- it's too hard to build them in remote places
- people will just climb over or dig under them
- We've tried it already and it didn't work:
Posted on 10/01/2011 6:25:08 AM PDT by BarnacleCenturion
Rick Perry can't get out of his own way. During the presidential debates, he has reviled three immigration issues that Republicans hold dear: passing mandatory E-Verify legislation, rejecting federal and state versions of the DREAM Act, and building a border fence.
About E-Verify, Perry foolishly claims that it would not make "a hill of beans" worth of difference. Regarding the DREAM Act, Perry said that those who disagree with his decision to enact it in 2001 "don't have a heart." As for the border fence, Perry insists that it is "idiocy" to build it.
The debates represented Perry's chance to moderate his immigration rhetoric, more in line with liberal Democrats than restrictionist Republicans, and reach out to skeptical conservatives. Instead, by performing his difficult-to-achieve hat trick, Perry has turned off most of the GOP and has dropped from the top of the candidates' list to also-ran status.
(Excerpt) Read more at lodinews.com ...
If you fix things we will no longer need life long politicians to unsolve all our problems for us.
Round up a few million illegals and set them to building a fence.
Without a doubt, determined illegals could still get into this country. But with a big enough fence, it would be a lot harder.
I have said this before in another couple of threads, and the fence crowd ignored it.
So, you want a fence, eh? We have one here. It is called 18 to 100 miles of sea water between the UK and Europe. A slightly more effective barrier than a poxy 30 foot fence, right? We still get between 600k and 1 million illegals coming in per year.
Italy has 50 to 200 miles of sea as their fence - they get the same sort of infulx - every year.
Don’t talk crap about fences. Boots on the ground!
“Sorry to be stupid.. but what was Prop 187?
I have an idea, but am interested in what it was..”
Here you go...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_187_%281994%29
The courts basically invalidated it.
Worked pretty damned well for China and (unfortunately) East Germany. Or are you denying historical fact? The San Diego fence GREATLY reduced crossings there as well. The Israeli fence reduced terrorism significantly.
The green zone in Iraq? Go back to the WW2 era and look at the barbed wire and ‘fencing’ on battlefields. Can you think of a reason it was there in use? There are a million legit reasons to build a fence and NONE to not do it.
Fences have worked since their creation and just because Rick Perry is AGAINST THEM that has no bearing on their historic effectiveness.
Two words: “Force multiplier”
Foolproof? No. So build it and back it up with patrols, cameras, GP Sonar, Predators etc. But a secure fence is absolutely a cornerstone of securing our border.
Thank you very much :)
Guess I was too lazy to Scroogle it :p
Much appreciated ;^)
Wow..
The first paragraph tell a lot.. I can see why the voters (at the time) wanted to get rid of Davis (besides the economy, at the time)...
ok.. am continuing to read it..
Does anyone remember the video of Pres. Bush at the border with illegals scrambling over a high fence in the background?
If we don’t want illegal immigration, then we have to cut off the jobs offered by employers.
If employers need the workers, then we have to have a well-regulated guest worker program. Look up the Bracero program that worked suceesfully from WWII until the Kennedy administration repealed it to pay off the unions.
Perry needs to talk with officials of Alabama. They passed a strong immigration bill which has withstood scrutiny of the Alabama state Supreme Court.
Heard on the radio yesterday that illegals are vacating the schools & rentals “in droves”. They also must prove citizenship to get ANY kind of state aid & must prove ability to pay for any medical treatment.
Take away the jobs- freebees & they will leave.
Now, if all the other 49 states would pass the same rules, the country could start getting back on it’s own feet & quit supporting intruders.
I am sure you'll agree that while we would all love a 30ft high, impenetrable fence along our southern border, people forget about the river. The fed gov doesn't own the land along the banks of the river -- private citizens do. And they have water rights to it, and I assume they use that water for their livestock, etc.
If we were to build a fence along the US side of the river, it would require the biggest eminent domain land grab in the history of this country.
The wall works in Israel because there is a military infrastructure stationed there to monitor and enforce it. Until our country regards our border as a national security weakness and sets up troops to defend it, the wall , or the lack of a wall, is irrelevant.
Bingo. Fence is probably third on the list of effective border control. No against it, but eliminating the incentives that attract the citizens of other countries to come here illegaly, and diplomatically insisting that other countries discourage their citizens and otms from crossing borders illegally (our borders are the others countries’ borders too) are even more important than a fence.
Very true. Texas was where California was in 1970, but it will take far less time for it to implode because the trickle of illegal immigrants has become a flood.
Wow one of only afew common-sense responses. I wonder why folks can’t understand that when Perry says, “A fence without observation isn’t an impediment”. Folks seem bound and determioned to give Romney the nod, then they’ll scream that we have a true RINO as our only choice. Perry’s not my top pick, but I think it’s stupid to trash him unless we have a super candidate sitting at the top; until then we need to keep all potential contenders available until we are sure Romney won’t be the “one”.
Only when manned with troops with orders to shoot to kill.
That's why Rick Perry wants an open border, a welcoming atmosphere for illegals and opposes e-verify.
Rick Perry is for sale. He always has been and always will be. He's a cross between Joe Isuzu and Elmer Gantry.
I’m totally for that.
California wasn’t today’s California in 1970. Ronald Reagan was governor and George Murphy was in the Senate. Illegals destroyed the state - from ruining its public schools to bankrupting hospitals.
Texas is on the same collision course, but Texans are simply too arrogant to realize it.
Go Lions!!!
- it's too hard to build them in remote places
- people will just climb over or dig under them
- We've tried it already and it didn't work:
He wants illegals in Texas for the agriculture industry as cheap labor.
Perry simply doesn't realize that he's running for President of the United States and needs to do what's best for the entire US, not the parochial interests of Texas agriculture.
The Federal Government has been about destroying this country with its polices for several decades.
Allowing rampant illegal immigration is one way to destroy it. Obama's the fast track, while Bush/McCain were destroying the country at a slower pace.
Fortunately for American and unfortunately for Perry, allowing illegal immigration is a deal-breaker for a majority of GOP voters. Destroying the country through illegal immigration or destroying the country through Statism of the Obamaniac variety is still destroying the country.
Perry's going down, unless he turns around on this issue.
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.