Published: Wednesday, May 8 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT
Re: ". . . the borders are more secure now than ever in our recent history .
. . ."Yeah, and the writer knows that because he can see the
border from his back porch in SLC?Take it from one who's been
there recently, and whose family lives and works there -- notwithstanding
Obama-regime propaganda to the contrary -- our border with Mexico is anything
but secure. Drugs, guns, illegal aliens, terrorists, stolen cars and
aircraft, Chinese knockoffs of American products, uninspected beef and other
agricultural imports, unregulated medical and professional services, even
Mexican military units . . . pretty much anything you can imagine, flows freely
across our southern border.And, illegal immigration -- once on the
decline -- has literally exploded, recently, as a result of all the blather on
bi-partisan support for amnesty-based "comprehensive reform."If the writer's unsupported, unsupportable blather is an indication of
the quality of information disseminated by the tiny, unknown organization he
claims to direct, I guess it's a good thing we've never heard of it.
Lots of distortions and half-truths.Based on certain admissions by
Obama Administration personnel, the Administration effectively has been
"cooking the books" on deportation numbers, by falsely counting
"border turnaways" as "deportations." Meanwhile, it has largely
REFUSED to deport and instead has given orders to NOT deport. So really
it's smoke and mirrors.And the real problem people have with
so-called "comprehensive immigration reform" (Why ever in the world are
you using euphemisms? Are you afraid to candidly admit what this really is
about, amnesty?) is that amnesty, or legalization of illegal aliens, is the
opposite of real enforcement, at the border and also in the nation's
interior. Amnesty and enforcement are not complementary principles. They are
opposites."Our economic security, our social stability and our
world moral leadership has been, and is now, based on compassion and
logic..."Another half-truth. It also is based on allegiance to
the U.S. Constitution, and on respect for the rule of law.
Would that be the same kind of "ignorance of facts, repeating of slogans and
myths", that caused eveyone associated with this regime, including the
press, to place preliminary blame for the Boston bombing on "angry white
Christian males"? A big part of securing our border, is to protect us from
fanatical, radicalized muxlims from eastern and mid easter countries, even
though BHO and fellow leftists have big soft spots in their heart for such
I have a dream...that my children will live in a country with no
illegal immigrantsObey the law or don't come to my country!
Haha.. that caused eveyone associated with this regime, including the press, to
place preliminary blame for the Boston bombing on "angry white Christian
males"? What in the world do you listen to? That is a blatantly false
statement. Within two hours of the blasts I stood ten feet from both the CNN
and MSNBC crews and listened to them reporting how they had no idea who had done
this. There was plenty of speculation as to whether this was home grown or
foreign terrorism, and if it was home grown was it a Timothy McVeigh type or a
local Jihadist. Nobody was placing blame however they simply had no
information. BHO and his fellow leftists have a big soft spot for
radicalized Muslims..really? If you believe that I invite you to sit and have a
cup of coffee with one of these radicalized Muslims in an open café
somewhere in Pakistan while one of those little drones is flying overhead.
Re: ChrisWhen did this country become ours? When did we gain the
moral high ground in this issue? Pretty sure a couple hundred thousand Native
Americans would disagree.
Where was the conservative "outrage" for the GOP do something about
border security under GW Bush when the Republicans controlled both houses of
congress?Can anyone tell me the legislation that was passed then?Yes, the borders are still porous today. Just like they have been for
years.Basically, it is much easier to complain about what the other
guy does (or doesn't do) than it is to push YOUR guy to do something.
I fear that the only reason our border is currently "secure" is because
of the economy. Once jobs begin to grow at pre-financial crisis rates, I doubt
the border will remain secure for long. Comprehensive immigration
reform needs to turn off the job magnet (for illegals) permanently, otherwise it
is not reform at all but just a jobs program for Latin America.
Saying because interdictions are up and the problem is fixed is like saying
since you’ve staunched the bleeding from the slit wrists and the patient
is OK, but you ignore the severed femoral arteries. And the blood from the
wrists is still oozing.Just because you plug 1 or 2 holes does not
mean you can deny the 37 other holes.Pragmatist,It may not
have been the lamestream media, but LDS? lib and other liberal posters on the
board were screaming how it had to be some right-wing Christian gun-nut. LDS?
lib even said he’d apologize if it turned out otherwise. He has not, but
has continued to attack conservatives.Claudio,1776 - and again
when the constitution was ratified. The Louisiana Purchase, Treaty of Hidalgo,
and the Gadsen Purchase also had something to do with it. Surprised you know so
little of our history that you would have to ask.
Uber-Conservatives won't feel secure until America looks like the former
East Germany - complete with concrete walls, barbed wire, and machine gun nests
- from Sea to shining Sea.
I guess it depends on how you define secure...
lost in DCWest Jordan, UTIt may not have been the lamestream
media, but LDS? lib and other liberal posters on the board were screaming how it
had to be some right-wing Christian gun-nut. LDS? lib even said he’d
apologize if it turned out otherwise. He has not, but has continued to attack
conservatives.========== I NEVER said right-wing
"Christian".I said right-wing "Religous" nut-job.I was correct about that.And FYI - I did apologized for it not
being a Tea-Partier.Guns are not going to secure the borders.Prosectuting crooked greedy businesses who exploit cheap illegal labor,
thereby encouraging and rewarding them for breaking the law - will.
JoeBlow, legislation passed during the bush administration to build the
fence and improve other border security measures. BO would do NOTHING like that
- IF IF IF there has been any improvement in interdictions, it is BECAUSE of the
legislation passed by the bush administraiton.LDS? lib, thanks
for the apology - didn't think you had it in you.but I see you
are still in denial - radical muslims are NOT right-wing - they are leftist.and it is BO and his ilk that are creating a US stassi, not
Why can't we just all get along and do ONLY legal immigration. The rest of
the world does it that way. Mexico does it that way, Guatemala does it that
way, Brazil, Philippines, Sudan, etc. Problem solved. Viva LEGAL immigration.
lost in DCWest Jordan, UT...but I see you are still in denial
- radical muslims are NOT right-wing - they are leftist.============
Let's look at the evidence shall we...They are
against:AbortionPremarital sexHomosexualityPornographyDrugs and Alcohol and that the West has fallen into
moral decay and they are merely trying to obey God's will to clease the
earth.They believe God's laws supercede Man's lawsand whatever death and destruction they cause, it is God's will and NOT
their own.If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks
like a duck...Pretty much 100% right-wing.BTW - I have
yet to ear any of THAT rhetoric coming from the tree-hugging, bra-burning,
Apparentally the pro-amnesty advocates think if they lie often enough, and get
enough OTHERS to lie for them they can get their way. That only works if people
are misinformed. Commenters here aren't.Prior to 2009 when
border patrol was out patrolling the border and came across folks trying to make
it across they would stop them, usually supply them with drinking water, and/or
maybe some granola bars or other snacks and point them back south.Those
individuals weren't counted as "deportations".After
Obama was elected, they were."Apprehensions" are when the
illegal trespassers (usually) AGREE to be processed through a border patrol
station. They get a cursory physical, usually something to eat, and are sent
back. I think they also get fingerprinted, but I may be mistaken about that.Most of the individuals, if they are about to be apprehended just go back on
their own. Usually just move down the border a ways, or wait a day or two and
try again. They mostly don't want to be fingerprinted."Interdictions" and "apprehensions" are one and the same thing
since 2009.Thats why the statistics are so inflated.
JoeBlowI was here. Actually, I was in high school doing a report on
it for one of my classes. I have had the same positions for each
president and their politics. I did not like Bush for his immigration and I do
not like Obama for his. There is a big problem with inconsistency
in this country on both sides. Republicans will do something and Dems will call
it bad. Then the Dems will do the exact same thing and the Reps will call it
bad. Let's be consistent everybody. If it's bad for one side,
it's bad for the other as well.
"There is a big problem with inconsistency in this country on both
sides."No Argument there from me.I seldom defend the
Dems, but I do point out that the GOP has done the same thing that Obama gets
blasted for daily on these boards.I think that the Clinton Quote is
applicable to both sides."It takes some brass to attack a guy
for doing what you did"Or it could be re-written."it takes some brass to attack a guy for not doing what you didn't
do"I applaud consistency. I find fault in both parties, and say
so daily on this board.
LDS? Lib,you have come out strongly in favor of gay marriage and
abortion and everything else you say the muslims condemn. but just because they
oppose what you support does not automatically make them right-wing. after all,
they welcome the open borders you espouse
"If the writer's unsupported, unsupportable blather is an indication of
the quality of information disseminated by the tiny, unknown organization he
claims to direct, I guess it's a good thing we've never heard of
it."@procuradorfiscal - and exactly where are your facts? Your
numbers? Your stats to back up your claims? You may be right....
but you supply not one shred of evidence to support your statements other than
very thinly vailed opinion passed as fact. If your going to make the above
statement, you sure had better do better yourself.... but alas.... nothing.Convince us. Support your statements with something other than passion.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments