Posted on 08/17/2011 10:42:50 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Rick Perry called the idea of a wall across the entire U.S.-Mexico border “ridiculous” today in a stop in New Hampshire.
“You got strategic fencing in some of the metropolitan areas – it’s very helpful,” the Texas governor said. “But the idea that you’re going to build a wall from Brownsville to El Paso is just -- it’s ridiculous on its face.”
That was in the context of Perry saying how he'd asked Washington for 1,000 National Guard troops and how current efforts at border security are ineffective.
Perry swatted at the Obama administration’s assertion that the “border is safer than it’s ever been.”
“Six week ago, the president went to El Paso and sai the border is safer than it’s ever been,” Perry began. “I have no idea, maybe he was talking about the Canadian border. I will assure you one thing, if I’m president of the United States, the border will be secure.”
(Excerpt) Read more at firstread.msnbc.msn.com ...
Do you not think he has been vetted by now?
How many people outside of Texas know anything about who is in our legislature or who is our agriculture commissioner or who our Lt Gov is or know that Perry was the lesser of two evils both times he ran for governor?
I'm talking national vetting.
They will continue to throw the same things at him that is being done here on the forum.
Yes indeed. And conservatives aren't going to like what they find out about him. Open borders, Dream Act, multinational health care, Mexican trucks taking American jobs, the Guardisal executive order, replacing a conservative on the Supreme Court with a moderate, etc, are not going to play well in most of the country. And most of the country hasn't heard these things yet.
So you can believe his record doesn't matter because he won some state elections, but I doubt that you are right.
A ranching economy based on, say, 10,000 A. ranches and river access as their only source of water wouldn't take kindly to being fenced off from the river. This describes a lot of Texas border counties.
Understand that ranchers don't like illegals traipsing across their property, trashing it out...and shooting at them...either.
Please understand that, in Texas, the situation is not the same as it is in California, Arizona and New Mexico -- simply because of geography.
In the cities, there is a fence along the river. Along with a battalion of Border Patrol vehicles and personnel. Illegals don't swim the river between El Paso and Juarez. Because they can walk thru a border crossing gate that allows maybe a million legal crossings a day.
Then, they can disappear into El Paso...and get transport to anywhere in the USA. Border control thru the cities is then exercised on the highways exiting El Paso -- perhaps 50 miles out. Most border cities are located in desolate territory and highway access is relatively limited and controllable. Far from perfect -- but the only practical solution when the two cities are wed together commercially. Cut off access between El Paso and Juarez...and both cities would die economically.
I'm taking the time to explain all this to you because you're obviously unaware of exactly what the border conditions are in Texas. And that, while most Texans want the border secured, like you, building a fence isn't necessarily the best way to achieve that security.
Instead, why don't we consider why people are coming across the border? e-verify and a more aggressive policing of employment practices would go a long way toward stemming the traffic. As would federal, state and local cooperation on enforcing immigration law (a la Arizona). Plus, a policy of denying welfare money and government services to illegal aliens.
In all cases, effective border security is dependent upon a federal government that has some interest in performing its duties under the Constitution. A simple 180 degree change in federal policy would have a far greater impact than 2000 miles of fencing.
We’ll just have to wait and see SUSSA.
Yep.
Bachmann is the strongest on the subject. She has a B- from Numbers USA. Perry has a D-.
Numbers USA is an environmentalist site. Check out who runs it.
It appears that the Bushes, and their pet Karl Rove, are pushing a Paul Ryan bid. Their money was on Romney (but I guess the numbers on the chances of his victory are in). How is it the Bushes don't get behind Perry? Hmmmmm?
Good post.
Because the Bushes are petty and vindictive is the main reason. But I also suspect that they don’t want any Republican to win this time, thinking that by ‘16 the public will have forgotten how bad the other two were and Jeb can squeak into the presidency. If a Republican wins Jeb will be out of luck in ‘16.
I've seen interviews with border ranchers who want a fence built because illegals constantly cross their property and cause damage and commit theft as they cross. And I expect there are solutions to the water problems some ranchers might have.
Unless there are significant natural, physical barriers in a section of the border, then double fencing and personnel are the only way to control that border short of stationing BP or a military guards several per mile. And that won't happen for many reasons.
But it's the US/Mexico border and not the Texas/Mexico. If some local priorities must be trumped by national priorities, that's precisely what should happen.
And as I've said several time already, letting border state politicians determine what is or isn't done has been and would continue to be a huge mistake, assuming there is ever a real intent to control the border.
Don’t waste your time explaining the border to me. I’ve been to El Pas and Juarez and know the situation along the border is vastly different in different locations. Mainly what you’re doing is giving the local border residents’ point-of-view and that has been too dominant for too long.
Border control is one part of the problem and internal enforcement of immigration laws (including visa overstays) is another part. But problems of internal enforcement are no reason to leave large sections of the border wide open.
If anyone can just come across a legal border crossing, why are there huge numbers of illegal crossing led by coyotes, and tunnels dug under the border and some who try to come by the ocean? Well, the drug smugglers as well as people smugglers, which make it all the more important to control ALL the border where anyone might conceivably cross illegally for any reason.
And there are many people who can’t just enter through a legal border crossing: such as illegals from nations other than Mexico and would be terrorists from other nations.
It’s ridiculous to try and make a case for not controlling the border.
Instead, I'm trying to help you understand some practicalities that apply to the Texas portion of the U.S.-Mexico border (did that description satisfy you?).
Practicalities which might cause Gov. Perry -- whom I am not supporting -- to call a fence "ridiculous". Practicalities which could cause severe economic hardship for U.S. citizens and businesses and, thus, are legitimate concerns.
At the same time, most Texans are in favor of "securing the border". But they want to find the best way to do that, respecting the hardships that it might work on innocent citizens and businesses.
If you have no interest in understanding this quandary and are set on a single, exclusive solution -- irrespective of its impact (as well as its efficacy) -- that's your decision.
I probably already know about all those local “practicalities”. I’ve been to parts of the border and there have been numerous and almost constant news reports from the border since amnesty became such an hot issue in 2006.
If we are ever serious about controlling that border, local “practicalities” will have to take a back seat to national security priorities.
Interesting, we all know they want Jeb to run but too many people say ‘no more Bushes’. It probably irks them that Perry entered the race.
Nope. I need to correct the fallacy of your argument.
The fence at my house keeps intruders from coming in through the “back” way...a way not intended for guests. There is no fence around the front because anyone who walks up to the door is doing things the right way and not trying to sneak in, so no need for a fence. The U.S. has a “front door” too....it’s the several u.s. checkpoints/entry/exit points along the border.... We wouldn’t put a fence before the checkpoint for obvious reasons, just like we dont put a fence around our front door for obvious reasons...
You said my home’s fence isn’t set up to keep intruders OUT? well, what the heck you think it is there for.??? It’s sure not to keep me in or else the lock on the gate would be on the outside instead of the INSIDE? Understand?
If we shouldn’t build a fence at all b/c of tunnels, ladders, etc then why does Perry suggest putting them up in some places? Ladders & tunnels can bypass those too...... duh....
To Tarantino this thing, I dont agree with putting up half a fence either. I dont think we need a fence. I think a fence is a way to pacify conservatives without creating the results we are looking for.
As to your fence, it is most likely built for privacy. It it is made of chain link or wood, there is no way it is set up to keep people out. And if it does not completely surround your house, then again, it is not set up for your protection. Locks only keep honest people from breaking the law.
In reality, security is a concept people create for themselves to allow them to live their life without fear. But security does not exist in reality.
Uh, Pardon you, but I have “thought it through”....
Did I say put a fence in the middle of the river? If a rancher uses the rio grande then why would anyone advocate cutting them off??? And you are being intellectually dishonest by acting as though Perry supports a fence EVERYWHERE except along the river. Not true.
Get him in office and lets see what he does.
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.