[Rumor]

Bush Signs U.S.-Mexico Border Fence Bill | Santa Rosa Press Democrat // News for California's North Bay and Redwood Empire

I'm going to have to agree with the opponents. Building a fence isn't going to deter them much. Isn't there already walls up in some places? Unless it's electric and 30 feet high, I can see people scrambling over it.

[itai195]

Just implement Colbert's plan. Surround it with a fiery moat filled with fireproof alligators.

[Dork.]

Didn't Reagan want us to tear down walls? I don't see how building a wall will do any good, except for the campaigns of politicians from xenophobic districts.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

Didn't Reagan want us to tear down walls? I don't see how building a wall will do any good, except for the campaigns of politicians from xenophobic districts.

Don't forget someone profits from this.

How long till some idiot contractor uses illegal immigrants in the construction of the wall?

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Don't forget someone profits from this.

How long till some idiot contractor uses illegal immigrants in the construction of the wall?

AS long as they work from their side only, what's the problem?

[Dakar²]

So, how does this wall prevent the use of underground tunnels?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

So, how does this wall prevent the use of underground tunnels?

Or ladders.

This is a useless waste of tax money.

[hyteckit]

It's a Republican scam for the November elections. Doesn't have much an impact on illegal immigrants coming here. It's like putting twenty locks on your door when your windows are unlock. There are already two layers of fences. Guess we are building a third layer. People dig under the fences, climb over the fences, cut holes in fences. 3 layers of fences would make it more difficult for them to climb over, but won't stop them.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

This is a useless waste of tax money.

Good for the economy!

[Rumor]

He should have signed a bill putting up automatic 50 cals with movement tracking.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

He should have signed a bill putting up automatic 50 cals with movement tracking.

That would at least do something, even if it's an evil something.

[Dakar²]

We should tag and release all of mexico. That or get those dog collars that shock them if they get too close to the US border.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

We should tag and release all of mexico. That or get those dog collars that shock them if they get too close to the US border.

We can put ankle bracelets on them like people on house arrest.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

We can put ankle bracelets on them like people on house arrest.

That's the sort of tracking I was implying with the tags.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

We should tag and release all of mexico. That or get those dog collars that shock them if they get too close to the US border.

How about those explody one's from Running Man?

...not funny!

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

That's the sort of tracking I was implying with the tags.

I thought you meant ear tags, like cattle. I suppose that could work too.

[ink]

There isn't a single conservative here that thinks this is a good idea?

I was hoping to get a bit of perspective on the whole fence thing, because I don't understand it at all. Even as a political device for the November elections (are they trying to get the Moron Vote or something?)

[Chuckit]

They're going for the xenophobic moron demographic. Unfortunately, they are a majority in most countries.

[BRussell]

OK, so this will protect us from the bad Mexicans, but where do we put the fence up to protect us from the gays?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

OK, so this will protect us from the bad Mexicans, but where do we put the fence up to protect us from the gays?

Where ? Border to Canadia (sic!)

-t

[probablecause]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

It's a Republican scam for the November elections. Doesn't have much an impact on illegal immigrants coming here. It's like putting twenty locks on your door when your windows are unlock. There are already two layers of fences. Guess we are building a third layer. People dig under the fences, climb over the fences, cut holes in fences. 3 layers of fences would make it more difficult for them to climb over, but won't stop them.

I'm sure the elections are a factor in the signing of this bill. However, the article also mentioned:

Its cost is not known, although a homeland security spending measure the president signed earlier this month makes a $1.2 billion down payment on the project. The money also can be used for access roads, vehicle barriers, lighting, high-tech equipment and other tools to secure the border.

It appears the money will not only be spent on a fence, but on other equipment as well. At the very least, (and I admit another fence is pretty lame) it's an indirect statement to the Mexican government. Vincente Fox seems to think its some type of human right for Mexican citizens to run across the border at will.

[BlueSky]

It's a good start. It's not going to stop illegal "immigration", but it's a start, though I'll be shocked if it actually gets built.

Vincente Fox seems to think its some type of human right for Mexican citizens to run across the border at will.

And it's currently being pounded into the heads of illegals that they have some sort of human right to be here by the organizers of their demonstrations.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

Didn't Reagan want us to tear down walls? I don't see how building a wall will do any good, except for the campaigns of politicians from xenophobic districts.

President Reagan said to tear down the Berlin Wall, which was constructed by the Soviets to keep their people from leaving East Germany. We want a wall because we want some measure of defense from Mexico, a country that wants its people to leave. Two different situations.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

President Reagan said to tear down the Berlin Wall, which was constructed by the Soviets to keep their people from leaving East Germany. We want a wall because we want some measure of defense from Mexico, a country that wants its people to leave. Two different situations.

How can one wall keep people in while another keep people out? By definition a wall performs both functions.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

President Reagan said to tear down the Berlin Wall, which was constructed by the Soviets to keep their people from leaving East Germany. We want a wall because we want some measure of defense from Mexico, a country that wants its people to leave. Two different situations.

Either way the people want to leave of their own accord.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

President Reagan said to tear down the Berlin Wall, which was constructed by the Soviets to keep their people from leaving East Germany. We want a wall because we want some measure of defense from Mexico, a country that wants its people to leave. Two different situations.

Um, what?

You've got people who want to move from point A to point B.

You've got some dumb asshole building a wall between point A and point B to stop those people. Who the dumb asshole is, is only of incidental interest to the situation.

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by Nicko 

How can one wall keep people in while another keep people out? By definition a wall performs both functions.

Are we forgetting that this all has to do with what is legal and what is illegal? Legally, there's a flow between the people of both countries into each others countries. The existence of a wall makes no difference to those who abide by the law.

[TheWOAT]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

We should tag and release all of mexico. That or get those dog collars that shock them if they get too close to the US border.

Why not just give them ID tattoos on their forearms and round them up by train in concentrated areas , camps if you will, and cause them enough hell that one day movies could be made about the ordeal.

anyways... dramatic comparison aside, that is a really stupid idea.

[probablecause]

Originally Posted by analogika 

Um, what?

You've got people who want to move from point A to point B.

You've got some dumb asshole building a wall between point A and point B to stop those people. Who the dumb asshole is, is only of incidental interest to the situation.

What is wrong with stopping illegal immigrants from crossing the border? The only problem with this wall is that it probably won't be all that effective.

Illegal immigration needs to be stopped. The best way to do this is for Mexico to take responsibility for its own social ills instead of trying to get the United States to pay for them. We are not the world's welfare agency.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by analogika 

Um, what?

You've got people who want to move from point A to point B.

You've got some dumb asshole building a wall between point A and point B to stop those people. Who the dumb asshole is, is only of incidental interest to the situation.

The thing is, you see, we have this thing in Western tradition known as state sovereignty. We have a country, Mexico, which encourages its citizens to violate the state sovereignty of America by flooding across the border. You're saying that such a thing should be permitted, and any attempt by America to reduce this trend and enforce its laws should be shunned.

Certainly people want to get from point A to point B - in this case from Mexico to America. America has laws that govern legal immigration and prohibit illegal immigration. Some say those laws need reform, and many advocate a guest worker program. Such things will be decided upon by the political process, but no matter what those who illegally come into America are breaking America's laws. I know you don't care about that, but Americans do. A large percentage of Americans are tired of the costs of illegal immigration - and if more Americans knew how much they are forced to pay in spill-over costs of illegal immigrants in order to get that cheap produce, they would gladly figure out a way to pick their own crops.

People want to get from point A to point B - that's the way you could describe the actions of many people. Many who commit unlawful acts often want to get from point A to point B. A person committing a bank robbery wants to get from the bank (point A) to his hideout (point B). A burglar wants to get over your fence (point A) and back again (point B) after stealing your valuables. Simply because people want to get from a given point A to point B doesn't necessarily make their motives or actions legitimate/lawful. Am I getting through to you, or do I need to be more pedantic to drive this point home?

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by TheWOAT 

Why not just give them ID tattoos on their forearms and round them up by train in concentrated areas , camps if you will, and cause them enough hell that one day movies could be made about the ordeal.

anyways... dramatic comparison aside, that is a really stupid idea.

Sometimes, sarcasm is hard to read over teh intarweb.

[analogika]

The idea of using more fence to do so is kind of...historically charged. There have been a number of posts in this thread that tried to drive *that* point home.

Also, unless you set up guard towers every few dozen yards and use automatic machine guns with motion sensors, it is hopelessly ineffective.

Big Mac: Do YOU think this thing is a good idea?

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Sometimes, sacasm is hard to read over teh intarweb.

Apparently so. It happens a lot when you're unfamiliar with the poster.

[TheWOAT]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Apparently so. It happens a lot when you're unfamiliar with the poster.

Sorry about that... Disregard my post please.

[memento]

Originally Posted by probablecause 

...At the very least, (and I admit another fence is pretty lame) it's an indirect statement to the Mexican government. Vincente Fox seems to think its some type of human right for Mexican citizens to run across the border at will.

There's your answer. Don't get all balled up on the definition of a fence.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by probablecause 

It appears the money will not only be spent on a fence, but on other equipment as well. At the very least, (and I admit another fence is pretty lame) it's an indirect statement to the Mexican government. Vincente Fox seems to think its some type of human right for Mexican citizens to run across the border at will.

That's a ****ing expensive statement. Give me the money, I'll write the bastard a letter and put the rest to better use.

[absurdist]

I had a one-on-one lunch with my congressman back in April, which is right when this whole "illlegal immigration is a national priority" thing started (this time). I asked him what his take on the issue was and he said that this is the same as the anti-gay marriage issue of 2004: An attempt to play to the extreme-right solely for votes. I agree with that view.

It doesn't mean anything substantive willl change nor that the country will be made any safer. It similarly doesn't mean that illegal immigration matters one way or another to the party in power, except that it gets the redneck, xenophobic, "America: Love it or leave it" nutjobs riled up and makes them feel as if the "guv'mint" is on their side and doing something for them.

In reality, the money for the project wil never be assigned to the actual construction of a fence and no construction, other than a possible symbolic ground-breaking ceremony which would serve merely as a photo-op to show that the current administration is tough on illlegal immigration, will ever occur. Michael certoff, Secretary of the Dept. of Homeland Security is on record as favoring a "virtual fence" over a physical barrier, and on Octobber 6th stated that a trial "virtual fence" will be tested in a 28-mile section for 8 or more months, prior to making any final construction plans for a physical fence. Of course, the installation of this test section will get lots of press and its location will be publicly known on both sides of the border, causing those seeking to cross illegally to cross elsewhere. This "virtual fence" test project willl be declared a "success" and show that a physical fence is not needed because illegal border crossings in the 28 mile section will be substantially reduced, thus the money for the physical fence will be diverted to other projects within DHS.

"It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

The Absurdist
CIB, OIF

[probablecause]

Originally Posted by absurdist 

I had a one-on-one lunch with my congressman back in April, which is right when this whole "illlegal immigration is a national priority" thing started (this time). I asked him what his take on the issue was and he said that this is the same as the anti-gay marriage issue of 2004: An attempt to play to the extreme-right solely for votes. I agree with that view.

It doesn't mean anything substantive willl change nor that the country will be made any safer. It similarly doesn't mean that illegal immigration matters one way or another to the party in power, except that it gets the redneck, xenophobic, "America: Love it or leave it" nutjobs riled up and makes them feel as if the "guv'mint" is on their side and doing something for them.

In reality, the money for the project wil never be assigned to the actual construction of a fence and no construction, other than a possible symbolic ground-breaking ceremony which would serve merely as a photo-op to show that the current administration is tough on illlegal immigration, will ever occur. Michael certoff, Secretary of the Dept. of Homeland Security is on record as favoring a "virtual fence" over a physical barrier, and on Octobber 6th stated that a trial "virtual fence" will be tested in a 28-mile section for 8 or more months, prior to making any final construction plans for a physical fence. Of course, the installation of this test section will get lots of press and its location will be publicly known on both sides of the border, causing those seeking to cross illegally to cross elsewhere. This "virtual fence" test project willl be declared a "success" and show that a physical fence is not needed because illegal border crossings in the 28 mile section will be substantially reduced, thus the money for the physical fence will be diverted to other projects within DHS.

"It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

The Absurdist
CIB, OIF

Yes, behind most projects like this there is always the hope for votes. That's the only reason politicans do anything and that's not exactly breaking news. It is no different when Democrats do dog and pony shows either. I certainly hope your Congressman wasn't the one to use the terms "redneck nutjobs" when conversing with you because that would reflect an unfortunate attitude that he holds toward some of the people he represents.

At any rate, "redneck, xenophobe nutjobs" aren't the only people who believe that the problem with illegal immigration needs to be addressed.

[Pendergast]

I, for one, welcome that fence.

I mean come on! How many threads will be devoted to this?

MacNN's pol lounge's future is guaranteed!

Stay the course!

[besson3c]

Even Bush thinks the fence is a bad idea, I agree with him on this!

Unfortunately, this retarded idea received bipartisan support. It will take many years to build and complete, and a ton of bread. I bet that this will be an abandoned project, and a complete waste of time and money.

[olePigeon]

Elephant > Fence

[Andy8]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Elephant > Fence

An Albino Elephant?

[ink]

Originally Posted by BlueSky 

Are we forgetting that this all has to do with what is legal and what is illegal? Legally, there's a flow between the people of both countries into each others countries. The existence of a wall makes no difference to those who abide by the law.

Ohhhhh! Now I get it..!

The illegal immigrants didn't know that they were doing something illegal. This fence will provide that negative reinforcement so that they go back to their starving family in the boondocks of northern Mexico instead of living large in the USA.

It makes soo much sense now.

[Spliffdaddy]

"Man, that Dubya is dumb as a brick. Why the hell doesn't he build a fence to keep out all the illegal Mexicans?"

"Man, that Dubya is dumb as a brick. A freakin frence isn't going to stop illegal Mexicans from crossing the border."

[finboy]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

"Man, that Dubya is dumb as a brick. Why the hell doesn't he build a fence to keep out all the illegal Mexicans?"

"Man, that Dubya is dumb as a brick. A freakin frence isn't going to stop illegal Mexicans from crossing the border."

What I don't hear from the Lefties is a set of legitimate, functional alternatives. The silence is deafening.

[TheWOAT]

How will this fence be different from the other fences on the border? Is it a "Super Fence"? A "Smart Fence" ? An Al Gore patented "Lock Box" fence? I don't know if this new fence thing will work, Im leaning to neither side on this one... <insert pun here>

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by finboy 

What I don't hear from the Lefties is a set of legitimate, functional alternatives. The silence is deafening.

Ideas at least as legitimate and functional as this wall, while remaining cheaper:

• Hire a team of psychics to concentrate really hard on the border and make immigrants want to turn back
• Put a bunch of stray cats along the border with orders to guard it
• Place a sign every 20 miles along the border reading, "Please go back"
• Just leave a pile of gold bars by the border, so would-be immigrants can just grab those and go back to their own country

[ink]

Originally Posted by finboy 

What I don't hear from the Lefties is a set of legitimate, functional alternatives. The silence is deafening.

There aren't many ways to stem the flow of water from going downhill.

Maybe that's why the "Lefties" haven't proffered a so-called solution?

The only real way to solve the immigration problem is to gradiate the terrain in such a way that the desire to flow downhill is less prevelant. This would involve improving the lives of those that live across the border (or diminish the attractveness of life in the USA, but that's understandably less desireable). It's called market economics; a basic component of any good undergraduate degree... GW's dad understood this, hence NAFTA; but then HW Bush didn't rely on right-wing indignation to get the vote out.

How's Ireland now? The conservatives wanted to get rid of them way back when, but then something hapened in Ireland...

How's the War on Drugs working out? It's based on the same faulty premise.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by finboy 

What I don't hear from the Lefties is a set of legitimate, functional alternatives. The silence is deafening.

Easy man, just give ever illegal a passport! Problem solved

*This solution has been brought to you by your friendly Canadian neighbour.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by ink 

How's the War on Drugs working out? It's based on the same faulty premise.

Also, Illegal immigrants could also be viewed as a minority group. So Bush is effectively creating a climate of fear and pinning it on minorities. It's a typical tactic used the world over to focus the irrational fears of a segment of the population (and thereby gaining their political support: votes). I have yet to see any credible evidence that the whole 'illegal immigration' issue in the States is anything but a red herring.