Yesterday he called a news conference to warn the american people to not become complacent about our vulnerability to attack by terrorist. Isnt this the same man who has refused to guard our borders and left us wide open to attack. Dont get me wrong Bush is far better than any of the dems when it comes to terrorism but i think he is afflicted with the same problem daddy bush had he just doesnt get it what do you think?
2007-11-02 02:07:28 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
As much as I like the guy, his attention to the matter of Border Security has been deplorable.
2007-11-02 02:10:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
The last bill in Congress was sensible by not trying to deport millions of people but recognizing their being here as a crime for which they were to pay a fine and put at the bottom of the list of people who could become citizens. Unfortunately the Republicans in Congress and the President did not go along and the Democrats thought of modifying the bill to appease some of the Republicans and than even the Democrats weren't happy. This whole immigration thing is a mess. The mess existst because Ronald Reagan gave unconditional amnesty to millions in the 1980s signalling that it is okay to cross our border illegally because you will eventually be forgiven for it. I don't see anything happening on this issue for the rest of this Congress.
2007-11-02 02:55:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you get that there have been thousands of terrorists captured or killed since 9-11?
Stop for a second and look at the list of successful attacks on US interests, assets, people and embassies prior to 9-11 and after.
For Bush to have done something difinitive with the border, I'm sure you would be on the band wagon saying he has usurped the congress and taken off on some radical plan to deprive you and the world of some right.
Nancy Pelosi has it in her power to do something about the border with a stroke of the pen. Does she not get it?
The congress had it in their power TWO times to clearly define torture and what a terrorist is. They didn't do it.
Pelosi could do it tommorrow but choses to leave it out there as a tool to leave the country without an Attorney General.
How does it make the country safer to have no chief law enforcement officer? Does she not get it?
2007-11-02 02:25:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
No, it's you who don't get it. We have over 7,000 miles of borders. And that's just the dry border. Factor in the accessible coast line and you've got another 2,000 miles or so. Do you have any idea of the resources required to constantly monitor that much land area? Do you really expect us to fence in America? Especially when the terrorists can simply fly into their nearest international airport on a first class ticket? You see, our enemies are not stupid. They're not going to send Osama over here. They'll send a guy with no record, no history that comes up on our radar.
Bottom line it is and always has been up to the American people, not the American government, to protect America with vigilance. Thinking that the government, any government, can adequately protect us from this type of enemy is naive in the extraordinary and any wall or fence is simply a meaningless and expensive bandaid meant to placate the fears of folks like you.
2007-11-02 02:22:58 · answer #4 · answered by The emperor has no clothes 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
GWB#43 has not caught on to anything. He is trying to be Conservative and he-is the prime example of blurring the distingusion between brain dead and conservative.
I am Richard Cook the other user of texascook@sbcglobal.net. I am a radically liberal conservative hater. I have to plead guilty to Ann Coulter in reverse. I assume all conservatives are brain dead dummies, so stuck in the past they are incapable of a new idea. Conservatives are greedy and abusive. Any democrat would make a better leader than George W. Bush!
2007-11-02 05:46:50 · answer #5 · answered by Cricket Cook Fibromialgia 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush is working on securing the boarders.
It doesn't help matters when you have cities and states opening their arms to illegals.
The terrorists didn't come from the Mexican boarder. The came from Canada last time.
The terrorists that did try to sneak across the Southern boarder were outed by the illegals.
2007-11-02 02:27:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is no serious push by either of the parties leaders to secure our borders. You heard tons of criticism from the Democrats leading up to the last elections about how Bush has really done nothing about port security and airline safety. How they needed to "Take back America" as only they were willing to make us safer. But now that they are in power, they seem to be much more concerned with trying to damage Bush than to do what they promised. I have not seen anything big in port security, airline security (they have held a hearing, whoopee) and have done nothing to secure our borders. I don't know why no one in authority seems to get it. Perhaps they are more afraid of the ACLU and Hispanic Groups than they are of the people who voted for them.
2007-11-02 02:23:19 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
When he goes on TV he's just trying to scare up votes. As you say, the borders are wide open and the ports unsecured. And if it wasn't for Lou Dobbs the Dubai Ports World deal would have gone through.
2007-11-02 02:16:43 · answer #8 · answered by Zardoz 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think talking about our security and ignoring border control is ridiculous. You can't have security with the borders wide open and people streaming through with no control... And I agree, he is better about security than the dems (Hillary wants to give the illegals drivers licenses, which will allow them to register to vote!), but he still does not have it under control.
2007-11-02 02:18:00 · answer #9 · answered by Leah 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think that you over simplify the border issue by stating the executive branch can overrule the legislative branch and the state governments by taking this problem over their heads.
Can you image the field day his opponents would have if he preemtively invaded the border states and declared federal marshal law to 'solve the problem'.
We would hear a non-stop drum beat of his dictatorial abuses forever.
2007-11-02 02:17:05 · answer #10 · answered by ROIHUNTER 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
He is attempting to bring the U.S. into the world economy. So far, it's been painful (more jobs going overseas, etc.). Allowing Mexican trucks (and drivers) to operate on our roadways is supposed to bring the AFL and Teamsters into check. Is it working? Do the profits outweigh the risks? I think he's headed in the wrong direction.
2007-11-02 02:18:52 · answer #11 · answered by Doc 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋