Bush: Militarizing Border Won't Stop Illegal Deluge

Newsmax.com ^ | Monday, Sept. 27, 2004 11:07 p.m. EDT

[HitmanLV]

I agree, but I do think that 'the military on the border' types have a poor grasp of what that entails and means, that's all.

[ApesForEvolution]

Not just sad, but disgusting and dangerous BTTT

[Barlowmaker]

Our soverignity is fully intact.

[Area51]

I have to stop reading this, it's making me ill. Mr. President had a great interview with BOR, but this subject is a loser for him. For both sKerry and Bush...but this one could really get a lot of us dead and bleeding, literally...do they want that? I have to assume yes unless security really is the priority, not a wing and a prayer...



125 posted on 09/28/2004 11:31:38 AM PDT by ApesForEvolution (You will NEVER convince me that Muhammadanism isn't a veil for MASS MURDERS. Save your time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

---

I promise you this. If an attack happens on the US Mainland and it comes from a Border jumping Illegal, Bush is history. The Republican Party is history.

History will be written that it was the REPUBLICAN Party that openly sneered at the American Citizens for votes and cheap labor. That they Refused to do their job of Protecting and defending us.

There will not be another Republican in the white house for 20-30 years. I for one would never forgive them.
GW Bush has me seeing red over this now that he isn't going to do his job he swore on a bible to do.

It isn't like others haven't tried to show them. Asa Hutchinson has had his nose rubbed in it. Dead Americans on American soil is a image that Americans will never forget or forgive.

[Jim Robinson]

Hey, I'm all for sovereignty. National, state and personal.

[HitmanLV]

You are wrong. There is no evidence that Americans, as it stands now, would follow your lead.

Work on developing some clarity of mind.

[radicalamericannationalist]

1. The post in which you replied to asked for the identity of a multilingual, multicultural nation. That America was multicultural at that point, which you seem to admit, negates your attempt to use America as an effective example.

2. The language differences were quite important as they tied into the cultural difference. The urban areas more likely to have non-English speakers were in industrialized regions in the North that had different cultural and economic interests than the agrarian South.

3. Again, this argument assumes you are correct that there were indeed "very large tracts of this country that didn't speak English until the advent of compulsory public education." What were these "vast areas" and what were their percentage of the population?

[citizen]

Point 1 - Yes, overhaul & secure the various welfare & related programs.

2. ...Americans will not be in favor of living in a walled in country...President Chirac: "Mr. President, TEAR DOWN THAT WALL!"

I, nor anyone AFAIK, is proposing America: The Prison. I favor walls where necessary with gates or checkpoints where all of legal status, permanent or temporary, enter and exit as they please. Our southern border warants increased security. Would the wall need to be continuous from the Gulf to the Pacific? Probably not. Israel's wall is not yet complete and is bearing positive results.

3. I'll respect the Lations when they respect our laws, not just laws of entry but all manner of other laws and safety and other regulations. --- China - yes, an economic competitor. The EU? Not hardly, they may get their collective acts together some day but it won't be soon. --- We need to give the Mexicans a big hug, metaphorically speaking, but under our terms. :) Huh? What terms? We already have "our terms" (legal immigration) & Mexico could care less.

4. Capitulation, pure & simple.

5. The 'solution' you describe is almost exactly the current system we have now for legal enrty and assimilation.

I simply don't think the American public is as uncaring or even as unaware as you seem to think on these issues. Nor do I think what would in reality be a total surrender will be the choice picked by an honorable American public.

[ApesForEvolution]

At least someone gets it...Thanks.

[ApesForEvolution]

BTTT

[Barlowmaker]

Okay. I hate the current Chinese ruling despots (although they are a step up from the Maoists). But the Chinese people have been part of China for dozens of milleniums.

That's success.

[JesseHousman]

Stopping these illegal goons at the border is what must happen.

[radicalamericannationalist]

If you think half a million illegals slipping over the border in the year is sovereignty, the word has no meaning.

[ApesForEvolution]

Bump To The Top

Good onya...

[truthkeeper]

The public face of conservatism shouldn't be left to those who would slay nice smiling folks trying to find a better life

Some things just leave me speechless.

[raybbr]

Our soverignity is fully intact.

Huh? With the tacit acceptance of millions of illegals?? How can you possibly claim that? Sovereignty means having a say in who comes into our country and how they will conduct themselves. It means not allowing millions of people to come here unchecked and without documentation. How can you possibly claim it is intact when our own president invites them in? Clearly Bush has open borders in mind for the future of the Unites States. How does that maintain sovereignty?

[citizen]

They tap our paychecks every two weeks, and that's all they need to know about us.

So true. I've been reading about the growing sentiment for the fair tax proposals.

I'll believe it when I se it, but in this case, the President in on the right track.

[Barlowmaker]

If you think half a million illegals slipping over the border in the year is sovereignty, the word has no meaning.

If those 500,000 came here legally on work visas, would you be satisfied?