Border fence dead on arrival
posted at 11:10 am on October 6, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
File this with Frist’s comments about the Taliban in the “What’s the difference?” folder.
They’re laughing at you:
The loopholes leave the Bush administration with authority to decide where, when and how long a fence will be built, except for small stretches east of San Diego and in western Arizona. Homeland Security officials have proposed a fence half as long, lawmakers said…
Asked whether Homeland Security would build 700 miles of fence, department spokesman Russ Knocke would not say…
The office of Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.) yesterday released a letter from House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) promising to ensure that Chertoff has discretion over whether to build a fence or choose other options…
Congress also hedged on when a fence would be completed. The law mandating it said Homeland Security officials should gain “operational control” of the border in 18 months. But the law funding it envisions five years. Chertoff has set a goal of two to three years, but only after completion of an immigration overhaul.
The boss called this three weeks ago. I guess when you cover this issue as thoroughly as she has, you realize you should expect nothing from your representatives. Which, I think, most of us don’t when it comes to this issue.
So why do we still feel disappointed?
The French, incidentally, are dealing with their immigration problem this week too. The only way they know how.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
They can’t even stand up to democrats. This isn’t surprising at all.
SouthernGent on October 6, 2006 at 11:24 AM
As are Frist’s Presidential aspirations.
Kid from Brooklyn on October 6, 2006 at 11:26 AM
You know, if Republican leaders had spent more time on the issues the base cares about, this Foley news would be bad, but not fatal. If you have an energized base (80-90% support) willing to go out and spend time trying to get Republicans elected, it minimizes the daily ups and downs of the news cycle.
2004 is a good example of this. The media and the Dems threw as much crap against the wall as they could, but with the president pulling 90% support from the base, he was essentially bulletproof. As long as Republicans were willing to turn out in large numbers, the president would win. And he did.
They don’t have that this time, as there is mostly a dispirited and angry base, many of whom are angry enough not to vote. The Foley mess is huge, but it’s the still-present irritation of the base that is the real problem.
Slublog on October 6, 2006 at 11:37 AM
Not suprised about the fence… its the Washington two step….
Look like we’re doing somthing, while actualy getting Pork for my own state.
Romeo13 on October 6, 2006 at 11:40 AM
I bet this news is worse for Republican candidates around the country than Foley-Gate…
canvas on October 6, 2006 at 11:44 AM
Meanwhile, organized immigration crime advocates were emboldened by their Columbia University riot;
The rioters take the stage of The Columbia Spectator to respond… with more ad hominem, slander and lies;
Terp Mole on October 6, 2006 at 11:50 AM
Who can you vote for? The Republicans are devisive twits and the Democrats are worse. It’s like watching a tragic accident in slow motion.
Hening on October 6, 2006 at 11:52 AM
So true, Kid from Brooklyn. He hasn’t a chance. He shouldn’t even bother, but of course, the senatorial ego will duly run its course as always.
Anywho, the “fence-straddling” (i know, sorry) in Washington is just ridiculous. It’s the epitome of asinine political positioning. Why won’t the GOP just freaking lead instead of wimping out on everything! It’s embarrassing as a Republican, not to mention frustrating. What am I voting for!?! Ok, you all know this, so I’ll go ahead and preempt my extended soapbox rant now and take deep breaths.
Here’s the slogan they should use…
“The Border Fence – We voted for it, before we voted against it.”
CP on October 6, 2006 at 11:56 AM
SG, I wished to hell you were not that wise, because the above statement is all too true. They’re kicking conservative asses just for drill.
Shit!Shoot!james hooker on October 6, 2006 at 12:04 PM
SouthernGent, you stole the words out of my mouth (or off my keyboard, as it were).
No surprise here.
thirteen28 on October 6, 2006 at 12:27 PM
Perhaps it is time to start a serious discussion about a viable center-right third party option. I, for one, am tired of having to hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils. Particularly now, when the so-called “lesser evil” refuses to secure our borders or curtail its runaway spending.
Kid from Brooklyn on October 6, 2006 at 12:41 PM
So much of this type of political slight of hand is not only hurting the Republicans with their base, but the Democrats are not going to benefit from the anger. What will happen is people will feel so disenfranchised that they will turn away from the entire political system in an apathetic, disgusted mindset where they simply says ” why should I even care any more?” and drop out of any participation. Anyone in America whith the honor and character to lead this country certainly will not compromise their reputation and standards by involving themselves in the current political sewer as it exisits in this nation. Seems there are untold history books that speak to this circumstance and clearly illustrate it’s consequences.
Chief1942 on October 6, 2006 at 12:45 PM
Kid from Brooklyn,
While frustrated, I don’t think the GOP is beyond reforming itself, though I don’t necessarily expect that in the immediate future. I do, however, think the prospects of a “viable center-right third party” are very slim.
CP on October 6, 2006 at 12:56 PM
CP,
You are correct regards any options. We are left with terrible or more terrible! Who’s going to involve themselves in that choice just to do their “civic duty”? Not I.
Chief1942 on October 6, 2006 at 1:00 PM
We need Theodore Roosevelt (the good cousin) and his Bull Moose Party. While he spoke softly and carried a big stick, he was also ready and capable of using that stick. I like to apply the “WWTD” rule; What Would Theodore Do?
DAT60A3 on October 6, 2006 at 1:15 PM
It’s OK to be very, very angry.
Call’em up and yell long and hard.
Remember that when a politician says lets keep the debate civil, what they really mean is, don’t worry we can ream your roids and the good news is we won’t even need to use our hands.
Want more insight into exactly how it works? Here’s an interesting read by an ex ‘Mexican’ foreign aid.
“Immigration and Usurpation
Elites, Power, and the People’s Will”
http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/back706.html
Speakup on October 6, 2006 at 1:20 PM
Listen, regarding border security I think there is one detail that will tell you whether any particular bill is serious or not: How much more new detention facilities will be built to hold any illegals caught. Without this, everything is just playing to the rubes.
thegreatbeast on October 6, 2006 at 1:26 PM
When the choice is business interests (cheap labor/open border) versus conservative/base interests (control of our borders) Bush goes with business every time. Time to wise up and call a spade a spade.
honora on October 6, 2006 at 2:16 PM
If our national politicos won’t do anything, we need to elect state and local ones that will!
SouthernGent on October 6, 2006 at 2:31 PM
OK, Who farted?
I can smell it.
Someone? at around 2:16pm?
I wish it was that simple, A.
Lets get behind Tom Tancredo, give him all the money, and all of our support and see what he can do with it.
I’ll call him now and send him this page link.
shooter on October 6, 2006 at 2:43 PM
Righto, SG. Here’s a good place to start, if you’re in Chicago. Others, look up your local Minuteman group; they need bodies to counteract the Moonbat Effect.
Jaibones on October 6, 2006 at 3:00 PM
Am I missing something here?
A link to a Washington Post article that puts a negative slant on Republican posturing for border security. Shocking.
Also from the linked article:
But shortly before recessing late Friday, the House and Senate gave the Bush administration leeway to distribute the money to a combination of projects — not just the physical barrier along the southern border. The funds may also be spent on roads, technology and “tactical infrastructure” to support the Department of Homeland Security’s preferred option of a “virtual fence.”
Where is it written in stone that a physical barrier is the one and only solution to the illegal immigration problem? It makes sense to diversify our means of securing and patrolling the border via technology, surveillance, tracking systems, new access roads, etc. It won’t take long for our southern neighbors to figure out the weakness of the fencing, and open up the illegal floodgates again. Back-up infrastructures will provide additional tiers of protection, oversight and support beyond the fence itself.
Instead of a one plan fits all, the Republicans have opted for a flexible strategy to counter the illegal border crossings. That’s called a creative plan, developed to handle a plethora of anticipated and/or unexpected situations on the ground.
Dems on the WOT: Bush is stubborn, has one plan, won’t change, we need a new direction
Dems on Border Security: Homeland Security has many plans and funding options, able to adapt to conditions as warranted, why can’t they just put up a fence?
Good or Bad?
fogw on October 6, 2006 at 3:10 PM
I like that! I really do! But the problem is that a third party is too hard to get going. Not to mention that most conservatives have regular jobs which prevent them from dedicating the kind of time they would have to in getting a “Conservative” party off the ground.
I don’t believe that the Republican party is beyond repair, but I agree whole-heartedly that it needs some major restructuring. As much as I hate to say it, we still need them, if only to prevent the dems from making things worse.
ArkCon on October 6, 2006 at 6:15 PM
When George Soros thinks Bush has the right approach on the illegal immigration issue, it’s time to throw out the baby with the bath water. I see no light at the end of the tunnel, only disgust and dispair. Thank you so very much to the Republican Party, who were given the White House and both the House and Senate yet manged to let the Democrats remain in control. Pitiful. Simply pitiful.
Chief1942 on October 6, 2006 at 6:37 PM
Jettison those who promise half of a fence over those who promise express bus service to the infil-traitors?
I’ll take a three-toothed pitbull over a gumming poodle any election year.
The Party of Truman and JFK has become the Party of Retreat and Defeat.
It’s all they can do to hijack the conversation is to throw gay IM chat up as serious point of political debate during a global war with imperialistic theocratic terrorists.
Vote for those who know what Nick Berg went through.
And want to prevent it from spreading.
Not those who think Lawyers can stop the Jihad.
profitsbeard on October 6, 2006 at 10:24 PM
Bearded One,
I have been carrying your position for some time, now, but keep getting kicked in the cajones by the GOP’s Country Club Weenies; McCain, Bush, Graham, Hagel, etc.
I am now inclined to believe that maybe less is more. Maybe a couple of years of watching Speaker Pelosi, and Chairman Leahy f*ck things up beyond all recognition will enable conservative Republicans to gain control of the GOP.
As it is, dickeaters like McCain stake out middle ground thinking that they are between conservatives and the Moonbats, so they must be the only choice. It’s time to flush the GOP toilet.
Jaibones on October 7, 2006 at 2:00 AM
I agree with your thoughts re the fence.
However, I believe the point is that the Republicans ballyhooed this as a bill to build a 700 mile fence–you know, the old bumper sticker school of government–fence good, Democrats had–and now that it appears not to be the case…well you know the rest. Rather ironic at that.
honora on October 7, 2006 at 1:35 PM
Building a fence will not fix the problem. If we build a fence, the Mexicans will just tear it down. It doesn’t cost anything to tear the fence down, all it take is time, something the Mexicans have in abundance.
The problem is employers in the United States who will hire applicants who can not document their citizenship status, or support their application with fraudulent documents.
As long as illegal immigrants can get jobs, they will keep coming.
rockhauler on October 7, 2006 at 2:24 PM
The American “Indians” handled their immigration problem partly by retreating westward. Ragtag bands of people left their ancestral land and wandered westward into the ancestral lands of other, non-yet-displaced tribes. Alexis de Tocqueville’s account in Democracy in America is quite moving.
Understand, I don’t mention the Indians in order to disparage the ancestors of the present-day Americans. They were, after all, the victors. I’m pointing to Tocqueville’s history of another people’s gradual retreat before colonists because it illustrates the deadliness of that response.
Machiavelli and Rousseau point out two small details about the French: The French have dark hair; the French used to have blonde hair. As I recall, Machiavelli and Rousseau leave it to their readers to work out the meanings of this change.
Kralizec on October 7, 2006 at 5:57 PM
A lot of enforcement actions must work together in order for America to become sovereign again.
None of those actions will work when our leaders sabotage every effort and could care less about the ‘citizens will’.
Real solution, new leaders, it might not happen overnight but if we keep demanding change, we can make adjustments and we can reverse the tide.
Speakup on October 7, 2006 at 10:31 PM
No, they won’t. We need to quit making up silly stuff and stay close to reality. This isn’t your 42″ galvanized chain link fence. It’s big, it’s strong, it’s deep, it’s two layers, and a bunch of unemployed Mexican punks are hardly going to “tear it down.”
Jaibones on October 8, 2006 at 1:26 AM
26 AM
You know what they say, what a 12 foot fence does most effectively is drive demand of 13 foot ladders. Think of what our ancestors endured to get here–a trip of thousand of miles in rickety sailing vessels with primitive navigation aids. For religious freedom and economic opportunity–human values that are in our genenic code.
Yeah a fence. That’ll do it.
honora on October 8, 2006 at 12:22 PM
Comment pages: