Posted on 09/27/2004 11:40:43 PM PDT by Robert Lomax
The U.S. has no plans to deploy troops along the Mexican border to stanch the deluge of illegal aliens currently pouring into the country at the rate of 3 million per year, President Bush said in an interview broadcast on Monday.
"As the governor of Texas, I was very aware of this issue," Bush told Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly.
Story Continues Below
"There is a long border, that makes it hard to control. We have beefed up places along the border to try to stop" the flow, he said. When told that his policy didn't seem to be working, Bush insisted, "It’s working a little better.
"They're doing a pretty good job down in Arizona, which is the main border crossing. ... I think there's a thousand more border patrol agents along the border. We’re modernizing border techniques, we’re using better surveillance methods to stop this crossing at the border."
The president contended, however, that illegal immigration was driven primarily by the economic realities of the region.
"If you can make 50 cents in the interior of Mexico and five bucks in the interior of the United States, you're coming for the five bucks," he explained.
"I happen to believe the best way to enhance the border is to have temporary-worker cards available for people," he said. "I think the long-term solution for this issue on our border is for Mexico to grow a middle class. That's why I believe in NAFTA."
When warned that "a lot of people are not going to like that answer," Bush told O'Reilly, "Well it’s a, a truthful answer."
As for voting, if Badnarik had followed Boortz's logic on the War on Terror, I'd be voting for him. As it is, my three main issues are the Terror war, guns, and taxes.
Bush is for an NRST and is taking the war to the enemy where they live instead of fighting them in our backyard. However, if he leaves the friggin' door open, things are going to get ugly here as well.
Which is why I'm happy Pres. Bush let the AWB die. Or at least didn't make a lot of noise about getting a new one signed and thereby letting it die. When push comes to shove and we face another Beslan on OUR soil this time, I wanna be able to go after the bastards myself. Especially if my daughter is one of the ones taken hostage.
The DMZ is much smaller than the US-Mexican border. Check a map.
People, right now, won't back this tactic.
A wall isn't notably violent, but it would be considered extreme by most Americans.
Again, there is no wide public mandate to use a tactic like that. That could change as events get more violent.
We aren't there yet.
Do you consider the tiny neutral tax haven of Switzerland to be analogous to the USA? Switserland has more in common with the Cayman Islands than the USA. Like I said, name a real country.
It's a good start! Kudos! Realistic but not needlessly violent.
200 miles vs. 2,100 miles.
And NKs get across the border routinely.
You forgot seven - "Get slaughtered in the court of public opinion and get run out of office on a rail."
GITMO works because Americans know there are bad bad guys there. Nothing like this would work on the mexican border, public opinion wise, because the people you would be detaining (even briefly) would be family types.
Americans aren't ready for this. Sorry.
You might wish to read Jim Robinson's comments on this thread about immigration.
I do not think he would appreciate the way you continuously misinform freepers and lurkers about immigration issues.
That's because no bill gets through Congress that he doesn't want.
It's gravitas.
When significant expose campaigns are put together about what is happening to and at our borders, and the resulting societal threats posed by it, it will take down the party that fights it...or does nothing. We won't see the days of both parties doing nothing or we will indeed see the wrong people elected that WILL complete the totalitarization of America's big brother state.
We have to find an effective way to protect America and not lose it to the Globalists, the Muhammadans, the DemocRAT Communists or the Latino invaders - or what Constitution will we be defending before too long?
Talk about our Constitutional rights in one hand while the enemy incrementally cooks our frog, slowly but surely, until we are weak enough to be finished off...
Proviso: He didn't want McCain-Feingold. He signed that one grudgingly.
I told you what I've witnessed. Schools where the 6th graders are doing 3rd grade work to accomodate the 50% illegal aliens who barely speak English, but are moved along at age level. ER's full of illegals, causing hospitals to shut down. Skilled jobs such as carpenter and plumber being closed to all but illegals who will work for half of the former prevailing wage.
Jim, I don't understand your blindness in this area. We are sowing the seends of the next Civil War in the Southwest. Remember those Serbs who were the majority in their Serbian province of Kosovo, until they decided to open the borders to illegal alien Albanians to lower their wage costs.
Look where open borders for cheap labor got them. It lead to civil war, and finally being kicked out of their own province. I don't want that future.
The American public, as of now, won't support violence and death on the Mexican border, regardless of how many Freepers living in fantasyland think they would.
An ounce of clarity goes a long long way.
Indeed.
Hate to tell you this...Serbs have been a minority in Kosovo since the 1940s.
Bwahahaha. And what, O Travis, is a "real country"?
How generous of you. And may I ask if you actually live in the belly of the beast, as I do?
That would be Southern California of course.
I am opposed to illegal immigration. Just don't want to jettison the constitution trying to prevent it.
bttt
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.