Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

[bripat9643]

A- Cost prohibitive
B- Won't work
C- It's racist
D- It would reduce those successfully crossing the border
E- None of the Above

The machine benefits by not having a wall. Business (Republicans) get their cheap labor and (Democrats) get the votes

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

There is no excuse for the Republicans not funding the wall.

-Geaux

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

I don't like to live in a country full of aliens content with living in a shit hole and doing everything they can to make it one. Calling those who oppose unlimited immigration "cowards" is the ultimate in stupid. It's like calling someone who declines to stick his finger in a light socket a coward. Prudence isn't cowardice, but calling a prudent person a coward is the sign of a douchebag.

 

[bripat9643]

Because building walls is the province of private property owners, not government.

That is a point well taken. If the wall must be built on private property, it then calls into question how far we will go in allowing the government to abuse eminent domain abuse. BTW, BEFORE 9 / 11 the same people worrying about a wall were worried about government over-reach with eminent domain abuse. Times change.

It has nothing to do with "how far we will go" it has to do with legality. The Supreme court ruled (a few years back) that eminent domain even applies to private companies wishing to make improvements to an area. In other words, being able to buy structures and evicting people out of them to tear those homes down and build new ones.

That's what you get when you have a "conservative" (corporatist) SCOTUS

We didn't have a conservative corporatist court at the time. We don't even have one now. That's why the Supreme Court just ruled that Trump can't deny asylum to people caught sneaking into the country.

Building a wall is applying a solution that the Chinese used in the 4th Century AD, and it didn't work then. The Great Wall proved no deterrent at all to attacking armies, despite 15 centuries of construction, fortification and expansion and was abandoned altogether by the last army which overall it.

The Eminent Domain cases from the last attempt to fence the entire southern border have still not cleared the dockets in Texas, and local residents are gearing up for another fight.

Cartels are now using drones to smuggle drugs across the border, so a wall is absolutely not deterrent to drugs.

And last but not least, Trump promised Mexico would pay for it, and now he's giving us some bullshit line that the new NAFTA 2.0 is paying for it. The American people will be paying for it. That's on top of the $4000 raises he promised everyone from the corporate tax cut that never materialized.

Actually, it did work. Putting off a Mongol invasion for hundreds of years is the sure sign that it worked.

The rest of your post is equally stupid, but that should be enough to convince anyone reading it that you're an idiot.

 

[bripat9643]

It's not a perfect solution but unarguably is would reduce crossings

-Geaux

But at what cost ?? You know the “wall” plan includes drones and all kinds of high tech sensors , roving border guards . It’s not just some one time cost and you are done .

How high is a preprogrammed drones salary? How many bathroom breaks does he need? How much gas for an 8 hour shift? Does he need a college educated driver who also requires an absurd salary?

DO YOU HAVE A BRAIN?

Clearly you do not. Drones don’t fly themselves….someone monitors what they see…for just one thing.

How much time do you spend thinking about illegal immigration in a day? Whatever it is…it’s too much.

The blob tells you your enemy is down there; you’re dumb enough to believe it. That is all.
That is the reason there is a supposed immigration crisis in the nation.

Essentially the same number people crossing today were crossing 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30, years ago….50 years ago; Somehow we managed to build the greatest society on the planet. Ever. But now you’re told there is a problem with a group of people who, by and large, are just here to do menial labor for little money…and you guys believe it.

Damn
You
Are
Stupid.

In other words open boarders are fine with you!

Like our con 5 deferment Pres You can't spell borders either or are you joking?
Do you know anyone who supports open borders?
I don't
Is that what knees news spews out?

You and all the other Hillary voters in here are for open borders.

 

[bripat9643]

A- Cost prohibitive
B- Won't work
C- It's racist
D- It would reduce those successfully crossing the border
E- None of the Above

The machine benefits by not having a wall. Business (Republicans) get their cheap labor and (Democrats) get the votes

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

There is no excuse for the Republicans not funding the wall.

-Geaux

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

Oh, that reverse psychology guilt trip thing again? You all tried that multiple times with gun discussions. When are you on the left going to realize that doesn't work? It's painfully transparent.

I've noticed that the pro-wall people are ALWAYS blaming the left for being against the nutty wall idea. The facts are that I am a Republican as are the majority of the people in the U.S. Senate. When push comes to shove, most Republicans are against the nutty wall idea.

Ray, you cannot come to grips with the fact that a wall is a socialist solution looking for a problem to solve. When people show you instances when a wall does not work, you are complaining about how far back into history the other poster went to prove the point. Even going back to BIBLICAL times, walls have not been long term solutions for much of anything.

Those, such as yourself, like wailing about the damn wall, but cannot tell us a single problem you're really addressing. If those with a few IQ points show you what's wrong with the pretext you rely on, you want to move the goal posts.

I really wish you would quit blaming opposition to the wall on the Republicans. The only reason most of them are supporting idea is in the best interests of party unity so that other legislation does not get bogged down AND the fix is in. Once the wall is fully funded and Donnie gets his win, you can kiss that gun in your avatar good-bye.

For everything you gain there is something lost. Trump isn't God. He is playing the Art of the Deal. You're simply too ignorant to ask what the real cost - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of legislation (legislation that will affect YOUR Liberties) does this nutty and INEFFECTIVE wall idea cost.

Sorry, turd, but you'll never convince me that you're a Republican. You walk like a Democrat, waddle like a Democrat and talk like a Democrat.

 

[beautress]

A- Cost prohibitive
B- Won't work
C- It's racist
D- It would reduce those successfully crossing the border
E- None of the Above

The machine benefits by not having a wall. Business (Republicans) get their cheap labor and (Democrats) get the votes

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

There is no excuse for the Republicans not funding the wall.

-Geaux

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

Oh, that reverse psychology guilt trip thing again? You all tried that multiple times with gun discussions. When are you on the left going to realize that doesn't work? It's painfully transparent.

I've noticed that the pro-wall people are ALWAYS blaming the left for being against the nutty wall idea. The facts are that I am a Republican as are the majority of the people in the U.S. Senate. When push comes to shove, most Republicans are against the nutty wall idea.

Ray, you cannot come to grips with the fact that a wall is a socialist solution looking for a problem to solve. When people show you instances when a wall does not work, you are complaining about how far back into history the other poster went to prove the point. Even going back to BIBLICAL times, walls have not been long term solutions for much of anything.

Those, such as yourself, like wailing about the damn wall, but cannot tell us a single problem you're really addressing. If those with a few IQ points show you what's wrong with the pretext you rely on, you want to move the goal posts.

I really wish you would quit blaming opposition to the wall on the Republicans. The only reason most of them are supporting idea is in the best interests of party unity so that other legislation does not get bogged down AND the fix is in. Once the wall is fully funded and Donnie gets his win, you can kiss that gun in your avatar good-bye.

For everything you gain there is something lost. Trump isn't God. He is playing the Art of the Deal. You're simply too ignorant to ask what the real cost - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of legislation (legislation that will affect YOUR Liberties) does this nutty and INEFFECTIVE wall idea cost.

Mr. Rockwell, I appreciate your concern and acknowledge your humanitarian side, but please read the rest of the watchdog's article of which I am quoting before you go too far down the road to letting sidewinders such easy access to the tax money we are presently paying if you have a few minutes:

Analysis: Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers $116 billion annually ​

With ongoing violent protests in favor of amnesty for illegal aliens, immigration reformer advocates point to exponential costs taxpayers already pay for illegal immigrants, and how much more taxpayers would spend if they were given amnesty.

According to the most recent analysis by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), one illegal immigrant living in America today costs U.S. citizen taxpayers about $8,075. In total, illegal aliens cost American taxpayers $116 billion annually.

FAIR researchers note the increasing costs of illegal immigration is a “disturbing and unsustainable trend.” Costs to taxpayers have risen by nearly $3 billion since 2013, when illegal aliens’ total cost to taxpayers was $113 billion, according to FAIR.

The rest of the story: Analysis: Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers $116 billion annually
​

$116,000,000,000/ 300,000,000 = $387.00 for every man, woman, and child living in this country right now, and half of them either have no income or are living on welfare, student loans, off their parents, or whatever, which doubles the ante to $773.00 for everyone earning wages. Why do people who work within the poverty status having to pay a noncitizen to get free housing, free food, free education, free utilities, free telephones, and everything else?

And if the government fixes it and poverty status taxpayers don't see a rise in their taxes, that leaves working parents trying to raise a family that omission, which means, they're having to pay about $5,000 apiece for this anomaly rather than save that for a rainy day or give donations to libraries, churches, museums, and other charitable causes.

Maybe my math isn't 100% perfect, but it could be low ball if we're forgetting other things than watchdog.org has discovered. The math doesn't lie.

Edit: One hundred and sixteen billion a year is what we're paying

​

 

[Lesh]

Build that Fence

Build that Fence

 

[toobfreak]

You post pictures of a staged event

Right. Were you in on the staging?

How absolutely bright of you!

I have shoes with more brains than you.

I'll tell you some of the things I'm sick of:

1) I'm sick

2) I'm sick

3) I'm tired

4) I'm tired

5) I'm tired

6) I'm REALLY sick

7) I'm sick

8) I'm sick

9) I'm sick

10) I'm sick

tl;dr But I think you nailed it right on the head. You're sick.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

It’s a waste of money .

View attachment 236224
It's a waste of skin.

Only a colossal dolt would argue against protection of one's own border. The Pentagon has misplaced more money MANY TIMES OVER over the years than what the wall would cost to build.

AND THAT IS WITHOUT EVEN CONSIDERING THE BILLIONS AND BILLIONS (AND BILLIONS) WE WOULD SAVE IN NOT-WASTED RESOURCES ONCE IT IS FINISHED.

PROVE ME WRONG. Once the wall is built, if it turns out to be a colossal mistake like you predict that backfires in our faces, we can always TEAR IT BACK DOWN, melt the steel, and use the metal to make free housing for illegal Latinos.

It is HIGHLY disingenuous for anyone to suggest that those opposed to the wall don't care about border security. Not having a case, the build the wall proponents are slinging the scare word liberal around and making a baseless and false accusation.

The people once known as patriots and constitutionalists had the issue under control and were successfully working toward permanent solutions to this issue. History has already proven you wrong.

The thing of it is, the really ignorant people are those who are for the wall, but against using their common sense. Rather than call people names; rather than question the motives of others, you should sit down and ask yourself what happens if you get the wall - and be OBJECTIVE. How will the law affect YOUR Liberty?

Having ninja clad, machine gun toting federal mercenaries patrolling a wall that cannot stop free enterprise nor cure people of their drug habit only brings cries for a bigger and bigger - and more intrusive government. With that more and more of your Liberties go south until you cannot reclaim them. I'd rather fight that inevitability because, once the wall is built, and proves ineffective we will not be able to stop it any more than we stopped the once TEMPORARY tax known as the income tax. And what has the 16th Amendment brought you besides a private corporation of murderers that makes the average American quake in their shoes? Most people would rather face an armed robber than the IRS. Yet you don't learn from history.

If the Democrats thought the wall wouldn't work, they wouldn't be fighting it so hard. In fact, it would be a dream come true.

They would be able to use the failure as a campaign issue against Republicans for the next two generations. They would be able to remove the wall by popular demand. So why are they fighting so hard against it? Because it's something they can't remove if they ever regain total power in the federal government.

A wall would not only retard drugs and invaders, it would send a message to the rest of the south that America is no longer a place you can run to if you get sick of where you're living now. You can't play the system anymore by filing a phony asylum claim and then being allowed to roam our country for two or three years before your court date, and not attend your court date when it finally arrives.

Instead, find some Democrat sanctuary city to hide in. Not only will you live your life like an American citizen, you can commit crimes and the cops won't inform ICE. They will give you drivers licenses, allow your illegal kids to attend their schools paid for by taxpayers, and look the other way if you find a place to work. They will even give you welfare and medical care for your kids; something our government doesn't give to some of their very own law abiding people.

At BEST, the Democrats give token resistance to the nutty wall idea. Since I never voted for a Democrat until this election (and then for the Public Service Commission) I don't know what their objections are; however, they have not (to my knowledge) made the objections I have.

Your overreactions, and being too melodramatic aren't working. You're working over-time posting on this while avoiding the real question. With the facts mounting against you, who are you trying to convince? Us or yourself?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

A- Cost prohibitive
B- Won't work
C- It's racist
D- It would reduce those successfully crossing the border
E- None of the Above

The machine benefits by not having a wall. Business (Republicans) get their cheap labor and (Democrats) get the votes

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

There is no excuse for the Republicans not funding the wall.

-Geaux

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

Oh, that reverse psychology guilt trip thing again? You all tried that multiple times with gun discussions. When are you on the left going to realize that doesn't work? It's painfully transparent.

I've noticed that the pro-wall people are ALWAYS blaming the left for being against the nutty wall idea. The facts are that I am a Republican as are the majority of the people in the U.S. Senate. When push comes to shove, most Republicans are against the nutty wall idea.

Ray, you cannot come to grips with the fact that a wall is a socialist solution looking for a problem to solve. When people show you instances when a wall does not work, you are complaining about how far back into history the other poster went to prove the point. Even going back to BIBLICAL times, walls have not been long term solutions for much of anything.

Those, such as yourself, like wailing about the damn wall, but cannot tell us a single problem you're really addressing. If those with a few IQ points show you what's wrong with the pretext you rely on, you want to move the goal posts.

I really wish you would quit blaming opposition to the wall on the Republicans. The only reason most of them are supporting idea is in the best interests of party unity so that other legislation does not get bogged down AND the fix is in. Once the wall is fully funded and Donnie gets his win, you can kiss that gun in your avatar good-bye.

For everything you gain there is something lost. Trump isn't God. He is playing the Art of the Deal. You're simply too ignorant to ask what the real cost - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of legislation (legislation that will affect YOUR Liberties) does this nutty and INEFFECTIVE wall idea cost.

That's nutty? I say that anybody who equates a border wall with losing all freedoms is nutty.

Correct, there are many Republicans who don't want the wall. But they took note at what just happened the last presidential election. Like any other election, they all said basically the same thing: the jobs, the economy, our international interaction and so on. But only one person stood for what the American people want; one person who said "I'm going to build a wall." With zero experience in politics, not even so much as a job on a school board somewhere, people elected Donald Trump. He not only beat out the over dozen Republican contenders, he beat out a very well known career politician, the wife of a former President who was beloved by nearly everybody in the Democrat party.

There is nothing Socialist about a wall. If you have no secure border, you really don't have a country.

Two days ago even Rush Limbaugh admitted on the radio that you can have secure borders without a wall. So, not even those who agree with your advocacy of the wall agree that the border cannot be secured without it.

Dude, you need a life outside of that damn wall. You're working me to death making all those posts that are easily refuted.

The first people in modern times that started the current movement was former neo - nazi turned Klansman, David Duke in 1977 Research the subject "border Watch". Then came the so - called Minutemen headed up by Jim Gilchrist. Gilchrist had Chris Simcox to help him found the organization. Simcox was PROVEN to be a neo-nazi that recruited at nazi rallies. His best friend was neo - nazi J.T. Ready. Ready was filmed with Simcox at nazi rallies wailing about the border and the need for a wall. Ready would go on to commit a mass shooting and committing suicide. In addition, another of the major players in the founding of the advocacy of a wall was neo - nazi, Shawna Forde. Forde would later be convicted of a double murder at the border. National Socialists and socialists.

The FUNDING for the wall rhetoric and the pretexts was made possible from organizations like the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIRUS) and NumbersUSA. The founder and primary financial financier for those organizations was a pro-eugenics millionaire by the name of John Tanton. Tanton had previously developed the same talking points for David Duke.

In the early to mid 1990s Bill Clinton and the Democrats (and Democrats have a socialist view of politics) was advocating much of what Donald Trump advocates today. You need to get your head screwed on right.

Adding insult to injury, EVERY example you've cited in favor of a wall was where socialist / communist countries used and benefited off them with the only exceptions being with nations at war... and we are NOT at war with those from south of the border.

Finally, after the 2020 Census is taken, Congressional districts will be redrawn. If the Republicans do not regain the House in the next election cycle, the Democrats will redraw the lines so as to benefit the Democrats. Hate to tell you this, but Trump LOST the popular vote and if the Congressional lines are redrawn, you are looking at the END of the Republican party. So, once again, you better learn the facts and heed sound counsel:

ANY solution should be a permanent one that the Democrats are willing to live with going into 2020. But, even that point is irrelevant as the Democrats are playing the Tea Party Republicans. The trade off is that, in the Art of the Deal, your Second Amendment Rights were negotiated away for that silly wall.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

You open your post with a straw man argument, add utter nonsense and then end it with the weakest argument you've ever had.

Mental health records are not sacred. There are legislators wanting them to be used right now to make sure you cannot exercise your Rights. WHEN it happens, get back to me.

Finally, building a guard-rail poses no threat to your constitutional Liberties.

And neither does criminal records being public.

The point is, Ray, you have admitted that ADD / ADHD are not real conditions - you know conditions where people need to be on drugs. You have admitted that, sir.

What you cannot see is that whether you do or do not, the public should NOT have access to your records because they cannot properly evaluate them.

In order to end this argument, I'll offer you an idea. If you want to hire someone, rent to them, etc. then since you trust the government so much why not submit the application along with the reason and let them just say they recommend that you hire them, rent to them, or you don't.

Because government doesn't make my decisions for me. I make my own decisions, and I make those decisions based on the information I have. One landlord might want to rent to an ex-con. I don't. I've had experience doing that and I base my future decisions on past experiences.

It's obvious that the government don't make your decisions for you. Rush Limbaugh does that. But, you clearly WISH that the government would be your personal Santa Claus.

Asking that government not hide information from me that could cause me harm either physically or financially is not Santa Clause. It's asking government to do it's job by protecting us from enemies foreign and domestic.

In 2005, a news article reported this:

"WASHINGTON, June 27 - The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm..."

Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone

You are FACTUALLY wrong again.

Another article quoted the above, but the United States Supreme Court is still ruling all the time on this question. A more recent article states this:

"However, did you know that the government, and specifically law enforcement, does not have any duty to protect the general public? Based on the headline and this information, you might assume this is a new, landmark decision. However, it has long been the court’s stance that, essentially, the American people are responsible for taking case of their own personal safety."

https://tribunist.com/news/supreme-court-ruling-police-have-no-duty-to-protect-the-general-public/

The government has NO duty to you as an individual when your personal safety is the issue.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Because building walls is the province of private property owners, not government.

That is a point well taken. If the wall must be built on private property, it then calls into question how far we will go in allowing the government to abuse eminent domain abuse. BTW, BEFORE 9 / 11 the same people worrying about a wall were worried about government over-reach with eminent domain abuse. Times change.

If you would not believe it, then there is no point in posting a link. It would be wasted verification.

One thing is for sure. You live on this board to argue the wall as if it were your lifeblood - your religion. Yet you fail to comprehend simple truths. For example:

Not too long back the liberals wanted to declare that any veteran who had been diagnosed with PTSD be denied the Right to keep and bear Arms. You won't believe that either, but it's true. The point is, the liberals would use your mental health records to deny you the Right to keep and bear Arms.

You argued against ADD / ADHD, claiming you are afflicted with such, but then denying that you are not on the drugs for it. Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but, if you have a real condition, you either have it or you don't. If you're born with juvenile diabetes, you have it. You don't wake up one morning and say I feel fine so I must be cured.

You cannot understand that I'm sometimes on YOUR side for IF ADD / ADHD were real conditions and IF you were not on your meds, the liberals would most assuredly pass legislation to address people like you. IF you think a person's criminal record is something the public should know about, then ditto for their mental health records.

WHEN mental health records become fair game, then you can be denied the Right to keep and bear Arms as well as be turned down for a job because you have a "mental health record." Does it matter that you went to see the psychologist because you lost interest in sex or that you needed a referral from a psychologist to go out of network and be hypnotized so that you could quit smoking? HELL NO. It will be just like a "criminal record." Nobody is going to read the transcripts nor weigh the value of the treatment nor more than they read court transcripts to find out that you were threatened with pleading guilty or facing a maximum prison sentence when the facts clearly dictate you were innocent. I leave you with the wisdom of Thomas Paine:

"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

Read more at: Thomas Paine Quotes

You're right about one thing, I have no idea where you're at half the time.

ADD is difficulty paying attention or your mind drifting off of a subject. It's something you can live with without taking medication. We were talking about criminal records, not mental records. You keep detouring the subject all the time.

What you don't understand is the Doctor/ patient relationship is sacred. Criminal records are not. Doctors take an oath to protect the confidence between themselves and their clients unless they believe a serious threat to the public is at large.

The government puts guardrails on our roads so you don't accidentally drive off a cliff or into a river. The government forces companies to put warnings on medications and various devices so you don't get hurt. The government forces companies to put something in front of dock doors so an employee doesn't fall out of it or a tow motor drive off of it. The government regulation is that we truck drivers chock our wheels (putting a rubber or metal wedge under the tire) even though tractor-trailers have two independent brake systems that make it virtually impossible for the system to fail.

In other words, government takes measures to insure our safety. So if government is aware of a potentially dangerous person; a person who may cause me serious grief; a person who may be a threat to my business or family, it's governments duty to warn me of this potential--not hide it from me so I have no idea.

No, it is not the government's duty to warn you of a "potentially" dangerous person. It maybe governments duty to warn you of "known" dangerous person.

No, a person who is a criminal is potentially dangerous. The government is we the people. When the government sends somebody to jail, we the people sent them to jail. We have a right to know who our government sent to prison for our own protection.

So if a guy loses his job and doesn't pay child support is dangerous? A guy who has a beef with the tax authorities is dangerous? Only in Ray's world.

That's up to me and employers to decide, not you and not the government. I need to know who and what I'm dealing with to make a safe and sound decision.

Under our Constitution as originally written and intended you are finally RIGHT. That is precisely why it's not the government's business who a company does or does not offer a job to. It's not your freaking job; it belongs to the employer that created it.

 

[bripat9643]

A- Cost prohibitive
B- Won't work
C- It's racist
D- It would reduce those successfully crossing the border
E- None of the Above

The machine benefits by not having a wall. Business (Republicans) get their cheap labor and (Democrats) get the votes

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

There is no excuse for the Republicans not funding the wall.

-Geaux

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

Oh, that reverse psychology guilt trip thing again? You all tried that multiple times with gun discussions. When are you on the left going to realize that doesn't work? It's painfully transparent.

I've noticed that the pro-wall people are ALWAYS blaming the left for being against the nutty wall idea. The facts are that I am a Republican as are the majority of the people in the U.S. Senate. When push comes to shove, most Republicans are against the nutty wall idea.

Ray, you cannot come to grips with the fact that a wall is a socialist solution looking for a problem to solve. When people show you instances when a wall does not work, you are complaining about how far back into history the other poster went to prove the point. Even going back to BIBLICAL times, walls have not been long term solutions for much of anything.

Those, such as yourself, like wailing about the damn wall, but cannot tell us a single problem you're really addressing. If those with a few IQ points show you what's wrong with the pretext you rely on, you want to move the goal posts.

I really wish you would quit blaming opposition to the wall on the Republicans. The only reason most of them are supporting idea is in the best interests of party unity so that other legislation does not get bogged down AND the fix is in. Once the wall is fully funded and Donnie gets his win, you can kiss that gun in your avatar good-bye.

For everything you gain there is something lost. Trump isn't God. He is playing the Art of the Deal. You're simply too ignorant to ask what the real cost - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of legislation (legislation that will affect YOUR Liberties) does this nutty and INEFFECTIVE wall idea cost.

That's nutty? I say that anybody who equates a border wall with losing all freedoms is nutty.

Correct, there are many Republicans who don't want the wall. But they took note at what just happened the last presidential election. Like any other election, they all said basically the same thing: the jobs, the economy, our international interaction and so on. But only one person stood for what the American people want; one person who said "I'm going to build a wall." With zero experience in politics, not even so much as a job on a school board somewhere, people elected Donald Trump. He not only beat out the over dozen Republican contenders, he beat out a very well known career politician, the wife of a former President who was beloved by nearly everybody in the Democrat party.

There is nothing Socialist about a wall. If you have no secure border, you really don't have a country.

Two days ago even Rush Limbaugh admitted on the radio that you can have secure borders without a wall. So, not even those who agree with your advocacy of the wall agree that the border cannot be secured without it.

Dude, you need a life outside of that damn wall. You're working me to death making all those posts that are easily refuted.

The first people in modern times that started the current movement was former neo - nazi turned Klansman, David Duke in 1977 Research the subject "border Watch". Then came the so - called Minutemen headed up by Jim Gilchrist. Gilchrist had Chris Simcox to help him found the organization. Simcox was PROVEN to be a neo-nazi that recruited at nazi rallies. His best friend was neo - nazi J.T. Ready. Ready was filmed with Simcox at nazi rallies wailing about the border and the need for a wall. Ready would go on to commit a mass shooting and committing suicide. In addition, another of the major players in the founding of the advocacy of a wall was neo - nazi, Shawna Forde. Forde would later be convicted of a double murder at the border. National Socialists and socialists.

The FUNDING for the wall rhetoric and the pretexts was made possible from organizations like the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIRUS) and NumbersUSA. The founder and primary financial financier for those organizations was a pro-eugenics millionaire by the name of John Tanton. Tanton had previously developed the same talking points for David Duke.

In the early to mid 1990s Bill Clinton and the Democrats (and Democrats have a socialist view of politics) was advocating much of what Donald Trump advocates today. You need to get your head screwed on right.

Adding insult to injury, EVERY example you've cited in favor of a wall was where socialist / communist countries used and benefited off them with the only exceptions being with nations at war... and we are NOT at war with those from south of the border.

Finally, after the 2020 Census is taken, Congressional districts will be redrawn. If the Republicans do not regain the House in the next election cycle, the Democrats will redraw the lines so as to benefit the Democrats. Hate to tell you this, but Trump LOST the popular vote and if the Congressional lines are redrawn, you are looking at the END of the Republican party. So, once again, you better learn the facts and heed sound counsel:

ANY solution should be a permanent one that the Democrats are willing to live with going into 2020. But, even that point is irrelevant as the Democrats are playing the Tea Party Republicans. The trade off is that, in the Art of the Deal, your Second Amendment Rights were negotiated away for that silly wall.

Rush Limbaugh admitted you can have secure borders without a wall?

When?

 

[bripat9643]

That is a point well taken. If the wall must be built on private property, it then calls into question how far we will go in allowing the government to abuse eminent domain abuse. BTW, BEFORE 9 / 11 the same people worrying about a wall were worried about government over-reach with eminent domain abuse. Times change.

You're right about one thing, I have no idea where you're at half the time.

ADD is difficulty paying attention or your mind drifting off of a subject. It's something you can live with without taking medication. We were talking about criminal records, not mental records. You keep detouring the subject all the time.

What you don't understand is the Doctor/ patient relationship is sacred. Criminal records are not. Doctors take an oath to protect the confidence between themselves and their clients unless they believe a serious threat to the public is at large.

The government puts guardrails on our roads so you don't accidentally drive off a cliff or into a river. The government forces companies to put warnings on medications and various devices so you don't get hurt. The government forces companies to put something in front of dock doors so an employee doesn't fall out of it or a tow motor drive off of it. The government regulation is that we truck drivers chock our wheels (putting a rubber or metal wedge under the tire) even though tractor-trailers have two independent brake systems that make it virtually impossible for the system to fail.

In other words, government takes measures to insure our safety. So if government is aware of a potentially dangerous person; a person who may cause me serious grief; a person who may be a threat to my business or family, it's governments duty to warn me of this potential--not hide it from me so I have no idea.

No, it is not the government's duty to warn you of a "potentially" dangerous person. It maybe governments duty to warn you of "known" dangerous person.

No, a person who is a criminal is potentially dangerous. The government is we the people. When the government sends somebody to jail, we the people sent them to jail. We have a right to know who our government sent to prison for our own protection.

So if a guy loses his job and doesn't pay child support is dangerous? A guy who has a beef with the tax authorities is dangerous? Only in Ray's world.

That's up to me and employers to decide, not you and not the government. I need to know who and what I'm dealing with to make a safe and sound decision.

Under our Constitution as originally written and intended you are finally RIGHT. That is precisely why it's not the government's business who a company does or does not offer a job to. It's not your freaking job; it belongs to the employer that created it.

It is the government's business if the person you hire is not in the country legally.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

It’s a waste of money . If the goal is to address illegal immigration, then that money is better spent in other ways .

More ins agents , more immigrantion courts , more judges . More enforcement vs companies who hire illegals . That’s a better use if the money .

How about we keep them from entering first, then we don’t have to risk agents lives. We also don’t need them destroying whatever is in their path, and needing to be supported. Not to mention the resources they use that should go to legal tax payers. Then there is the crime they commit. We also don’t need to tie up the court system with bullshit. They should also track down the visa violators, and send them back. Steel construction, and razor wire should do the trick. Like what they use to keep criminals in jail. We already have enough people who don’t contribute anything to society. Why do we need more. You seem to have quick fixes for everything dimmy. What have you done personally to address these issues, or assist they poor people?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The solution to this problem is simple: anybody caught here illegally will be charged with a first degree felony. It carries a minimum of five years in prison. Then we wouldn't need a wall or even border security. If you want to see what 20 million people rushing to get out of a country would look like, pass a law like that and that's exactly what you'd see.

Let us put an end to this idiocy right now:

"As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain in the United States." Arizona v US

ARIZONA v. UNITED STATES

Like it or not the moment a foreigner's feet hit U.S. soil, they have constitutional rights as per the 14th Amendment.

Adding insult to injury, had the build the wall advocates kept their butts at home, the constitutionalists and patriots in favor of the Constitution had this under control and were winning the fight. That court case above - that decision is all on the build the wall advocates. They own it and now you choose to misrepresent it???

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A- Cost prohibitive
B- Won't work
C- It's racist
D- It would reduce those successfully crossing the border
E- None of the Above

The machine benefits by not having a wall. Business (Republicans) get their cheap labor and (Democrats) get the votes

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

There is no excuse for the Republicans not funding the wall.

-Geaux

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

Oh, that reverse psychology guilt trip thing again? You all tried that multiple times with gun discussions. When are you on the left going to realize that doesn't work? It's painfully transparent.

I've noticed that the pro-wall people are ALWAYS blaming the left for being against the nutty wall idea. The facts are that I am a Republican as are the majority of the people in the U.S. Senate. When push comes to shove, most Republicans are against the nutty wall idea.

Ray, you cannot come to grips with the fact that a wall is a socialist solution looking for a problem to solve. When people show you instances when a wall does not work, you are complaining about how far back into history the other poster went to prove the point. Even going back to BIBLICAL times, walls have not been long term solutions for much of anything.

Those, such as yourself, like wailing about the damn wall, but cannot tell us a single problem you're really addressing. If those with a few IQ points show you what's wrong with the pretext you rely on, you want to move the goal posts.

I really wish you would quit blaming opposition to the wall on the Republicans. The only reason most of them are supporting idea is in the best interests of party unity so that other legislation does not get bogged down AND the fix is in. Once the wall is fully funded and Donnie gets his win, you can kiss that gun in your avatar good-bye.

For everything you gain there is something lost. Trump isn't God. He is playing the Art of the Deal. You're simply too ignorant to ask what the real cost - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of legislation (legislation that will affect YOUR Liberties) does this nutty and INEFFECTIVE wall idea cost.

That's nutty? I say that anybody who equates a border wall with losing all freedoms is nutty.

Correct, there are many Republicans who don't want the wall. But they took note at what just happened the last presidential election. Like any other election, they all said basically the same thing: the jobs, the economy, our international interaction and so on. But only one person stood for what the American people want; one person who said "I'm going to build a wall." With zero experience in politics, not even so much as a job on a school board somewhere, people elected Donald Trump. He not only beat out the over dozen Republican contenders, he beat out a very well known career politician, the wife of a former President who was beloved by nearly everybody in the Democrat party.

There is nothing Socialist about a wall. If you have no secure border, you really don't have a country.

Two days ago even Rush Limbaugh admitted on the radio that you can have secure borders without a wall. So, not even those who agree with your advocacy of the wall agree that the border cannot be secured without it.

Dude, you need a life outside of that damn wall. You're working me to death making all those posts that are easily refuted.

The first people in modern times that started the current movement was former neo - nazi turned Klansman, David Duke in 1977 Research the subject "border Watch". Then came the so - called Minutemen headed up by Jim Gilchrist. Gilchrist had Chris Simcox to help him found the organization. Simcox was PROVEN to be a neo-nazi that recruited at nazi rallies. His best friend was neo - nazi J.T. Ready. Ready was filmed with Simcox at nazi rallies wailing about the border and the need for a wall. Ready would go on to commit a mass shooting and committing suicide. In addition, another of the major players in the founding of the advocacy of a wall was neo - nazi, Shawna Forde. Forde would later be convicted of a double murder at the border. National Socialists and socialists.

The FUNDING for the wall rhetoric and the pretexts was made possible from organizations like the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIRUS) and NumbersUSA. The founder and primary financial financier for those organizations was a pro-eugenics millionaire by the name of John Tanton. Tanton had previously developed the same talking points for David Duke.

In the early to mid 1990s Bill Clinton and the Democrats (and Democrats have a socialist view of politics) was advocating much of what Donald Trump advocates today. You need to get your head screwed on right.

Adding insult to injury, EVERY example you've cited in favor of a wall was where socialist / communist countries used and benefited off them with the only exceptions being with nations at war... and we are NOT at war with those from south of the border.

Finally, after the 2020 Census is taken, Congressional districts will be redrawn. If the Republicans do not regain the House in the next election cycle, the Democrats will redraw the lines so as to benefit the Democrats. Hate to tell you this, but Trump LOST the popular vote and if the Congressional lines are redrawn, you are looking at the END of the Republican party. So, once again, you better learn the facts and heed sound counsel:

ANY solution should be a permanent one that the Democrats are willing to live with going into 2020. But, even that point is irrelevant as the Democrats are playing the Tea Party Republicans. The trade off is that, in the Art of the Deal, your Second Amendment Rights were negotiated away for that silly wall.

Hate to tell you this, but Trump LOST the popular vote and if the Congressional lines are redrawn, you are looking at the END of the Republican party.

Well WTF do you think their goal is now? Do you think they are fighting this thing because they are such gracious people and love their fellow man so much? What they are doing is trying to wipe out white people. They need to make us a minority so THEY DO have the ability for a single-party government.

Every other group outside of whites vote a majority Democrat. Get white people out of the way, and that becomes possible.

Democrats don't care about selling out Americans for power. The white Democrats don't care about selling out their own race. These are selfish and greedy people, and you are falling right into their hands. They've conned you into believing that borders are actually anti-American. They've conned you into believing a wall will never work in spite of border performance in other countries.

Let me tell you, this is a path to the end of our country. First takeover politics. Next introduce Socialism. Next it's Communism, and then we will be just like any other country of controlled people.

Generations after us (if they have the ability to learn what a great country this once was) will be asking why people like you ushered in their demise. They will be asking what would make people stupid enough to surrender all they worked for and give what they had to the rest of the world.

I don't have any children, but when my niece and nephews grandchildren asked what happened, they will be proud to say their Uncle fought against it. It was him (and people like him) who resisted the MSM brainwashing.

As for your great grandchildren, good luck.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

A- Cost prohibitive
B- Won't work
C- It's racist
D- It would reduce those successfully crossing the border
E- None of the Above

The machine benefits by not having a wall. Business (Republicans) get their cheap labor and (Democrats) get the votes

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

There is no excuse for the Republicans not funding the wall.

-Geaux

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

Oh, that reverse psychology guilt trip thing again? You all tried that multiple times with gun discussions. When are you on the left going to realize that doesn't work? It's painfully transparent.

I've noticed that the pro-wall people are ALWAYS blaming the left for being against the nutty wall idea. The facts are that I am a Republican as are the majority of the people in the U.S. Senate. When push comes to shove, most Republicans are against the nutty wall idea.

Ray, you cannot come to grips with the fact that a wall is a socialist solution looking for a problem to solve. When people show you instances when a wall does not work, you are complaining about how far back into history the other poster went to prove the point. Even going back to BIBLICAL times, walls have not been long term solutions for much of anything.

Those, such as yourself, like wailing about the damn wall, but cannot tell us a single problem you're really addressing. If those with a few IQ points show you what's wrong with the pretext you rely on, you want to move the goal posts.

I really wish you would quit blaming opposition to the wall on the Republicans. The only reason most of them are supporting idea is in the best interests of party unity so that other legislation does not get bogged down AND the fix is in. Once the wall is fully funded and Donnie gets his win, you can kiss that gun in your avatar good-bye.

For everything you gain there is something lost. Trump isn't God. He is playing the Art of the Deal. You're simply too ignorant to ask what the real cost - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of legislation (legislation that will affect YOUR Liberties) does this nutty and INEFFECTIVE wall idea cost.

Sorry, turd, but you'll never convince me that you're a Republican. You walk like a Democrat, waddle like a Democrat and talk like a Democrat.

When you stoop to name calling, it negates ANY argument you bring to the table. Furthermore, NO liberal has ever offered up ANY argument I've made on this subject. NO liberal has quote me; I've not quoted ANY liberal in support of my position. But, I can damn well cite a liberal arguing YOUR point of view:

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That is a point well taken. If the wall must be built on private property, it then calls into question how far we will go in allowing the government to abuse eminent domain abuse. BTW, BEFORE 9 / 11 the same people worrying about a wall were worried about government over-reach with eminent domain abuse. Times change.

You're right about one thing, I have no idea where you're at half the time.

ADD is difficulty paying attention or your mind drifting off of a subject. It's something you can live with without taking medication. We were talking about criminal records, not mental records. You keep detouring the subject all the time.

What you don't understand is the Doctor/ patient relationship is sacred. Criminal records are not. Doctors take an oath to protect the confidence between themselves and their clients unless they believe a serious threat to the public is at large.

The government puts guardrails on our roads so you don't accidentally drive off a cliff or into a river. The government forces companies to put warnings on medications and various devices so you don't get hurt. The government forces companies to put something in front of dock doors so an employee doesn't fall out of it or a tow motor drive off of it. The government regulation is that we truck drivers chock our wheels (putting a rubber or metal wedge under the tire) even though tractor-trailers have two independent brake systems that make it virtually impossible for the system to fail.

In other words, government takes measures to insure our safety. So if government is aware of a potentially dangerous person; a person who may cause me serious grief; a person who may be a threat to my business or family, it's governments duty to warn me of this potential--not hide it from me so I have no idea.

No, it is not the government's duty to warn you of a "potentially" dangerous person. It maybe governments duty to warn you of "known" dangerous person.

No, a person who is a criminal is potentially dangerous. The government is we the people. When the government sends somebody to jail, we the people sent them to jail. We have a right to know who our government sent to prison for our own protection.

So if a guy loses his job and doesn't pay child support is dangerous? A guy who has a beef with the tax authorities is dangerous? Only in Ray's world.

That's up to me and employers to decide, not you and not the government. I need to know who and what I'm dealing with to make a safe and sound decision.

Under our Constitution as originally written and intended you are finally RIGHT. That is precisely why it's not the government's business who a company does or does not offer a job to. It's not your freaking job; it belongs to the employer that created it.

And yet you stand by an employees past being hidden from an employer so the employer doesn't know what kind of jeopardy he or she is putting their company in. Wonderful.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A- Cost prohibitive
B- Won't work
C- It's racist
D- It would reduce those successfully crossing the border
E- None of the Above

The machine benefits by not having a wall. Business (Republicans) get their cheap labor and (Democrats) get the votes

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

There is no excuse for the Republicans not funding the wall.

-Geaux

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

Oh, that reverse psychology guilt trip thing again? You all tried that multiple times with gun discussions. When are you on the left going to realize that doesn't work? It's painfully transparent.

I've noticed that the pro-wall people are ALWAYS blaming the left for being against the nutty wall idea. The facts are that I am a Republican as are the majority of the people in the U.S. Senate. When push comes to shove, most Republicans are against the nutty wall idea.

Ray, you cannot come to grips with the fact that a wall is a socialist solution looking for a problem to solve. When people show you instances when a wall does not work, you are complaining about how far back into history the other poster went to prove the point. Even going back to BIBLICAL times, walls have not been long term solutions for much of anything.

Those, such as yourself, like wailing about the damn wall, but cannot tell us a single problem you're really addressing. If those with a few IQ points show you what's wrong with the pretext you rely on, you want to move the goal posts.

I really wish you would quit blaming opposition to the wall on the Republicans. The only reason most of them are supporting idea is in the best interests of party unity so that other legislation does not get bogged down AND the fix is in. Once the wall is fully funded and Donnie gets his win, you can kiss that gun in your avatar good-bye.

For everything you gain there is something lost. Trump isn't God. He is playing the Art of the Deal. You're simply too ignorant to ask what the real cost - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of legislation (legislation that will affect YOUR Liberties) does this nutty and INEFFECTIVE wall idea cost.

Sorry, turd, but you'll never convince me that you're a Republican. You walk like a Democrat, waddle like a Democrat and talk like a Democrat.

When you stoop to name calling, it negates ANY argument you bring to the table. Furthermore, NO liberal has ever offered up ANY argument I've made on this subject. NO liberal has quote me; I've not quoted ANY liberal in support of my position. But, I can damn well cite a liberal arguing YOUR point of view:

Right. Isn't that the same guy who ran on welfare reform, and when it was finally introduced by THE REPUBLICAN CONGRESS, he vetoed the bill twice? Isn't it the same guy who was forced to sign it because the Republicans introduced it a third time right before his reelection bid?

 

[bripat9643]

A- Cost prohibitive
B- Won't work
C- It's racist
D- It would reduce those successfully crossing the border
E- None of the Above

The machine benefits by not having a wall. Business (Republicans) get their cheap labor and (Democrats) get the votes

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

There is no excuse for the Republicans not funding the wall.

-Geaux

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

Oh, that reverse psychology guilt trip thing again? You all tried that multiple times with gun discussions. When are you on the left going to realize that doesn't work? It's painfully transparent.

I've noticed that the pro-wall people are ALWAYS blaming the left for being against the nutty wall idea. The facts are that I am a Republican as are the majority of the people in the U.S. Senate. When push comes to shove, most Republicans are against the nutty wall idea.

Ray, you cannot come to grips with the fact that a wall is a socialist solution looking for a problem to solve. When people show you instances when a wall does not work, you are complaining about how far back into history the other poster went to prove the point. Even going back to BIBLICAL times, walls have not been long term solutions for much of anything.

Those, such as yourself, like wailing about the damn wall, but cannot tell us a single problem you're really addressing. If those with a few IQ points show you what's wrong with the pretext you rely on, you want to move the goal posts.

I really wish you would quit blaming opposition to the wall on the Republicans. The only reason most of them are supporting idea is in the best interests of party unity so that other legislation does not get bogged down AND the fix is in. Once the wall is fully funded and Donnie gets his win, you can kiss that gun in your avatar good-bye.

For everything you gain there is something lost. Trump isn't God. He is playing the Art of the Deal. You're simply too ignorant to ask what the real cost - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of legislation (legislation that will affect YOUR Liberties) does this nutty and INEFFECTIVE wall idea cost.

Sorry, turd, but you'll never convince me that you're a Republican. You walk like a Democrat, waddle like a Democrat and talk like a Democrat.

When you stoop to name calling, it negates ANY argument you bring to the table. Furthermore, NO liberal has ever offered up ANY argument I've made on this subject. NO liberal has quote me; I've not quoted ANY liberal in support of my position. But, I can damn well cite a liberal arguing YOUR point of view:

Plenty of liberals have used the exact same arguments. There are no new arguments in this debate. Either your for the wall or you're against it. In the latter case, you lie to support your position. That's the bottom line.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

A- Cost prohibitive
B- Won't work
C- It's racist
D- It would reduce those successfully crossing the border
E- None of the Above

The machine benefits by not having a wall. Business (Republicans) get their cheap labor and (Democrats) get the votes

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

There is no excuse for the Republicans not funding the wall.

-Geaux

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

Oh, that reverse psychology guilt trip thing again? You all tried that multiple times with gun discussions. When are you on the left going to realize that doesn't work? It's painfully transparent.

I've noticed that the pro-wall people are ALWAYS blaming the left for being against the nutty wall idea. The facts are that I am a Republican as are the majority of the people in the U.S. Senate. When push comes to shove, most Republicans are against the nutty wall idea.

Ray, you cannot come to grips with the fact that a wall is a socialist solution looking for a problem to solve. When people show you instances when a wall does not work, you are complaining about how far back into history the other poster went to prove the point. Even going back to BIBLICAL times, walls have not been long term solutions for much of anything.

Those, such as yourself, like wailing about the damn wall, but cannot tell us a single problem you're really addressing. If those with a few IQ points show you what's wrong with the pretext you rely on, you want to move the goal posts.

I really wish you would quit blaming opposition to the wall on the Republicans. The only reason most of them are supporting idea is in the best interests of party unity so that other legislation does not get bogged down AND the fix is in. Once the wall is fully funded and Donnie gets his win, you can kiss that gun in your avatar good-bye.

For everything you gain there is something lost. Trump isn't God. He is playing the Art of the Deal. You're simply too ignorant to ask what the real cost - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of legislation (legislation that will affect YOUR Liberties) does this nutty and INEFFECTIVE wall idea cost.

Sorry, turd, but you'll never convince me that you're a Republican. You walk like a Democrat, waddle like a Democrat and talk like a Democrat.

When you stoop to having to call people names you negate your own argument. The facts are that NO liberal has EVER quoted me. I have NEVER quoted a liberal in support of my position. The liberals have never made the same argument I have...but, they've damn well argued the points you make here on a daily basis: