« Fifth Column Takes Control of the House Judiciary Committee | Main | Zero Tolerance For Wetting Pants »

How long will this administration continue to have our Border Patrol and National Guard put into harm's way without fighting back. If the NG had been allowed to fire back and would have killed a few of those upstanding Mexican citizens, we might see a change in attitude on the southern side of the border.
Oh, well, perhaps when we are willing to give all of Mexico our Social Security benefits, they will like us more.

Countdown before one of the trolls accuses us of being racist...

5... 4... 3... 2...

It would help if the moonbats would allow our NG troops on the border to have GUNS.

We should send troops to the border! Oh wait, they're in Iraq. And ASSghanistan. And Germany. And about 100 other countries around the globe. Why? Because of imperialist conservative policies, of course.

Hey, a liberal troll showed up to CHANGE THE SUBJECT!! What a surprise.

So, mr. troll, care to comment on the SUBJECT AT HAND instead of Iraq?

Didn't think so.

Do you agree or disagree that the government should seal our souther border?

wakeupfools, sorry if you knew you ass from a hole in the ground you would know that a) the NG is designed to protect our borders and our citizens and b) only 30% of the NG is allowed to be deployed to foreign wars at any given time.

Geeze, you liberals are soooooo stupid.

Um, you don't seem to understand that 30% of the NG being stuck in Iraq means there's 30% of the NG that can't patrol the border. I know it's a difficult concept to get your pea brain around, but do try.

And yes, I do agree the government should seal the U.S.-Mexican border. But the government is filled with conservative tools like you who must constantly seek out and instigate meaningless wars that consume our troops and limited resources. These resources would be better utilized on legitimate government functions, like protecting the border. Unfortunately, Bush has crippled our ability to do this and Democrats would rather just ignore the issue altogether.

Wake up, fools!

During the eight years of the Clinton administration, no one was rushing to seal the border.

It has nothing to do with "conservative tools".

There's no question that defending our border should have much higher priority than Iraq. But we have the resources to handle both situations easily. It's only the will that's lacking, thanks to moonbattery.

wakeupfools, you seem hell bent to prove that your small liberal mind can only handle one thing at a time. So much for being able to multi-task.
As for being "stuk in Irak" those soldiers who signed the dotted line have a different opinion. My friend who was TxNG, signed on to be full time Army JUST SO HE COULD GO BACK TO IRAQ.
But then, we realize that you could not possibly get your brain around that. That someone would really feel that the mission in Iraq is worthwhile. So while your daddy probably ran off to Canada to avoid the draft, I can only say that your shortcomings must be genetic.

retarded05,

Well, if you're friend wanted to return to Iraq, then I guess all the troops must just love it there. (!?) Tell me, do you employ the same fallacious reasoning to arrive at each of your goofball conclusions? Sounds like you have shrapnel lodged in your mellon.

...

Also, the problem with the Clinton Administration is that they ignored the border. The problem with the Bush Administration is that they wasted many of the resources we could have used securing the border on a meaningless war. Both are as retarded as the shrapnel-laden poster above. (Ok, maybe not that retarded, but still pretty bad.)

There's no question that defending our border should have much higher priority than Iraq. But we have the resources to handle both situations easily. It's only the will that's lacking, thanks to moonbattery.

Well put.

The fact is, even if there were zero American troops in Iraq, Afghanistan or anywhere else in the world... there still would be none defending our borders because moonbats would squeal "racism" and big business interests in both parties love the cheap labor.

Exactly my point in my previous post. The dems had the oppurtunity to seal the border under Clinton, there was no war in Iraq, no drain on the troops. But they didn't. If all it took was to not have troops in Iraq, why wasn't it ever done before?

There's just a lack of will to do it, to follow through with any promises about it. Everyone's afraid of offending the racial vote or losing the cheap labor.

What bother's me is that this is nothing new. Our weak border has been a problem for years and nothing's been done about it. If it wasn't secured after 9/11 and all the media hype, I doubt it will be anytime soon.

My point is that since nothing drastic has happened because of it, since no invading army has positioned itself along the border, what this means is that the problem can survive the worst onslaught it's probably going to get...masses of unknown people coming across with no accountability.

Is it just me. Or does anyone else who served in the military remember being issued a weapon and being instructed in it's use?

who the hell sends these guys down there unarmed?

Attacked without shots being fired? What with harsh language. Only people that would take this seriously are cowards.

Write the scum in the White House and tell him "Enforce the 1986 Immigration Reform Act". He doesn't and he won't.