They don't want people entering the country illegally, but any action taken to stop illegal entry is labeled by them as racist and/or anti-immigrant.
And once they have illegally entered, arresting them, even questioning them is labelled by liberals as profiling, racist and/or anti-immigrant.
And of course, in the debate over a wall that could impede that entry, liberals are willing to force a confrontation up to and including shutting down the federal government. It's a little ironic that not too long ago, some of the most vocal combatants were supportive of funding a wall that would have cost 5 times as much. But hypocrisy is bipartisan in today's politics.
And in response to a GoFundMe page to help fund the wall, liberals started a GoFundMe page to buy ladders for the illegal immigrants.
Now if you ask them, 9.9 out of 10 liberals will say they want secure borders. They just don't want anyone to do anything to secure the borders.
Must be really tough to be a liberal. How do you justify all of these blatantly illogical dichotomies? Perhaps they use the "Scarlet Ohara" approach. "Oh fiddle dee dee. I'll worry about that tomorrow. After all, tomorrow is another day".
Instead of seeking cooperation, our petulant President, the Deal Maker, is forcing a confrontation with the Democrats. It's his way or the highway, and it's Trump who will have to hitch hike.
How is he forcing a confrontation when he's insisting on a wall when not so long ago, both Pelosi and Schumer supported a wall costing 5 times as much and once sounded very similar to Trump on illegal immigration.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jan/23/chuck-schumer-offered-25-billion-border-wall-now-w/
As I recall, Schumer's offer was contingent upon DACA being funded. It's always tit-for-tat in Washington.
Yeap, so the compromise is, no DACA and 5 billion instead of 25. Let's face it, 5 billion in todays DC budget is barely a rounding error.
This never should have been an issue, wasn't Mexico supposed to fund the wall? What happened to that "deal"? Now he's boxed himself into a corner, shutting down the govt, trying to save face with the far right by to getting a token amount.
Tim that Trump question gets ask a lot now a days....the answer in simple. Anything Trump is for the dems are automatically, categorically, and forever against
"As I recall, Schumer's offer was contingent upon DACA being funded. It's always tit-for-tat in Washington."
"This never should have been an issue, wasn't Mexico supposed to fund the wall? What happened to that "deal"? Now he's boxed himself into a corner, shutting down the govt, trying to save face with the far right by to getting a token amount."
WOW guys, you've been sucked into the political black hole that defines everything in terms of politics and us against them mentality.
The authentic question that should get all the weighting is "Does the United States of America need a border wall with Mexico?"
How can the answer to the question be anything but yes!!!!
However, one side has turned this into a purely political issue with ZERO consideration for the American people.
It's "Trumps wall".........not the American people's wall.
The dems need to get something big for voting for it..............as in, we can't do/vote for whats in the best interest of our country unless we get something political for it.
This is exactly why Trump got elected and he's acting the way that people who voted for him expected. He doesn't play the political clap trap games very well. He was voted in based on a platform he strongly believes in that is good for the American people and that's what he goes after.
So pj, if Mexico paid for it, are you saying that THEN we would need a wall? We only need one if its free?
So Mexico isn't paying for it. Either a wall would be a good thing or it wouldn't.
Some democrats voted for a smaller wall previously and are being blatant hypocrites here to play politics and block "Trumps" wall. If this was "Obama's" wall, he would get their votes.
How about America's wall?
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/15/schumer-democrats-against-trump-wall-1065738
https://gop.com/democrats-then-vs-now-on-border-wall-funding/
"Yesterday, Rep. Pelosi stated “Democrats will stand fast against the immoral, ineffective border wall.”
Likewise, Sen. Schumer threatened to shut down the government if funding for a border wall is part of the legislative package.
But back in 2006, 80 U.S. Senators, including Senator Schumer himself, along with Senators Obama, Biden, Clinton, Bill Nelson, Debbie Stabenow, and many others supported a bill that authorized 700 miles of fencing on our southern border.
In the House, 64 Democrats voted for the 700 miles of border fencing, including then Rep. Sherrod Brown."
Here's what that class act, CNN says about the go fund me account and border wall:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/20/opinions/gofundme-border-wall-trump-deception-kohn/index.html
"And yet now, through a GoFundMe page, Trump supporters are volunteering to pay for the wall. It's a horrific bait-and-switch that, ironically, is symbolic of much of Trump's presidency.
The very idea of a border wall between the United States and Mexico is a foolish endeavor, designed to gin up anti-immigrant fear and resentment."
Back in 2017, Trump called the media "the enemy of the American people"
At the time this seemed way, way, way out of line. However, since then it seems like much of the media is out to prove him right by their actions.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/business/trump-calls-the-news-media-the-enemy-of-the-people.html
"The authentic question that should get all the weighting is "Does the United States of America need a border wall with Mexico?"
Mike, IMHO,The authentic question that should get all the weighting is "Does the United States of America need a secure border with Mexico? The answer is yes, and a token, face-saving wall is not going to fill that need. Of course, that not the reason the Dems won't cave to our petulant President's bulling tactics.
"Does the United States of America need a secure border with Mexico? The answer is yes, and a token, face-saving wall is not going to fill that need"
Anaology: If you have a country of starving people and they need 20 million dollars to get them sustenance, but you can only get them 5 million dollars of food.............it's not worth satisfying only a quarter of the needs...........let them all starve.
Your political leaders actually voted for a smaller, less expensive wall in 2006. Why is this less expensive wall now(than what is needed) , different..........other than it's Trump's wall and approving it would cause him to fulfill a campaign promise.
For you, since Trump clearly is not going to get the more expensive wall that he envisioned, why is this him settling on the "face-saving" smaller wall not him willing to concede to something much smaller than what he really wants and the best that he can do and the dems refusing to give him ANY wall?
He's insisting on the wall he really wants but the best that he can possibly do with the ones who oppose him.
Your "face saving wall" verbiage tells a lot Carl.
Its a view that does not reflect on it satisfying a (partial) need in America but instead, seen purely as whether its going to make Trump look good or not..........which is what this has turned into.
Who actually patrol the boarder want nothing to do with a wall as trump has demanded or requested.
Do you understand the difference between a fence and a wall if you have to patrol it. Lastly thereis something close to 2.5 billion usd in allocated border security funds that have yet to be spent and the border patrol has places it wants to spend it and they aren't building a 30 ft high concrete wall.
Bad policy is bad policy
Does it bother any of you that the people
Who actually patrol the boarder want nothing to do with a wall as trump has demanded or requested.
What the heck are you talking about frey?
From NPR, 2017:
https://www.npr.org/2017/01/26/511745401/head-of-border-patrol-union-on-trumps-wall-plans
"The U.S. Border Patrol agents' union backed Donald Trump's candidacy."
INSKEEP: In a few seconds, how different do you think the country could be in three or four years if these proposals are carried out?
JUDD: Well, I think the country is going to be a lot safer.
INSKEEP: A lot safer.
JUDD: I really do, yes, absolutely. I mean, I was there with what they call the angel families, families that had children that were killed by persons that were in the United States illegally. If these laws are carried out properly - and he's not talking about new laws. By the way, he's not saying that he's going to give us new laws. He's talking about enforcing the laws that are currently on the books.
frey,
It was great for you to bring this up though so that we could read the actual words/statements from the border patrol.
I think this discussion conclusively proves a few things.
1, Lib-dems absolutely don't care about border security. Of the 4 points I raised, the only one discussed was the wall, which is really the least of the debate, beyond symbolic, IMO. At about 1 tenth of 1 percent of the federal budget, it barely amounts to a rounding error. I've been of the opinion that while the wall may impede things like the recent caravan, it would not have a significant impact overall. Mike's above reference forces me to rethink that. But there is only one reason this has become such a hot point.
2, The dem opposition to the wall is purely political. So far, they have turned up with failure after failure in their assorted witch hunts, so they are obviously hoping to make the wall Trump's "Read my lips" moment. It goes with out saying that politics drive DC, but this is so blatantly political, even at the sake of the safety and the well being of the current citizens they are sworn to serve, the dems have descended to lows I previously would not have considered possible.
But the good news.. I am pretty sure the Kavanaugh debacle dost them at least a few seats in the senate. This debacle is likely to cost them seats in the house. We've seen what happens to candidates who show themselves to be weak on illegal immigration and his strong stance on the issue is what caused many voters to hold their noses and vote for Trump.
This will turn out to be one more nail in the coffin of the ever leftward movement of the demmunist party.
You've been watching Hannity again, haven't you.
You obviously have not read the thread. Willful ignorance has become a popular trait on the left.
MetMike,
"So pj, if Mexico paid for it, are you saying that THEN we would need a wall? We only need one if its free?"
No, I don't think building a concrete wall over uninhabited stretches is the way to go. I'm all in favor of more security, but think there are more cost effective ways to ensure it than spending $20-25 billion on a wall that would surely to go over budget.
And promising Mexico would pay for it? Pure poppycock from the get-go. Any day now I expect Trump to deny he ever said it.
Plus this business about Trump being the deal maker... LOL. Constantly sticking his thumb in the eye of everybody who disagrees with him. Then expecting cooperation?
BTW I didn't like Obama, but this constant outrage that Trump supporters express that the Dems (and liberal media) oppose everything Trump wants . How soon they forget that the Pubs (and right wing media) did the exact same thing to Obama. And Obama (as a bit snotty as he was), wasn't in same ballpark as Trump infuriating his opposition. To me it's pure hypocrisy.
I would expect opposition from the left though I think they are reaching a self-destructive level with the amount and tactics, but I am misreading when it appears you compare the media treatment of Trump with that of Obama? I think there have been several objective studies showing raw numbers that would show otherwise. Even without that, casual observation would strongly suggest otherwise.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/29/media-double-standard-revealed-in-trump-16-vs-obam/
"BTW I didn't like Obama, but this constant outrage that Trump supporters express that the Dems (and liberal media) oppose everything Trump wants . How soon they forget that the Pubs (and right wing media) did the exact same thing to Obama. And Obama (as a bit snotty as he was), wasn't in same ballpark as Trump infuriating his opposition. To me it's pure hypocrisy."