Image 01 Image 03

Democrats Come Out in Support of Taking Down Existing Border Barriers

Democrats Come Out in Support of Taking Down Existing Border Barriers

“Yes, absolutely. I’d take the wall down.”

Protecting our country’s borders and ensuring the sovereignty of our nation should be the one thing we can all agree on. But it’s 2019 and the country has lost its mind. Or at least the Democrats have.

In the midst of the immigration debate, Texas Congressman Dan Crenshaw tweeted a question to the former Congressman from El Paso, Texas and former Senate candidate:

Friday, Beto was asked by MSNBC host Chris Hayes if he supported tearing down existing border barriers around El Paso, to which he responded, “Yes, absolutely. I’d take the wall down.”

Fox News has more:

He continued: “Here’s what we know. After the Secure Fence Act [of 2006], we have built 600 miles of wall and fencing on a 2,000-mile border. What that has done is not in any demonstrable way made us safer. It’s cost us tens of billions of dollars to build and maintain. And it’s pushed migrants and asylum seekers and refugees to the most inhospitable, the most hostile stretches of the U.S.-Mexico border, ensuring their suffering and death.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and other Democrats, including then-Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, supported the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which authorized the construction of some 700 miles of fencing at the border. As of 2015, virtually all of that fencing had been completed, according to government figures.

“More than 4,000 human beings, little kids, women and children, have died,” O’Rourke continued. “They’re not in cages, they’re not locked up, they’re not separated — they’re dead, over the last 10 years, as we have walled off their opportunity to legally petition for asylum, to cross in urban centers like El Paso, to be with family, to work jobs, to do what any human being should have a right to be able to do, what we would do if faced with the same circumstances they were.”

Rep. Crenshaw responded:

And it’s not just Beto. Sen. Gillibrand jumped on board.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Rep. Crenshaw responded:

At least Beto is honest about his open border policy. Most Dems claim to support a secure border while simultaneously undermining it at every turn.

Au contraire. . . . [T]o do what any human being should have a right to be able to do, what we would do if faced with the same circumstances they were is not an honest statement. It’s fantasy and projection. Distilled D’rat innuendo, misdirection, rubbish.

Idiots all. I say Trump must absolutely dump every illegal in their neighborhoods. Bus them up there and let them squat in their yards, defecate, and knock on their doors demanding food, money, clothing, and a room in their house.

    Frank G in reply to gonzotx. | February 15, 2019 at 8:41 pm

    Trouble is – they don’t stay. I’m born and raised in San Diego County and I can say: “The Wall Works”. You’d have to be an idiot or Anti-Reality Democrat to say different. Robert O’Rourke is both

regulus arcturus | February 15, 2019 at 8:16 pm

Beta can start by surrendering all of his security, and any barriers around his house in Austin, where I’m very certain he lives.

There’s only somewhere around 7 billion people on the other side of our border and around 6.5 billion of those won’t need take advantage of our welfare state.

So, let’s tear down that wall…

JusticeDelivered | February 15, 2019 at 8:47 pm

Maybe they have a point, we can deploy automatic machine gun nests along the border, and start executing all invaders trying to illegally enter. Then the only fence we will need are those which keep Americans from wandering into the kill zone.

There is absolutely no excuse for tolerating 20-30 million illegals who will have 4-5 children. They represent a large expense which American taxpayers bear.

“No borders, no walls, no USA at all!”

Combined with their Antifa chant along with their open enthusiasm for infanticide, abolition of private health insurance (i.e. the gub’mint gets to choose) and AOC’s mass killing GND, the democrats have truly become the Death to America party.

“migrants and asylum seekers and refugees” = Illegal alien border jumpers.

The illegal alien problem has been fomented by Democrats and Republicans alike. It may take a few elections, but the people we elected who refuse to actually represent us need to be replaced by people who will represent us.

Emigration reform to reduce the collateral damage (e.g. refugee crises, people left behind, human trafficking, displaced natives, Pro-Choice/abortion) at both ends of the bridge and throughout. Legal immigration that does not exceed the rate of assimilation and integration before selective/cannibalized-child, and that does not harm affordable and available through labor arbitrage, the planet through environmental arbitrage, and communities through shared responsibility. Also, UnPlanned Parenthood for science, human rights, and a viable American future. Mrs. Pelosi, reject the wicked solution, and tear down the walls affording privacy to your abortion chambers.

    stevewhitemd in reply to n.n. | February 15, 2019 at 9:52 pm

    Sucked to get laid off at Buzzfeed, didn’t it n.n?

    Edward in reply to n.n. | February 16, 2019 at 9:31 am

    I sort of got lost in the keyboard diarrhea, but I do wonder why you are concerned with reforming the process for Americans to move out of the country, unless you plan on emigrating if the President wins re-election. Nah, those are always election year promises which are never carried out – dammit

    JusticeDelivered in reply to n.n. | February 16, 2019 at 10:25 am

    Every issue is not about abortion. Have you considered that Dems having abortions might not be such a bad thing?

    Conversely, have you considered that Muslims having 7-8 kids might be a very bad thing?

    Western civilization has a problem in that there are people who take advantage of our good will, and then conquer based on high reproductive rates.

“And it’s pushed migrants and asylum seekers and refugees to the most inhospitable, the most hostile stretches of the U.S.-Mexico border, ensuring their suffering and death.”

That is called a deterrent.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to Hexenjager. | February 15, 2019 at 10:23 pm

    It is a deterrent which needs to be enhanced with technology, thousands, tens of thousands drones, all interconnected with anti-personnel versions to deal with invaders. I think Rags would like to help test the technology 🙂

    We most certainly do not want them here, any hardship they suffer is self inflicted.

    If the deterrent fails, it is to some degree self-selected elimination of those least likely to contribute to society.

There is a very good post in Powerline about the good effects of the existing wall by an El Paso resident today, Showdown in El Paso: A Footnote.

Yes, Beto’s an idiot. But he lost to Cruz 50.8 to 48.3. That’s too close to ignore. He’s like AOC – stupid, but dangerous. If the republicans aren’t worried, they should be. Congressional republicans need to quit straddling the fence and pick a side.

    Colonel Travis in reply to VaGentleman. | February 16, 2019 at 1:38 am

    Agree with you 100% on the big picture. But the Senate race was close because of the candidates, not because the state is on the verge of turning blue. It’s not. Gov. Abbot won re-election easily, for example.

    Cruz has a likability problem even in his own state. I find it irrational, but I’m also intellectually honest enough to admit it exists. He also started campaigning too late. I don’t know how much of an effect it had but I heard people calling into local radio and asking – does this guy even want to win? Letting Robert O’Rourke (I refuse to call this clown by anything but his real name) get that much of a head start was stupid.

    Meanwhile, O’Rourke attracted insanely huge piles of outside money. It was the most expensive Senate race in American history. He had yard signs months before Cruz did, he also got a non-stop kiss-ass media. That kind of starting momentum was big for him.

      VaGentleman in reply to Colonel Travis. | February 16, 2019 at 7:24 am

      I think the outside money was more attracted by the chance to defeat Cruz than by BO. They would have given to a yellow dog if they thought it would beat Cruz.
      Your point about Cruz’s likability problem, coupled with the wide gap between the candidates ideologies raises a question: Did BO get out that many new dem voters or did people on our side dislike Cruz enough to ignore or discount the differences in philosophy and cross over?
      Looking at the map here:
      What caused the border areas to go blue? I would have thought they would be bright red.

        The “border area” has been a Democrat stronghold even before the Texas “Blue Dogs” either switched parties or retired from politics. Need I mention they aren’t Blue Dogs.

        Joe-dallas in reply to VaGentleman. | February 16, 2019 at 10:58 am

        One other point- the valley has always been blue.
        What everyone seems to forget is that Texas is actually a huge urban population with Dallas, FTworth houston, austin and San Antonio. .

        those areas are also huge blue areas

        Colonel Travis in reply to VaGentleman. | February 16, 2019 at 1:43 pm

        Did BO get out that many new dem voters or did people on our side dislike Cruz enough to ignore or discount the differences in philosophy and cross over?

        O’Rourke was so hard left I doubt any (R) who disliked Cruz would dislike him so much to cross over. It may have happened somewhere in some voting booth with someone who never had strong principles to begin with, I’m confident it never happened with any significance. It seemed to me O’Rourke energized apathetic (D) voters who wouldn’t have voted otherwise and Cruz turned some (R)s off.

        As far as the crazy outside-of-Texas money that went to O’Rourke, it was really because of him. It wouldn’t happen to any old (D) candidate placeholder. This is why leftists want him to run for president. I don’t understand the allure. I try (honestly) but I simply don’t get it. He’s kinda dumb and not good on his feet. But that’s Democrats for you. The Ministers Of Truth tell you someone is pure magic and that someone becomes pure magic. No thinking required!

Eastwood Ravine | February 16, 2019 at 12:02 am

When they return to the executive branch and the Democrats move to remove barriers that provide protection to Americans, that might as well be the opening act for a shooting civil war. They’d be deliberately putting American civilian lives at risk.

I can’t believe the Demoncrats took the bait on the Tear Down the Wall suggestion. They really are stupid but I’m supremely grateful!

I pray that they run on Tear Down the Wall, Late Term Abortion, and Socialism for all in 2020.

We had 8 years of Obama craziness and they created Trump!

    Edward in reply to Merlin01. | February 16, 2019 at 9:42 am

    And gun control. At this point it appears a guaranteed campaign point for them, possibly because they expect Camera Hogg to carry the day for them (OK, mostly Bloomberg’s money and possible candidacy).

JusticeDelivered | February 16, 2019 at 10:03 am

It seems that Democrats court lazy, stupid and criminals.

Guatemala Intel Minister: Migrant Caravans Are ‘Well-Planned, ’ Not Spontaneous

From Breitbart
“Guatemalan head of intelligence Mario Duarte said during a visit to Washington Tuesday that the migrant caravans heading to the U.S. southern border are “well-planned” and “well-organized” by those wanting to “weaponize those in need.”

“This was not a spontaneous event. It was well-planned. It was well-organized, ” Duarte, head of the Secretariat of Strategic Intelligence of Guatemala, said at an event hosted by the Center for a Free Secure Society at the National Press Club.

He said different intelligence, law enforcement, and military agencies found evidence that the October caravan from Honduras to the U.S. – which at one point contained about 40, 000 migrants – was organized in advance.

There was a call on October 5 in Honduras for citizens to join a “massive migration walk to the United States, ” he said. “We detected logistical preparation throughout Guatemala and Mexico, to be able to bring all these people to the U.S. southern border.”

He said the main organization behind the caravans was a non-governmental organization based out of Chicago, called Pueblos Sin Fronteras, led by organizer and pastor Emma Lozano. My insert: Pueblos Sin Fronteras is a Soros funded NGO

“We had a big, huge contingent of police officers protecting our border. Unfortunately this migrant groups put women, the elderly and children as young as 40 days of age at the front, and started pushing and pressing against our police force, ” he said.

“We could not even use tear gas … because some of the smoke could hurt the small children, ” he said.

Ohio Historian | February 17, 2019 at 9:56 am

I could go for an open border under the following conditions:
1) People incoming are screened for diseases and contraband like drugs and guns.
2) All Federal and Federally-assisted welfare is prohibited and that is enforced.
3) E-verify is enforced.
4) Automatic deportation upon charging with a crime of DUI or higher.