Speaking last Friday at the Center for American Progress, Napolitano said 600 miles of border fence have been completed to date and more than 20,000 Border Patrol agents have been hired, the Associated Press (AP) reports.

"I’ve been dealing hands-on with immigration issues since 1993, so trust me: I know a major shift when I see one, and what I have seen makes reform far more attainable this time around," she said, quoted by the news provider.

However, Terence P. Jeffrey, editor-in-chief of CNSNews.com, recently quoted Lloyd Easterling, acting director of media relations for the DHS, as saying that Border Patrol is planning to decrease the number of agents on the U.S.-Mexico border by 384 in fiscal year 2010 which started on Oct 1.

In addition, Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, who is the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, expressed concerns about the more than 400 miles of border with Mexico which are still open.

The AP says the 2006 immigration enforcement legislation called for 700 miles of border fences and barriers to be built, and it quotes immigration critics who say the existing fence has not been built with double layers as the law requires.

While most of the initial concerns centered on the issue of national security, recent objections have also included the constitutional rights of the alleged terrorists. For example, Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, who is the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, stated that trying the accused in a civilian court will expand their constitutional rights and may result in more lenient sentences than in a military court.

"The administration should not prioritize the rights of terrorists over the rights of Americans to be safe and secure," he added.

Critics have also voiced their opinion on the Democratic side, with Senator Jim Webb of Virginia pointing to the potential disruption and high costs associated with conducting the trail on U.S. soil.

However, the Obama administration’s decision was praised by civil rights organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union, whose executive director Anthony Romero called it "a huge victory" for the rule of law.

"It would have been an enormous blow to American values if we had tried these defendants in a process riddled with legal problems," he added.

Five Guantanamo prisoners accused on planning the terrorist attacks will stand trial in a civilian court in New York just blocks away from "ground zero."

The results of the research were published in Nutrition Journal and suggest that consumption of the exotic fruit may lower the levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), which is a measure of inflammation.

Dr. Jay Udani, lead researcher in the study, explained that inflammation—as measured by CRP—is a predictor of cardiovascular disease and a precursor of metabolic syndrome.

He added that the results are important because they suggest that reducing inflammation in obese people is a treatment goal. Moreover, drinking a natural product such as mangosteen juice tends to be preferable to other therapy methods due to its lack of side effects.

MangosteenBasics.com, an informational website, says mangosteen fruit is rich in antioxidants and contains fiber, potassium, calcium, vitamins B1, B2 and B6 as well as iron and vitamin C. It is also a good source of xanthones, which are believed to boost the immune system and promote general wellbeing.

How’s that for a dramatic beginning to a story? Years ago, when I used to give a lot of talks to high school classes, this was one of my favorites. It always got the students’ attention. And I have to admit, I also enjoyed seeing some liberal teachers get so upset with me they almost lost their lunches.

Here’s the story I told those students in those long-ago presentations.

The Pilgrims who arrived at Plymouth Rock in 1620 were incredibly brave and hardy souls. They were motivated by the noblest of virtues. They vowed, each and every one, to be as selfless as possible—to always put the needs of the group first. They agreed to own everything in common and to share everything equally.

And their naïve piety almost killed the entire colony.

We all know how the adventure begins. A group of devout Christians, seeking religious freedom for themselves and eager to "advance the Gospel of the Kingdom of Christ" in the New World, sets sail from Plymouth, England in 1620. An investment consortium known as the Merchant Adventurers of London paid the expenses for the trip, including chartering the Mayflower and its 40-man crew.

The deal was simple: The Pilgrims agreed to establish a colony in northern Virginia where they would plant crops, fish the waters and hunt in the forests. They would return a certain percentage of each year’s bounty to London until their debt had been repaid.

Things went wrong from the start. First, the syndicate changed the deal, drastically reducing the amount they would loan the Pilgrims. The brave adventurers were forced to sell many of their own possessions, and much of their provisions, to pay for the trip. As a result, they landed in the New World badly short of supplies.

Next, the small ship they had purchased in Holland, which was to accompany them to America so they could fish the waters off the coast, had to be abandoned in England.

Shortly after they set sail, the ship, badly misnamed the Speedwell, became "open and leakie as a sieve," as its captain reported. They returned to Dartmouth, where the boat was dry-docked for three weeks as repairs were made.

But to no avail. After leaving Dartmouth, the group sailed less than 300 miles when the captain decided the Speedwell "must bear up or sink at sea." This time the ships put in at Plymouth, England, where it was decided to go on without the Speedwell. On Sept. 16, 1620, the Mayflower set out alone to cross the Atlantic.

A month later, when they had reached the halfway point, fierce storms battered the ship and threatened the lives of passengers and crew. Many wanted to turn back for England. But if they abandoned the journey, they would lose everything they had invested. The Pilgrims decided to trust in God and sail on.

Despite the storms, the hazards, the crowding and the poor food, only one Pilgrim died during the voyage, a young servant. His death was balanced by the birth of a son to Stephen and Elizabeth Hopkins, who named their child Oceanus.

There were 102 passengers on board the Mayflower—50 men, 20 women and 32 children—along with a crew of 40. The captain set a course along the 42nd parallel, a bearing that would carry him to Cape Cod. From there he intended to swing south and follow the coast to northern Virginia.

A little over two months later, on Nov. 19, land was finally sighted and the captain turned the ship south, toward Virginia. However, they soon encountered such "dangerous shoals and roaring breakers" that they turned back to Massachusetts. It was then that the grumblings of dissent turned into a full-fledged roar. Many of the passengers insisted on landing in Massachusetts, where "none had power to command them."

The Pilgrim leaders decided to meet the explosive situation by asking each male on board, except for the crew, to sign a formal document that would lay "the first foundation of their government in this place." Thus the Mayflower Compact was born.

The Pilgrims were a diverse lot. Many of them were illiterate. Yet in creating the Mayflower Compact they showed an extraordinary political maturity. They agreed to establish a government by the consent of the governed, with just and equal laws for all. Each adult male, regardless of his station in life—gentleman, commoner or servant—would have an equal vote in deciding the affairs of the colony. Of the 65 men and boys on board, all but 24 signed the agreement. The only ones who did not were the children of those adults who did sign, or men who were too sick to do so.

The first decision made under the covenant was to abandon efforts to reach Virginia and instead to settle in New England. The first explorers landed at Plymouth on Dec. 21, 1620.

Weather delays kept the majority from seeing their new home for nearly two weeks. On Jan. 2, 1621, work began on the first building they would erect—a storehouse.

Because provisions were so scanty they decided that the land would be worked in common, produce would be owned in common, and goods would be rationed equally. Not unlike the society Karl Marx envisioned of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Unfortunately, thanks to illness, injury and attitude, the system did not work. Pilferage from the storehouse became common. Suspicions of malingering were muttered. Over the course of that first, harsh winter, nearly half of the colonists perished. Four families were wiped out completely; only five of 18 wives survived. Of the 29 single men, hired hands and servants, only 10 were alive when spring finally came.

The colonists struggled desperately for two more years. When spring arrived in April 1623, virtually all of their provisions were gone. Unless that year’s harvest improved, they feared few would survive the next winter. The Pilgrim leaders decided on a bold course. The colony would abandon its communal approach and permit each person to work for his own benefit, not for the common good.

Here is how the governor of the colony, William Bradford, explained what happened then. This is taken from his marvelously readable memoir (if you can make adjustments for the Old English spellings), History of Plimoth Plantation:

The experience that was had in this commone course and condition, tried sundrie years, and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanitie of that conceite of Plato & other ancients, applauded by some of later times;—that ye taking away of properties, and bringing it in communitie into a commone wealth, would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God.

For this communitie (so farr as it was) was found to breed much confusion & discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefite and comforte. For yet young men that were most able and fitte for labor & services did repine that they should spend their time & strength to worke for other men’s wives and children with out any recompense.

Once they replaced communal efforts with individual responsibility the differences were dramatic—and life-saving. Men went into the fields earlier and stayed later. In many cases, their wives and even their children (some barely past the toddler stage) worked right alongside them. More acres were planted, more trees were felled, more houses were built, and more game was slaughtered because of one simple change: People were allowed to keep the fruits of their own labors.

The Pilgrims arrived deeply in debt to the London merchants who sponsored them. They worked for more than 20 years, as individuals and as a community, to pay off the crushing burden. In 1627, they borrowed money to pay off the Merchants Adventurers. By 1645, they had paid off the entire debt to the company which had advanced them the sums to pay off the Merchants.

When their debt had been paid in full (at the astronomical interest rate of 45 percent per year), the company that had advanced the sums wrote the Pilgrims:

Let it not be grievous to you, that you have been instruments to break the ice for others who come after with less difficulty. The honour shall be yours to the world’s end.

As we celebrate this coming Thanksgiving Day, some 380 years after the Pilgrims celebrated the first of this uniquely American holiday, let us remember the sacrifices they made… the devotion they showed… and the lessons they learned.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

—Chip Wood

The research, appearing in the journal Neurology, reports that 12 percent of all stroke victims identified over a four-year period in Ontario suffered a transient ischemic attack (TIA)—or mild stroke. A TIA is identified as lasting less than 24 hours and resolving itself.

Those with the warning stroke were typically older than those without warning strokes. They were also more likely to have diabetes, high blood pressure and heart problems. Researchers say it’s possible their blood vessels were "preconditioned to the lack of blood flow, which protected them from the full result of the larger stroke."

Sufferers who did not have a TIA were more likely to have a more serious stroke than those who did have one.

Researchers say all strokes should be treated at an emergency room immediately.

Symptoms of a stroke include trouble walking or speaking, paralysis or numbness on one side of the body, vision problems and headache.

According to WebMD, controlling high blood pressure, lowering cholesterol, maintaining a healthy weight, exercising regularly and managing stress are all things that can be done to reduce the risk of stroke.

*New Calendar Features Conservative Women. Many thanks to all of you who had kind things to say about my Straight Talk interview with Michelle Malkin. Permit me to note she is as pretty as she is smart—as you can prove for yourself by getting the 2010 Great American Conservative Women calendar. A fundraiser for the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute, you can see the calendar at www.cblpi.org. Other women featured this time include Anne Coulter, Star Parker, Bay Buchanan and Carrie Prejean.

*What Happened to Global Warming? That’s the provocative headline over a story on the British Broadcasting Corporation website. The article notes that climatologists have not been able to confirm any global warming in the past 11 years, despite a measurable rise in carbon-dioxide, which is blamed for much of this non-existent problem. By the way, the Met Office (the British weather service) says that over the next decade, at least half of the years will be hotter than 1998—so far the warmest year on earth since records were kept.

*A Rush to Loan Uncle Sam Money. The latest Treasury auction three weeks ago, for a record $123 billion in U.S. debt, was oversubscribed by nearly $250 billion. The five-year notes, which will pay just over 3.5 percent, were especially popular with central banks, foreign governments and other eager lenders. Let’s see if this remains true for the rest of this fiscal year when the profligate federales will need to borrow an additional $1.2 trillion to cover the deficits they’re accumulating.

—Chip Wood

According to Reuters, researchers at the University of Helsinki assessed the coffee drinking habits, as well as other social, demographic and health data of a large population of twins who were 50-years-old on average. The majority of subjects—75 percent of men and 83 percent of women—reported drinking more than three cups of coffee a day.

Participants were screened on a yearly basis starting at age 74 to measure cognitive function and dementia.

They found no association between coffee consumption and declining cognition or dementia scores in either men or women. They did find, however, that aging was linked to declines in thinking ability.

In addition, the study, appearing in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, found that coffee consumption wasn’t protective in preserving brain function in middle-age.

Heart disease, diabetes and depression are associated with lower cognitive function, according to the report.

Nutritional supplements that can boost brain function and memory include B vitamins, vitamin C, vitamin E and beta carotene, as well as omega-3 fatty acids and gingko biloba.

According to a study published in The International Journal of Low Radiation, extracts of gingko biloba may protect cells from radiation damage.

To arrive at this conclusion, researchers collected white blood cells from healthy donors between the ages of 18 and 50. Half of the cells were then treated with gingko biloba and the rest were subjected to a saline solution.

After subsequent exposure to radiation, the scientists found the cells treated with gingko biloba had a lower rate of apoptosis, or cell death.

Subsequent laboratory studies on animals confirmed the results.

The leaves of gingko biloba—which naturally grows only in Zhejiang province in Eastern China—contain antioxidant-rich compounds which are believed to protect cells from damage by free radicals and other reactive oxidizing species.

It has been used in herbal medicine for thousands of years and is one of the most popular herbal supplements in the U.S, according to the Mayo Clinic. Gingko is believed to have a host of health benefits, including preventing dementia, Alzheimer’s disease and other memory problems, treating altitude sickness and reducing symptoms of premenstrual syndrome.

That’s the view of Judge Andrew P. Napolitano in his book, The Constitution in Exile.

Napolitano, the senior judicial analyst for Fox News Channel, New Jersey judge and legal professor and talk radio co-host, describes what the founders envisioned when they wrote the constitution. He explains Natural Law—that rights are endowed by a Creator, not by government—and what that idea meant to the Founders and should mean to us today. He describes Natural Law’s opposite—Positivisim—which is the idea that the law is whatever those in power say it is.

And, Napolitano lists and describes the 18 enumerated powers granted to government by the constitution and what each of them means, as well as the purpose behind the inclusion of the Bill of Rights.

He writes:

“In establishing our system of separate powers, checks and balances, and federalism, the Founders limited Congress—and thus the will of Positivists—to eighteen specific, enumerated, and delegated powers. Those three words are important. Specific means something that is definite or explicitly set forth. Enumerated refers to things that are listed individually by their identifying characteristics. Delegated refers to a power that has been assigned by one party another.

“The Founders did this to create a system of government in which power is diffused between the states and the central government and diffused further within the central government. State sovereignty is maintained; and because governmental power was not concentrated anywhere, individual liberty is protected…”

The judge takes the reader on a legal course through American history outlining the first assault that began with the Judiciary Act of 1789, passed by the Federalist-controlled Congress, and the effects the 1800 presidential election had on the makeup of the federal judiciary.

After Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams for the presidency, the Federalist-controlled Congress created 42 additional judgeships and then Adams appointed Federalist John Marshall as chief justice of the Supreme Court.

Jefferson voided the appointment of the “Midnight Judges” and one of them, William Marbury, sued directly to the Supreme Court. Two years later, after much legal wrangling over Marbury’s suit, the Supreme Court ruled that portions of the Judiciary Act of 1789 were unconstitutional and Marbury had sued in the wrong court.

That result made it appear as if Marshall was in favor of limiting Congress’ powers to those enumerated. But future decisions by Marshall and his court showed his desire was to centralize power, and Napolitano covers the individual cases and what they meant.

Napolitano also covers the Federalism of Abraham Lincoln and how his unconstitutional actions before and during the Civil War further centralized power, and how Lincoln’s actions affected the Constitution.

The next great assault on the Constitution came from Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal and Roosevelt’s threat and then his attempt to stack the court or alter its very makeup. And Napolitano covers that era in great detail.

Included in that era is the beginning of the use of the Constitution’s “Commerce Clause” to grant Congress the power to regulate almost everything, a ploy that continues apace to this day.

And then there is the assault on freedom known as the USA PATRIOT Act, passed by Congress and signed into law by George W. Bush while the rubble of 9/11 still smoldered.

“The PATRIOT Act is the most unpatriotic of the things that the Bush administration and this Congress could have visited upon us,” Napolitano writes. “When then-Attorney General John Ashcroft advocated before the House Judiciary Committee, he said, in effect, ‘we need the powers under this PATRIOT Act. We need them so badly—there are so many bad people out there we need to prosecute—that there isn’t enough time to debate it.’”

And without debate it passed.

Among other things, the USA PATRIOT Act effectively voided the Fourth Amendment and gave federal agents and local police the authority to write their own search warrants and serve them without the intervention of a judge. Such a thing would be anathema to the Founders.

This book is written in the plain, easy to understand language that Napolitano uses every day on Fox and on his radio show. It’s a roadmap of the assaults hoisted upon our Constitution, and hence our freedoms, throughout the 200-plus years of that great document’s existence.

Among other things, The Constitution in Exile shows that the power grab going on today is not new, but rather is the culmination of many years of assaults led by those who believe that government knows best.

In announcing his decision, Dobbs—who has attracted controversy in recent years for vocally expressing his conservative views on the air—aid that "some leaders in media, politics and business have been urging me to go beyond the role here at CNN and to engage in constructive problem solving as well as to contribute positively to the great understanding of the issues of our day."

However, there is no shortage of speculation that Dobbs was ousted for practicing what CNN president Jonathan Klein term "advocacy journalism."

The 64-year-old anchor has become a target of criticism for taking a tough stance on issues such as illegal immigration and for his involvement in the so-called "birther" movement, which questioned President Obama’s eligibility for the office for failing to produce his original birth certificate.

Hispanic groups have expressed satisfaction with the developments at the cable network. The Latino Policy Coalition issued a statement expressing gratitude to more than 40 local and regional civil rights organizations "that have succeeded in their efforts to draw national attention to CNN Anchor Lou Dobbs’ anti-immigrant news program, and thus ultimately end his slanted commentary show."

Monday night, Dobbs is expected to appear on The O’Reilly Factor with Bill O’Reilly, which airs on Fox News. Last summer, O’Reilly defended Dobbs’ right to free speech.