God is not mocked, for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. Gal. 6:7

[SBD]

[four-niner delta]

Sen. Boxer is an embarrassment to her party and to the state of California. Just look at the introduction Sen. Feinstein gave Dr. Rice at the opening of the hearings. Boxer has become the attack dog of the Bush administration and she doesn't even see that the democratic party is using her as their sacrificial lamb. This woman doesn't have the IQ for the job. Where are Liebermann and the other moderates in their party?
_________________
Gary Armitstead
Burbank, CA
U.S. Army Vietnam 1966-67 Mekong Delta
Mobile Riverine Force
A Co. 3/60 9th INF DIV

[SBD]

[four-niner delta]

Heaven help us if she is Sec. of State!
_________________
Gary Armitstead
Burbank, CA
U.S. Army Vietnam 1966-67 Mekong Delta
Mobile Riverine Force
A Co. 3/60 9th INF DIV

[wwIIvetsdaughter]

FYI, Mseeger PAN stands (translation) National Action Party. PAN is closest to the GOP, PRI closer to the present day dems and PRD are just plain 'ol socialists/communists types. PS I live 15 miles from Mexico.

[DLI78]

Just before the election one of the local talk radios decided that every time they talked about Kerry's wife they would do an intro of the Planter's Peanuts jingle: "Sometimes I feel like a nut, sometimes I don't..."

First time I heard it I almost ran off the road.

Now when I look at Boxer on the TV I can't help remembering that jingle.

I'm from California, and I figure that the reason we elect Boxer every few years is to provide the country with comic relief. Same reason the locals up north keep reelecting Pelosi. Now there's somebody who looks dumber than a box of rocks.
_________________
DLI 78
Army Linguist
1978-1986

[PhantomSgt]

Only in the Republic of Liberal California would this waste of human flesh win an office higher than county dogcatcher if that.

After living in California for ten years I decided to ditch those tax and spend liberals for a reality check.

Take a drive down Sunset Boulevard on a Saturday evening and you will see the strangest group of characters assembled on planet earth. Look carefully and learn folks, these are your regular everyday liberals living in the blue areas of California. Take a drive through East or South LA and enjoy the crescendos of gunshots most any night of the week. These are the Blue areas of Liberal California.

Go up North to the land of leather (San Francisco) and watch the X-rated antics taking place on the street male on male or female on female. This is Blue California at its’ liberal best.

Would I take my children to these places? Of course not as it is way too liberal for them or me. The Blue areas of California have fallen off the left side of the liberal scale and thus are so out of touch with mainstream America they could never understand them.

When the rights of a rat outweigh the Farmer’s rights, welcome to liberal California.

When your house burns down because you couldn’t clear the brush from the land around it, welcome to liberal California.

When your son has three cars totaled and is nearly killed because unlicensed and uninsured illegal aliens run red lights, welcome to liberal California.

The list goes on and on and on folks……...

GOOD RIDDANCE LIBERAL CALIFORNIA!



_________________
Retired AF E-8

Independent that leans right of center.