Thread: Is a border fence offensive?

Or is it another one of your famous 'Bash Ron Paul' threads...???

"1.) Enforce our current laws in the workplace."

This line needs to be addressed in regards to building a wall

A huge part of the illegal workforce cannot be addressed "in the workplace"

Landscapers , painting companies ,pool services , the huge floor cleaning service industries and many others are fly by night , most of the time
"underground" businesses that would never have to worry about
workplace enforcement ,

Sure they would get a few busts from IBP beef or tyson chicken

But without the fence they will still sneak in here and work , And
a big part also is how many sneak in here not to work but to
commit crimes ? They would still have an open door

IMHO, arguing against a quality border fence is a non-starter. A quality (physical) fence should have been part of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. Least we forget, a quality (Duncan Hunter's double-layered version) fence is not only for the purpose of slowing illegal immigration.

Ironically, President Calderon and most amnesty supporters also consider a border fence offensive.

According to NumbersUSA:

Voted on House floor against amendment to increase security with border fence in 2005
Rep. Paul voted against the Hunter Amendment to H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005. The Hunter Amendment would shore up security by building fences and other physical infrastructure to keep out illegal aliens. Specifically, it mandates the construction of specific security fencing, including lights and cameras, along the Southwest border for the purposes of gaining operational control of the border. As well, it includes a requirement for the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a study on the use of physical barriers along the Northern border. The Hunter Amendment passed by a vote of 260-159.

Ron Paul voted against the fence in 2005. He voted for it in 2006. Ron Paul calls the fence "offensive" in 2008.

PineStrawGuys wrote:

I thought this thread was about the 'fence'...

Lately things do seem to have a tendancy to get off track around here.

I'm not arguing against a fence, I'm simply stating my reasons for believing that it could be found 'offensive' by someone who is FOR border security.

Personally I would and do support a 2,000 mile fence from Brownsville to San Diego even though I find the thing 'offensive' also.

Does someone have a problem with that? Does that make me an illegal alien supporter?

PineStrawGuys wrote:

Personally I would and do support a 2,000 mile fence from Brownsville to San Diego even though I find the thing 'offensive' also.

If you don't mind me asking, why do you find the fence offensive?

MOD EDIT I hope it offends the Illegal Sons Of _____ along with the Bleeding Heart Liberal Jack ____s in the Senate and the House.

Originally Posted by MW

If you don't mind me asking, why do you find the fence offensive?

For several reasons, starting with the fact that it's current necessity stems directly from the fact that this nation no longer has 'good Corporate citizens'. Our 'America first' business model has been destroyed by profit-seeking multi-national conglomerates without a shred of loyalty to the nation that created them. This type of corporate behavior DISGUSTS me, as it should ALL Americans.

Additionally, it's a BLIGHT on the landscape. It's UGLY. It is (or will be) a HUGE SCAR running across some of the most beautiful areas of the desert Southwest.

I'm sure I can come up with other reasons but those 2 are my biggies.