Bush to sign border fence bill during Arizona campaign swing


PDA






Desertdog
October 3, 2006, 10:50 PM
Bush to sign border fence bill during Arizona campaign swing
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=5493368

President Bush plans to sign a bill that could bring hundreds of miles of fencing to the busiest illegal entry point on the U.S.-Mexico border during a campaign swing through Arizona on Wednesday.


The signing will be another move in Bush's get-tough approach to illegal immigration and will come in the state that has been the illegal entry hot spot for several years and the center of much of the debate over secure borders.

Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano is expected to be present for the bill signing at the Camelback Inn in Paradise Valley. The ceremony will follow a breakfast fundraiser for U.S. Rep. Rick Renzi, a Republican seeking a third term from Arizona's sprawling 1st District.

Included in the Homeland Security funding measure Bush plans to sign is $1.2 billion for border security spending, including fences and other barriers along the border.

Bush's actions come despite last-minute pleas from the Mexican government for him to veto the bill. In a diplomatic note sent to the United States on Monday, Mexico harshly criticized the Senate vote authorizing 700 miles of new fencing along the border.

The money will also go toward border infrastructure and other security assets and resources that will complement the development of a high-tech virtual fence that DHS announced almost two weeks ago, agency spokesman Russell Knocke said.

DHS awarded a $67 million contract to Boeing Co. to install 28 miles of high-tech fencing along a portion of the Arizona border, including towers with cameras and other sophisticated sensing devices. The $67 million comes from money allocated during the fiscal year that ended Saturday, Knocke said.

The government has said the virtual fence will eventually cover 6,000 miles along the Mexican and Canadian borders in efforts to make them secure. It has not placed a price tag on the project.

"Fencing is an important part of the plan for the urban areas," Knocke said. Physical fencing will be more critical in those settings where undocumented crossers can quickly blend in with crowds of people, he said.

In remote areas, Knocke added, the virtual fencing will be more important in enabling Border Patrol agents to intercept illegal immigrants "on their own terms and in the location of their own choosing."

Mario Martinez, a Border Patrol spokesman in Washington, said no figures were available yet on how much fencing is to be built.

The visit will be Bush's 15th to Arizona as president, and second since a May 18 stop in Yuma to tour the U.S.-Mexican border near San Luis.

Bush was scheduled to arrive in Arizona on Tuesday evening following a day of campaigning in California for Republican candidates.

"The president has shown that he loves Arizona and the voters ... have stayed with him, they're true supporters, true in their loyalty to him," Renzi said.

If you enjoyed reading about "Bush to sign border fence bill during Arizona campaign swing" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Biker
October 3, 2006, 10:56 PM
Excuse me for not posting a more lengthy reply, but duplicity makes me puke.

Biker

bouis
October 3, 2006, 10:59 PM
So this is how the poor must feel about Democrats and all the things they do to (purportedly) advance their "war on poverty," eh?

http://www.businesslinkwessex.co.uk/uploads/content/carrot-stick(1).jpg

FTF
October 3, 2006, 11:00 PM
Too little, too late and too close to mid-terms. :cuss:

They're already here you retards!

.38 Special
October 3, 2006, 11:02 PM
That's an expensive fence. We could probably save some money by hiring Mexicans to do it.

Lone_Gunman
October 3, 2006, 11:02 PM
The signing will be another move in Bush's get-tough approach to illegal immigration and will come in the state that has been the illegal entry hot spot for several years and the center of much of the debate over secure borders.



Get tough approach???

I must have entered some bizarro world where up is down, black is white, and Bush is tough on immigration.

Either that, or its just an election year.

salvador31c
October 3, 2006, 11:06 PM
"Bush's actions come despite last-minute pleas from the Mexican government for him to veto the bill. In a diplomatic note sent to the United States on Monday, Mexico harshly criticized the Senate vote authorizing 700 miles of new fencing along the border."

Sorry for not knowing this if i should but why would Mexico Care if we put up a fence its like when i put up block fence around my home why would my neighbors care they got a nice new block fence for free

Lone_Gunman
October 3, 2006, 11:08 PM
Mexico wants illegal immigration to continue. Millions of dollars of US money are sent back to Mexico each year by the illegal immigrants.

Desertdog
October 3, 2006, 11:19 PM
Mexico urges Bush to veto U.S. border fence bill
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-10-02T152952Z_01_N02359478_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEXICO-USA.xml&src=rss&rpc=22


MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexico pleaded with President Bush on Monday to veto a Senate proposal to build a new fence to keep illegal immigrants out, saying it could backfire by making the border more dangerous.

The U.S. Senate overwhelmingly backed a bill on Friday to construct about 700 miles of fence, a project Republicans hope will impress voters calling for tougher immigration control ahead of November 7 congressional elections.

"The Mexican government strongly opposes the building of walls in the border area between Mexico and the United States," President Vicente Fox's spokesman Ruben Aguilar told reporters on Monday.

"This decision hurts bilateral relations, goes against the spirit of cooperation needed to guarantee security on the common, creates a climate of tension in border communities," he said.



Aguilar said it would send a diplomatic note to Washington later on Monday urging Bush to veto the bill, which requires the president's signature to become law.

.38 Special
October 3, 2006, 11:22 PM
I'm very nearly a proponent of open borders.

But the Mexican government's stand on the border irritates the daylights out of me. And the fact that anyone at all on this side of the border gives a flying @#$! about what the Mexicans think we should do about immigration is arguably even more annoying.

3rdpig
October 4, 2006, 02:16 AM
At this moment in time I don't care WHY it's being done, just that it IS being done. It's pointless to worry about what to do with the illegals that are already here while thousands more are pouring across the border each day. Shut off the flow, then we'll deal with illegals already here and employers that knowingly hire them

I'm glad to see the Republicans are getting the message from their base, "Start behaving and voting like conservatives or we'll vote third party and Dems will wind up in office".

I'm also happy that the core Republican base is standing firm and not putting up with the RINO's in the Senate. The message is much like the one that the Father of Dobie Gillis had for his son. "I brought you into this world, and I can take you back out again". We put them there, and by God we can put them right back in the private sector if they stray too far from their base.

mons meg
October 4, 2006, 07:30 AM
Shut off the flow, then we'll deal with illegals already here and employers that knowingly hire them

Shutting off the flow will not be accomplished with a fence.

ilbob
October 4, 2006, 10:37 AM
how about a real get tough policy? a few snipers at random places along the border. inexpensive and effective. it is time to take the invasion seriously.

El Tejon
October 4, 2006, 10:43 AM
Feckless.

fourays2
October 4, 2006, 11:26 AM
trying to figure out just who's the bigger hypocrit here, either jorge bush or our "alternative lifestyle" governor who has vetoed every piece of border legislation given to her.:banghead:

LAR-15
October 4, 2006, 11:28 AM
It's a good start.

We need to constrict the border flow first, then go after who is here.

The fact that Mexico is upset at this, means it will work.

I support it.

Desertdog
October 4, 2006, 11:48 AM
"Start behaving and voting like conservatives or we'll vote third party and Dems will wind up in office".
During the Clinton years, how many Democrats switched to the Republican Party? IIRC it was over 400. If so, maybe that is what happened to to the Republican party.

If that is the case, let's get the third party candidates to change the party to where we want it.

Keith Wheeler
October 4, 2006, 11:49 AM
The fact that Mexico is upset at this, means it will work.

Ah yes, Mexico's reaction surely trumps two thousand years of history that shows fences don't work. From the Great Wall to the Berlin Wall...

LAR-15
October 4, 2006, 11:51 AM
The border fence at San Diego is working extremely well and was supported by Democrats and Republicans alike.

Desertdog
October 4, 2006, 11:59 AM
Ah yes, Mexico's reaction surely trumps two thousand years of history that shows fences don't work. From the Great Wall to the Berlin Wall..
But the Berlin Wall did work. Yes, I realize that a few got through, then hords got through when the wall fell.

Don't forget;The Berlin Wall was not to keep people out , it was to keep people in. Never forget that

Keith Wheeler
October 4, 2006, 12:13 PM
The border fence at San Diego is working extremely well and was supported by Democrats and Republicans alike.

In San Diego. In very controlled, very calm terrain. I lived in San Diego for 6 years. One of my favorite hobbies during that time period was to take my Rover out into the "back country" -- the Anza Borrego desert, "valley of the moon", "canyon sin nombre"...fun places to go. Have you ever been there? The terrain is ungodly rough, to put it mildy. One of my favorite humourous anecdotes was having lunch on the tailgate of the Rover, only a few hundred yards from the border, watching a border patrol agent trying in vain to get his jeep cherokee up the hill we were on top of. A few minutes later he came walking past on foot...

Mexicans who struggle through that terrain won't be stopped by a fence. It seems to me that a fence will be on a difficulty level of 8, the terrain 10+. Add in to that the remoteness of these places and difficulty of maintaining any structure in this environment, one of the most geologically active places on earth. Research the railroad through Anza-Borrego, and how difficult that was to maintain.

My point being "build a fence! build a fence!" is about like the anti-gunners saying "no more school shootings, ban guns!".

Are there places where a border fence is practical? Sure. And these exist in many places, and should be bolstered where practical. The concept of building "The Great Fence of America's South Border", an all encompassing way to keep "them" out, will be an expensive waste of effort. In my opinion, the concept of a complete fence on the border is only a knee-jerk reaction presented by well meaning citizens and clueless politicians who have never actually visited the rugged and punishing terrain they are talking about.

LAR-15
October 4, 2006, 12:24 PM
But a fence in areas where the border is easy to cross is necessary.

It's not a 'cure all' but in certain places a solid fence is needed.

I'm not naive enough to think a fence is the magic answer.

MrTuffPaws
October 4, 2006, 12:38 PM
Can't we just annex Mexico and be done with it?

longeyes
October 4, 2006, 12:41 PM
I'm waiting to see a crackdown on employers. Until we do that, and start taking away public assistance and money transfer, we're not going to make serious headway on this problem.

The fence is one important step but only the first of many needed.

Color me skeptical.

.38 Special
October 4, 2006, 12:43 PM
Can't we just annex Mexico and be done with it?
Amen, brother. There ain't nothing wrong with Mexico except for Mexican government. And one well armed troop of Boy Scouts could solve that little problem within a week, max.

Then instead of being a bunch of damned foreigners stealing jobs from decent Americans, they'd just be a bunch of hard working folks trying to get ahead.

Hmm...

Keith Wheeler
October 4, 2006, 12:45 PM
I'm waiting to see a crackdown on employers.

The current administration is too in love with the "free market" to do much of anything against businesses.

While people fret over our government becoming Big Brother, our nation's corporations have taken 1984 as their blueprint, newspeak and all. We've become a nation of "one market under g-d", that is the largest threat to our security and liberties.

It seems really simple....if people illegally enter the US looking for work, prevent them from working...faced with that obvious equation instead we decide to spend as yet undetermined millions to build a fence here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Fontspoint02262006.JPG

.38 Special
October 4, 2006, 12:49 PM
It seems really simple....if people illegally enter the US looking for work, prevent them from working
Exactly. Nothing gets my goat more than people trying to earn a living. Next thing you know they'll be grocery shopping and renting apartments and just generally contributing to the economy. Those bastards.

Manedwolf
October 4, 2006, 01:13 PM
Speech, dog and pony show, and then as soon as he leaves the state, take down the sets and quietly drain the funding.

Same old story. And too little, too late.

Oh, and:


Next thing you know they'll be grocery shopping and renting apartments and just generally contributing to the economy.

I take it you don't live in an area where there's lots of illegals? Twelve guys per apartment with salsa music blaring (and lots of drinking), and the opening of just-like-back-home thirdworld "mercados" that constantly fail health department inspections doesn't do much for the area.

LAR-15
October 4, 2006, 01:14 PM
BS.

Only congress can drain the funding and the Repubs won't.

Manedwolf
October 4, 2006, 01:18 PM
They won't drain the funding?

Huh! Tell that to the firefighters and other first responders who were promised all sorts of funding for new equipment and radios.

If it's not home-district porkbarrel that can be tacked into a spending bill, it's a target to have its drain plug pulled, and the porkbarrel people then gather beneath the spout to guzzle.

TMAS
October 4, 2006, 01:19 PM
Exactly. Nothing gets my goat more than people trying to earn a living. Next thing you know they'll be grocery shopping and renting apartments and just generally contributing to the economy. Those bastards.

So am I correct in believeing that you feel it's OK to break our countries laws, in order to make a living, and go shopping and such?

.38 Special
October 4, 2006, 01:27 PM
So am I correct in believeing that you feel it's OK to break our countries laws, in order to make a living, and go shopping and such?
I feel that the argument is circular. "We don't want them here because they broke the law in coming here so that's why it should be illegal for them to come here. Because they're breaking the law."

If the only thing that's bothering you is that they are breaking the law by coming here, then let's make it legal. Problem solved.

longeyes
October 4, 2006, 01:41 PM
While people fret over our government becoming Big Brother, our nation's corporations have taken 1984 as their blueprint, newspeak and all. We've become a nation of "one market under g-d", that is the largest threat to our security and liberties.

+1

The fact that they are lawbreakers isn't the only reason to oppose illegal immigration from Mexico and Central America. Maybe we don't want to reproduce the cultural and political environment of those countries up here? Maybe we don't want our society Mexicanized?

.38 Special
October 4, 2006, 01:55 PM
Maybe we don't want to reproduce the cultural and political environment of those countries up here? Maybe we don't want our society Mexicanized?
An honest argument!

Frankly, I don't much care for the way the typical Mexican wants to live. Sixteen to a house, mom popping out a kid a year, lawn gone all to hell. But that's being honest and honest is often looked at askance in this world. Moreover, even reading what I just wrote, it seems kind of racist. But we like people who think like us and act like us and live like us, which is just human nature.

Is that enough reason to put up a wall intended to prevent our neighbors from escaping their third-world hellhole? Not in my opinion.

cmidkiff
October 4, 2006, 01:57 PM
'Good fences make good neighbors'

The US government has the right to specify who, and how many, immigrants we will allow into our country, just as every other country on earth does. You want to attempt an exercise in futility... try to move to Mexico permanently!

'but it's too hard'... with the contruction methods that we have available, a simple security fence across rough ground is _not_ an impossible task.

'but they're just trying to make a living'... These people broke our laws getting here, and continue to break our laws by using false ID's, stolen SSN's, and a whole host of other crimes. Even simple daily activities such as driving (without a license, and without insurance) is AGAINST THE LAW.

'the fence won't work'... If it won't work, why is every open-borders group in the country dead set against them? A decent fence, with regular maintence, electronic monitoring, and regular patrols WILL END the huge stream of people invading our nation from the south.

Yes, I accept that a small number of creative individuals will manage to cross the fence. I also realize that in addition to the fence, we need to target employers who hire illegals, and state and local governments who provide them with benifits reserved for citizens. That doesn't change the fact that a good fence is a positive step towards securing our nations borders.

As far as the sudden support from politicians, it just lets us know that they are starting to listen to the people of this country, who are DEMANDING that the border be secured.

.38 Special
October 4, 2006, 02:00 PM
'but they're just trying to make a living'... These people broke our laws getting here, and continue to break our laws by using false ID's, stolen SSN's, and a whole host of other crimes. Even simple daily activities such as driving (without a license, and without insurance) is AGAINST THE LAW.
More circularity. All of these "crimes" can be prevented by allowing them to live here legally.

Manedwolf
October 4, 2006, 02:29 PM
More circularity. All of these "crimes" can be prevented by allowing them to live here legally.

And the people who have been patiently waiting for their chance to enter legally?

Reward cutting in line?

And more and more, I think places like Switzerland, Iceland, etc have the only option for survival as a first world nation. You can emigrate...IF you already have a job lined up.

Keith Wheeler
October 4, 2006, 02:52 PM
'but it's too hard'... with the contruction methods that we have available, a simple security fence across rough ground is _not_ an impossible task.

"rough ground"? Again, have you been to these places? Calling these places "rough ground" is kind of like saying "Bill Gates has some money". A "simple security fence" is nothing compared to the terrain we're talking about.

I didn't say it was impossible however, what I've claimed is that in some places it is just not economically worth it to build a 'fence'. Again, it seems to me that people who support this fence do so in the same blind way people support anti-gun legislation. Make it realistic project, not just a reaction.

AGAINST THE LAW

So was drinking beer, but we changed that.

But we like people who think like us and act like us and live like us, which is just human nature.

This is exactly the sort of "reasoning" as to why I'm a heavily armed Jew.

SoCalShooter
October 4, 2006, 02:55 PM
Seriously for the love of Cthulu does anyone remember Chinese history seriously they built the Great Wall to keep out the Mongols and guess what that did not work!!!

Biker
October 4, 2006, 03:01 PM
What the hell does that have to do with a fence designed to keep illegal wetbacks out of our country?
Good Lord, these people aren't led by a brilliant Mongol Khan, they're not armed with siege engines,composite bows, and they're not riding fleet steppe ponies.
You're comparing apples and canaries.

Biker

SoCalShooter
October 4, 2006, 03:05 PM
These are very resourceful carnaries cause 12million of them have made it here. Its a war of attrition. And they dont need to be led by a military genious just need to have that the will to make a better life for themselves. I see it as an unessary cost. There are many many other things we can do to deter them that cost less money. Not to mention (conspiracy theory coming up) that wall could be used to keep you in.

If you enjoyed reading about "Bush to sign border fence bill during Arizona campaign swing" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!