there were all kinds of offenses for us to atone for. our reputation, we were told, needed some polishing, and he was the right guy for the job. the constitutional law background is worked out in a rather interesting way, when you think about it. 20 times, unanimously, the supreme court has had to set him straight on the limits of executive power. and when an american president is constantly exceeding his lawful authority, it doesn't exactly do much for bipartisan goodwill either. he has taken to saying, if congress won't act, i will. which certainly serves up a certain element of our society out there. the problem is, we've still got two elected branches of government in this country. and yet, for all of those

inconveniences, we still like to do things democratically. we are seeing this misuse of presidential power right now. and one of the issues that brings us here today, and that is, the integrity of our nation's security, our nation's border. we have a crisis on our nation's border that is entirely under the president's authority to deal with under the law, but he will not fully and consistently enforce the laws as they are written. that is, requiring the protection of our borders against unlawful entry. and he wants to establish new laws, such as the amnesty of 2012 without the consent of congress. on the one hand, we are seeing a willful neglect of clear, presidential response ability.

on the other hand, we are seeing an aggressive overreach into the powers that do not belong to the president at all. when laws are treated this way, what usually follows are chaos and grief, and that is exactly what we've got right now. there is no briefing from far away that can capture the scenes along our border. not long ago, i invited the president to come with me and have a look for himself. he happened to be in dallas anyway on a very vital presidential trip to help the texas democrats, so why not chopper down to the border and take a look for yourself to see what is going on? he turned me down. and to this day, the president has yet to see the facts on the

ground on our southern border. even though they are the direct consequences of his foreign policies. children, 1000 miles from their parents, vulnerable and afraid. they are drawn here by rumors of amnesty. there are these coyotes, these smugglers, these gang members and lowlifes and other forms who are exploiting these children. and mind you, the unaccompanied children you are reading about are just 20% of those illegally crossing the border. many are adults. some are working for the cartels, or involved in other serious criminal activity. over the years, many thousands of violent crimes in the united states trace directly back to our porous border.

these are thefts and the thought -- and assaults and murders that should never have happened, because the thieves and the assailant and the murderers should never have been in the country to begin with. on our side, we have some very fine, dedicated people on the border patrol. they are doing their level best under difficult circumstances. this summer, we began deploying up to 1000 of our national guard's -- national guard men. they are doing all they can come along with all of the public safety officers that i have directed to deal with criminal aliens. the entire nation is benefiting from that, but the resources, the initiative, and the will all come from the people of the state of texas, the people that i have sworn to defend, to serve.

if the federal government showed half that kind of resolve, the border of the united states of america would be secure. here's what it comes down to. defending the border is not a political option. it is a constitutional obligation. and until the federal government meets that duty and secures that border, all talk of immigration reform is pointless, because washington has no credibility on the matter. you earn credibility when you enforce the law, and you lose it when you don't. chaos is not the right condition for discussing long-term immigration policy. to those who wait on comprehensive immigration reform here is my answer. how about we start with

comprehensive border enforcement? [applause] border security, after all, is the nearest front of national security. and i'm sorry to relate that this front is today, largely undefended. so many people come across the border without us and ever knowing about us. and the cartel, as vicious and brutal as they are, they might be the least of our worries. what other bad actors are coming here? or for that matter, have arrived already? where have they come from? what have they brought with them? behind all of the political opportunism that has marked this debate is a profound sense of false security.

after all, we are watching this crisis and our border at the very moment that other crises far away demand our concentrated attention. just consider the events in syria and iraq, and other places in the middle east, they should have us thinking about the possibility of another terrorist attack in this country. we have been put on notice lately by the jihadist army that is right now charging across the country, we were told, was secure and stable. and the astonishing seizure of territory these past few months, if that is any indication, then we have every reason to take these individuals at their word. alertness is everything.

here, too, presidential leadership requires the most candid assessment of the facts on the ground, because the most fundamental interests of our nation ride in the balance. and here, too, we have to understand the consequences of doing nothing. all of us, republicans and democrats, have a duty to put no concern of politics before the security of america. we have to take things are in the world today, not as we wish things were. that, certainly, is the way we approach things here at heritage. let me allow just a few things i would share with you on this unfolding crisis. one third of iraq is under the control of islamist terrorism.

nearly as much of syria is dominated by the same jihadists. the group in iraq and syria is isis. when this year started, most of us had never even heard of that group. they had been advancing and captured american vehicles, killing captured americans, taking weapons and and ammunition, and all of this and more has happened just since june. and that the terrorists see it, they have had a triumphant summer, complete with islamic law and caliphate, complete with recruits to join in the offensive.

we are talking about a movement that is bigger and better financed than al qaeda ever was. and it's got nothing to learn from al qaeda about ruthless butchery either. isis has been butchering nonbelievers, otherwise known as innocent victims. the poor souls that did not get away have met the worst of fate, beheadings, rape, enslavement, crucifixions. that is the character of this enemy. and in case we missed the point, they actually take pictures of their atrocities and post them online, calling it a preview of what we can expect in america. we have all seen the sorrowful images of the innocent photojournalist, james foley,

forced to kneel and await a savage execution. the merciless killer was apparently british. in this case, we were seeing a radicalized british subject behead an american citizen in iraq. among other questions that come to mind, how many other jihadists out there are carrying western passports? what mission might isis have for them? the danger of isis for the united states and other western nations may still strike some people as a little remote. but for many americans, of course, just about the last thing we want to think about is more conflict in iraq and what that might involve. but we better get on top of this crisis by every means necessary, because event are moving fast and the price is only going to

go up from here. we have come to one of those moments when american action will be decisive, and inaction will be consequential. there used to be a bipartisan tradition in american foreign policy, a basic willingness to unite in fundamental matters of security. if anything is left of that old spirit, we need to draw on it in a big way and right now. sure, it is attempting to revisit and reargue the old decisions that have already been made. many on the left will say that a fatal mistake was made when we went into iraq in the first place. many republicans would argue that the 2011 withdrawal from iraq left some hard-won gains at risk.

the pullout seemed to be driven by political cap collations and not strategic ones. still others -- political calculations and not strategic ones. still, others take the view that what happened in iraq is no concern of ours. their attitude is, we gave it our best effort, but now we are done. and then there is the sense of regret and tragedy that still hangs over the failure to help syrian rebels at a crucial point when he could have made all the difference. they could well have gained the upper hand against the assad regime. syria could have been spared a lot of violence and other trouble, instead of becoming the isis stronghold that it is today. we heard from the white house that assad must go. that was an opinion, not a

policy. so it all came to nothing. just now, however these and other questions also just they need to wait for another day. we can talk about all of causes and the contributing factors all day long and it will get us nowhere. what matters in the here and now are the outcomes that are still within our power to influence. we know what the jihadist objectives are in iraq and syria. let's be clear and unequivocal about our own. erbil, a strategically crucial city in the north of iraq must not be allowed to fall. a momentum in the fight must be reversed, so the cities overrun by isis can be taken back by iraqi troops.

in syria, as well as iraq, this army must be confronted. in recent weeks, president obama, his response has included limited airstrikes in hopes of finally slowing the isis offensive in the kurdish north. he also sent 1000 or so of our american military advisers and special operators. he provided humanitarian relief and aid. the people there were able to escape and get into the mountains. the administration wishes -- and for that matter, who doesn't -- that this was just a humanitarian crisis. and when they talk about limited airstrikes, they place a great emphasis on the word limited.

yet clearly, more airstrikes are necessary. nothing less than a sustained campaign to destroy isis forces are required. the iraqi people are up against a terrorist blitzkrieg and it went practically unhindered for many weeks. and even though they have seen glimpses of our superior power and technology, they need to see a lot more of it. and as for the many iraqis who are trying to defend themselves and their country, they need to see more help from us. air power is a major part of it. but it is also going to take more special operations, intelligence, and advisory support than we have offered so far. one more potent force for the good. the peshmega in the kurdish region. they are a well-trained and disciplined militia. by every account, they have the ability and the will to fight

back against the terrorists. what is missing are the heavy weapons they need. the united states and allies, if they are willing, should launch an immediate airlift and deliver those assets to the kurdish forces. peshmerga fighters, aided by american airstrikes in mid-august have already pushed back isis in cities that looked to be lost just a few weeks ago. peshmerga is a fierce and ready force on the ground, and right now, they are in the best position to confront, overpower, and in time, defeat this enemy. in all of this, our allies are essential to the effort. and i might add, to the credit of the british and the french and the germans, they have begun to act already.

people in those countries, as in america, have been stirred to action in these last weeks by these chilling news reviews of the savagery of the islamic state. and these great nations, if they do nothing else, they are in the business of preventing the worst from happening. and we know the worst when we see it. the atrocities of isis would command our attention even if we had no security interest, although we clearly do. and the list of countries with a big stake in defeating isis doesn't end with just western powers. because it is so very extreme, even by local standards. the islamic state has clarified some very common interests in the region. isis has designs on jordan, for example.

and a serious threat to the stability of that country would not be a welcome development for other powers in the region. even iran is in this complicated position. for years, they saw to undermine our efforts in iraq, and yet today, they oppose isis. we shouldn't assume that the people today terrorizing iraq and syria have powerful support across the region. they do not. and where they are operating now, they are, of course, universally feared and despised. yet, there are chronic problems and divisions within the iraqi government itself. and these have hindered the country's ability to act when united action is needed. but the basic situation is this. iraq is a democratic nation of

32 million people who are horrified by the danger that is around them. and everything on the line, if we helped them, a rock can -- iraq can protect and defend themselves. in the weeks and months to come, we need for these and other military measures in iraq to become more obvious and urgent. president obama is going to hear warnings from his party. he is going to hear the word mission creep. and that is also a very valid concern. how can we not be mindful of that after what we have seen occur? and yet, in this case, it seems to me that we would be very wise to remember the isis version of mission creep.

that is when they start following through on the threats they have been making by sending their recruits into this country. it may be a team of terrorists arriving with their passports and papers all in order, just like before, or it may be when one or more of them slips across our unsecured border. but what rational observer doubts that such an attack is not part of their plan? and who thinks it is a good idea to wait and to give them more time, instead of eliminating this menace right now? we have a viable stake here, reluctant as we might be to face 12 years of war in iraq. and three years after we are told that war was over, it is no

one's idea of where this nation hoped we would be in the summer of 2014. it's a long way from what we expect, but it's where we are. and our strength and our resolve today can steer us clear of our greater problems that are ahead. the demand of national security always require dealing with the threats as they come. better still, we deal with them before they come in the faithful and vigilant protection of the united states. thank you. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> governor perry put me in

charge. ladies and gentlemen, we have time for just one question. i saw his hand go up first, so we will give it here. please state your name and affiliation and the governor will take a question. >> thank you. i am with u.s. border security committee. listening to your question or your statement, is there a concern that isis may be coming through the southern border into the united states? >> yes -- certainly, there is great concern that the border between the united states and mexico is unsecure. we do not know who is using that. what i will share with you that we have seen historically -- high levels of individuals from countries with terrorist ties over the course of the last month. i will give you one anecdotal

picture of what is happening. three ukrainian individuals were apprehended at a ranch in far west texas. so -- i think there is the obvious great concern that the cause of the condition of the border from the standpoint of it not being secure -- knowing who is penetrating across -- ort individuals from isis other terrorist states could be, very realk it is a possibility that they may have already used that. we have no clear evidence of that. but your common sense tells you -- when we have seen the number of criminal activities that have occurred, i am talking about the ders, theyrape, mur

individuals who have come into this country illegally over the last five years. the idea that they would not be looking at and managing any of those types of attacks from that region is not a good place to be. we need to have clear and both lawg forces, enforcement and otherwise. send a message that it is secure. the border can be secure. it requires boots on the ground. it requires aviation assets, which is why we requested the use of faa drones. and identify activities occurring on the border. this is very helpful as well.

issue facingous this country. the security of our systems. we need to be very vigilant. we need to be using every authority that we have. the president needs to be engaged in using his presidential authority. needs to engage in security in this country. until the water is secure, there will be no conversation in this country about any immigration reform. trustans do not washington to deal with comprehensive immigration reform until that border is secure. thank you. [applause] >> they said we have time for one more question. we will even it out and come right here. >> thank you for taking time to take questions.

i have one political in one policy question for you. first -- news. nbc politically, you discussed your indictment. i am wondering why you view this as political if the justice was appointed by a republican and the prosecutor also served in a republican presidential administration. you havese, on isis, called for more aggressive measures from this administration, but stopped short of saying traditional combat forces. i'm wondering if you think we should center national combat troops back to iraq. >> when david axelrod, alan allhowitz, jonathan jett, say that this is sketchy, outrageous, totalitarian and mccarthy-ite, i agree with them. that is just on the democrats side of the aisle. [applause] i think all your options have to be open, from the standpoint of

dealing with this terror in this force in that country. what you to your enemy are not going to put on the both is very bad, strategically and tactically. we need to have all of our options open. it is too important to jordan. it is too important to israel. it is too important to the is of the westnterests in that part of the world to not stop isis. they are not going to stop. they need to be eliminated. they need to be eliminated now. thank you all. [applause] gentlemen, thank you again to the governor of texas, rick perry. john, willeague, give a few directions about what

we have outside. he will come out here in jett a moment. >> next, "washington journal. then, the national hispanic christian leadership conference. and former arkansas governor mike huckabee will talk about education standards. american bar0, the association hold a discussion on cyber security. coming up next on "washington journal," clarence page talks about the recent events in ferguson, missouri, and how they compare to recommendations from past government reports on civil unrest. after that, we conclude our weeklong discussion on president lyndon johnson's great society with a look at what led to the creation of the consumer product safety commission. the current commissioner, robert

adler, joins us for that discussion. mark hamrickd, and >> good morning. we begin with the military efforts against the islamic militant group known as the islamic state. airstrikes began two weeks ago. the white house is insisting that we will not do mission creep. military officials said a larger action may be needed to defeat the group. it this could involve strikes across the border at isis bases in syria. we are asking for your response.