Skip to comments.
U.S.-Mexico Border Plan Nixed
CBS 11 DALLAS ^
| 27 OCTOBER 2007
| AP
Posted on 10/27/2007 10:20:54 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-59 next last
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Is the opposition to the fence because they will lose access to the water?
Before jumping to big govt. taking from citizens (eminent domain) or making negative comments about a whole group of people (surname reference) maybe a little analysis of why there is opposition should take place. Aren’t those on the border the most vulnerable and shouldn't they be the first to support a fence?
21
posted on
10/27/2007 11:17:06 AM PDT
by
wmfights
(LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
To: muawiyah
Gov. Perry certainly thinks the state of Texas has the right of eminent domain to take the land from farmers for the Trans Texas corridor, so surely the US should have that same right along its southern border. Let’s have some consistency here.
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Benavides, a lifelong resident of Roma, said residents and local governments may eventually lose their battle against the fence, but they plan to keep fighting. State officials, including Republican Gov. Rick Perry, also oppose plans to build the fence. Next, these guys will want to give back the Alamo. :-(
23
posted on
10/27/2007 11:21:33 AM PDT
by
calcowgirl
("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
I have been down there, along the Rio Grande in south texas is 95% latino. The Latino power is big The land is probably owned by them for a couple of generations now, it’s Mexico for all practically purpose. Thats why the refusal to allow a fence. Its too late, critical mass has been reached years ago.
24
posted on
10/27/2007 11:25:49 AM PDT
by
modican
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Have the landowners never heard of eminent domain? That is the next step, and a legitimate use of the government’s power. A step towards national defense, if you will.
That is opposed to the local (New Jersey) situation in which communities are trying to take well located properties to enable larger tax ratables to be built.
25
posted on
10/27/2007 11:25:57 AM PDT
by
JimRed
("Hey, hey, Teddy K., how many girls did you drown today?" TERM LIMITS, NOW!)
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Phuque 'em ...
EMMINENT DOMAIN
26
posted on
10/27/2007 11:31:04 AM PDT
by
knarf
(I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true.)
To: texastoo
No doubt you could see trails as there is no pavement. May people line up by the river holding cups, begging.
////////////
begging is it? so your point is that mexico’s elites are both greedier and smarter than america’s elites. I don’t think you really understand what’s happening.
I am not saying that some people dont swim across. They do. But you have to admit that you dont see the pictures of them swimming like you see them walking across in Arizona, hundreds at a time. Arizona is where the fence is needed.
///////////////
what you see are trash piles. some of the junk is not bad looking. Mexico doesn’t have poverty like say the indonesia or sections of india.
the rio grande is the border but it is no barrier.
arizona needs a fense too.
27
posted on
10/27/2007 11:33:16 AM PDT
by
ckilmer
To: JimRed
They could bring it in a few miles. Just fence and follow the back roadways or buy from who would sell and put up guards at entry points. Nature would not be disturbed and people here without authorization couldn’t go anywhere. The businesses in the red zones could be monitored for legal employees much easier. No plans for development would be approved on the south side. No schools. No stores. Gradually turn it into a park and turn it over to the park rangers.
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Congress has authorized $1.2 billion to build 700 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border. The project includes about 330 miles of so-called virtual fence - a network of cameras, high-tech sensors, radar and other technology. The remaining sections, primarily in urban areas are expected to have an actual fence. About 70 miles of actual fence is planned in South Texas.
Bush... we voted for a warrior, and we got a NWO idiot who lacks the guts and common sense to defend our border. Our "virtual fence" sections should only be virtual in one sense: that they are made up of labels that say "THIS END TOWARDS ENEMY".
29
posted on
10/27/2007 11:44:35 AM PDT
by
snowrip
(Liberal? YOU ARE A SOCIALIST WITH NO RATIONAL ARGUMENT.)
To: modican
I have been down there, along the Rio Grande in south texas is 95% latino. The Latino power is big The land is probably owned by them for a couple of generations now, its Mexico for all practically purpose. Thats why the refusal to allow a fence. Its too late, critical mass has been reached years ago. I've often heard from Texans "Don't Mess with Texas." But is McAllen to Brownsville really "Texas" any more? Is it more Mexico than Texas? What if it was made a Mexican State instead of a US State? Would Texans miss it?
30
posted on
10/27/2007 11:59:45 AM PDT
by
Solitar
("My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them." -- Barry Goldwater)
To: ckilmer
Go ahead, take Chertoffs plan for a fence. I don’t care.
I have lived 9 miles from the border for the past 20 years. Maybe, I don’t understand as you have flown over the border and you are a know it all. NOT.
Our city bus route goes to the border. Illegals have border crossing cards and most don’t have to swim. This is the reason for the over stay of visas.
Mexico claims approximately 400 deaths in the desert each year with about 60 deaths from drowning. The numbers aren’t even close.
Chertoff would love for you to back him. You can’t smell a set up by Chertoff? The border mayors are trying for money not to build a fence but they claim other programs to keep the illegals out. They want money.
31
posted on
10/27/2007 12:00:01 PM PDT
by
texastoo
((((((USA)))))((((((, USA))))))((((((. USA))))))))
To: Solitar
Where do you live? Maybe we can change that to little Mexico also.
It is true that the population is 95% hispanic. More people are over here since Bush. Your government has invested over a billion in this economy to make it go. Welfare and food stamps is rampant here. Nafta almost did this area in when Mexico hoarded water in 1992. Bush did nothing.
We still speak English.LOL!
32
posted on
10/27/2007 12:07:40 PM PDT
by
texastoo
((((((USA)))))((((((, USA))))))((((((. USA))))))))
To: texastoo
Brownsville is part of Cameron County which went red for the first time in who knows when. I agree that most don’t wade the river. If the rest of the border gets fenced then they might though. I believe we need a fence but we don’t have to have one to claim our territory. It doesn’t have to be at the waters edge.
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
"You are talking about land that Texans and Americans shed blood for to keep," he said. When did that ever matter?
34
posted on
10/27/2007 12:19:59 PM PDT
by
unixfox
(The 13th Amendment Abolished Slavery, The 16th Amendment Reinstated It !)
To: texastoo
Or just make the southernmost four counties (Hidalgo, Cameron, Willacy and Starr) their own 51st US State?
And maybe El Paso a 52nd. Then the rest of Texas can be Texas.
35
posted on
10/27/2007 12:21:04 PM PDT
by
Solitar
("My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them." -- Barry Goldwater)
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Use the eminent domain law. Isn't that why the Supremes passed that law, or is that just for things that the government really wants to build?
36
posted on
10/27/2007 12:24:52 PM PDT
by
NRA2BFree
(Some elected people are alive only because it's illegal to kill them!!!)
To: Solitar
I live in Brownsville and I wish you could see all the US flags here. We are not your typical stereotyped border town.
To: texastoo
The fence should be built where there is no river. Not that many people try to cross the river especially in Brownsville. It is deeper and wider at the mouth of the Rio Grande river. Not many people try to swim it.I was in the Del Rio area recently. The Rio Grande is so narrow there I could throw a rock across it. And anyone crossing has ideal cover in the thick growth of cane on the US side. If any place needs a fence, that does. Their big problem is going to be the homeowners whose houses line the banks. I don't know how they're going to accommodate them.
38
posted on
10/27/2007 12:27:38 PM PDT
by
John Jorsett
(scam never sleeps)
To: CindyDawg
Cameron County only went for Bush. The Catholic bishop was running half page ads. He is against abortion. That is the reason they went for Bush. The other democrats that were running in Cameron County were reeleted with large majorities.
I believe the majority of illegals walk across. They don’t swim. Arizona needs the fence more than we do since we will only have 700 miles. Put it where it will do the most good.
39
posted on
10/27/2007 12:27:58 PM PDT
by
texastoo
((((((USA)))))((((((, USA))))))((((((. USA))))))))
To: calcowgirl
Next, these guys will want to give back the Alamo. :-(LOL! It won't be long.
40
posted on
10/27/2007 12:29:32 PM PDT
by
texastoo
((((((USA)))))((((((, USA))))))((((((. USA))))))))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-59 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson