Republican media people, who have better access to our President than those at State, etc, are obviously behind this shutdown. I’m praying that it’s hurting their watchers so they will learn a lesson and not vote for the next con man. Swing voters must learn a lesson as well.
Hmmmm. There is an awful lot of innuendo and conjecture in that post.
JWK
Politically speaking, a fully informed citizen today is one who gathers their news from MSNBC and Fox News.
Crossings are down 85% since then.
Not that anyone on the conservative side cares.
See: Border apprehensions increased in 2018 – especially for migrant families
January 8, 2019
There were nearly 416,000 apprehensions at the U.S.-Mexico border in the first 11 months of 2018, the most in any January-November period since 2014, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of the most recent available data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The increase was driven in part by a dramatic spike in border apprehensions of family members in the fall of last year.
Despite the increase, the number of border apprehensions through the first 11 months of 2018 remained far below the levels throughout most of the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s, when around 1 million or more migrants were being apprehended each fiscal year.
The statistics, if accurate, confirm border crossings are surging. Aside from that, one thing is self-evident ___ we have an invasion taking place in our country by the poverty stricken, poorly educated, low skilled and criminal populations from Central America, and Congress has not fulfilled its 1986 promise to secure our border.
President Trump must not cave in and surrender the leverage he has to force Congress to make good on its 1986 promise to secure our border.
JWK
There is no surer way to weaken, subdue and then conquer a prosperous and freedom loving people than by allowing and encouraging the poverty stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, criminal and diseased populations of other countries to invade that country, and make the country’s existing citizens tax-slaves to support the economic needs of such invaders.
Apprehensions are a sign that the border is secure. You don’t apprehend people crossing on an “open border”. What you really should care about is the apprehension rate which is around 80% according to DHS.
1 Like
You are using Inductive reasoning.
JWK
The Democrat Party Leadership has been encouraging this ongoing invasion of our southern border since 1985 when amnesty was granted to 2.5 million illegal entrants in return for a guarantee to build a wall and secure our border. And here we are today, no wall, but 10-15 million more illegal entrants and the invasion continues
I don’t think you are using that phrase correctly…
Address his point.
1 Like
No. I’m using information provided by the DHS.
No, hes not.
If the border was truly as open as you are trying to contend, there would be NO apprehensions, as there would be no need for security if the intent was to actually leave the border open.
The fact that anyone is being caught kinda belies the idea that the border isn’t secured.
Has everyone now figured out that this shutdown is owned by the Yankee con man?
You too are using inductive reasoning. If the border were secured, there would be little to no apprehensions. Try using deductive rather than inductive reasoning.
JWK
Yankee con man is offesive to us that are Yankees and men but not cons.
Please use the term “New York Democrat” in the future, since I’m originally from New York but not a DEM I would find that not offensive at all.
Your consideration in this matter is greatly appreciated.
.
.
.
.>>>>
1 Like
Man, you are bad at this…you are completely backwards in your thinking…let me see if I can help with that…
You seem to think that securing the border would then prevent anyone from trying to enter the country illegally. That is false. The border is more secure now than it has been in decades, and yet we are still apprehending people every day. That shows that the border is secure. Were it not, ALL of those that have attempted to get in over that time would have, as there would be nothing and nobody to stop them.
Nothing we do is going to prevent people from trying to get into our country…but we could do lots of other things that wouldn’t waste money to do more to lessen the desire some have to come here illegally. If we simply enforced the law the way we should and penalized businesses who hired illegals to a devastating point, and then severely punished anyone who was caught here illegally, there would be little to no reason for a single added foot of wall on the border, as the motivation for coming here would be gone.
4 Likes
That does beg the question though…
If you arent a Dem and therefore wouldnt be offended, then by extension if you arent a con, shouldn’t you also not be offended?
The “con” in “con man” refers to “confidence man” (as in fraud) and not “conservative man”.
(My personal political beliefs probably lie right of center, my biggest belief is that the main problem in our country right now is that so much of the political discussion is driven by extreme RWNJs and LWNJs. It pollutes the whole discussion.)
.
.
.
.>>>>
I was aware of all that…it was meant as more a joking jab than anything.
Trust me, you are the furthest thing from a con man, and we love ya for that.
Instead of posting insulting comments, spend a little more time paying attention to what I have actually posted, and avoid misrepresenting what I ‘think’.
I have already addressed your erroneous charge IN THIS POST, the erroneous charge being that I “think securing the border would then prevent anyone from trying to enter the country illegally”.
The fact is, I would never make such an absurd claim.
JWK
The Democrat Party Leadership has been encouraging this ongoing invasion of our southern border since 1985 when amnesty was granted to 2.5 million illegal entrants in return for a guarantee to build a wall and secure our border. And here we are today, no wall, but 10-15 million new illegal entrants and the invasion continues
But you did say there would be little to no one trying to enter the country illegally if the border was secure.
That is already an absurd statement.
Well, that is not what I wrote, or even suggested. Border crossings are not the only way foreigners enter our country. So “but” this and “but” that.
Now, let us look at what I really posted.
With reference to the geographical border line, and illegal border crossings, what I actually wrote was:
If the border were secured, there would be little to no apprehensions. And this comment was in regard to the following which I wrote:
See: Border apprehensions increased in 2018 – especially for migrant families
January 8, 2019
There were nearly 416,000 apprehensions at the U.S.-Mexico border in the first 11 months of 2018, the most in any January-November period since 2014, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of the most recent available data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The increase was driven in part by a dramatic spike in border apprehensions of family members in the fall of last year.
Despite the increase, the number of border apprehensions through the first 11 months of 2018 remained far below the levels throughout most of the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s, when around 1 million or more migrants were being apprehended each fiscal year.
The statistics, if accurate, confirm border crossings are surging. Aside from that, one thing is self-evident ___ we have an invasion taking place in our country by the poverty stricken, poorly educated, low skilled and criminal populations from Central America, and Congress has not fulfilled its 1986 promise to secure our border.
Now, contrary to you charge, walls do work! And, there are a number of existing examples confirming a substantially built barrier/wall drastically reduces illegal border crossings, e.g.,:
Israel’s border wall along the Gaza Strip is very effective, and its southern border wall is likewise effective;
The two-story corrugated steel fence built under Bush in El Paso, Texas has also proven to prevent illegal border crossings;
And let us not forget Yuma, Arizona’s wall cut illegal border crossings to a 10th of what they were in 2006.
The facts are what they are!
JWK
Politically speaking, a fully informed citizen today is one who diligently gathers their news from MSNBC and Fox News.
You wrote the above. The implication of the above is that if the border were somehow MORE secure, there would be less apprehensions. That, of course, is wrong. If the border were secure, there would indeed be more apprehensions, which I pointed out to you. Trying to claim that what we implied wasn’t what you were actually trying to get across is just being intellectually dishonest, and you know it.
Just admit that your premise was wrong and move on.
