[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

. . . Walls and fences are temporary solutions that focus on the symptom (illegal immigration) rather than the problem (employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens).

"temporary SOLUTIONS . . ." Hey let's not do anything that isn't permanent . . . you know . . . like all the permanent stuff the government always does. Wait . . . nothing is permanent . . . right? There are no absolutes. Change is normal. Change is good. Hope and change.

Walls and fences are only a speed bump.

Speed bumps work. But, alas, they are only those bugaboo "temporary solutions that focus on the symptom rather than the problem".

People who want to come to the United States to obtain employment will continue to go over, under, and around the walls and fences that are constructed.

See there . . . the temporary SOLUTION just ain't no good. It might stop or slow down a lot of folks. But it won't stop all of them. It ain't a perfect solution. We need an all encompassing perfect and immediate solution or none at all.

Walls and fences will undoubtedly (even though they don't work) result in an increase in fraudulent documents and smuggling through the Ports of Entry.

Exactly. Even Ports of Entry don't work. You can't even stop illegals there. What's the point of a "Port of Entry"? It's supposed to identify fraudulent documents and stop smuggling. What's the point of a wall that funnels illegals to Points of Entry. We could eliminate them and save lots of money.

Walls and fences do not solve the issue of people entering the country legally and staying beyond the date they are required to leave the country, a problem which will undoubtedly increase as more walls and fences are constructed.

There you have it. We better not solve the issue of people entering illegally because it will increase the problem of them coming legally.

The NBPC position regarding walls and fences is not due to a concern of losing our jobs if fences and walls are built. On the contrary, the NBPC realizes that walls and fences require just as much manpower to protect them. Border Patrol Agents witness what happens to walls and fences when there are not enough Border Patrol agents to protect them.

Yup. We'll need more border agents. That's obviously a bad thing. Not part of a permanent all encompassing perfect solution. I thought Mr. Trump also said we need more border agents . . . but he's a liar.

. . . Rather, it is a case study in the folly of treating the words of public-employee union officials as if they should carry weight in policy debates. Public-sector unions are biased by the labor interests of members and their political interests in forging strategic relationships with whoever is in power. Union officials do not tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Disinterested policy insight isn’t something they offer. And politicians who pretend otherwise are trying to mislead you.

No doubt about it . . . Union officials are liars . . . can't go by their claim that a wall would help.

Also not a single Representative in Congress on the Border supports a wall.

Unlike union officials, Congress people tell the truth. They are not self-interested nor politically motivated as are union officials.

Along the 2,000-mile border with Mexico, which sprawls across four states and nine House districts, a single seat is held by a Republican: Representative Will Hurd of Texas.

No doubt those Democrat Representatives are not politically motivated.

And Mr. Hurd, a former undercover C.I.A. officer who barely won re-election in Texas’ 23rd District, the largest of the nine, has emerged as perhaps the most persistent critic in his party of President Trump’s wall.

Drawing upon his years undercover and his work in the private sector, Mr. Hurd has a starkly different vision for the southwestern border: fiber optic cables, sensors, radar, drones, increased staffing — but not the concrete or steel barrier that Mr. Trump has demanded before he reopens the government.

There we go. Mr. Hurd has the total and perfect answer. Mr. Trump should jump the wall thing and latch onto the fiber optics solution. I'm sure Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Schumer will support Mr. Trump on this perfect all-encompassing solution. And it will, somehow, not aggravate the legals-who-overstay problem which a wall would do. And I thought that Mr. Trump said that other stuff, like the drones and fiber optics would be part of an overall solution. But, anyway, he's a liar.

And, unlike a wall, this fiber optics and stuff solution will not just "focus on the symptom (illegal immigration) rather" it will focus on "the problem (employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens)"
. . . right?