I see. So you're saying a physical wall is the ONLY solution? It's either a wall or open borders. The GOP was in charge for two years why was there no wall then? I guess that makes the GOP the party of open borders too. Seems to me, the only people who want a wall are Trump and his base, about 40% of the country. I guess that makes us a country of open border supporters or do you think we should be ruled by the minority?
Trump fires off late night tweet calls democrats open border policies " treasonous"
- Thread starter MindWars
- Start date
Do you really believe illegal voting is a major part of the Dem base or is it you just can't accept that most Americans think your tin hat looks silly?
Eric Arthur Blair
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2015
- 25,955
- 15,967
- 1,415
Not the only solution. Just the best solution employed by many many nations.
How 65 countries have erected security walls on their borders | Daily Mail Online
But I guess they are all just wrong.
The American left insists otherwise when it comes to walls. Needless to say they have no credibility.
The GOP traditionally has been filled with globalist quislings (McCain and Bush being two notable examples) that would love to flood the country with cheap compliant labor driving down wages and protections for native workers.
Maybe you know better, maybe you don't but Trump has not only had to take on the socialists on the left but fifth column factions entrenched in the republican party itself. We have a legitimate invasion on the Southern border and pretending we don't and our borders could be secured by other means is ridiculous as many agreements to improve security there have been simply ignored, forgotten or applied halfheartedly to say the least.
A wall cannot be ignored or avoided by illegals moving North or by slimy politicians playing disingenuous games and
it does not depend on the mood of the next administration or other presidents yet to come. Once there it stays put.
Yeah, Trump is right and everyone else is wrong.Not the only solution. Just the best solution employed by many many nations.
How 65 countries have erected security walls on their borders | Daily Mail Online
But I guess they are all just wrong.
The American left insists otherwise when it comes to walls. Needless to say they have no credibility.
The GOP traditionally has been filled with globalist quislings (McCain and Bush being two notable examples) that would love to flood the country with cheap compliant labor driving down wages and protections for native workers.
Maybe you know better, maybe you don't but Trump has not only had to take on the socialists on the left but fifth column factions entrenched in the republican party itself. We have a legitimate invasion on the Southern border and pretending we don't and our borders could be secured by other means is ridiculous as many agreements to improve security there have been simply ignored, forgotten or applied halfheartedly to say the least.
A wall cannot be ignored or avoided by illegals moving North or by slimy politicians playing disingenuous games and
it does not depend on the mood of the next administration or other presidents yet to come. Once there it stays put.
Did you even look at your own link? Many of the 65 'walls' were no more intimidating than what we currently have. Here's a section of Israel's 'wall':
Eric Arthur Blair
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2015
- 25,955
- 15,967
- 1,415
That's certainly true when it comes to disingenuous leftists who claim that walls are pointless. Thanks for the admission.
That wasn't so hard, was it?
It looks like it would be very difficult to scale (sort of the whole idea). What's your point?
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
- Apr 29, 2017
- 99,171
- 105,188
- 3,615
Dear Clueless,
Tell us, are you simply out to insult our intelligence with maddeningly ignorant and offensive comments or are you simply airing your abyssal stupidity with typical democratic aplomb?
"Dems may not want a wall but that is not the same as open borders" News flash for you buddy, a wall CLOSES the border. That is a MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE condition to it NOT having a wall (being OPEN), that is, unless your plan is to somehow close the border by parking bumper to bumper cars, pick up trucks or non-stop police dogs in front of it?
"GOP wanting to repeal ACA means they don't want Americans to have health care" Again, wanting to repeal ACA has NOTHING to do with being for or against healthcare, it simply means wanting a different way of getting there. In case you didn't know, we all actually HAD healthcare before Obama-Pelosi.
Always nice to be lectured on the finer point of "logic" by an idiot who wouldn't know an axiomatic tautology or truth table if one bit him on the ass.
And since you asked (apparently you live in a cave somewhere out of touch with the world):
Details for H.Res. 990: Supporting the officers and personnel who carry out the important mission of the United ... - GovTrack.us
H.Res. 990: Supporting the officers and personnel who carry out ... -- House Vote #337 -- Jul 18, 2018
Which Democrats advocated for open borders?
Here is the recent vote on a resolution to simply support the border patrol, ICE. Couldn't even get them to vote for THAT. (Names at bottom of link above)
Illegal Immigration: Yes, Democrats Are Now The Party Of Open Borders
Democrats' Open Borders Immigration Policy | National Review
Border Protection: Democrats Reveal Their True Open Border Stripes | Investor's Business Daily
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
- Apr 29, 2017
- 99,171
- 105,188
- 3,615
Yeah, Trump is right and everyone else is wrong.Not the only solution. Just the best solution employed by many many nations.
How 65 countries have erected security walls on their borders | Daily Mail Online
But I guess they are all just wrong.
The American left insists otherwise when it comes to walls. Needless to say they have no credibility.
The GOP traditionally has been filled with globalist quislings (McCain and Bush being two notable examples) that would love to flood the country with cheap compliant labor driving down wages and protections for native workers.
Maybe you know better, maybe you don't but Trump has not only had to take on the socialists on the left but fifth column factions entrenched in the republican party itself. We have a legitimate invasion on the Southern border and pretending we don't and our borders could be secured by other means is ridiculous as many agreements to improve security there have been simply ignored, forgotten or applied halfheartedly to say the least.
A wall cannot be ignored or avoided by illegals moving North or by slimy politicians playing disingenuous games and
it does not depend on the mood of the next administration or other presidents yet to come. Once there it stays put.
Dear Lying Jackass,
What fantasy bullshit do you live in believing that Trump is alone in his border wishes???
"Everyone else" are simply the few knuckle heads like you.
TRUMP WON THE ELECTION PRIMARILY ON HIS STANCE FOR STOPPING ILLEGAL ALIEN INVASION.
THAT IS:
- THIRTY STATES
- 306 Electoral Votes, and
- 3,084 of the 3,141 counties in the United States.
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
- Apr 29, 2017
- 99,171
- 105,188
- 3,615
Supporting the OP by making up his own '2020 DEMOCRATIC AGENDA' is the very definition of a straw man argument.
Even worse when an idiot like you mistakes a post SUPPORTING the OP as a strawman argument. Meantime, GIVE US THE LIST of Democrats defending Trump's call for a border wall!(oh that was just too easy)
Look, Ace, you don't even know what a strawman is.
I wasn't refuting the OP, I was supporting it.
And the list of details I gave were taken from the very things said and actions taken by the Democratic Party.
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
- Apr 29, 2017
- 99,171
- 105,188
- 3,615
HOW COULD IT BE ANY EASIER?
Which laws have the Dems passed or even voted for, that would curb illegal invasion?
WHERE WAS IT in Hillary's Campaign?
WHERE IS IT on the DNC website list of Dems "things to do?"
GIVE US THE LONG LIST.
Dems want secure borders, they simply want a different way of getting there.
Just that we agree that a fence is adequate and a wall is not needed.
Yes. The Democrats want large numbers of "foreign nationals" to overthrow the current government and dismantle the Constitution. The president should bring home our troops and put them along our border with orders to use whatever force is necessary to keep the illegals out.
There is no Democrat 2020 agenda so you invented one. Sounds like a straw man to me.
House Democratic Conferees Unveil Proposal for Smart, Effective Border Security
January 30, 2019
Press Release
House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita M. Lowey (D-NY) and House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee Chairwoman Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA) today released a list of House Democratic proposals for smart, effective border security that Democrats will advocate for in the House-Senate Conference Committee on Homeland Security.
“Today was a starting point, and I am pleased that it seems like the Members and Senators on the panel are ready to work in a constructive way. A finished product will include a good Homeland Security bill, the other six outstanding appropriations bills, and an emergency disaster supplemental bill,” Chairwoman Lowey said. “House Democrats have already included $1.6 billion for border security-related programs in the six outstanding appropriations bills. As we negotiate Homeland Security, we will expand on that amount. We will do so in a smart and effective way.”
“Within the limited funding available in the bill, we will be fighting for balanced investments across the Department’s mission areas. And we will be pushing for a strong, but smart, border security posture, one that does not rely on costly physical barriers,” Chairwoman Roybal-Allard said. “Democrats support homeland security, including border security, that is smart, effective, and consistent with our core values as Americans. I look forward to working with my colleagues to reach an agreement.”
The full text of the proposal, distributed at House Democrats’ media availability following the Conference Committee meeting, is below:
DEMOCRATS SUPPORT SMART, EFFECTIVE BORDER SECURITY
Within the limited funding available in the Department of Homeland Security bill, we will fight for balanced investments across the Department’s mission areas. We will push for a smart, effective border security posture, one that does not rely on costly physical barriers. House Democrats’ proposal funds:
- 1,000 new Customs officers;
- New imaging technology at the land ports of entry to ensure all vehicles are scanned before entering the country for drugs and other contraband.
- New equipment at mail processing facilities to interdict fentanyl and other opioids shipped through the international mail;
- New cutting edge technology along the border to improve situational awareness;
- An expansion of CBP’s air and marine operations along the border and in U.S. waters;
- An expansion of risk-based targeting of passengers and cargo entering the United States; and
- Critical repair projects at ports of entry.
- Addresses the only real crisis at the border – which is not a border security crisis but a humanitarian one – by improving CBP’s capacity to appropriately meet the needs of migrants who are temporarily in their custody.
- Supports the hiring of new Homeland Security Investigations agents to focus on drug smuggling, gang crimes, financial crimes, and other high priority law enforcement areas.
- Expands ICE’s Alternatives to Detention program, including family case management.
- Significantly reduces ICE detention beds; requires more frequent detention facility inspections, and limits ICE’s ability to use more detention beds than Congress intends to fund.
- Targeted increases in FEMA preparedness grant programs;
- Support for the Coast Guard’s personnel and air and marine fleets, include a new polar icebreaker;
- Investments in TSA’s ability to detect threats at security checkpoints without slowing air travel.
Eric Arthur Blair
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2015
- 25,955
- 15,967
- 1,415
Trump has clarified things and made it clear he is for some sort of obstacle or barrier that would deter illegal immigrants from sneaking into our nation. A wall necessarily is not mandatory and he's said so since the government shut down
over the funding of this "wall".
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
- Apr 29, 2017
- 99,171
- 105,188
- 3,615
What way is that? And what year are they going to secure it?
What's a secure border to a democrat, one that secures the right of 700,000 to come across undocumented each year?
And what do you have against walls? Not pretty enough for ya? Don't match the color of your blue eyes? Don't think they are secure enough or are you just trying to save on bricks?
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
- Apr 29, 2017
- 99,171
- 105,188
- 3,615
Then you still have no clue what a strawman is. But I agree. The democrats have NO 2020 agenda. They just want their power back for themselves and screw the rest of us.
toobfreak
Tungsten/Glass Member
- Apr 29, 2017
- 99,171
- 105,188
- 3,615
We will do so in a smart and effective way.”
-- -- -- -- You repeat that over and over. Smart = calling anything the president wants dumb. Effective = nothing more direct or effective than a wall. That's why democrats agreed for 30 years we need to put up a wall.
we will be pushing for a strong, but smart, border security posture, one that does not rely on costly physical barriers
-- -- -- -- costly to put up a wall, yet we can afford to give away over 50 billion a year to other countries as foreign aid. But we can't afford to protect our own border.
New imaging technology at the land ports of entry to ensure all vehicles are scanned before entering the country for drugs and other contraband.
-- -- -- -- costly, untried technology that will simply force vehicles not to use land ports to smuggle drugs. No effect on stopping people.
New equipment at mail processing facilities to interdict fentanyl and other opioids shipped through the international mail
-- -- -- -- fine for drugs, no effect on stopping illegal people.
New cutting edge technology along the border to improve situational awareness
-- -- -- -- situational awareness: think-speak gobbledeegoop that doesn't mean jack.
An expansion of risk-based targeting of passengers and cargo entering the United States
-- -- -- -- a fancy word for discrimination. Why can't we apply that screening to passengers at airports? And how are you going to do that out in the middle of the desert?
Addresses the only real crisis at the border – which is not a border security crisis but a humanitarian one – by improving CBP’s capacity to appropriately meet the needs of migrants who are temporarily in their custody.
-- -- -- -- better processing of illegals fast-tracking them into the USA.
Supports the hiring of new Homeland Security Investigations agents to focus on drug smuggling, gang crimes, financial crimes, and other high priority law enforcement areas.
-- -- -- -- wouldn't need a lot of this if you were simply stopping them at the border in the first place.
Expands ICE’s Alternatives to Detention program, including family case management.
-- -- -- -- gotta let them in the country and intend to KEEP them here before you need "family case management."
Significantly reduces ICE detention beds; requires more frequent detention facility inspections, and limits ICE’s ability to use more detention beds than Congress intends to fund.
-- -- -- -- more efforts to force greater flow and speed in fast-tracking illegals into the country.
Targeted increases in FEMA preparedness grant programs
-- -- -- -- we don't have a crisis at the border but we need bigger grants for federal EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT?
Support for the Coast Guard’s personnel and air and marine fleets, include a new polar icebreaker
-- -- -- -- Trump's already doing that. One more thing that has nothing to do with actually STOPPING ILLEGAL TRAFFIC at the border. ANYWHERE along the border.
Investments in TSA’s ability to detect threats at security checkpoints without slowing air travel.
-- -- -- -- al fine. Still doesn't address the CORE PROBLEM of stopping illegals.
Lot's of democratic talk as usual, 85% wouldn't be needed if you simply had a barrier at the border to STOP people from coming in except authorized ports of entry IN THE FIRST PLACE. This is all an ONGOING expense while a wall is mostly a ONE TIME expense. In the end, will be much more costly and a fraction as effective. Just a fancy way of taking up a lot more time, spending a lot of pork around, while still getting in tons of illegals into the country. No thank you. I like the president's idea much better and will do it HIS way.
Personally, I object to paying for something wasteful just because Trump made a campaign promise to his base, especially since he also promised the Mexicans would pay for it.
We can't just build a wall, no matter how big, that people couldn't get over, under, around, or through. To make it secure we'll ALWAYS have to maintain, monitor and patrol the border so you're wrong that 85% of the expenses wouldn't be needed and the wall is a one-time expense.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
I swam in my pool yesterday, March 20th earliest day of the year ever.- Started by MarathonMike
- Replies: 5
-
-
-
Zone1 VIDEO : A group of MOSCOW imperialists men attacked Jewish worshipers- Started by Litwin
- Replies: 0
-
If the war can keep the price of gas up for 20 months, the increased revenues, from gas, will pay for the war.- Started by ElmerMudd
- Replies: 1
