Posted on 01/04/2016 6:48:02 AM PST by Isara
Trump never said he was the first to ever think of a wall, he often repeats that both sides of the aisle agree that a wall should be built. He says the reason it has not been built (and he’s NOT talking about a “fence”) is environmental hurdles, the endangered frogs or fishies. The strength he brings to the Wall is that he is a builder and has conquered many environmental hoops. I believe he will get it done as president, Cruz could not do it as senator.
Thanks for posting this.
Trump’s consistantcy is in being inconsistant. Nobody remembers or even knew that when the issue of the Syrian refuse came a-pouring into europe. Scott Walker issued a; No! Not here! We have enough problems, statement. But Trump while slamming Walkers fund raiser which shoved Walkers position off the front pages. Took the opposite, and a we should welcome the Syrian refuse position. Three days later Trump then takes the Walker position.
Then there is Trumps confrontation with the guy from Univision. Who holds a dual US/Mexican citizenship and supports the Mexican claim on US territory as well as demands illegals can vote and own land here while any US citizen entering Mexico to retire there legally cant, Jorge whatshisname. Besides flooding the job market with cheap labor. It would have been a perfect time to confront these issues with a person who supports these Mexican positions. But instead was given a lets be friends pass.
There is no such thing as a quote, Hispanic race, unquote.It is a strawman invented by so called liberals. That term has been applied to those from individual South American countries some of which have governments hostile to US and actually claim parts of this country as theirs, and others which are friendly. They are composed of various races as we are, with the difference being their primary common language is Spanish.
Besides flooding the labor market with cheap labor which reduces job opportunities for American citizens in a diminishing base. Highly infectious comunicable diseases are also pouring through this uncontrolled border creating serious health problems.
This destructive utopian Mexican open border approach of even considering granting those who enter the US illegally through it. Entitlement to all benefits beyond those of what we give to our citizens destroys the value of an American citizenship. It is being promoted by the name callers mostly in socialist circles such as the democrat party as well some republicans who use such terms as nativist promoting racial division .
What we should be doing is taking a very very hard look at our relationship with Mexico along with trade and its myriad misstreatment of Americans as 3rd class citizens and its claims on American territory . There is no doubt there are hundreds of complaints, if not thousands, from American citizens who have retired there. Along with travelers running to American consulates about conditions that are going unreported because of this Mexican policy
While we are expected to allow Mexican citizens enter to our country illegally and offer them preferential treatment over our citizens allowing them to purchase land in their own name and and even voting privledges which they cannot do if they choose to retire in Mexico.
The leading Republican candidates and that includes Trump may mention some of this but thus far have refused to identify the problem let alone properly redress it by suggesting or implementing reciprocity.
Since the Mexicans are permitting foreigners transit through their country for illegal entry into ours. Any person entering illegally through that open border whether a bona fide citizen of Mexico or not should be treated as if they were a Mexican and tossed back to Mexico and let Mexico deal with them. Illegals should be offered the same rights as Americans. No property ownership and voting rights let alone access to the multitude of costly programs comm9ng out of US taxpayer pockets.
If reciprocity were implemented there would be no need to worry about who will pay for walls or border fences.Illegals would leave on their own accord . And the value of being an American citizen restored.
Trump was talking about a legalization amnesty without deportations as late as July 24th 2015.
Universal coverage will be mandated.
What matters is if you believe him when he says he’d repeal Obamacare or build the wall. I do. You don’t. Nothing I can say will change your mind, nothing you can say will change mine.
So I’ll just bid you good day.
Ted Cruz never had an original thought in his life.
He is a government trained LAWYER running a campaign on our dime.
But because Trump is not a lawyer, it's now a disqualifier.
George Orwell would be proud.
Give it up. Those men weren’t the kind of WHORES we have for lawyers now, like CRUZ who lets you pay his salary and doesn’t do the job he was elected to and then they weren’t 75% of the legislatures and executive branches making LAW. Less than half of the founding fathers were lawyers. Lawyers have NO business in those branches and are the reason we have the mess we have today. But you keep defending this mess since you seem to approve.
Our first president, GEORGE WASHINGTON WAS NOT A LAWYER.
Washington wasn't a big-government, silver-spoon, New York real estate heiress either, but we're not excluding those apparently.
Lawyer-bashing is a lot older than you -- or Jefferson, Adams, or Lincoln, for that matter. "First, kill all the lawyers" was a line written by Shakespeare. You ought to try familiarizing yourself with the context of that remark, because it's kind of relevant to the point you're making.
You should be careful about lumping people into the same category before educating yourself on the facts. That "whorish lawyer" Ted Cruz is one of the reasons the Second Amendment was finally recognized as an individual right. Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas are two other "whorish lawyers" who have done more to protect individual rights than you could ever dream of. Plenty of other "whorish lawyers" do pro bono work to stick up for individual rights, whether it be gun ownership, eminent domain, or whatever.
Lawyers have NO business in those branches and are the reason we have the mess we have today. But you keep defending this mess since you seem to approve. Our first president, GEORGE WASHINGTON WAS NOT A LAWYER.
If the Framers didn't want lawyers to be Presidents, Senators, or Representatives, don't you think they'd have put that in the Constitution? Or are we all supposed to abide by Auntie B's Pocket Constitution of It Means Whatever Is Convenient To Me At That Moment?" In any case, you pointing to Washington not being a lawyer just doubles down on you disqualifying guys like Lincoln. Well done.
Less than half of the founding fathers were lawyers.
And nearly half were. Seems that proves my point, not yours.
There are so many holes in the amendment to the Gang of Eight bill, that Cruz offered and which Stryker sites, that it’s clear the author is hoping people will just read his headline and not bother to check the details. Stryker’s proof that Cruz was pushing hard for a border fence (not a wall, but a fence) is an amendment he offered which required that the 700 mile border fence, WHICH IS ALREADY REQUIRED BY LAW, be built. How does he require it? Cruz’s efforts consist of giving 20% of Dept. of Homeland Security’s budget as block grants to the states if the fence isn’t built.
What Stryker ignored, is that legislation like this is often designed to be ignored or bypassed. Even if Cruz’s amendment passed, what makes anyone think that the fence would have actually been built? The kinds of amendments Cruz offered are just ‘feel good’ amendments that can easily be bypassed and/or reversed by future Congresses and Administrations. For example, what would stop Congress down the road, from increasing the Dept. of Homeland Security’s budget by 20% to offset the block grants or for that matter, to completely repeal the amendment at some later time?
It’s one thing to pass tough sounding legislation about building a border fence. We already have that. It’s quite another to actually build it. And it’s quite another to build a wall. To do that you need a President who’s committed to getting it done, not just legislation.
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.