Last-minute bill changes funding for border fence

Washington Post ^ | Oct 6, 2006 | Spencer S. Hsu

[4Freedom]

"What, exactly, do we retain by entrusting power to provenly compromised scoundrels who demonstratively hold us in contempt?"

We didn't have anywhere near as much illegal immigration with Clinton in the White House as we do with Bush. When we had a Democrat president, we at least had a Republican congress that appeared to be fighting for us.

Now the congress is just a rubber stamp for this craven, open borders, one-worlder.

[stephenjohnbanker]

In a word, no.

[Shermy]

.

[philetus]

ets face it, folks
this fence/wall is not gonna be built until we have a leader who WILL DEMAND IT! "

Which I don't think is going to happen.

[Prokopton]

Would you demand a fence on this stretch of the Texas/Mexican border?

In a word, yes. That particular location is in a National park which means the Federal government owns all the land. I'm sure they could find a suitable location for the fence.

[Dog Gone]

Either you didn't click the link or you think a 20 foot fence is much harder to scale than a 150 foot vertical cliff.

[Prokopton]

Either you didn't click the link or you think a 20 foot fence is much harder to scale than a 150 foot vertical cliff.

I went to the link. I don't believe the fence would have to be at that exact spot. Because they own all the land they could use the path of least resistance. Mexicans are risking their lives to cross inhospitable desert every day and many of them are dying. If the fence is built only on the easiest places to cross the border they will risk their lives to cross at the more difficult spots. The "toothpaste effect" has already been shown in areas, like San Diego, where fence has been built and in areas with increased spot enforcement. The point is that the entire border needs to be secured, not just the easier areas.

[Dog Gone]

And that's the only point I was trying to make. We don't need a fence at Santa Elena Canyon because the natural barrier is better than any we fence we could build anywhere along the border.

I agree that we have to deter crossing at all points along our border, but we might as well do it intelligently. The border is not uniform and the fence doesn't have to be uniform in order to be effective.

[LowOiL]

BTTT...

[mthom]

Ill withhold judgment for now but this article suggests the money will be spent on a so called "virtual" fence. Otherwise known as "not a fence". If true its a case of deception plain and simple.

[BradtotheBone]

hmmm, person who wrote this works for The Washington Post. This is the same tactics that are used to divide and conquer, and right before an election too !

[LowOiL]

People have said this is not true... but have yet to produce any source that it was untrue... Washington Post is pretty credible to me, so until I see proof otherwise, I believe this story.

[Plutarch]

The loopholes leave the Bush administration with authority to decide where, when and how long a fence will be built...

Great, they will build a pretty white picket fence 2-1/2 feet tall and stretching all of 50 miles. When it doesn't work they will say, "See...fences don't work, not without comprehensive reform".