I’ve never heard anyone try any make this argument.

Even the govt’s own study last year concluded we didn’t need a wall. It’s a campaign stunt not immigration policy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The first point is completely and totally false.

The second point is mind blowing stupid.If they're here without authorization they are not here legally.How they arrived here is irrelevant.

The fear of "brown" people?Talk about broadening the race card.The the vast majority of all US citizens can claim "brown" status.With my ethnic heritage I'm the "brownest" guy on this site!

Much like your "what if" thread you might want to check back in with reality.

No, I’m pretty sure close to 60% of illegal aliens are people who have overstayed VISAs rather than made illegal border crossings.

Same goes for illegal drugs, only a small fraction is smuggled over land, most all comes through ports.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Upper end of what you'd be OK forgiving? Multiple DUIs?

Trump is the only person in the conversation lacking common sense

that a Wall doesn’t work. It does, and properly built, almost 100%! They say it’s old technology - but so is the wheel.

or “Jeb Bush just talked about my border proposal to build a ‘fence,’” he tweeted. “It’s not a fence, Jeb, it’s a WALL, and there’s a BIG difference!” or President and Mrs. Obama built/has a ten foot Wall around their D.C. mansion/compound. I agree, totally necessary for their safety and security. The U.S. needs the same thing, slightly larger version!

...The Wall will be paid for, directly or indirectly, or through longer term reimbursement, by Mexico, to bad there is no wall around the house

we could go all day now his people are backpedaling again

“To be honest, it’s not a wall,” Kelly said, adding that the mix of technological enhancements and “steel slat” barriers the president now wants along the border resulted from conversations with law enforcement professionals.

Graham “the wall has become a metaphor for border security” and referred to “a physical barrier along the border.”

this is my favorite to bad he might not have said it but i can't be 100 % Sure

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...017/924316002/

Homeland Security: More than 600,000 foreigners overstayed U.S. visas in 2017

here is reality Trump and his administration have focused far more on building a wall along the southern border with Mexico,

why would that be??????

Your article points out, rather quietly, that Trump addressed the overstay problem, and that the numbers have gone down since 2016.

Why do you say that the administration has focused far more on building a wall? It focused on the overstay and Congress has quietly implemented, as your article states, the "biometric entry-exit tracking system that would better monitor foreigners who legally visit the United States. Completion of that system, which uses fingerprints and iris scans to more accurately capture when people enter and exit the country, was included in an executive order he signed shortly after being sworn in as president."

But Congress is not cooperating on the wall, that's why the focus seems to be so large on building the wall.

Fact Check.org has quoted the estimate that about 44% of the "undocumented population" are those who overstayed their visas.

Of Course, government "estimates" are ridiculously low for various reasons (political to hiding incompetence). There are probably way, way, more illegals than the low ball official estimates.

In any case, whether the % is visa overstay or border crossing, either is a large number and both have to be addressed, as has been the visa overstay issue.

How about being illegal is the line?

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) says Pelosi & Schumer have "blood on their hands" for refusing to secure the border: “Democrats have an open borders philosophy, they don’t believe in border security, they believe this is the way to change the American electorate in order to win elections.”

And once again as if on cue the conspiracy theory's flow

Despite those gradual improvements, the report acknowledges that there is "no specific cause that can be directly attributed to the decrease in overstay rates" in 2017. Guess you missed that

and executive orders once deemed bad are not a replacement for legislation .. which some how could not be passed by his own party ...

"I’ve never heard anyone try any make this argument."

Everyone is making that argument, saying that people can circumvent the wall by going under or over. Using that logic, we should all leave our doors wide open at night, because some burglars know how to bypass deadbolts.

yOu used a different argument, that "so many" police chiefs support it. But you provided zero evidence to support that made up, self serving statement.

The wall is a campaign stunt? I'd bet my life, in return for 50 cents on your end, that you didn't say that when Schumer and Bernie supported a wall. Was it merely a campaign stunt then?

Spence, do you have ANY principles. other than agree with what liberals are saying at the moment? Is that literally the only thing that guides you?

I don't know that we "need" a wall. But it would help reduce illegal immigration.

His party did pass wall funding in the House. The Senate required the other party's help--which was not given.

And executive orders are bad or wrong only when they order something that does not fall within the purview of Article 2 of the Constitution. That is still the case, regardless of who trespasses that restraint, nor of which party allows it to stand. Unfortunately, party power concerns and judicial corruption and inertia have been letting the abuse stand.

That's one of the reasons that the Constitution is barely hanging on, as they say, by a thread--or a few threads.

Interesting article in the LA Times on a new migration pattern:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/mi...cid=spartanntp

Well then you’d just be back to the situation sanctuary laws were employed for in the first place.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think 44 percent is the overall population with the ratio being much higher in recent years. Likely a result of illegal border crossings being so historically low the last decade.

Still, it’s roughly half which supports wdmso’s statement.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Since when were Schumer and Sanders big wall proponents?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

When dealing with millions, 44% vs. 50% is a big difference. And its way different than the 60% you were pretty sure of. But, in any case, either is huge in itself and needs fixing. Comparison, any way, is irrelevant. Fixing one is not at the expense of the other. The border problem needs its own solution. Trying to compare it to another problem in a negative way does not diminish it. It's just a misdirection attempting to disparage the need for a wall.

Are we not at that situation now? Actually being illegal puts a huge crimp in the notion that something is not illegal. Being here illegally is contrary to being here as if you have a right to be here and to being protected from discovery and deportation.

Without explicitly saying so, just about everything you say to justify the protection of and aid to illegal immigrants amounts to the notion, if not the actual fact, that they have a right to be here. It basically supports the idea of open borders. It would be more respectful if you admitted that rather than couching your thoughts in elusive language.

Secure Fence Act of 2006. unless you’re one of those who say a fence and a wall aren’t the same thing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It’s not a misdirection, rather it highlights Trump’s motivation is mostly political.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It doesn’t mean they have a specific right to be here, but it’s an acceptance they they are here, they are an important part of our economy and their presence as undocumented isn’t a crime. It’s a complex systems issue not something you can just boil down to extremes. Reagan understood this, HW understood this, Clinton understood this, W understood this and Obama understood this. Trump, not so much.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I’m giggling
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Haha
Love this post
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Aug 25, 2015 07:39:01 AM Jeb Bush just talked about my border proposal to build a "fence." It's not a fence, Jeb, it's a WALL, and there's a BIG difference!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, it is a misdirection from the wall to the overstays. Each has their own solutions. If it were, as you say, that there is a 50/50 split in how many of each are here, then each is equally important to solve. To deke from one to another as if to say the previous is not valid but merely political is deliberate misdirection.

And OMG, pointing out that a politician's motive is mostly political . . . what a revelation!!! Mostly any politician's motive is mostly political. Pelosi's and Schumer's motives are mostly political. Probably more mostly than Trump's.

(And BTW, "mostly" of something indicates there is more of other somethings. In this case, a need to control illegal border crossings. Your slippery, indefinite verbiage notwithstanding.)

You do realize they all had "mostly" political motivations.

Again, a vague insult with nothing specific about why I was wrong. It's almost all you do.

Spence, let me ask you this...what's the most significant policy agenda item, on which you completely disagree with liberalism? I completely disagree with conservatives on gay marriage and the death penalty, and I have disagreements with conservatism on gun control and on the obligation to provide healthcare to everyone. I can think for myself, which is why I'd never agree 100% of the time with any one party.

How about you?

I don’t think of liberalism as some monolithic block. Mostly I’m a centrist, not a liberal.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Completely false on both points.
.
Are you sure or just "pretty sure"?.Big difference between the two...one is an opinion and the other is a fact.