to wall or not to wall...

[bbgun]

Yes, we need a wall. Soon.

http://www.czabe.com/mediaclips/inde...howclip&id=792

[ZeroClub]

Originally Posted by iceberg

the immigration problem has been around a lot longer than bush has been in office. i don't see how he's made a mess of something that was already a mess. maybe he didn't clean it up, but he didn't make a mess.

I wasn't clear, sorry. When I said "what a mess he has made of things," I was making a more general comment about his overall presidency.

As far as the border & Bush goes, the thing that disgusts me is that Bush - the candidate (vs. Gore):

1. Promised that control of the border would be a top priority for his administration.

2. Claimed that he (Bush) was the perfect guy to do it - given that he was the Governor of a border state.

3. And despite 9/11 (which should have supplied additional urgency) and a Republican congress throughout most of his Presidency (with which he should have been able to work), Bush accomplished virtually nothing with respect to border control. He has turned out to be pathetically inept on this issue.

[superpunk]

Originally Posted by ZeroClub

Bush accomplished virtually nothing with respect to border control. He has turned out to be pathetically inept on this issue.

Surprise?

I wouldn't say he accomplished nothing, though. I'm not sure this was him - maybe it was California legislation, but I was surprised to see these signs when I went to San Diego.



They may cross the border illegally, but I'll be damned if they cross our major highways dragging their offspring.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Originally Posted by ZeroClub

I wasn't clear, sorry. When I said "what a mess he has made of things," I was making a more general comment about his overall presidency.

As far as the border & Bush goes, the thing that disgusts me is that Bush - the candidate (vs. Gore):

1. Promised that control of the border would be a top priority for his administration.

2. Claimed that he (Bush) was the perfect guy to do it - given that he was the Governor of a border state.

3. And despite 9/11 (which should have supplied additional urgency) and a Republican congress throughout most of his Presidency (with which he should have been able to work), Bush accomplished virtually nothing with respect to border control. He has turned out to be pathetically inept on this issue.

Well I guess the buck stops with bush on this but to be fair to him, it was not so much the border issue that did him in with his own party, it was the amnesty/works program that did him in.

However I did think it was funny they passed the approval for a wall in some sections and not fund it.

[iceberg]

Originally Posted by ZeroClub

I wasn't clear, sorry. When I said "what a mess he has made of things," I was making a more general comment about his overall presidency.

As far as the border & Bush goes, the thing that disgusts me is that Bush - the candidate (vs. Gore):

1. Promised that control of the border would be a top priority for his administration.

2. Claimed that he (Bush) was the perfect guy to do it - given that he was the Governor of a border state.

3. And despite 9/11 (which should have supplied additional urgency) and a Republican congress throughout most of his Presidency (with which he should have been able to work), Bush accomplished virtually nothing with respect to border control. He has turned out to be pathetically inept on this issue.

ok, that yes he did lay claim to and has done zip about it. i agree with you there.

i disagree 9/11 increased the urgency *at all*. 9/11 had nothing to do with the mexican border, did it?

the wall is all about and only about illegal immigrants. terrorists can find plenty of ways here that have nothing to do with mexico. can they walk up here from there?

sure.

and they can swim in a mile out from the ocean.

they can walk down from canada.

they can fly in and take that plane into our biggest buildings....

[BrAinPaiNt]

Originally Posted by superpunk

Surprise?

I wouldn't say he accomplished nothing, though. I'm not sure this was him - maybe it was California legislation, but I was surprised to see these signs when I went to San Diego.



They may cross the border illegally, but I'll be damned if they cross our major highways dragging their offspring.

Reminds me of a guy I served with in Louisiana.

Not sure why it was at Fort Polk but there were a large number of soldiers there that had just came from overseas. A good deal of us from Korea and others from Germany.

Anyways this guy had married a German Woman while he was serving over there and of course brought her back to the states.

Really nice woman, good looking and very nice manners.

So anyways he was telling us some stories of her getting used to being in the USA and stuff.

He started laughing getting ready to tell us a story and took a few minutes before he could get it out.

I guess one day they were driving and they were in a residential part of town.

They saw this sign...or something similar.



She sees it and says something like...Ahhhh that is so sad or ahhh that is so nice.

He was not sure what she was talking about, thinking maybe she saw something in yard or on a house or something so he asks what she is talking about.

She said something like...they put up signs for slow children.

She thought it meant children with disabilities instead of to make the driver slow down because there were children around.

[ZeroClub]

Originally Posted by iceberg

ok, that yes he did lay claim to and has done zip about it. i agree with you there.

i disagree 9/11 increased the urgency *at all*. 9/11 had nothing to do with the mexican border, did it?

the wall is all about and only about illegal immigrants. terrorists can find plenty of ways here that have nothing to do with mexico. can they walk up here from there?

sure.

and they can swim in a mile out from the ocean.

they can walk down from canada.

they can fly in and take that plane into our biggest buildings....

I certainly agree that 9/11 wasn't caused by a breach in the Mexican border.

But in the aftermath of 9/11, as the government sought to prevent future acts of terrorism, border security became (or should have become) a concern for a second reason - terrorist infiltration.

So, really, the Bush administration had a golden opportunity, politically speaking, to increase security on the Mexican border. Not only could Bush continue to use his first set of arguments (regarding illegal immigration) but he could have added a second set of arguments (prevention of terrorist infiltration - the southern boarder is one of the holes that needs to be plugged). Together, that's a very persuasive set of arguments, particularly for a guy who said from the get-go that he'd make headway on border security.

[iceberg]

Originally Posted by ZeroClub

I certainly agree that 9/11 wasn't caused by a breach in the Mexican border.

But in the aftermath of 9/11, as the government sought to prevent future acts of terrorism, border security became (or should have become) a concern for a second reason - terrorist infiltration.

So, really, the Bush administration had a golden opportunity, politically speaking, to increase security on the Mexican border. Not only could Bush continue to use his first set of arguments (regarding illegal immigration) but he could have added a second set of arguments (prevention of terrorist infiltration - the southern boarder is one of the holes that needs to be plugged). Together, that's a very persuasive set of arguments, particularly for a guy who said from the get-go that he'd make headway on border security.

yes - work on making coming into this country more difficult.
no - a wall on the southern border won't do this.

plugged how and for what exact reason is what we need to sort out. those saying it's a terrorist haven i think just make "everything" a drama-fied problem.