Connect with us

Immigration

3 reasons to build the wall despite polls showing it isn’t popular

Published

on

Why does a constitutional republic work while a true democracy would not? Because the general public in most countries and particularly in the United States form political opinions based on the wrong factors while not spending the time actually researching the facts, opinions, projections, and options. As I’ve said in a previous video about sheep, these four components go into what I call the “FOPO method” to form my own political perspectives. Unfortunately, most Americans either check to see what their preferred political icon of the moment says on a subject or they make a gut reaction without knowing the full implications of what they support.

Depending on what side of a debate the media and each political party is on will determine how much attention is paid to polls. But that attention only goes towards making an argument, whether it’s an argument for a particular piece of legislation, a political stance, or the vote for or against a politician. But when it comes to actual actions made by the federal government, the will of the people is usually ignored. It’s all about public relations, not actual policy making.

We’ve seen in recent days the poll numbers that show Republicans and the President are taking most of the blame for the government shutdown. We’ve also seen most Americans are apparently against building a border wall, thanks in large part to the first poll that shows Americans want the government shutdown ended, not to mention mainstream media’s incessant onslaught of anti-wall propaganda. I could go on for hours about how using the shutdown now is a failure on the part of the Republicans for not tackling the border wall when they had the power to do so, but that’s the past. It’s time to look ahead and figure out how we’re going to get it done now that Democrats are in charge of the House.

One thing is certain: the polls are wrong. It’s not that they’re inaccurate, but the way polls are administered helps determine the outcome. In nearly every case, poll questions are worded in a way to deliver the desired outcome. If the questions were framed differently, the results would be very different. For example, if you asked Americans the following question, I believe most would support building the wall.

“Should America adopt similar security efforts that Israel applied to their southern border six years ago, which decreased illegal immigration, drug trafficking, and terrorist incursions by over 95%?”

What Israel did six years ago was, of course, build a wall. That wall worked. Even the most progressive anti-wall activists in the nation had to acknowledge it did what it was supposed to do.

There are three reasons we shouldn’t simply listen to the polls to determine policy.

  1. The people are often wrong. Most Americans supported invading Iraq. Few can now argue this was a good move. Most Americans were against getting involved in the World Wars. Even fewer can argue that we should have let Germany win either war, which they would have had the United States gotten involved. It’s not that Americans are dumb. It’s that our sentiment is too easily swayed by propaganda and the will of those we idolize.
  2. Even when the people are right, government doesn’t act on it. 82% of Americans support term limits on Capitol Hill. We occasionally get an upstart politicians who tackles it, but when was the last time term limits were seriously discussed on the floor? Oh, right. Never.
  3. Opinions change too quickly. Around a decade ago, gay marriage was opposed by a majority of Americans. In fact, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were against gay marriage when they ran for president in 2008. The same poll today reveals much different numbers.

We need a steady hand in government, one that does not bounce around from one public sentiment to the next. This is why it behooves the President and Republicans on Capitol Hill to not bend or break over the border wall issue. Is it losing popularity? Yes. They definitely need to do a much better job of selling it to the American people instead of playing the Democrats’ game of rebuking their talking points. They need stronger talking points of their own. Then, they need to get those talking points out to the people through friendly media outlets. Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be anywhere near the strategy they’re employing today.

There is only one appropriate resolution: Congress funding the wall properly. Not building the wall shouldn’t even be on the table. Declaring a national emergency to fund the wall will end up wrapping it in so much red tape it’ll never actually happen. This shutdown is extremely unpopular and growing more so every day, but it’s the last opportunity America has to get funding for the wall any time in the next two years. If the President bends or breaks on this now, the border crisis will have no end in sight.

I’m JD Rucker. Thank you for listening.

Advertisement

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Guns and Crime

Illegal alien Wilbur Ernesto Martinez-Guzman expected to be charged in 4 murders

Published

on

Illegal alien Wilbur Ernesto Martinez-Guzman expected to be charged in 4 murders

A man believed by authorities to have committed four murders in Northern Nevada was taken into custody on January 19, possibly bringing to an end a killing streak that has worried residents for the last two weeks.

19-year-old Wilbur Ernesto Martinez-Guzman was arrested by Washoe County Sheriff’s department on charges of burglary, possession of stolen property, and immigration law violations. Martinez-Guzman is an illegal alien with a federal hold. The District Attorney’s office plans to file murder charges against him as well, claiming they have sufficient evidence to convict him.

Murder charges expected against suspect in killings

https://www.kolotv.com/content/news/Murder-charges-expected-against-suspect-in-Northern-NV-murders-504626241.htmlThe first killing took place January 9 or 10, 2019. 56-year-old Connie Koontz was found shot to death at her home in the Gardnerville Ranchos. She was found dead by her mother, who also lives in the home and is hard of hearing and disabled.

January 13, 74-year-old Sophia Renken was found dead in her home about a mile away, also shot to death.

January 16, the bodies of 81-year-old Gerald David, a former Reno Rodeo President, and his wife, 80-year-old Sharon David, were found dead in their home on La Guardia Lane in south Reno, near Zolezzi. They also had been shot to death.

My Take

If he is proven guilty, this will be another example of American citizens dying at the hands of an illegal immigrant. How many people have to die before Democrats take the border crisis seriously enough to do something about it?


Subscribe on YouTube

Continue Reading

Immigration

Title 10: How border wall construction could start tomorrow without Congress or a national emergency

Published

on

Title X How border wall construction could start tomorrow without Congress or a national emergency d

What I’m about to describe to you isn’t a new idea. In fact, it’s probably been thrown about by Congressmen, Senators, and White House advisers since before the government shutdown started. But there’s a reluctance to take advantage of it that I’ll discuss a little later. For now, let’s talk about Title 10, subtitle A, part 1, chapter 15, section 284 of the United States code.

Yes, it’s a mouthful, but stay with me on it.

Title 10 refers to the armed forces. Subtitle A covers general military law. Part 1 details legal military powers. Chapter 15 covers military support for civilian law enforcement agencies. Hmm. You probably already know where I’m heading with this, but let’s dig into section 284, which is titled, “Support for counterdrug activities and activities to counter transnational organized crime.”

Subsection A reads:

(a)Support to Other Agencies.—The Secretary of Defense may provide support for the counterdrug activities or activities to counter transnational organized crime of any other department or agency of the Federal Government or of any State, local, tribal, or foreign law enforcement agency for any of the purposes set forth in subsection (b) or (c), as applicable, if—

(1) in the case of support described in subsection (b), such support is requested—

(A) by the official who has responsibility for the counterdrug activities or activities to counter transnational organized crime of the department or agency of the Federal Government, in the case of support for other departments or agencies of the Federal Government;

Okay, so far, so good. The Secretary of Defense can provide support for law enforcement agencies at all levels requesting assistance to fight drug or organized crime that’s coming from transnational sources. That means drug lords trafficking across the border. It means MS-13 sending members into America. Heck, a local county sheriff on the border could ask the Secretary of Defense for assistance if he couldn’t keep up with heroine traffickers crossing the Rio Grande.

Now, the next logical question is what can the Defense Secretary do to support law enforcement agencies at the border? The answer is found in subsection B, line 7.

(7) Construction of roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States.

Some may balk at this point. They’ll say we need a wall, not a fence. I have no idea if it’s legal to call the steel slats the President is requesting a fence, per se, but even if they can’t be considered fencing, we should take a quick peek at Israel’s border with Egypt. Prime Minister Netanyahu recently Tweeted an image of the fence that has virtually eliminated illegal immigration on their southern border.

As you can see, this isn’t a chain link fence that border crossers could climb over or cut through in a matter of seconds. This is a sturdy, tall fence with a gnarly razor wire at the top. By itself, it cannot solve our border crisis. Combined with monitoring technology, increased border patrols, and a concerted campaign to inform people south of the border that they need to use the designated ports of entry, this will dramatically improve our border security.

The best part is, we don’t need to keep the government shutdown. We don’t need to convince Democrats to come to their senses. The President wouldn’t have to declare a national emergency that would wrap the border wall in so much red tape, we won’t see construction beginning for years. And, we wouldn’t have to trade amnesty to get it done.

This would be a beautiful move for the President. Imagine how Democrats would look if they passed on his offer to extend DACA protections, only to have him rescind his offer and build the barrier anyway. They’ll look like stubborn fools who had an opportunity to make a trade and squandered that opportunity with nothing to show for it.

Now, if you’re wondering why this isn’t done, I’ll assume it’s because of the wording. It’s a fence. The President wants a wall. Heck, I want a wall. But at this point, I’ll take a tall, thick fence with gnarly razor wire on top instead of the open air that currently separates the United States from illegal immigrants, drug traffickers, gang members, and terrorists.

If you would like to see this happen, please alert everyone you know about this information. Get every conservative on your Twitter list to Tweet this at the President and those in his orbit. Share it heavily on Facebook. Let them know we want the border secured and the government open and there’s a solution sitting right in front of them. Let’s make America safe again as quickly as possible.


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Immigration

As predicted, Trump offers DACA amnesty in exchange for border wall

Published

on

As predicted Trump offers DACA amnesty in exchange for border wall

Throughout Trump’s first two years in office, I’ve been one of only a handful of conservative voices shouting from the rooftops that the New York liberal’s promise to fix America’s out-of-control illegal immigration problem was nothing but a lie.

As a candidate, Trump promised to build a “big beautiful powerful wall” on our southern border at Mexico’s expense, and he promised to overturn Obama’s unconstitutional Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order that allowed illegals to stay in America indefinitely. Unfortunately, the “wall” has become an “artistically designed” barrier of some sort funded by the U.S. taxpayer, and DACA is not only still in effect, it’s on its way to becoming permanent.

While the reality of Trump’s broken promises dealing with illegal immigration have been crystal clear to those not drinking the orange Kool-Aid, his inevitable betrayal on the issue has been brought sharply into focus since last summer.

In May 2018, as Trump and the GOP were looking for ways to save their jobs ahead of the midterms, the House Freedom Caucus joined hands with Democrats to push for a “fix” to DACA.

In June 2018, Paul Ryan proposed a plan that would allow DREAMers to legally stay in the country and be put on the pathway to citizenship in exchange for $23 billion for building a border wall.

Following their September 2018 budget betraying funding everything from Planned Parenthood to DACA and sanctuary cities, rumors began spreading around Washington that Trump was ready to cut an immigration deal with Democrats in light of the reality that the Democrats were about to retake the House in the midterms.

The Democrats did retake the House, and in the days since their victory, Trump and the GOP have been laying the foundation for their inevitable immigration betrayal. With the help of Trump’s son-in-law and advisor Jared Kushner, trading DACA amnesty for a border wall is now the official position of the Trump administration and the GOP-controlled Senate.

So, it came as no surprise when Trump proposed a deal over the weekend to end to his manufactured government shutdown by offering Democrats a three-year extension of DACA in exchange for $5 billion for border security funding — an idea originally conceived by Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Three years? I’m sure it’s just a coincidence, but that’s just enough time to kick the can down the road until after his 2020 election … assuming there is one. And just in case there are any doubts about the motivation behind this three-year timeframe, consider this: Mitch McConnell, who has refused to let the Senate vote on the shutdown, has endorsed Trump’s offer and will hold vote on it this week.

Mickey is also up for re-election in 2020.

For now, Democrats are rejecting Trump’s offer, but it’s only a matter of time before they get what they want. After all, Trump and the GOP want the same thing.

Originally posted on StridentConservative.com.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook.

Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report