Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

[Flopper]

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

You you won't even HAVE a country without strong defensible borders which includes a wall.

we have a refugee problem not a common defense problem.

People who illegally crash our border are NOT refugees they are ILLEGAL ALIENS!! A refugee is NOT a refugee until identified as so by our border authorities. How can you be so ignorant?

Refugees do not come to the US border. They apply for refugee status through any us embassy, the UN, or a private organization. Only people seeking asylum apply at the border.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

Oh, that reverse psychology guilt trip thing again? You all tried that multiple times with gun discussions. When are you on the left going to realize that doesn't work? It's painfully transparent.

I've noticed that the pro-wall people are ALWAYS blaming the left for being against the nutty wall idea. The facts are that I am a Republican as are the majority of the people in the U.S. Senate. When push comes to shove, most Republicans are against the nutty wall idea.

Ray, you cannot come to grips with the fact that a wall is a socialist solution looking for a problem to solve. When people show you instances when a wall does not work, you are complaining about how far back into history the other poster went to prove the point. Even going back to BIBLICAL times, walls have not been long term solutions for much of anything.

Those, such as yourself, like wailing about the damn wall, but cannot tell us a single problem you're really addressing. If those with a few IQ points show you what's wrong with the pretext you rely on, you want to move the goal posts.

I really wish you would quit blaming opposition to the wall on the Republicans. The only reason most of them are supporting idea is in the best interests of party unity so that other legislation does not get bogged down AND the fix is in. Once the wall is fully funded and Donnie gets his win, you can kiss that gun in your avatar good-bye.

For everything you gain there is something lost. Trump isn't God. He is playing the Art of the Deal. You're simply too ignorant to ask what the real cost - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of legislation (legislation that will affect YOUR Liberties) does this nutty and INEFFECTIVE wall idea cost.

Mr. Rockwell, I appreciate your concern and acknowledge your humanitarian side, but please read the rest of the watchdog's article of which I am quoting before you go too far down the road to letting sidewinders such easy access to the tax money we are presently paying if you have a few minutes:

Analysis: Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers $116 billion annually ​

With ongoing violent protests in favor of amnesty for illegal aliens, immigration reformer advocates point to exponential costs taxpayers already pay for illegal immigrants, and how much more taxpayers would spend if they were given amnesty.

According to the most recent analysis by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), one illegal immigrant living in America today costs U.S. citizen taxpayers about $8,075. In total, illegal aliens cost American taxpayers $116 billion annually.

FAIR researchers note the increasing costs of illegal immigration is a “disturbing and unsustainable trend.” Costs to taxpayers have risen by nearly $3 billion since 2013, when illegal aliens’ total cost to taxpayers was $113 billion, according to FAIR.

The rest of the story: Analysis: Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers $116 billion annually
​

$116,000,000,000/ 300,000,000 = $387.00 for every man, woman, and child living in this country right now, and half of them either have no income or are living on welfare, student loans, off their parents, or whatever, which doubles the ante to $773.00 for everyone earning wages. Why do people who work within the poverty status having to pay a noncitizen to get free housing, free food, free education, free utilities, free telephones, and everything else?

And if the government fixes it and poverty status taxpayers don't see a rise in their taxes, that leaves working parents trying to raise a family that omission, which means, they're having to pay about $5,000 apiece for this anomaly rather than save that for a rainy day or give donations to libraries, churches, museums, and other charitable causes.

Maybe my math isn't 100% perfect, but it could be low ball if we're forgetting other things than watchdog.org has discovered. The math doesn't lie.

Edit: One hundred and sixteen billion a year is what we're paying

​

I don't play to the humanitarian side. I've already exposed WHO the organizations you cite really are. A mind is like a parachute. It only operates when it's open.

The build the wall advocates make an idiotic claim about how much so called illegal aliens "cost," but they NEVER examine the other side of the ledger in order to understand why they are here. The reason I call their method idiotic is that it is BLATANTLY dishonest as if the rest of society is too stupid to examine the three most important facts:

1) As much as it makes Tea Party Republicans cringe, there are two sides of an accounting ledger and the supposed facts you cite do not figure in how much foreign labor contributes and how much wealth they create

2) The people on this thread, advocating for the wall, fight tooth and nail against the effort to rehabilitate those who are disenfranchised and get them working so that there is less demand for foreign labor

3) Tea Party Republicans want to keep a segment of their own people locked out of society and then blame the people that take the jobs Americans CANNOT take due to double minded people that want to keep some Americans from getting a job AND denying employers their unalienable Right to hire the person they want to hire for the job.

So you against minimum wage laws, since Illegal's work under the table


.

Yes, I am against minimum wage laws. Who an employer hires and how much they get hired for is a personal matter between the employer and the potential employee.

For once, hear me out:

Even with foreign laborers here and no minimum wage laws, the government has MANY options. For example, local counties can figure out how much it costs to live in that county. Then they could ask potential businesses how much they intend to pay their employees and what percentage of the jobs they will offer to local residents.

If the county don't get the answer they want, they don't issue the business license.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It has nothing to do with the fourth amendment. Your criminal records are not your personal property, it's governments property.

And the United States government has no Right or duty to share those records with anyone.

Nor are they restricted from it either. If a politician wants my vote, he or she better do what they can to not hide things from me that I need to know about.

Yes, they ARE restricted. That is why you have a Fourth Amendment. You simply want to circumvent it with a records search without a warrant via a proxy.

One more time since you obviously don't get it: it's not the persons property. It's property of the government. The government can do whatever it wants with that information including making it public. The Fourth Amendment prohibits GOVERNMENT from seizure of your PERSONAL PROPERTY that is in your possession. Criminal records are not in your possession, therefore there is no way the government is violating your Fourth.

Your first argument was that the protection covered the federal government - now you're moving the goal posts once again.

Information obtained by the government ultimately belongs to the individual. That is the essence of a Republican form of government.

The Fourth Amendment guarantees us a Right to be secure in our "papers." Your idiotic argument don't hold water and you know it. You're embarrassing yourself with strawman arguments, moving the goal posts and filibustering with horse manure. Your "papers" is inclusive of government records.

You may like the idea of the government circumventing the Constitution and spying on Americans via proxy by giving the general public access to data on individuals, but one day YOU personally are going to learn the cost.

I'm not moving anything. Government CREATES records on people. Therefore it is government records. It's their property--not the individual they are creating records for. If an individual creates a record........let's say a tax form, gives it to the government, it is still personal information that the individual gave to the government. Therefore it is protected unless ordered to be seen by a judge for some reason.

The media reports on most of the serious cases such as rape, murder, serious assault and so on. It's not a private thing. Therefore anybody has access to that information because it was held in a public setting like a court. The media reports when the crime happens, reports when an arrest is made, gives the name and even city of the offender, and reports the outcome of the trial. It's not personal and it's not private. They are even gone so far as to report on people abusing their animals for crying out loud.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Plenty of liberals have used the exact same arguments. There are no new arguments in this debate. Either your for the wall or you're against it. In the latter case, you lie to support your position. That's the bottom line.

The only thing you have not lied about thus far is that you're either for the wall or against it.

I'm against it and know there are better ways to secure the border. Admit it, you don't care about anything but the wall. You'd sell your soul for a wall. You don't even know what's being traded off in order to get it built.

No liberal has ever quoted me; I've never quoted a liberal and they do NOT make the same arguments I do.

You and the liberals are both against the wall because a wall would work. What more do we need to know?

The wall would work to expand the POLICE POWERS of the state at the expense of our God given Rights; it will NOT work because the United States of America is not a communist country; however, after you get your silly wall it will be.

Only Communist countries secure their borders? And how would a wall change an entire system of government?

Guess what? I won't lose one right if we get that border wall.......not one. Which rights do you think you'd be losing?

What absolute dishonesty stupidity. Communists, dictators and PEOPLE AT WAR use walls. All others use other forms of solutions to resolve the problem and secure their borders.

Lmfao you stupid .

 

[MaryL]

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

What is wrong with building the wall? I voted for Trump. Trump is wrong, like the liberals. We need to tear down the border wall. What we really need make a national identity card. Linked to fingerprints. You don't get a job if you can't prove your identity linked to your real immigration status . Why Replicratrats are so opposed to that, boggles my mind.

 

[Flopper]

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

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

Oh, that reverse psychology guilt trip thing again? You all tried that multiple times with gun discussions. When are you on the left going to realize that doesn't work? It's painfully transparent.

I've noticed that the pro-wall people are ALWAYS blaming the left for being against the nutty wall idea. The facts are that I am a Republican as are the majority of the people in the U.S. Senate. When push comes to shove, most Republicans are against the nutty wall idea.

Ray, you cannot come to grips with the fact that a wall is a socialist solution looking for a problem to solve. When people show you instances when a wall does not work, you are complaining about how far back into history the other poster went to prove the point. Even going back to BIBLICAL times, walls have not been long term solutions for much of anything.

Those, such as yourself, like wailing about the damn wall, but cannot tell us a single problem you're really addressing. If those with a few IQ points show you what's wrong with the pretext you rely on, you want to move the goal posts.

I really wish you would quit blaming opposition to the wall on the Republicans. The only reason most of them are supporting idea is in the best interests of party unity so that other legislation does not get bogged down AND the fix is in. Once the wall is fully funded and Donnie gets his win, you can kiss that gun in your avatar good-bye.

For everything you gain there is something lost. Trump isn't God. He is playing the Art of the Deal. You're simply too ignorant to ask what the real cost - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of legislation (legislation that will affect YOUR Liberties) does this nutty and INEFFECTIVE wall idea cost.

Mr. Rockwell, I appreciate your concern and acknowledge your humanitarian side, but please read the rest of the watchdog's article of which I am quoting before you go too far down the road to letting sidewinders such easy access to the tax money we are presently paying if you have a few minutes:

Analysis: Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers $116 billion annually ​

With ongoing violent protests in favor of amnesty for illegal aliens, immigration reformer advocates point to exponential costs taxpayers already pay for illegal immigrants, and how much more taxpayers would spend if they were given amnesty.

According to the most recent analysis by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), one illegal immigrant living in America today costs U.S. citizen taxpayers about $8,075. In total, illegal aliens cost American taxpayers $116 billion annually.

FAIR researchers note the increasing costs of illegal immigration is a “disturbing and unsustainable trend.” Costs to taxpayers have risen by nearly $3 billion since 2013, when illegal aliens’ total cost to taxpayers was $113 billion, according to FAIR.

The rest of the story: Analysis: Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers $116 billion annually
​

$116,000,000,000/ 300,000,000 = $387.00 for every man, woman, and child living in this country right now, and half of them either have no income or are living on welfare, student loans, off their parents, or whatever, which doubles the ante to $773.00 for everyone earning wages. Why do people who work within the poverty status having to pay a noncitizen to get free housing, free food, free education, free utilities, free telephones, and everything else?

And if the government fixes it and poverty status taxpayers don't see a rise in their taxes, that leaves working parents trying to raise a family that omission, which means, they're having to pay about $5,000 apiece for this anomaly rather than save that for a rainy day or give donations to libraries, churches, museums, and other charitable causes.

Maybe my math isn't 100% perfect, but it could be low ball if we're forgetting other things than watchdog.org has discovered. The math doesn't lie.

Edit: One hundred and sixteen billion a year is what we're paying

​

You do realize that you are referencing data from Federation for American Immigration Reform, FAIR, an organization dedicated to not only stopping illegal immigration but also legal immigration, not exactly and independent source.

 

[Wyatt earp]

There is nothing off topic about it. Democrats are born liars. As Limbaugh said repeatedly, when Democrats want to win elections, they talk like Republicans. The Democrats never wanted a wall. If they did, it would have been built in the first two years of Obama, or the first year of Clinton. Much like Welfare Reform, they simply state they are for it when they are really not.

But do tell (since you believe their BS) what Democrat President ever took action on building a wall? More importantly, what Republican ever fought a Democrat President from building one?

Starting to get the picture yet? If not, sleep on it, and maybe it will come to you.

You have a very limited (if any) capacity to see how politics work.

The objective of the NEW WORLD ORDER is to seize all the power and make resistance to tyranny an impossibility. Why stop at with just the wall when sheeple will screw themselves out of the Bill of Rights for the illusion of a win on the nutty wall idea? They win two fights for the price of one - and useful idiots will assist them in converting our Republic into the world's shining example of a POLICE STATE?

It's difficult to have a serious discussion with you Black Helicopter people. If you want to discuss issues, do it in reality, not television movies.

It's impossible to have a discussion with those of you who think Rush Limbaugh is an informed political strategist. He is an entertainer.

Then why do you keep bringing him up?

You sound like a parakeet, always rehashing what Hush Bimbo said.

You and the liberals are both against the wall because a wall would work. What more do we need to know?

The wall would work to expand the POLICE POWERS of the state at the expense of our God given Rights; it will NOT work because the United States of America is not a communist country; however, after you get your silly wall it will be.

Only Communist countries secure their borders? And how would a wall change an entire system of government?

Guess what? I won't lose one right if we get that border wall.......not one. Which rights do you think you'd be losing?

Nobody builds walls today, because they don't work, and they have never worked in all of history. They give a false sense of security, though.

Only a idiot would spend $25 billion dollars on something that has never worked throughout history. Even in Biblical times, Joshua fought the battle of Jericho and the walls came tumbling down! Look at all of the people who escaped from East Berlin, despite the Wall. The Great Wall of China was abandoned after the Ming Dynasty, which built most of the Great Wall we see today, because the last army that overran the Great Wall and defeated them thought it was a waste of time and money.

Gated communities - only in America. They tried them in Canada and they were a "no sale". We're not afraid of our neighbours. But I am reminded of the Trayvon Martin case. It was a gated community and yet it had been plagued by break-ins. That's why Zimmerman was following Trayvon - because he suspected the kid was casing properties for break-ins. If walls keep the bad guys out, why was Zimmerman patrolling the neighbourhood at all?

Criminals like easy access to their targets. They want to get in and then get out quickly. Do gated communities work most times? Yes. All the time? Perhaps not. It really depends on the area.

Will a wall stop all illegals? No it won't. Will it reduce illegals and drugs to a more tolerable level, yes it will.

While you relish in ancient history, we in modern times know walls and borders do work.

Homeland Security secretary: Border walls work. Yuma sector proves it.

Where do Border Fences work? Everywhere

https://nypost.com/2018/01/13/we-already-have-a-border-wall-and-it-works/

Hungary credits razor wire border fence for almost 100 percent drop in illegal migration

What your sources are not revealing is that they took OTHER precautions - which you conveniently ignore.

What's that gibberish?


I bet you go to a plumber to get an enema , instead of going to a doctor right?

.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Because front doors and gated communities are likewise immoral. Anyone who has a front door hates everyone outside their house, especially if they ever lock it. If they were truly humane, they would have an "open door" policy. People in gated communities are even more immoral, obviously.

Israel's West Bank border wall has worked remarkably well. That's the problem. Liberals know the wall would drastically curtail the flow of illegal immigrants.

Because building walls is the province of private property owners, not government.

That is a point well taken. If the wall must be built on private property, it then calls into question how far we will go in allowing the government to abuse eminent domain abuse. BTW, BEFORE 9 / 11 the same people worrying about a wall were worried about government over-reach with eminent domain abuse. Times change.

Wow, you really are off your rocker. Public records equate to a New World Order? And let me see this evidence that 30% of inmates never did anything wrong to be imprisoned; not that I believe you have any credible link (but it will be fun if you try to post something) however I just want to see where you make this stuff up from.

Yes, criminal records are government records, and nothing in the Constitution "prohibits" government from sharing those records with the people. It would be an injustice to not warn people of potentially dangerous people. But I'm sure in the name of privacy, you wouldn't mind a rapist to move in next door to your mother or sister without your knowledge.

If you would not believe it, then there is no point in posting a link. It would be wasted verification.

One thing is for sure. You live on this board to argue the wall as if it were your lifeblood - your religion. Yet you fail to comprehend simple truths. For example:

Not too long back the liberals wanted to declare that any veteran who had been diagnosed with PTSD be denied the Right to keep and bear Arms. You won't believe that either, but it's true. The point is, the liberals would use your mental health records to deny you the Right to keep and bear Arms.

You argued against ADD / ADHD, claiming you are afflicted with such, but then denying that you are not on the drugs for it. Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but, if you have a real condition, you either have it or you don't. If you're born with juvenile diabetes, you have it. You don't wake up one morning and say I feel fine so I must be cured.

You cannot understand that I'm sometimes on YOUR side for IF ADD / ADHD were real conditions and IF you were not on your meds, the liberals would most assuredly pass legislation to address people like you. IF you think a person's criminal record is something the public should know about, then ditto for their mental health records.

WHEN mental health records become fair game, then you can be denied the Right to keep and bear Arms as well as be turned down for a job because you have a "mental health record." Does it matter that you went to see the psychologist because you lost interest in sex or that you needed a referral from a psychologist to go out of network and be hypnotized so that you could quit smoking? HELL NO. It will be just like a "criminal record." Nobody is going to read the transcripts nor weigh the value of the treatment nor more than they read court transcripts to find out that you were threatened with pleading guilty or facing a maximum prison sentence when the facts clearly dictate you were innocent. I leave you with the wisdom of Thomas Paine:

"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

Read more at: Thomas Paine Quotes

You're right about one thing, I have no idea where you're at half the time.

ADD is difficulty paying attention or your mind drifting off of a subject. It's something you can live with without taking medication. We were talking about criminal records, not mental records. You keep detouring the subject all the time.

What you don't understand is the Doctor/ patient relationship is sacred. Criminal records are not. Doctors take an oath to protect the confidence between themselves and their clients unless they believe a serious threat to the public is at large.

The government puts guardrails on our roads so you don't accidentally drive off a cliff or into a river. The government forces companies to put warnings on medications and various devices so you don't get hurt. The government forces companies to put something in front of dock doors so an employee doesn't fall out of it or a tow motor drive off of it. The government regulation is that we truck drivers chock our wheels (putting a rubber or metal wedge under the tire) even though tractor-trailers have two independent brake systems that make it virtually impossible for the system to fail.

In other words, government takes measures to insure our safety. So if government is aware of a potentially dangerous person; a person who may cause me serious grief; a person who may be a threat to my business or family, it's governments duty to warn me of this potential--not hide it from me so I have no idea.

No, it is not the government's duty to warn you of a "potentially" dangerous person. It maybe governments duty to warn you of "known" dangerous person.

No, a person who is a criminal is potentially dangerous. The government is we the people. When the government sends somebody to jail, we the people sent them to jail. We have a right to know who our government sent to prison for our own protection.

Potentially dangerous and know to be dangerous are not the same.

And therefore, the public doesn't have the right to know who the potentially dangerous people are?

Let me ask: if a convicted child molester moved to your neighborhood, wouldn't you want to be notified of that if you have children or grandchildren of a young age? Or there was something suspicious about a character moving in, you have no ability to learn about this person? And if you say no, you wouldn't want to know about it, what then if the con harms your children, rapes them or tricks them into taking dangerous narcotics?

I think you'd be pretty pissed about it because government knew that was a possibility, but restricted you from knowing about it so you couldn't take extra precautions.

 

[Wyatt earp]

You sound like a parakeet, always rehashing what Hush Bimbo said.

How do you know what he said? I don't bring up Rush, you do. You have this problem of thinking people are saying something they never said.

What your sources are not revealing is that they took OTHER precautions - which you conveniently ignore.

WTF difference would that make even if it were true. The fact of the matter is border walls work. They work around the world, they work here, and they will work even more when more wall is erected.

When I'm traveling about in town, I get a few minutes of Rush here and there several times a week. So, when you babble on about your precious wall, it's pretty evident that you are getting your info from Rush and / or the same sources he gets his drivel from.

A border wall will not work in a free society. They work in totalitarian regimes for a reason. I can explain that simple concept to you, but I cannot understand it for you. You want to live in the ultimate POLICE STATE; I don't. End of story.

We already have 600 miles of walls, we do live in a free society , that protects us from rapist killers in mexico


.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

You sound like a parakeet, always rehashing what Hush Bimbo said.

How do you know what he said? I don't bring up Rush, you do. You have this problem of thinking people are saying something they never said.

What your sources are not revealing is that they took OTHER precautions - which you conveniently ignore.

WTF difference would that make even if it were true. The fact of the matter is border walls work. They work around the world, they work here, and they will work even more when more wall is erected.

When I'm traveling about in town, I get a few minutes of Rush here and there several times a week. So, when you babble on about your precious wall, it's pretty evident that you are getting your info from Rush and / or the same sources he gets his drivel from.

A border wall will not work in a free society. They work in totalitarian regimes for a reason. I can explain that simple concept to you, but I cannot understand it for you. You want to live in the ultimate POLICE STATE; I don't. End of story.

Yes, I know. You want to live in an invaded state instead.

What you people on the left don't understand is that we turn on right-wing radio because the program is based around their audience--not the other way around. Unlike your leftist MSM broadcasts, nobody tells us what to think and we are not easily brainwashed.

True story: Many years ago I started to become interested in politics, but knew little about it. I tried reading the paper but it was difficult to follow.

One day at a family doing, my father and I started to argue about social issues. It's something me and my father enjoy doing. My brother-in-law was bringing dinner to the table laughing. He said to me "you must be a diehard Rush Limbaugh fan!" I heard of the guy; this was when he first came to Cleveland, but I didn't know who he was or what he was about. I was younger and only used the radio for rock music.

Some time went by and the Democrats did something to really piss me off. I forget what it was now. But in any case, I remembered what my brother-in-law said to me, and I finally found this Limbaugh guy.

I was amazed. I really thought the country was turning Communist. But when I listened to Limbaugh, it was like somebody was stealing my thoughts and broadcasting them over the radio.

So how did you become so brainwashed that right-wingers only parrot Limbaugh and Hannity? Because it's what we've been accusing the left of for years, and they are trying to turn it around on us because they know they are guilty of just that.

We on the right can explain our convictions. Many on the left can't. They are just told what to think, not why they should be thinking it. It's why they stumble and fall when you ask them what Voter-ID has to do with race? They don't know why they think it, but were told to think it. Or why they believe disarming society will make the criminals disarm as well? They can't explain their position, but only know that disarming good people will make the criminals stop.

You are a VERY foolish individual. I was a constitutionalist and patriot before you were a gleam in your daddy's eyes. I knew Sean Hannity personally BEFORE he became the big deal he is today.

I point out to my fellow right wing friends and family that Hannity drew his paycheck from a company that was owned by a Board of Director of the Council on Foreign Relations and a Saudi Prince, most of people cannot connect the dots. It's pretty naive to think that organizations like the CFR (who are diametrically OPPOSED to the message you're hawking on this site) would allow people to advocate against them on their dime - while paying the right wing mouthpieces a fortune to spew the moronic "solutions" they promote.

What in the Hell short circuits in that vast expanse between your ears that I see the problem as clearly as you, but disagree with the solution? Tell me you're not that freaking stupid. Please tell me that.

You hover over this site 24 / 7, protecting your only cause in the world - a damn wall - as if it were your daughter's cherry. Yet you expect me to believe that the REAL LEFT, the CFR, not only allows you access to the Hannitys and Limbaughs, but pays them big bucks to spew stuff that contradicts the goals and objectives of the CFR. You're out here posting horse dung as if it were manna from heaven. Do you not understand the dichotomy?

Hannity was a reasonable guy until the left began lining his pockets. Today, he and Limbaugh are lackeys; they are entertainers and if they advocated a REAL constitutional approach to the issues, they would be unemployed.

 

[Wyatt earp]

It’s a waste of money .

View attachment 236224
It's a waste of skin.

Only a colossal dolt would argue against protection of one's own border. The Pentagon has misplaced more money MANY TIMES OVER over the years than what the wall would cost to build.

AND THAT IS WITHOUT EVEN CONSIDERING THE BILLIONS AND BILLIONS (AND BILLIONS) WE WOULD SAVE IN NOT-WASTED RESOURCES ONCE IT IS FINISHED.

PROVE ME WRONG. Once the wall is built, if it turns out to be a colossal mistake like you predict that backfires in our faces, we can always TEAR IT BACK DOWN, melt the steel, and use the metal to make free housing for illegal Latinos.

It is HIGHLY disingenuous for anyone to suggest that those opposed to the wall don't care about border security. Not having a case, the build the wall proponents are slinging the scare word liberal around and making a baseless and false accusation.

The people once known as patriots and constitutionalists had the issue under control and were successfully working toward permanent solutions to this issue. History has already proven you wrong.

The thing of it is, the really ignorant people are those who are for the wall, but against using their common sense. Rather than call people names; rather than question the motives of others, you should sit down and ask yourself what happens if you get the wall - and be OBJECTIVE. How will the law affect YOUR Liberty?

Having ninja clad, machine gun toting federal mercenaries patrolling a wall that cannot stop free enterprise nor cure people of their drug habit only brings cries for a bigger and bigger - and more intrusive government. With that more and more of your Liberties go south until you cannot reclaim them. I'd rather fight that inevitability because, once the wall is built, and proves ineffective we will not be able to stop it any more than we stopped the once TEMPORARY tax known as the income tax. And what has the 16th Amendment brought you besides a private corporation of murderers that makes the average American quake in their shoes? Most people would rather face an armed robber than the IRS. Yet you don't learn from history.

The border security says the 600 miles of walls we have now are highly effective.


.

The border security? Who are these people you speak of? Show me their statistical analysis and the qualitative and quantitative analysis it's been subjected to. Who verified it?

So Im suppose to believe you a guy who appears that goes to a barber to get a broken leg fixed?


People have fences and walls all around the US according to you they are not effective...



.

 

[basquebromance]

$5 billion could give clean water to Flint, Michigan. $5 billion could provide universal pre-K to every child in America. $5 billion could house every homeless veteran on the street. There are a lot of useful ways to spend $5 billion. Building a wall isn’t one of them.

 

[Wyatt earp]

You sound like a parakeet, always rehashing what Hush Bimbo said.

How do you know what he said? I don't bring up Rush, you do. You have this problem of thinking people are saying something they never said.

What your sources are not revealing is that they took OTHER precautions - which you conveniently ignore.

WTF difference would that make even if it were true. The fact of the matter is border walls work. They work around the world, they work here, and they will work even more when more wall is erected.

When I'm traveling about in town, I get a few minutes of Rush here and there several times a week. So, when you babble on about your precious wall, it's pretty evident that you are getting your info from Rush and / or the same sources he gets his drivel from.

A border wall will not work in a free society. They work in totalitarian regimes for a reason. I can explain that simple concept to you, but I cannot understand it for you. You want to live in the ultimate POLICE STATE; I don't. End of story.

Yes, I know. You want to live in an invaded state instead.

What you people on the left don't understand is that we turn on right-wing radio because the program is based around their audience--not the other way around. Unlike your leftist MSM broadcasts, nobody tells us what to think and we are not easily brainwashed.

True story: Many years ago I started to become interested in politics, but knew little about it. I tried reading the paper but it was difficult to follow.

One day at a family doing, my father and I started to argue about social issues. It's something me and my father enjoy doing. My brother-in-law was bringing dinner to the table laughing. He said to me "you must be a diehard Rush Limbaugh fan!" I heard of the guy; this was when he first came to Cleveland, but I didn't know who he was or what he was about. I was younger and only used the radio for rock music.

Some time went by and the Democrats did something to really piss me off. I forget what it was now. But in any case, I remembered what my brother-in-law said to me, and I finally found this Limbaugh guy.

I was amazed. I really thought the country was turning Communist. But when I listened to Limbaugh, it was like somebody was stealing my thoughts and broadcasting them over the radio.

So how did you become so brainwashed that right-wingers only parrot Limbaugh and Hannity? Because it's what we've been accusing the left of for years, and they are trying to turn it around on us because they know they are guilty of just that.

We on the right can explain our convictions. Many on the left can't. They are just told what to think, not why they should be thinking it. It's why they stumble and fall when you ask them what Voter-ID has to do with race? They don't know why they think it, but were told to think it. Or why they believe disarming society will make the criminals disarm as well? They can't explain their position, but only know that disarming good people will make the criminals stop.

You are a VERY foolish individual. I was a constitutionalist and patriot before you were a gleam in your daddy's eyes. I knew Sean Hannity personally BEFORE he became the big deal he is today.

I point out to my fellow right wing friends and family that Hannity drew his paycheck from a company that was owned by a Board of Director of the Council on Foreign Relations and a Saudi Prince, most of people cannot connect the dots. It's pretty naive to think that organizations like the CFR (who are diametrically OPPOSED to the message you're hawking on this site) would allow people to advocate against them on their dime - while paying the right wing mouthpieces a fortune to spew the moronic "solutions" they promote.

What in the Hell short circuits in that vast expanse between your ears that I see the problem as clearly as you, but disagree with the solution? Tell me you're not that freaking stupid. Please tell me that.

You hover over this site 24 / 7, protecting your only cause in the world - a damn wall - as if it were your daughter's cherry. Yet you expect me to believe that the REAL LEFT, the CFR, not only allows you access to the Hannitys and Limbaughs, but pays them big bucks to spew stuff that contradicts the goals and objectives of the CFR. You're out here posting horse dung as if it were manna from heaven. Do you not understand the dichotomy?

Hannity was a reasonable guy until the left began lining his pockets. Today, he and Limbaugh are lackeys; they are entertainers and if they advocated a REAL constitutional approach to the issues, they would be unemployed.

Stop you bullshit and get off your high horse, you could care less about the all, you just don't want a monument to Trump


.that's all what it's about to you admit it .

 

[Porter Rockwell]

And the United States government has no Right or duty to share those records with anyone.

Nor are they restricted from it either. If a politician wants my vote, he or she better do what they can to not hide things from me that I need to know about.

Yes, they ARE restricted. That is why you have a Fourth Amendment. You simply want to circumvent it with a records search without a warrant via a proxy.

One more time since you obviously don't get it: it's not the persons property. It's property of the government. The government can do whatever it wants with that information including making it public. The Fourth Amendment prohibits GOVERNMENT from seizure of your PERSONAL PROPERTY that is in your possession. Criminal records are not in your possession, therefore there is no way the government is violating your Fourth.

Your first argument was that the protection covered the federal government - now you're moving the goal posts once again.

Information obtained by the government ultimately belongs to the individual. That is the essence of a Republican form of government.

The Fourth Amendment guarantees us a Right to be secure in our "papers." Your idiotic argument don't hold water and you know it. You're embarrassing yourself with strawman arguments, moving the goal posts and filibustering with horse manure. Your "papers" is inclusive of government records.

You may like the idea of the government circumventing the Constitution and spying on Americans via proxy by giving the general public access to data on individuals, but one day YOU personally are going to learn the cost.

I'm not moving anything. Government CREATES records on people. Therefore it is government records. It's their property--not the individual they are creating records for. If an individual creates a record........let's say a tax form, gives it to the government, it is still personal information that the individual gave to the government. Therefore it is protected unless ordered to be seen by a judge for some reason.

The media reports on most of the serious cases such as rape, murder, serious assault and so on. It's not a private thing. Therefore anybody has access to that information because it was held in a public setting like a court. The media reports when the crime happens, reports when an arrest is made, gives the name and even city of the offender, and reports the outcome of the trial. It's not personal and it's not private. They are even gone so far as to report on people abusing their animals for crying out loud.

I have made my point. You are a master at filibustering. But, let me repeat something I've told you repeatedly:

You told us earlier in this thread that you suffered from ADD (or was it ADHD), but were not taking meds. YOU said it was a legitimate condition (I disagreed, trying to help you out.)

Well surprise, surprise the drugs prescribed for your condition are CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES. That means the government has a record of you're having been prescribed the drug. WHEN the government gets around to including mental conditions to be a bar to owning a firearm, the fact that you were taking the drugs, but no longer do WILL mean you cannot pass a background check. Your lack of commitment to privacy will mean the government will take that gun in your avatar and stick up your arse. You think I'm kidding?

The government has already considered taking away a veteran's Rights to own a firearm if they ask the VA for help with PTSD. They WILL get to you. Then all that shit you sling will come back to bite you in the arse.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You sound like a parakeet, always rehashing what Hush Bimbo said.

How do you know what he said? I don't bring up Rush, you do. You have this problem of thinking people are saying something they never said.

What your sources are not revealing is that they took OTHER precautions - which you conveniently ignore.

WTF difference would that make even if it were true. The fact of the matter is border walls work. They work around the world, they work here, and they will work even more when more wall is erected.

When I'm traveling about in town, I get a few minutes of Rush here and there several times a week. So, when you babble on about your precious wall, it's pretty evident that you are getting your info from Rush and / or the same sources he gets his drivel from.

A border wall will not work in a free society. They work in totalitarian regimes for a reason. I can explain that simple concept to you, but I cannot understand it for you. You want to live in the ultimate POLICE STATE; I don't. End of story.

Yes, I know. You want to live in an invaded state instead.

What you people on the left don't understand is that we turn on right-wing radio because the program is based around their audience--not the other way around. Unlike your leftist MSM broadcasts, nobody tells us what to think and we are not easily brainwashed.

True story: Many years ago I started to become interested in politics, but knew little about it. I tried reading the paper but it was difficult to follow.

One day at a family doing, my father and I started to argue about social issues. It's something me and my father enjoy doing. My brother-in-law was bringing dinner to the table laughing. He said to me "you must be a diehard Rush Limbaugh fan!" I heard of the guy; this was when he first came to Cleveland, but I didn't know who he was or what he was about. I was younger and only used the radio for rock music.

Some time went by and the Democrats did something to really piss me off. I forget what it was now. But in any case, I remembered what my brother-in-law said to me, and I finally found this Limbaugh guy.

I was amazed. I really thought the country was turning Communist. But when I listened to Limbaugh, it was like somebody was stealing my thoughts and broadcasting them over the radio.

So how did you become so brainwashed that right-wingers only parrot Limbaugh and Hannity? Because it's what we've been accusing the left of for years, and they are trying to turn it around on us because they know they are guilty of just that.

We on the right can explain our convictions. Many on the left can't. They are just told what to think, not why they should be thinking it. It's why they stumble and fall when you ask them what Voter-ID has to do with race? They don't know why they think it, but were told to think it. Or why they believe disarming society will make the criminals disarm as well? They can't explain their position, but only know that disarming good people will make the criminals stop.

You are a VERY foolish individual. I was a constitutionalist and patriot before you were a gleam in your daddy's eyes. I knew Sean Hannity personally BEFORE he became the big deal he is today.

I point out to my fellow right wing friends and family that Hannity drew his paycheck from a company that was owned by a Board of Director of the Council on Foreign Relations and a Saudi Prince, most of people cannot connect the dots. It's pretty naive to think that organizations like the CFR (who are diametrically OPPOSED to the message you're hawking on this site) would allow people to advocate against them on their dime - while paying the right wing mouthpieces a fortune to spew the moronic "solutions" they promote.

What in the Hell short circuits in that vast expanse between your ears that I see the problem as clearly as you, but disagree with the solution? Tell me you're not that freaking stupid. Please tell me that.

You hover over this site 24 / 7, protecting your only cause in the world - a damn wall - as if it were your daughter's cherry. Yet you expect me to believe that the REAL LEFT, the CFR, not only allows you access to the Hannitys and Limbaughs, but pays them big bucks to spew stuff that contradicts the goals and objectives of the CFR. You're out here posting horse dung as if it were manna from heaven. Do you not understand the dichotomy?

Hannity was a reasonable guy until the left began lining his pockets. Today, he and Limbaugh are lackeys; they are entertainers and if they advocated a REAL constitutional approach to the issues, they would be unemployed.

I don't watch or listen to Hannity. I tried once but his show was too repetitive. Same people on every night, same topics on every night. He just wasn't informative.

Rush doesn't need a job. He's probably a billionaire by now. He says what he believes in, it's just that you black helicopter people refuse to believe it. You'd rather believe in your left-wing conspiracy theories instead. It makes you feel better that way.

I know when somebody is talking liberal and I know when somebody is talking conservative New World Order conspiracies aside. You can believe anything you want to believe, but don't start dishing out this horse shit that other people have no individual thoughts or beliefs of their own. Like I said, it's what they told you to think.

 

[bripat9643]

$5 billion could give clean water to Flint, Michigan. $5 billion could provide universal pre-K to every child in America. $5 billion could house every homeless veteran on the street. There are a lot of useful ways to spend $5 billion. Building a wall isn’t one of them.

$5 billion would build several hundred miles of wall.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

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

What is wrong with building the wall? I voted for Trump. Trump is wrong, like the liberals. We need to tear down the border wall. What we really need make a national identity card. Linked to fingerprints. You don't get a job if you can't prove your identity linked to your real immigration status . Why Replicratrats are so opposed to that, boggles my mind.

Well, let me help you unboggle your mind. Why not start by reading Orwell's book 1984. It was a warning in the form of a novel.

The government big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take all you have... a quote by a famous Republican

 

[Wyatt earp]

$5 billion could give clean water to Flint, Michigan. $5 billion could provide universal pre-K to every child in America. $5 billion could house every homeless veteran on the street. There are a lot of useful ways to spend $5 billion. Building a wall isn’t one of them.

Deflection, from the safety of me a death of her

 

[beautress]

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

I don't like to live in a country of cowards cowering behind a wall

Oh, that reverse psychology guilt trip thing again? You all tried that multiple times with gun discussions. When are you on the left going to realize that doesn't work? It's painfully transparent.

I've noticed that the pro-wall people are ALWAYS blaming the left for being against the nutty wall idea. The facts are that I am a Republican as are the majority of the people in the U.S. Senate. When push comes to shove, most Republicans are against the nutty wall idea.

Ray, you cannot come to grips with the fact that a wall is a socialist solution looking for a problem to solve. When people show you instances when a wall does not work, you are complaining about how far back into history the other poster went to prove the point. Even going back to BIBLICAL times, walls have not been long term solutions for much of anything.

Those, such as yourself, like wailing about the damn wall, but cannot tell us a single problem you're really addressing. If those with a few IQ points show you what's wrong with the pretext you rely on, you want to move the goal posts.

I really wish you would quit blaming opposition to the wall on the Republicans. The only reason most of them are supporting idea is in the best interests of party unity so that other legislation does not get bogged down AND the fix is in. Once the wall is fully funded and Donnie gets his win, you can kiss that gun in your avatar good-bye.

For everything you gain there is something lost. Trump isn't God. He is playing the Art of the Deal. You're simply too ignorant to ask what the real cost - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of legislation (legislation that will affect YOUR Liberties) does this nutty and INEFFECTIVE wall idea cost.

Mr. Rockwell, I appreciate your concern and acknowledge your humanitarian side, but please read the rest of the watchdog's article of which I am quoting before you go too far down the road to letting sidewinders such easy access to the tax money we are presently paying if you have a few minutes:

Analysis: Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers $116 billion annually ​

With ongoing violent protests in favor of amnesty for illegal aliens, immigration reformer advocates point to exponential costs taxpayers already pay for illegal immigrants, and how much more taxpayers would spend if they were given amnesty.

According to the most recent analysis by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), one illegal immigrant living in America today costs U.S. citizen taxpayers about $8,075. In total, illegal aliens cost American taxpayers $116 billion annually.

FAIR researchers note the increasing costs of illegal immigration is a “disturbing and unsustainable trend.” Costs to taxpayers have risen by nearly $3 billion since 2013, when illegal aliens’ total cost to taxpayers was $113 billion, according to FAIR.

The rest of the story: Analysis: Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers $116 billion annually
​

$116,000,000,000/ 300,000,000 = $387.00 for every man, woman, and child living in this country right now, and half of them either have no income or are living on welfare, student loans, off their parents, or whatever, which doubles the ante to $773.00 for everyone earning wages. Why do people who work within the poverty status having to pay a noncitizen to get free housing, free food, free education, free utilities, free telephones, and everything else?

And if the government fixes it and poverty status taxpayers don't see a rise in their taxes, that leaves working parents trying to raise a family that omission, which means, they're having to pay about $5,000 apiece for this anomaly rather than save that for a rainy day or give donations to libraries, churches, museums, and other charitable causes.

Maybe my math isn't 100% perfect, but it could be low ball if we're forgetting other things than watchdog.org has discovered. The math doesn't lie.

Edit: One hundred and sixteen billion a year is what we're paying

​

You do realize that you are referencing data from Federation for American Immigration Reform, FAIR, an organization dedicated to not only stopping illegal immigration but also legal immigration, not exactly and independent source.

Well, guess what, Flopper, Clinton government websites were often diametrically opposite from their predecessors as well as their successors. Particularly their Secretary of State's dot govs. lol

As far as this particular source being against legal immigration, it could be because instead of the traditional 20,000 a year immigrants coming over when their turns came up in years past, there's a flood at the south borders of four states and has been for years due to surreptitious crossings not to mention subtrafuge as in the case of the 9/11 attackers who got stopped but also got placed at Guantanamo Bay for their criminal crossings with intent to kill Americans.

We're full up. Nobody wants more landfills except politicians using immigrants to bus to elections to illegally vote on a purpose of their cause of not caring about the overtaxed taxpayer having his money expropriated to finance this fruitless cause. We stop them at the border, it makes Mexico be better problem solvers of employing the people they produce rather than dumping their unwanted on the American taxpayer's back.

Landfills stink.

 

[Wyatt earp]

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

What is wrong with building the wall? I voted for Trump. Trump is wrong, like the liberals. We need to tear down the border wall. What we really need make a national identity card. Linked to fingerprints. You don't get a job if you can't prove your identity linked to your real immigration status . Why Replicratrats are so opposed to that, boggles my mind.

Well, let me help you unboggle your mind. Why not start by reading Orwell's book 1984. It was a warning in the form of a novel.

The government big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take all you have... a quote by a famous Republican

A. Bunch of sheep fuckers had a. 18 year war with the us military...they are not taking our guns.


.