Freep This Poll! - Put Troops on the Mexican Border?

GOPUSA ^ | 6/24/02 | GOPUSA

[Tancredo Fan]

GOPUSA Poll:

Do you agree with Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) that President Bush should place troops on the Mexican border?

[Tancredo Fan]

Ping!

[FryingPan101]

I think every inch of the Mexican Border should be covered by our troops...BUT.... that won't guarantee anything. I invite everyone to read a two part investigative report on murder in Juarez...the Mexican city adjacent to El Paso. Yes, you will see the name of an Egyptian suspect. www.elpasotimes.com (I don't know how to offer a link.)
The reporter is Diana Washington Valdez. It's a pretty courageous piece considering where she lives.

[Geezerette]

I got a message from them saying that my E-Mail address has already voted, and I haven't! At least I could see the results ... Wow!!!! Now if we can just get this message across to Bush & Congress.

g

[madfly]

ping

[Tacis]

Don't know who "GOPUSA" site is, but the leftists at CNN or the DNC couldn't have distorted the issue any better.

"Do you agree with Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo calling on President Bush to place U.S. troops on our border with Mexico?"

"Yes, to protect the United States from terrorism."

"Yes, to protect our economy and our culture from further erosion."

"No, we are an open society founded on immigration."

No, Mexicans are not a threat to our country."

We don't want to stop immigration! We just want to stop the criminals, Mexicans and terrorists alike, who believe that they have an absolute right to sneak into our country. We must never reward past criminal illegal aliens by granting amnesty. If we start a new, monitored program to allow Mexicans to enter our country (just like when you open your front door and allow the plumber to enter your house to peform work that you require him to do) to work, it should also cover those already here who must cycle through it, going back to Mexico and applying just like those who respect our laws. THERE MUST BE NO REWARD FOR PAST VIOLATIONS!!

This silly poll does not state the alternatives and, thereby, distorts the outcomes. This has to be an untra-liberal, extreme left wing site to present the positions like that.

[Twodees]

"Ultraliberal" pretty well describes the Bush GOP anyway. I don't "freep" polls. The whole idea is repugnant to me. It may have been a fun joke when Clinton was in office governing by poll, but to keep it up now is just encouraging these jerks who operate on the assumption that our form of government is democracy.

Thanks for postng their poll positions. I'm with you, they appear to have been written by a Clintonite.

[LisaFab]

I know I'm in the minority on this issue but I believe the idea of federal troops under arms on our soil to repel anything short of an armed invasion would have been an anethema to our founders.

I believe that the border states (backed by federal funding) should institute modern security systems utitilizing unarmed drones and possibly raising some sort of local force to man surveilence equipment and patrol where necessary.

[aculeus]

The US military is busy fighting wars or training to fight wars.

Putting thousands of them on border patrol would be a waste.

If needed greatly enlarge and improve our Border Patrol but leave the US Army alone. It has more demanding things to do than chase border-crossers.

[grania]

Wow...the two "yes" categories totalled 94% of the vote; the two "no" categories only had 4% of the vote!!!

The survey is written in a kind of silly way, as if to imply that their reasons are the only ones to close the border, and on the other hand that people might not have more that one reason to close the border.

But, in spite of what looks like an attempt to confuse, the message couldn't be any clearer. Maybe politicians will see that supporting Representative Tancredo's viewpoints will win votes!

[Tancredo Fan]

It has more demanding things to do than chase border-crossers.

Let me get this straight..... the military has more important things to do than to keep the U.S. from being invaded? Like what?

[inkling]

Exactly how many people would Washington have to draft in order to occupy our southern border? 100,000? 500,000? All that, and then have a million more troops killing Al Qaida around the globe.

As an Arizonan, I don't want eveything from Tucson south looking like the Feds are enforcing martial law. Army checkpoints on major roadways, desert hikers being stopped at gunpoint and asked to produce "papers" -- yeah, that'd solve our problems.

Sorry, but I think we have more important things to do than than hermetically sealing a 1,000-mile desert border to prevent Jose from beginning an exciting career in lettuce cultivation.

[BTW, prayers to all in Show Low and the White Mountains!]

[Tancredo Fan]

Someone sent me this a while back. It might interest you:

Arab Terrorists were here

El Clarin
September 28, 2001
Translation by American Patrol

Before and after the airplane attack which destroyed the Twin Towers in New York, and a section of the U.S. Pentagon, several groups of foreigners of Arab origin were hidden in Agua Prieta and then crossed illegally to the United States.

This comes from investigations made by the FBI, that arrested at least three Yemenites, who in their way to the neighboring country arrived to the border, and they are linked to the bloody events of September 11, and its said that they were smuggled by a band of "polleros" who operated at the border, and was presumably headed by the Giron brothers, who managed to escape.

Last Friday September 21, the FBI alerted the Mexican authorities through the National Institute of Immigration (INM), that they had evidence that in Agua Prieta were hidden illegals of Arab origin. And even gave the addresses of the safe houses where they were, and a day later the "blow ups" started, headed by Luis Teran Balaguer, INM Subdelegate, and Edgar Antonio Gonzalez Rubio, agent of the Federation Public Ministry.

According to the investigation, in a residence located on Street 3, Avenue 39, there were individuals of Arab origin, but when they arrived they only found Central American illegals, and some Mexicans, among them eleven "polleros."

Coincidentally, on Kilometer 153 of the Agua Prieta-Janos road, were arrested three Arabs from Yemen, who supposedly were coming from Chihuahua, but according to reliable sources, the foreigners were fleeing from this city when they realized they had been detected and the "polleros" were taking them to the neighbor nation.

According to reports obtained, for approximately two months the "polleros" were bringing groups of Arabs to this city and after keeping them for a few days, were crossing them to U.S. territory, and they were taking them to Douglas, Sierra Vista, Tucson and Phoenix, Arizona, paying each of them between 20,000 and 40,000 dollars.

[RooRoobird14]

Freeped and bumped

[MeekOneGOP]

Here we go again.........

[inkling]

Okay... So how many troops will Washington have to draft in order to occupy our southern border? And you are cool with southern California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas turning into a Federal armed camp?

As a conservative I'm suspicious of the press, let alone some fishwrap daily out of Agua Prieta (have you ever been to Agua Prieta? Yikes!). And although I'm very concerned about Mexico being a conduit for terrorists, it is FAR easier for them to sneak through our northern border. Shouldn't we seal that one first?

Look, the border and illegal immigration problems are serious and real. I just don't think it's feasible or practical to spend all our limited military resources in a line between San Diego and Brownsville. I'd rather stop terrorism by attacking Iraq and taking severe action against Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran, if they don't get their priorities in order.

[Tancredo Fan]

Whatever.

[Digger]

If you think it is ONLY lettuce picking then I see why it doesn't bother you. Sad situation is that you do not understand the problem.

[Sabertooth]

Militarizing a border is still a monumentally dumb idea.

Think about the abuse of power possible to a rogue executive who can use the military in civilian matters. Think about another Clinton with this power.

Think very carefully before giving a Republican administration new powers you don't want the Democrats to have later.

I dare anyone to accuse me of being soft on the matter of Illegals.

There are ways to deal with the border and ways to deal with Illegals without bringing the military into it. Whatever the political sea-change necessary to accomplish those is no more difficult than the political change necessary to modify or overturn the Posse Commitatus Act. There are ways to turn back the invasion of Illegalss that aren less dangerous and would be at least as effective as militarizing the border.

Attempts to militarize the border are at their very best a complete waste of energy. But they also undermine serious debate on the issue of how to deal with the Illegals, how to discourage them, and how to deport them.

This is so counterproductive. It undermines our credibility in fighting Amnesty, and the Democrats are going to be pushing for a Section 245(i) extension soon to a President all-too-willing to sign it.

Keep your powder dry and let it die.

Thanks for the ping, Meek.

[Mo1]

Attempts to militarize the border are at their very best a complete waste of energy. But they also undermine serious debate on the issue of how to deal with the Illegals, how to discourage them, and how to deport them

Now this I can agree with .. I don't think it is a good idea either ...