Posted on 09/17/2014 4:36:52 PM PDT by Kansas58
A very disturbing number of Freepers are openly advocating, on Free Republic threads, for the defeat of Senator Pat Roberts and other good Conservative Republicans. Greg Orman, in Kansas, is a pro abortion, anti gun, tax and spend Liberal Democrat who has given tens of thousands of dollars to Obama and Pelosi and the Democrat Party and Harry Reid. I am called an "idiot" for supporting Roberts. However, I think that those on Free Republic who support Harry Reid and Greg Orman should be ZOTTED, kicked off the site. I have had enough of there hate filled, vindictive, misguided trash.
I was stunned as well. With ambiguous FR handles, you sometimes have no idea whether a FReeper is male or female.
That’s why I chose my FR name, first because I am a lady, and second because I knew it would always actually describe me. ;-)
You're playing games. What I wrote was very clear and you are trying desperately to deflect it. Don't preach Jesus and then encourage others to vote against their principles.
Is that clear enough for you?
And how has voting for the liberal rinos worked out for you?
I hate your name. I think the “old” is insulting and that’s why I simply call you “Lady”. :-)
I am not lying.
It is your post, and it is a direct quote.
I even gave links.
Too bad for you.
Perhaps if you asked the mod to remove your posts you can claim you never said what was quoted!
Some people have tried that you know.
LOL!
Awww, I like my name. It is something I can never outgrow, for I will always be old, if I live, and a lady.
Should I have called myself TheHotYoungChick? When I was in my mid 50’s and signing up here?
ICK! That’s worse than ClassyGreenEyedBlond. ;-)
It’s just that it’s used as a derogatory for older ladies and I’ve never liked it.
No you quoted my words out of context. That’s deceptive, aka lying.
No, it is what you mean.
It is not out of context, it is a quote, and I provided links.
Don’t like it, tough.
Which one? This is a double-ZOT thread, Kansas58 and toasty one both got the heave-ho.
I like that ZOT gif, but I promise not to “borrow” it. It’s your signature ZOT thread gif, no?
A massive reduction? Let's examine the numbers, shall we?
The double pedestrian fencing in the San Diego sector was complete in 2005. So let's look directly at the Border Patrol apprehension data from 2005 to 2012, when the current surge began due to Obama's announcement of no deportation for minors.
| Year | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Big Bend | 10,536 | 7,520 | 5,536 | 5,391 | 6,360 | 5,288 | 4,036 | 3,964 |
| Del Rio | 68,506 | 42,636 | 22,920 | 20,761 | 17,082 | 14,694 | 16,144 | 21,720 |
| El Centro | 55,722 | 61,465 | 55,883 | 40,961 | 33,521 | 32,562 | 30,191 | 23,916 |
| El Paso | 122,679 | 122,256 | 75,464 | 30,312 | 14,999 | 12,251 | 10,345 | 9,678 |
| Laredo | 75,346 | 74,840 | 56,714 | 43,658 | 40,569 | 35,287 | 36,053 | 44,872 |
| Rio Grande Valley | 134,136 | 110,528 | 73,430 | 75,473 | 60,989 | 59,766 | 59,243 | 97,762 |
| San Diego | 126,904 | 142,104 | 152,460 | 162,390 | 118,721 | 68,565 | 42,447 | 28,461 |
| Tucson | 439,079 | 392,074 | 378,239 | 317,696 | 241,673 | 212,202 | 123,285 | 120,000 |
| Yuma | 138,438 | 118,549 | 37,992 | 8,363 | 6,951 | 7,116 | 5,833 | 6,500 |
As you can see, San Diego's apprehensions went up not down from 2005 to 2009. Nearly every other sector's apprehensions, the ones without double fencing or any fencing at all, went down.
From 2009 to 2011, San Diego's apprehensions went down significantly. So did nearly every other sector's apprehensions. Remember, those sectors don't have double fencing. Some have no fencing. So the double fence in San Diego had been there for four years. Did the fence suddenly become a substantial deterrent?
What happened in 2009 that caused such a drop in apprehensions, not just in San Diego, but all across the southern border? Well, from 2005 to 2009, we increased the number of Border Patrol agents from 11, 264 to 20,119, of whom 17,399 are deployed to the southern border. And we increased technological detection and enforcement capabilities, such as cameras, radar, sensors, and towers. (i.e. your dreaded "smart fencing")
Then, in 2012, apprehensions jumped all across the southern border when Obama announced he wouldn't bother with deporting minors.
In short, Norm, the attribution of apprehension reductions in San Diego to the double pedestrian fencing is a myth.
By the way, Rick Perry is not the only one who supports strategic fencing. Here's what The Heritage Foundation has to say about border fencing:
In some areas, erecting fences is the best way to tackle the illegal-entry problem. But the cost makes it important to use fencing only in areas with a low "melting point." The melting point is the time it takes for an individual to cross the border and "melt" into a landscape unnoticed. In urban border communities, spending money on physical barriers makes sense because individuals can easily cross the border and sneak quickly into the urban landscape (for example, one can hide in a building or steal a car and drive away). But in other areas, like the middle of the desert, the barren landscape makes it easy for Border Patrol agents to detect border crossers.
No. I’m not playing games. I asked you a straight up question and you refuse to give me a straight up answer. Why?
Also, I repeatedly stated I respect and will not condemn anyone who thinks it’s better to not vote for RINOs. I disagree with that approach in limited cases which I repeatedly stated...over and over ad nauseam, i.e. general elections ONLY, when there are NO other realistic alternatives, and the Democrat will do more damage. I even mentioned circumstances where it might be better to NOT vote for the lesser of two evils.
I also clearly wrote that people should do what the Lord tells them to do. I ONLY spoke for myself and did not tell you or anyone else what they “must” do. Do what you think is right. That’s what I actually wrote. It’s all there.
Even if you think I somehow meant something different, I’m telling you flat out, right now. What I just wrote is what I meant then and now—nothing more or less. Don’t read into it any more than what I said, because I was being as literal as possible. I don’t know how to post any clearer, and if you think I’m telling you you MUST compromise your principles, I’m not.
I’ll write it again: Do what you think the Lord wants you to do. May the Lord’s will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven. That sums it up (again).
You are playing games.
And being amusing too boot.
Adieu.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.