Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sure is a rather larger and more urgent, than usual, propaganda push to diminish the stellar Washington Post, lately. In this thread among numerous others. I smell fear of truth emanating from under the tin foil hats.
[1] Democrats are not for open borders, that is a Republican hoax, and ...
[2] Democrats always look for a humanitarian solution, and ...
[3] Democrats have always recognized the complexity of illegal immigration and always advocated for more sophisticated and viable approaches than a a simple 'wall'.
Most Republicans wouldn't want to admit these things and ruin their narrative.
If the Democrats aren't currently for open borders then why do they object to the wall today but were all for it in the past? How is it humanitarian to our own citizens not to protect them from illegal entry which ends up costing us billions every year including loss of jobs and depleted resources not to mention the threat of criminals and those from known terrorist countries getting n here? They are more worried about being humane to illegal aliens than our own people. There is no complexity to illegal immigration. Secure our border with good physical barriers along with other methods to deter it and deport those who are here illegally already.
(Feel free to read the rest of that and how it was because of Obama's actions that the number of unchaperoned kids under the age of 18 starting flooding our border back then.)
[1] Democrats are not for open borders, that is a Republican hoax, and ...
[2] Democrats always look for a humanitarian solution, and ...
[3] Democrats have always recognized the complexity of illegal immigration and always advocated for more sophisticated and viable approaches than a a simple 'wall'.
Most Republicans wouldn't want to admit these things and ruin their narrative.
Oh gad...those things are simply too much work for Republicans! Scapegoating and pouring concrete is so much simpler.
If the Democrats aren't currently for open borders then why do they object to the wall today but were all for it in the past?
Because its the future. Because they are interested in 21st Century solutions. Because their decisions are fact ,research based from professionals and front linesmen. Because Drug Cartels cant be managed with a concrete wall.
A better use of covert ops ,then sending them to Venezuela, would be covert ops into Mexico and Central America to weed out Cartels. Followed by Humanitarian aid to the residents. But that helps people. Not him.
How much ya wanna bet he has his eyes on land grabbing South America...country by county. Then he would own all the cheap labor he wouldnt know what to do with.
Well, it's a crisis now. Stephen Miller just went on television to say we need to protect the US military (the 4,000 troops now sitting on the border) from all those invading hoards of women and children.
If you're serious about these issues (as I know you are) then look at it clearly enough to understand rather than repeating rightwing talking points. The Schumer YouTube video was from 2009. And he said exactly what you wrote:
And here's Chuck Schumer talking about how the 630 miles of newly constructed border fencing created a "significant barrier to illegal immigration".
There was no outrage back them for two reasons: (1) That degree of fencing was necessary and (2) The Secure Fence Act of 2006 was promoted as precursor to that comprehensive immigration reform he's also mentioning on the video. It became Democratic policy.
Democrats also supported more fencing as part of the Gang of 8 initiative. 2013. There it's easy enough to find commentary that they did not think that additional fencing was necessary but they were willing to spring for it again as part of the immigration reform package.
We still have illegals coming into this country. If 630 miles of fencing 10 years ago made a dent, just think what an actual border wall can do.
Sure is a rather larger and more urgent, than usual, propaganda push to diminish the stellar Washington Post, lately. In this thread among numerous others. I smell fear of truth emanating from under the tin foil hats.
I wrote what I wrote about WaPo because in the process of reading and copy/pasting excerpts to include in my thread post, it suddenly directed me to buy a subscription - hence why I stated that you may have to get a subscription to read the rest....cause, you know, "Democracy Dies In Darkness".
Well, it's a crisis now. Stephen Miller just went on television to say we need to protect the US military (the 4,000 troops now sitting on the border) from all those invading hoards of women and children.
Build. The. Wall.
Just stop. You go from post to post acting like its only innocent mothers and children representing those trying to come here. Wrong , watch the caravan footage and see all the men. It was even said in mainstream media that women and children do not make up the majority of those trying to come here.
And either way people have to follow the rule of law. We do not have enough space to hold the people coming here to seek asylum. We do not have enough border patrol. New caravans continue to form sending people here by the thousands, its not in our best interest as a country to absorb thousands each month, those who wait at the border trying to seek asylum or those climbing the fence illegally.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.