Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

[dblack]

Pablum for cowards and dummies.

 

[dblack]

It's difficult to do which is why I started out on this thread asking if it were possible that both the left and the right are hoodwinking the people. What if this discussion is a strategy ploy to con you into acquiescing all of your rights in lieu of a false promise to get rid of undocumented foreigners.

Ayup. That covers it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

LEGALY, only emergency health care is possible. But there is NO way welfare type agency's have the skills to pick out the fake ID'S so YES ILEGAL'S get services that are only suppose to be for citizens.
many pay into the system because of they have to but because there illegal cant /don't get to take anything out. . how much money we make off of them I don't know. sure the big company's that hire them make money. home owners that use them save money. would be interesting to know the real figures. some parts of the country they are a real burden
. other areas the cheap farm, ranch, labor keeps prices down & profits up . need some Truthful information. not this hyper mix of fact & fiction.

there is no doubt its a mess. don't get why rich powerful people & big corporations get special permits to bring in temp people, from Ireland, the middle east or any where else.

Illegals don't have to create a fake id to get welfare. They only have to poop out an American and collect it on the behest of their spawn.

I'm sorry, but I have to call you on this:

The welfare is only intended for the American born child. It is not for the parents and they cannot live off a poverty level check intended for one person. Neither does that baby in any way anchor the parents here. So, how come we're calling them anchor babies?

Undocumented parents are still subject to deportation - American born baby or not. Some people will be advocating to change the law, but in reality, the law simply does not exist to make those you call anchor babies citizens. Those children are here by virtue of the 14th Amendment and I know from reading posts here that I'm not alone in questioning the validity of the 14th Amendment. It simply does not pass constitutional muster. It will be up to the voters to study the history of that Amendment, expose it, and then resist it.

Very difficult to do with the leftist media. Don't you remember how they came out in full force when children were separated from their parents just a few months ago? They even got a picture of kids in cages during the Obama administration and tried to pass it off as something Trump was doing.

It's difficult to do which is why I started out on this thread asking if it were possible that both the left and the right are hoodwinking the people. What if this discussion is a strategy ploy to con you into acquiescing all of your rights in lieu of a false promise to get rid of undocumented foreigners.

My observation is that the symptoms people complain about and the reason they support the wall are not one and the same. The rationale or default position of those in favor of a wall has to do with border security. Mike Huckabee, on his most recent tv show, began with the analogy of WalMart having cameras looking at you every moment from the time you arrive until you leave. Of course there are those cameras and listening devices on cop cars that can track your every move.

The problem for me is that some are giving up our Liberty and finding excuses to trash the Constitution just to keep foreigners out. It won't work. We'd be better off admitting that and then work to get those people to become Guest Workers with no expectation of citizenship or welfare. At the same time we have to find innovative ways to get Americans back into the workforce which will diminish any perceived need for the foreigners to be here in the first place.

Let me explain to you what's really going on here. I've said this repeatedly, so those who read my theory can just skip over it.

The Democrat party has become the anti-white party. Why? Most of the Democrats are white themselves! The reason is power. The Democrats long term goal is to have a one-party government with little to no opposition. So how could they accomplish this?

Simple: every other group outside of whites vote a majority Democrat. The Jewish vote majority Democrat. The middle-eastern people vote a majority Democrat. The Asians vote Democrat. This is especially important of the Hispanic community. Blacks? Forget about it.

Once the Democrat party wipes out whites (not in a genocidal way, but a political way) they will have the ability to have this one-party government for eternity. This is why they are working tirelessly to make whites a minority in this country for the first time since our founding.

Think about it. Why is the wall such a threat to them so to the point they are willing to shutdown the government? Why are they (and their activist judges) fighting to keep sanctuary cities and now states? Why do they want to eliminate ICE? Why do they provide aid and comfort to illegals such as giving them drivers license?

The point is, you can't compromise with people trying to wipe you off the planet. It's a very similar situation to the Palestinians and the Jewish. There is no compromise when one side wants the other side totally eliminated.

 

[dblack]

Let me explain to you what's really going on here. I've said this repeatedly, so those who read my theory can just skip over it.

...

I haven't read your theory, but I skipped over it anyway. Am I doing it wrong?

 

[Lakhota]

Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

Why is building the wall RIGHT?

 

[hunarcy]

What is so silly is the reich totally ignores the largest immigration problem is expired visa's. There are more of them than people crossing without permission or documentation.

40%. Of illegals came in legally and overstay. Wall does nothing for that .

So fuck it forget about the rest?

Like I said, RUSSIAN ROULETTE

Funny how the troll wants you to focus on the 40% while ignoring the 60%

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Let me explain to you what's really going on here. I've said this repeatedly, so those who read my theory can just skip over it.

...

I haven't read your theory, but I skipped over it anyway. Am I doing it wrong?

Are you doing what wrong?

 

[bripat9643]

Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

Why is building the wall RIGHT?

Because it's our country, nimrod, not theirs.

 

[Asclepias]

Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

Why is building the wall RIGHT?

Because it's our country, nimrod, not theirs.

Nimrod was the son of Cush and the first king on earth.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

LEGALY, only emergency health care is possible. But there is NO way welfare type agency's have the skills to pick out the fake ID'S so YES ILEGAL'S get services that are only suppose to be for citizens.
many pay into the system because of they have to but because there illegal cant /don't get to take anything out. . how much money we make off of them I don't know. sure the big company's that hire them make money. home owners that use them save money. would be interesting to know the real figures. some parts of the country they are a real burden
. other areas the cheap farm, ranch, labor keeps prices down & profits up . need some Truthful information. not this hyper mix of fact & fiction.

there is no doubt its a mess. don't get why rich powerful people & big corporations get special permits to bring in temp people, from Ireland, the middle east or any where else.

Illegals don't have to create a fake id to get welfare. They only have to poop out an American and collect it on the behest of their spawn.

I'm sorry, but I have to call you on this:

The welfare is only intended for the American born child. It is not for the parents and they cannot live off a poverty level check intended for one person. Neither does that baby in any way anchor the parents here. So, how come we're calling them anchor babies?

Undocumented parents are still subject to deportation - American born baby or not. Some people will be advocating to change the law, but in reality, the law simply does not exist to make those you call anchor babies citizens. Those children are here by virtue of the 14th Amendment and I know from reading posts here that I'm not alone in questioning the validity of the 14th Amendment. It simply does not pass constitutional muster. It will be up to the voters to study the history of that Amendment, expose it, and then resist it.

Very difficult to do with the leftist media. Don't you remember how they came out in full force when children were separated from their parents just a few months ago? They even got a picture of kids in cages during the Obama administration and tried to pass it off as something Trump was doing.

It's difficult to do which is why I started out on this thread asking if it were possible that both the left and the right are hoodwinking the people. What if this discussion is a strategy ploy to con you into acquiescing all of your rights in lieu of a false promise to get rid of undocumented foreigners.

My observation is that the symptoms people complain about and the reason they support the wall are not one and the same. The rationale or default position of those in favor of a wall has to do with border security. Mike Huckabee, on his most recent tv show, began with the analogy of WalMart having cameras looking at you every moment from the time you arrive until you leave. Of course there are those cameras and listening devices on cop cars that can track your every move.

The problem for me is that some are giving up our Liberty and finding excuses to trash the Constitution just to keep foreigners out. It won't work. We'd be better off admitting that and then work to get those people to become Guest Workers with no expectation of citizenship or welfare. At the same time we have to find innovative ways to get Americans back into the workforce which will diminish any perceived need for the foreigners to be here in the first place.

Let me explain to you what's really going on here. I've said this repeatedly, so those who read my theory can just skip over it.

The Democrat party has become the anti-white party. Why? Most of the Democrats are white themselves! The reason is power. The Democrats long term goal is to have a one-party government with little to no opposition. So how could they accomplish this?

Simple: every other group outside of whites vote a majority Democrat. The Jewish vote majority Democrat. The middle-eastern people vote a majority Democrat. The Asians vote Democrat. This is especially important of the Hispanic community. Blacks? Forget about it.

Once the Democrat party wipes out whites (not in a genocidal way, but a political way) they will have the ability to have this one-party government for eternity. This is why they are working tirelessly to make whites a minority in this country for the first time since our founding.

Think about it. Why is the wall such a threat to them so to the point they are willing to shutdown the government? Why are they (and their activist judges) fighting to keep sanctuary cities and now states? Why do they want to eliminate ICE? Why do they provide aid and comfort to illegals such as giving them drivers license?

The point is, you can't compromise with people trying to wipe you off the planet. It's a very similar situation to the Palestinians and the Jewish. There is no compromise when one side wants the other side totally eliminated.

I appreciate your theory. I agree with a lot of it. You have just left a few important players out of the game, so let me share my observations with you and you might want to consider them in addition to what you're thinking.

We are both agreed that this is about POWER. Rather than to fight for power, it makes better sense to flip your opposition. In order to do that you employ Hegelian Dialectics: Thesis + Anti-thesis = Synthesis. Or, in simple English you create a problem (Thesis) and then generate the hysteria and chaos surrounding the problem you created (Anti-Thesis) and you offer up to the people your pre-planned solutions that you had already thought up. They choose the most obvious "solution" (Synthesis.)

As stated, the facts are that manning the border and border security were started by a neo-nazi turned Klansman, David Duke. The self proclaimed Minutemen (who were later exposed as nazis) revived the border security issue. The genesis of the wall idea was promoted by Bill Clinton before it was adopted by the Tea Party Republicans and then Donald Trump.

There is a commonality between Democrats, socialists, National Socialists, and globalists. They want POWER. There is this delusional belief that they can erect a wall and control those within that wall. The reality is, the National Socialists cannot control those inside the wall because most people are non-white OR they hate their own race. The Democrats, socialists, and globalists on the other hand CAN co-exist.

Today, the posterity of the founders who fought, bled and died in order to create our constitutional Republic no longer exist as a political entity. Constitutionalists gave way to conservatism which, in turn, became the Tea Party Republicans. Tea Party Republicans buy into the socialist proposition that building a wall around America will benefit border security. Those people cannot and will not understand that a wall will NOT increase border security. Why?

Study the genesis of this discussion. Manning the border started out by a National Socialist; the wall idea is consistent with the message that Bill Clinton promoted during his presidency. When the Tea Party Republicans argue for a wall, they cite the immigration laws of Mexico; the wall in China (which is communist), or some other third world cesspool and / or nations at war. At the heart of the discussion, those who would have been constitutionalists are now buying into the proposition that only "citizens" have rights. In the view of Democrats, socialists, and National Socialists - along with globalists, man derives his rights from government as opposed to natural, inherent, God given, unalienable, absolute Rights.

If you could build a wall around America and if we all accept the proposition that government grants us our rights, then the non-whites will outvote the whites and continue the anti-white immigration that results in non-whites being wiped out, as a people, but more importantly as a culture of people who live in a constitutional Republic with Liberty. The whites, for whatever reason, cannot or will not delineate between unalienable Rights and citizenship. Neither can those who would have been constitutionalists understand that the rest of the world despises us, as a people and consequently, hate the form of government our forefathers created.

 

[danielpalos]

Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

Why is building the wall RIGHT?

Because it's our country, nimrod, not theirs.

Our welfare clause is general. Our defense clause is common. Where is this alleged wall building power that overrides the express enumerations, enumerated in our federal Constitution?

 

[bripat9643]

Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

Why is building the wall RIGHT?

Because it's our country, nimrod, not theirs.

Our welfare clause is general. Our defense clause is common. Where is this alleged wall building power that overrides the express enumerations, enumerated in our federal Constitution?

It's right there next to the clause that allows government to provide healthcare and Social Security.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Illegals don't have to create a fake id to get welfare. They only have to poop out an American and collect it on the behest of their spawn.

I'm sorry, but I have to call you on this:

The welfare is only intended for the American born child. It is not for the parents and they cannot live off a poverty level check intended for one person. Neither does that baby in any way anchor the parents here. So, how come we're calling them anchor babies?

Undocumented parents are still subject to deportation - American born baby or not. Some people will be advocating to change the law, but in reality, the law simply does not exist to make those you call anchor babies citizens. Those children are here by virtue of the 14th Amendment and I know from reading posts here that I'm not alone in questioning the validity of the 14th Amendment. It simply does not pass constitutional muster. It will be up to the voters to study the history of that Amendment, expose it, and then resist it.

Very difficult to do with the leftist media. Don't you remember how they came out in full force when children were separated from their parents just a few months ago? They even got a picture of kids in cages during the Obama administration and tried to pass it off as something Trump was doing.

It's difficult to do which is why I started out on this thread asking if it were possible that both the left and the right are hoodwinking the people. What if this discussion is a strategy ploy to con you into acquiescing all of your rights in lieu of a false promise to get rid of undocumented foreigners.

My observation is that the symptoms people complain about and the reason they support the wall are not one and the same. The rationale or default position of those in favor of a wall has to do with border security. Mike Huckabee, on his most recent tv show, began with the analogy of WalMart having cameras looking at you every moment from the time you arrive until you leave. Of course there are those cameras and listening devices on cop cars that can track your every move.

The problem for me is that some are giving up our Liberty and finding excuses to trash the Constitution just to keep foreigners out. It won't work. We'd be better off admitting that and then work to get those people to become Guest Workers with no expectation of citizenship or welfare. At the same time we have to find innovative ways to get Americans back into the workforce which will diminish any perceived need for the foreigners to be here in the first place.

Let me explain to you what's really going on here. I've said this repeatedly, so those who read my theory can just skip over it.

The Democrat party has become the anti-white party. Why? Most of the Democrats are white themselves! The reason is power. The Democrats long term goal is to have a one-party government with little to no opposition. So how could they accomplish this?

Simple: every other group outside of whites vote a majority Democrat. The Jewish vote majority Democrat. The middle-eastern people vote a majority Democrat. The Asians vote Democrat. This is especially important of the Hispanic community. Blacks? Forget about it.

Once the Democrat party wipes out whites (not in a genocidal way, but a political way) they will have the ability to have this one-party government for eternity. This is why they are working tirelessly to make whites a minority in this country for the first time since our founding.

Think about it. Why is the wall such a threat to them so to the point they are willing to shutdown the government? Why are they (and their activist judges) fighting to keep sanctuary cities and now states? Why do they want to eliminate ICE? Why do they provide aid and comfort to illegals such as giving them drivers license?

The point is, you can't compromise with people trying to wipe you off the planet. It's a very similar situation to the Palestinians and the Jewish. There is no compromise when one side wants the other side totally eliminated.

I appreciate your theory. I agree with a lot of it. You have just left a few important players out of the game, so let me share my observations with you and you might want to consider them in addition to what you're thinking.

We are both agreed that this is about POWER. Rather than to fight for power, it makes better sense to flip your opposition. In order to do that you employ Hegelian Dialectics: Thesis + Anti-thesis = Synthesis. Or, in simple English you create a problem (Thesis) and then generate the hysteria and chaos surrounding the problem you created (Anti-Thesis) and you offer up to the people your pre-planned solutions that you had already thought up. They choose the most obvious "solution" (Synthesis.)

As stated, the facts are that manning the border and border security were started by a neo-nazi turned Klansman, David Duke. The self proclaimed Minutemen (who were later exposed as nazis) revived the border security issue. The genesis of the wall idea was promoted by Bill Clinton before it was adopted by the Tea Party Republicans and then Donald Trump.

There is a commonality between Democrats, socialists, National Socialists, and globalists. They want POWER. There is this delusional belief that they can erect a wall and control those within that wall. The reality is, the National Socialists cannot control those inside the wall because most people are non-white OR they hate their own race. The Democrats, socialists, and globalists on the other hand CAN co-exist.

Today, the posterity of the founders who fought, bled and died in order to create our constitutional Republic no longer exist as a political entity. Constitutionalists gave way to conservatism which, in turn, became the Tea Party Republicans. Tea Party Republicans buy into the socialist proposition that building a wall around America will benefit border security. Those people cannot and will not understand that a wall will NOT increase border security. Why?

Study the genesis of this discussion. Manning the border started out by a National Socialist; the wall idea is consistent with the message that Bill Clinton promoted during his presidency. When the Tea Party Republicans argue for a wall, they cite the immigration laws of Mexico; the wall in China (which is communist), or some other third world cesspool and / or nations at war. At the heart of the discussion, those who would have been constitutionalists are now buying into the proposition that only "citizens" have rights. In the view of Democrats, socialists, and National Socialists - along with globalists, man derives his rights from government as opposed to natural, inherent, God given, unalienable, absolute Rights.

If you could build a wall around America and if we all accept the proposition that government grants us our rights, then the non-whites will outvote the whites and continue the anti-white immigration that results in non-whites being wiped out, as a people, but more importantly as a culture of people who live in a constitutional Republic with Liberty. The whites, for whatever reason, cannot or will not delineate between unalienable Rights and citizenship. Neither can those who would have been constitutionalists understand that the rest of the world despises us, as a people and consequently, hate the form of government our forefathers created.

I think you substituted the word "hate" for jealousy. Few people actually hate the US. After all, who is the most giving to foreign nations than the US? I'm not just talking about government aid, but private donations to charities and organizations.

Jealous I'm more likely to believe. There are few places in the world where a nobody can become a somebody. For instance perhaps the French may say they hate the US because our gasoline is 2/3 cheaper than their gasoline, but again, it's envy and not hate.

As far as the wall is concerned, we know it would work. How? By other places that did (or now have) walls. While it doesn't solve 100% of the problems in most cases, it greatly slows it down. After all, from time to time, even prisoners break out of jail.

Is there something I think that would work just as good if not better than a wall? Yes there is. Make being in the US illegally a first degree felony carrying a minimum of five years in prison. That would solve our border problem as well as our expired VISA problems.

 

[danielpalos]

Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

Why is building the wall RIGHT?

Because it's our country, nimrod, not theirs.

Our welfare clause is general. Our defense clause is common. Where is this alleged wall building power that overrides the express enumerations, enumerated in our federal Constitution?

It's right there next to the clause that allows government to provide healthcare and Social Security.

Our welfare clause is General and must cover any contingency.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

I'm sorry, but I have to call you on this:

The welfare is only intended for the American born child. It is not for the parents and they cannot live off a poverty level check intended for one person. Neither does that baby in any way anchor the parents here. So, how come we're calling them anchor babies?

Undocumented parents are still subject to deportation - American born baby or not. Some people will be advocating to change the law, but in reality, the law simply does not exist to make those you call anchor babies citizens. Those children are here by virtue of the 14th Amendment and I know from reading posts here that I'm not alone in questioning the validity of the 14th Amendment. It simply does not pass constitutional muster. It will be up to the voters to study the history of that Amendment, expose it, and then resist it.

Very difficult to do with the leftist media. Don't you remember how they came out in full force when children were separated from their parents just a few months ago? They even got a picture of kids in cages during the Obama administration and tried to pass it off as something Trump was doing.

It's difficult to do which is why I started out on this thread asking if it were possible that both the left and the right are hoodwinking the people. What if this discussion is a strategy ploy to con you into acquiescing all of your rights in lieu of a false promise to get rid of undocumented foreigners.

My observation is that the symptoms people complain about and the reason they support the wall are not one and the same. The rationale or default position of those in favor of a wall has to do with border security. Mike Huckabee, on his most recent tv show, began with the analogy of WalMart having cameras looking at you every moment from the time you arrive until you leave. Of course there are those cameras and listening devices on cop cars that can track your every move.

The problem for me is that some are giving up our Liberty and finding excuses to trash the Constitution just to keep foreigners out. It won't work. We'd be better off admitting that and then work to get those people to become Guest Workers with no expectation of citizenship or welfare. At the same time we have to find innovative ways to get Americans back into the workforce which will diminish any perceived need for the foreigners to be here in the first place.

Let me explain to you what's really going on here. I've said this repeatedly, so those who read my theory can just skip over it.

The Democrat party has become the anti-white party. Why? Most of the Democrats are white themselves! The reason is power. The Democrats long term goal is to have a one-party government with little to no opposition. So how could they accomplish this?

Simple: every other group outside of whites vote a majority Democrat. The Jewish vote majority Democrat. The middle-eastern people vote a majority Democrat. The Asians vote Democrat. This is especially important of the Hispanic community. Blacks? Forget about it.

Once the Democrat party wipes out whites (not in a genocidal way, but a political way) they will have the ability to have this one-party government for eternity. This is why they are working tirelessly to make whites a minority in this country for the first time since our founding.

Think about it. Why is the wall such a threat to them so to the point they are willing to shutdown the government? Why are they (and their activist judges) fighting to keep sanctuary cities and now states? Why do they want to eliminate ICE? Why do they provide aid and comfort to illegals such as giving them drivers license?

The point is, you can't compromise with people trying to wipe you off the planet. It's a very similar situation to the Palestinians and the Jewish. There is no compromise when one side wants the other side totally eliminated.

I appreciate your theory. I agree with a lot of it. You have just left a few important players out of the game, so let me share my observations with you and you might want to consider them in addition to what you're thinking.

We are both agreed that this is about POWER. Rather than to fight for power, it makes better sense to flip your opposition. In order to do that you employ Hegelian Dialectics: Thesis + Anti-thesis = Synthesis. Or, in simple English you create a problem (Thesis) and then generate the hysteria and chaos surrounding the problem you created (Anti-Thesis) and you offer up to the people your pre-planned solutions that you had already thought up. They choose the most obvious "solution" (Synthesis.)

As stated, the facts are that manning the border and border security were started by a neo-nazi turned Klansman, David Duke. The self proclaimed Minutemen (who were later exposed as nazis) revived the border security issue. The genesis of the wall idea was promoted by Bill Clinton before it was adopted by the Tea Party Republicans and then Donald Trump.

There is a commonality between Democrats, socialists, National Socialists, and globalists. They want POWER. There is this delusional belief that they can erect a wall and control those within that wall. The reality is, the National Socialists cannot control those inside the wall because most people are non-white OR they hate their own race. The Democrats, socialists, and globalists on the other hand CAN co-exist.

Today, the posterity of the founders who fought, bled and died in order to create our constitutional Republic no longer exist as a political entity. Constitutionalists gave way to conservatism which, in turn, became the Tea Party Republicans. Tea Party Republicans buy into the socialist proposition that building a wall around America will benefit border security. Those people cannot and will not understand that a wall will NOT increase border security. Why?

Study the genesis of this discussion. Manning the border started out by a National Socialist; the wall idea is consistent with the message that Bill Clinton promoted during his presidency. When the Tea Party Republicans argue for a wall, they cite the immigration laws of Mexico; the wall in China (which is communist), or some other third world cesspool and / or nations at war. At the heart of the discussion, those who would have been constitutionalists are now buying into the proposition that only "citizens" have rights. In the view of Democrats, socialists, and National Socialists - along with globalists, man derives his rights from government as opposed to natural, inherent, God given, unalienable, absolute Rights.

If you could build a wall around America and if we all accept the proposition that government grants us our rights, then the non-whites will outvote the whites and continue the anti-white immigration that results in non-whites being wiped out, as a people, but more importantly as a culture of people who live in a constitutional Republic with Liberty. The whites, for whatever reason, cannot or will not delineate between unalienable Rights and citizenship. Neither can those who would have been constitutionalists understand that the rest of the world despises us, as a people and consequently, hate the form of government our forefathers created.

I think you substituted the word "hate" for jealousy. Few people actually hate the US. After all, who is the most giving to foreign nations than the US? I'm not just talking about government aid, but private donations to charities and organizations.

Jealous I'm more likely to believe. There are few places in the world where a nobody can become a somebody. For instance perhaps the French may say they hate the US because our gasoline is 2/3 cheaper than their gasoline, but again, it's envy and not hate.

As far as the wall is concerned, we know it would work. How? By other places that did (or now have) walls. While it doesn't solve 100% of the problems in most cases, it greatly slows it down. After all, from time to time, even prisoners break out of jail.

Is there something I think that would work just as good if not better than a wall? Yes there is. Make being in the US illegally a first degree felony carrying a minimum of five years in prison. That would solve our border problem as well as our expired VISA problems.

The Bible says that "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways." James 1 : 8

You sound much like the former conservative that unwittingly adopted a socialist point of view. If other countries are jealous of the United States, it boggles the mind that you would make an argument for something that supposedly "worked" in another country.

Walls work for communists in communist countries. They work in dictatorships. They work temporarily when you are at war. But they will not work with our form of government. For that reason, you cannot show an example of a wall being built that culminated in a free society.

 

[Lesh]

It's stupid because at best..half of illegals come over the border.

So if the wall ever got built...at what...40 billion? 50 once all the land is taken by eminent domain...it would have to be 100% effective to even stop HALF of the illegals coming here.. And it WON'T be 100% effective.

Not even close

 

[hazlnut]

A- Cost prohibitive
B- Won't work
C- It's racist
D- It would reduce those successfully crossing the border
E- None of the Above

The machine benefits by not having a wall. Business (Republicans) get their cheap labor and (Democrats) get the votes

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

There is no excuse for the Republicans not funding the wall.

-Geaux

Wasting tax dollars on an unworkable solution to a nonexistent problem. Might as well be funding repairs to the moon base before the martians get there.

 

[Thinker101]

It's stupid because at best..half of illegals come over the border.

So if the wall ever got built...at what...40 billion? 50 once all the land is taken by eminent domain...it would have to be 100% effective to even stop HALF of the illegals coming here.. And it WON'T be 100% effective.

Not even close

Yup, and we don't even want to stop half of them...dumbass.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

It's stupid because at best..half of illegals come over the border.

So if the wall ever got built...at what...40 billion? 50 once all the land is taken by eminent domain...it would have to be 100% effective to even stop HALF of the illegals coming here.. And it WON'T be 100% effective.

Not even close

Yup, and we don't even want to stop half of them...dumbass.

Your board name does not match your response.

We have an immigration problem. We could resolve it without a wall. We could resolve the pretexts for building a wall AND address the 60 percent of foreigners that are not affected by the all ALONG WITH those from Mexico and south of there.

 

[Thinker101]

It's stupid because at best..half of illegals come over the border.

So if the wall ever got built...at what...40 billion? 50 once all the land is taken by eminent domain...it would have to be 100% effective to even stop HALF of the illegals coming here.. And it WON'T be 100% effective.

Not even close

Yup, and we don't even want to stop half of them...dumbass.

Your board name does not match your response.

We have an immigration problem. We could resolve it without a wall. We could resolve the pretexts for building a wall AND address the 60 percent of foreigners that are not affected by the all ALONG WITH those from Mexico and south of there.

Yup, sounds like one heck of a plan.