Skip to comments.
Chertoff to deliver Texas landowners ultimatum on border fence
The Houston Chronicle/AP ^
| Dec. 6, 2007
| SUZANNE GAMBOA
Posted on 12/06/2007 1:17:42 PM PST by SwinneySwitch
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
It's about to hit the fan!
To: SwinneySwitch
THIS is where a proper exercise of eminent domain is warranted.
2
posted on
12/06/2007 1:20:10 PM PST
by
fishtank
(Fenced BORDERS, English LANGUAGE, Patriotic CULTURE: A good plan.)
To: SwinneySwitch
I would be in favor a simple choice to those in the pathway.
Do you want to be on the Northside of the fence or the Southside?
3
posted on
12/06/2007 1:21:06 PM PST
by
thackney
(life is fragile, handle with prayer)
To: flattorney; bigjoesaddle; FryingPan101; AnimalLover; backtothestreets; Olephart; pulaskibush; ...
Ping!
If you want on, or off this S. Texas/Mexico ping list, please FReepMail me.
4
posted on
12/06/2007 1:22:26 PM PST
by
SwinneySwitch
(US Constitution Article 4 Section 4..shall protect each of them against Invasion...domestic Violence)
To: SwinneySwitch
About 127 miles of land are being considered for the fencing and about 15 miles of that is on property where the government cannot get access 127 miles? Thats all? As for those 15 miles, go around them and they can become citizens of Mexico.
To: SwinneySwitch
If they want access to the river, why not build a gate?
Otherwise, I’m suspect of the reasons.
6
posted on
12/06/2007 1:28:35 PM PST
by
wolfcreek
(The Status Quo Sucks!)
To: SwinneySwitch
If it was just a developer who wanted Mrs. Crabapples acres for a mall, the bulldozers would have already rolled across her house.
7
posted on
12/06/2007 1:29:11 PM PST
by
Travis McGee
(---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
To: SwinneySwitch
Chertoff has -- and will -- do nothing. Sounds like one more scheme of his to delay, delay, delay, delay, delay, delay.
So far several US cities have been hit by Islamonazis and Chertoff does NOTHING .. except to delay and work to give them Amnesty.
8
posted on
12/06/2007 1:29:39 PM PST
by
Diogenesis
(Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
To: SwinneySwitch
Seems like a simple proposition to me - which side of the fence do they want to be on?
Chertoff et al simply hope to divide and conquer - pitting private property rights against the constitutionally mandated federal charge to protect the borders - and to delay the construction for as long as possible. We of course won't see any of this humming and hawing with the TTC (or gated retirement complexes).
9
posted on
12/06/2007 1:35:25 PM PST
by
M203M4
(True Universal Suffrage: Pets of dead illegal-immigrant felons voting Democrat (twice))
To: wolfcreek
If they want access to the river, why not build a gate? Livestock can't use keys or unlock combination padlocks.
But, honestly, based on their actions to date, it sounds like the government has no interest in accommodating the landowners or listening to their (legitimate) requirements.
They're being ham-handed. Either, by nature...or intentionally.
10
posted on
12/06/2007 1:36:47 PM PST
by
okie01
(.)
To: SwinneySwitch
"...the way they are approaching solving security problems, we just disagree with," said McAllen Mayor Richard Cortez. "We just don't see how a non-continuous fence, when you have 6,000 miles of land borders, is going to stop terrorism and illegal immigration. We continue to believe it is a waste of taxpayers' money."
LMAO! This is hilarious coming from a Democrat Mayor of a federal money sinkhole located 8 miles north of the border.
11
posted on
12/06/2007 1:42:58 PM PST
by
Liberty Valance
(Keep a simple manner for a happy life :o)
To: SwinneySwitch
John McClung, president of the Texas Produce Association opposes the fence. Hmm...Texas Produce Association. Who uses a lot of illegal alien labor?
To: M203M4
That’s what makes me think that this is a ploy - that the land selected was picked specifically to cause an uproar and the Chertoff knew at least some landowners would balk.
To: Liberty Valance
“...This is hilarious coming from a Democrat Mayor of a federal money sinkhole located 8 miles north of the border.”
Amen. The eastern third of Mexico is receiving US food stamps and WIC payments. Talk about a federal money sinkhole!
To: fishtank
There is no proper exercise of eminent domain. I guess you’ve never been a victim of this socialist gimmick.
To: cannonball
The Tennessee Valley Authority was unconstitutional?
16
posted on
12/06/2007 1:55:17 PM PST
by
Borges
To: SwinneySwitch
I’ve been to McAllen and that whole area. A lot of those land owners are farmers. They can get water from the Rio Grande through pumping and standard plumbing. The real reason they don’t want a fence is because they rely heavily on illegals to work the fields down there, especially the cane fields. This is about super cheap labor.
17
posted on
12/06/2007 1:56:49 PM PST
by
navyguy
(Some days you are the pigeon, some days you are the statue.)
To: SwinneySwitch
You may own the land, but you don’t own the border. There is a compelling government interest, here. This is a legitimate use of eminent domain.
Maybe they would prefer it if we fenced around the other side of their property and ceded their land to Mexico so we could have a defensible border...
18
posted on
12/06/2007 1:56:55 PM PST
by
gridlock
(Recycling is the new Religion.)
To: Travis McGee
19
posted on
12/06/2007 1:58:15 PM PST
by
Guenevere
(Duncan Hunter...President '08)
To: thackney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 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