Quantcast
Opinion

Letters: Borders are secure

Comments

Return To Article
  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    May 10, 2013 9:36 a.m.

    m.g. scott
    clearfield, UT
    Tyler D

    Good point, the idea of radical Muslims being either right or left as per our American perception of politics is an apples and oranges argument. I have always wondered how the NAZI party of WW11 Germany was a "right wing" government when the term stood for "National Socialism".

    ============

    They high-jacked the term "National Socialist" as a misnormer to appease and draw support from the blue-collar Germans who wanted stronger Unions and leaned Communist.

    When in fact, the Nazis never owned a single "business" or saw to the equal dispersement of the wealth -- as an actual Socialist would have done.

    They round up and executed:
    Communists
    Liberals
    Progressives,
    Homosexuals
    Immigrants
    the poor, addicts, homeless and the termanally ill.

    They were pro-Military
    Pro-Christian
    and Ultra-National, like a contest to see who could be the MOST German.


    Pretty much verbatim of America's Right-Wing today.

  • wrz Pheonix, AZ
    May 9, 2013 9:15 p.m.

    @Claudio:
    "Pretty sure a couple hundred thousand Native Americans would disagree."

    I think the Indians lost the battles... All except with Custer. And, 'to the victor goes the spoils' have you not heard? That includes the war with Mexico over Texas and much of the West.

    @JoeBlow:
    "Can anyone tell me the legislation that was passed then?"

    Can anyone identify what legislation is needed to be passed? Our immigration laws are just fine. What is needed now and was needed under the prior administration was enforcement of the immigration laws on the books.

    @Tyler D:
    "Comprehensive immigration reform needs to turn off the job magnet (for illegals) permanently..."

    The job magnet will never be turned off. There are too many Hispanic votes at stake.

    "... otherwise it is not reform at all but just a jobs program for Latin America."

    That's what it is now... and it will not change soon, if ever.

  • RRB SLC, UT
    May 9, 2013 8:52 p.m.

    "The leadership of unions representing thousands of immigration agents now contend that the Obama Administration - specifically the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) - is implementing a new policy that forces officials to ignore the law and allow illegal immigrants to stay in this country with no verifiable documentation.

    The concern is clear: the Obama Administration's lax enforcement of our immigration policy now becomes even worse - with border agents claiming they are under threat of losing their jobs if they don't give illegal immigrants a pass."

    The ICE union has a lawsuit against Obama, so far the ruling by a Federal judge has not favored Obama, stating he can not stop ICE from arresting people who break the law.

    Obama counted people turned away at the border as deportations. Other Presidents have listed them separately.

    Obama spent his first four years trying to destroy out immigration laws.

  • wrz Pheonix, AZ
    May 9, 2013 7:41 p.m.

    "...the borders are more secure now than ever in our recent history "

    That doesn't say much. The borders were never secured enough. And never will be. We have too much border and there are too many ways to breach it.

    Furthermore, it's not the border so much that is the problem. The biggest problem is... about 43 percent of illegal enter with visas, but overstay. They are as illegal as anyone crossing the border without permission. Nothing, absolutely nothing is being done about that abuse.

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    May 9, 2013 1:14 p.m.

    I found it interesting that during Obamas recent trip to Mexico, they asked Obama to try to stop the flood of weapons coming into Mexico from the U.S. Ironic that is, because the very fact of people being able to come into the U.S. with drugs and such is the answer to why the guns going south can't be stopped. Sounds like the Mexicans want strict border control going only one direction. I'm sure the irony was not lost on Obama, who had to tap dance around that without being embarrased. Bottom line. Mexico, you want border control for guns. Do it for drugs and people going both ways and maybe you will get what you want. In the meantime, 95% of illegal drugs are still coming in from Mexico. When the drug runners return, I'm sure many bring guns and ammo back.

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    May 9, 2013 1:05 p.m.

    Tyler D

    Good point, the idea of radical Muslims being either right or left as per our American perception of politics is an apples and oranges argument. I have always wondered how the NAZI party of WW11 Germany was a "right wing" government when the term stood for "National Socialism". Truth is, attributes of any movement can cross political boundries. In the case of radical Muslims, they may have some conservative values as was pointed out by DC, but since they seem to be very opposed to any kind of free society with the kind of liberties we value, i.e. religious freedom, free speech, ect. one could definately call them totalitarian. And to totalitarianism is bad whether religious based or secular.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    May 9, 2013 8:54 a.m.

    @lost in DC – “but I see you are still in denial - radical muslims are NOT right-wing - they are leftist.”

    Whenever someone starts by saying “there are 2 kinds of people in the world…” you can be almost guaranteed that the ideas to follow will be more ideological Disneyland than reality. Anyway…

    Radical Muslims are not Leftist or Right-wingers… they are Radical Muslims. They are basically apolitical except for the sake of expediency. You won’t find their ideology in Edmund Burke or Che Guevara, but in the Koran and Hadith.

    To try and fit them onto your antagonistic political spectrum is to ignore reality… but by all means keep riding Space Mountain if it makes you feel good.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    May 8, 2013 10:41 p.m.

    LDS Liberal - you claim "Uber-Conservatives" wont be happy until America looks like East Germany with barbed wire, etc.



    Anyone listening during 5th grade world history would know that post WWII East Germany was run by the soviets - who were extremist LEFT WING big government types.



    The barbed wire and concrete fencing was to keep people WITHIN that oppressive government system; not out. So comparing it to a US border fence is just plan silly. The logic of you post says more about your extremism than it does moderate, neo, or uber conservatives

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    May 8, 2013 5:01 p.m.

    No facts or numbers or references will be coming as glen or rush or sean don't actually use facts or references.

    It's all opinion and poor entertainment as far as I've been able to listen.

  • tenx Santa Clara, UT
    May 8, 2013 4:56 p.m.

    Speaking of Amnesty, did you read that the Heritage Foundation did a study and come up with the paltry figure of 6.7 Trillion that amnesty is going to cost us. All you open boarder supporters get out your check book and pay up. Viva LEGAL immigration.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    May 8, 2013 4:26 p.m.

    Here is the problem with all this "secure our border" rhetoric. Until we require visa's for visitors to come to our country, which none are required.... people can just get in their car and drive across the border claiming they are on family vacation disney. Or they can hop on a plane... and fly to where they want to go.

    You could put a million men, and a wall 50 feet tall..... the door in the wall is wide open to visitors to this country. If they choose to not exit... that is another situation. But as "tourist".... the door is wide open.

    So build your wall. Install gun towers. Plant mines up and down the whole length. Even fly drones. Until we seal off our country to "visitors".... it is a HUGE waste of time.

    "secure our boarder" is again just rhetoric masking as a logical argument.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    May 8, 2013 4:21 p.m.

    "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.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    May 8, 2013 3:50 p.m.

    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

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    May 8, 2013 2:15 p.m.

    "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.

  • TOO Sanpete, UT
    May 8, 2013 1:56 p.m.

    JoeBlow

    I 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.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    May 8, 2013 1:55 p.m.

    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.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    May 8, 2013 1:26 p.m.

    lost in DC
    West 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:

    Abortion
    Premarital sex
    Homosexuality
    Pornography
    Drugs 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 laws
    and 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, Anti-War lefties.

  • tenx Santa Clara, UT
    May 8, 2013 1:18 p.m.

    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 DC West Jordan, UT
    May 8, 2013 1:07 p.m.

    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 conservatives

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    May 8, 2013 12:58 p.m.

    lost in DC
    West Jordan, UT

    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.

    ==========

    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.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    May 8, 2013 12:17 p.m.

    I guess it depends on how you define secure...

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    May 8, 2013 12:01 p.m.

    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.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    May 8, 2013 10:46 a.m.

    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.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    May 8, 2013 10:44 a.m.

    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.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    May 8, 2013 10:33 a.m.

    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.

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    May 8, 2013 10:32 a.m.

    Re: Chris

    When 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.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    May 8, 2013 8:12 a.m.

    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.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    May 8, 2013 8:12 a.m.

    I have a dream...

    that my children will live in a country with no illegal immigrants

    Obey the law or don't come to my country!

  • HaHaHaHa Othello, WA
    May 8, 2013 5:30 a.m.

    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 deginerates!

  • anti-liar Salt Lake City, UT
    May 8, 2013 3:26 a.m.

    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.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    May 8, 2013 1:54 a.m.

    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.