I did not dodge the Reagan comment, that’s an entirely different situation completely. You took the conversation in a completely different topic altogether from the point I was addressing. Free Speech.

Yes, we ARE a shining city on a hill. But since you refuse to see any point but your own… I’ll leave it as you said….

Allenah out.

What the Obama administration is doing here is correct. You dodged the Reagan amnesty altogether. After he signed immigration reform into law, which included amnesty for 3 million illegals, Reagan said, “The legalization provisions in this act will go far to improve the lives of a class of individuals who now must hide in the shadows, without access to many of the benefits of a free and open society. Very soon many of these men and women will be able to step into the sunlight and, ultimately, if they choose, they may become Americans.”

That is the act of a compassionate land. One that upholds the true meaning of the Statue of Liberty, and one that lives up to that “shining city on the hill” that attracts any who can, to come. Don’t blame a porous border, or the innate will within all people to seek out a better life.

Enjoyed the exchange. Max out.

Your war is wrongfully against our president for essentially doing what Reagan accomplished, albeit in a sloppy manner.

This example is where conservatives get it wrong most of the time. You will either hand pick the reasons why Reagan was right (if you know of any), or you will criticize Reagan by saying something like “I didn’t agree with Reagan on everything he did.” Well let me tell you what, I did support Reagan when he granted amnesty, and I sure as hell support Obama for FOCUSING scarce resources on the FELONIOUS criminal element crossing our borders.

“Ideology to a fault is faulted ideology.” That quote is mine.

I live in San Antonio, so while we are not directly on the border, remember, I said I PERSONALLY know someone who’s had their immediate family kidnapped by illegals.

Just a few years ago I went on a mission trip with our church where we actually drove across the border, and went into another town some 30 miles or so into Mexico to work at an orphange. While danger was a slight issue- it is anytime you are- well, anytime you do just about anything these days, I honestly was not on edge when I was there. I walked around the town with the teenagers I was leading, we bought THE BEST I’VE EVER HAD gorditas at a road side vendor, went to the restaurants there, and had no problem at all. That was approximately 6 years ago. Obviously, a LOT has changed since then.

Unfortunately, GW Bush did not solve the border problem, and Obama MOST CERTAINLY is not solving it, and in fact, is only inflaming the situation even more.

I am not of the mind that we mindlessly shoot whoever dares cross the border, but by the same token, if our laws were enforced, I do not honestly believe we would have the problem we have. Illegals would know that they would be deported.

Being that I do live in a border state, just a couple of hours from the border itself, we see the effects of an immigration problem completely out of control.

Mr. Wallace has written another article on immigration- I am sure you’ve seen it, but the link is here: http://conservativedailynews.com/2011/08/back-to-the-border/

Now, as to yours and docs ongoing issue/diagreement/argument/debate ….. obviously I’ve stated that I do not believe “shoot to kill on site anyone who crosses the border”, and I do not see anywhere where Mr. Wallace has stated that, so to say doc “has a following” on the belief is incorrect. Now, if there have been others in previous discussions, then obviously I can’t speak to that. However, I believe the issue that’s at the heart of the matter is that everyone has the right to their own opinion. We do still live in a country where free speech is allowed- at least for now. And just speaking for myself here, the day those rights become extinct is the moment I become a criminal. As my bio quote says, “They may take my life but they’ll NEVER take MY FREEDOM!” I may die in the process, but God blessed me beyond belief with the freedoms this country affords- which has been bought and paid for by the sacrifice of time, blood, sweat, tears and lives of many men and women who believe in those freedoms just as I do. I may die in the process, but I most certainly WILL NOT give up my freedoms- for immigration or anything otherwise.

We’ve become so soft on crime of any kind… oh, that is, unless you are a law-abiding citizen, and it’s become increasingly harsher on LAW ABIDING CHRISTIANS.

His focus isn’t on firing against armed drug dealers. His focus is on stopping illegal crossings with “shoot to kill” authority. And he has a following here? I can’t believe this.

Fortunately, we live in a country with a second amendment, and there is nothing stopping law abiding citizens from arming themselves to defend and protect their lives and their property. If I lived along the border, you can best be sure I would be armed for that purpose. There is a huge difference between that, and say a Border Patrol that has, what amounts to, rules of engagement that are “shoot to kill.” That isn’t my America, and the fact some here think that would be ok, is stupefying.

You end your comment by saying “something needs to be done.” Yes, something does need to be done. But it isn’t shoot to kill those who are illegally crossing to improve their life. That is the action of a police state. Is this what we have become, on the right? Not all illegals who cross are of ill-intent, and there is a huge difference between them and the “NARCO-STATE” they are trying to escape. Tell me, would you be any different if you were in their shoes? You don’t know the answer to that. No one does.

If you want to wage war against armed drug dealers, hey I support that. But that isn’t the argument here. Until America wakes up and realizes that the inflow of illegals is being caused by economic repression, and fear of being targeted by drug lords, we will never grasp the magnitude of our own humanity, nor embrace the circumstances behind which out forefathers escaped from when they came to this country (when immigration law was virtually non-existent.)

The border is a huge challenge. So instead of tossing around mindless bloodshed as the way forward, lets propose real solutions. I mean look… wouldn’t it be much better to re-direct hateful energy into a positive force? I think so, and a positive way forward here is to create an “Economic Zone” along the southern border. Close those factories in China, and open them in our southern border states along the border. And control the daily flow of Mexican nationals entering to work, and leaving to go home. Part of that solution would require the bloodlust some are seeking by eradicating drug lords once and for with a strong military presence on the border under effective Rules of Engagement.

In any case, mindless calls for extreme measures should never replace sound reasoning and full understanding of the situation at hand.

Personally, I’ve never been in the military. However, I am a mom of 5- two of which are very beautiful little girls. Let me assure you, if someone came into my house uninvited, I would use WHATEVER FORCE NECESSARY to protect my children! Yes, I’m a gun-totin’ Bible clingin’ lady, so if it required I shoot the intruder, YOU BET I WOULD!

I believe it was WillofLA that pointed out our immigration laws are not being enforced. Very good point.

These people are coming into our country- UNINVITED- intending harm on our citizens.

How many ranchers on the border have been murdered?

I PERSONALLY know a family who’s brother and nephew were kidnapped by illegals. The family paid the ransom that was demanded, and thankfully, the brother and nephew were returned to the family still alive. That is one of the rare cases of that actually happening.

Not too long ago, a 15-year-old was killed on the border. He had already been deported once before, and was known as a smuggler. Here is the story link: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/09/mexican-teen-killed-border-known-juvenile-smuggler-source-says/

Now, of course the Mexican government and the family and all kinds of other people condemned the killing.

Logic says you play dangerous games, you very well may have dangerous- or even deadly- consequences.

There comes a point where enough is enough. If the government doesn’t take care of things, the violence will only increase. Our border agents and citizens on the border are paying with their lives. Something has to be done. Period.

The 9th district court of appeals did. In a 2-1 decision, the majority opinion wrote, “These statements are particularly repugnant because they directly encourage violence,” “We nevertheless hold that neither of them constitutes an offense within the meaning of the threat statute under which Bagdasarian was convicted.”

While I give you full credit for gathering the facts to support your argument, it is discouraging to see this type of debate occurring within conservative ranks. I come from a different generation, or breed, in which the very subject of our debate (shoot to kill) doesn’t qualify as rational discussion. It reminds me of the vile nature seen in liberals in how they describe conservatives… “I want you to get in their face,” “Punish your enemies,” “They have acted like terrorists,” “They are racists,” “They want to destroy America”…. etc. and it pains me greatly to see conservatives stoop down to their vile level.

When one side repels vile attacks with diplomacy, peace results. But when both sides give in to the same low-life tactics, and mindless calls for violence, then senseless violence results, and I am afraid if we don’t raise the bar to where it once was, bloodshed isn’t that far away.

As conservatives, we can, we should do better. Thanks for your involvement and discussion on this matter.

That is EXTREME.

“Have you ever considered that others may find your oppinion extremist?” No. And I challenge you to find anything I have stated calling for the killing of any group.

“Would you like for someone to demand suspension of your ablity to have your voice heard?” If my opinions supported the killing of any group or person, I would expect no less.