Beto would 'absolutely' destroy existing walls on southern border

Here's a glimpse at just how much 2020 Democratic candidates for president will pander to the open borders crowd and just how radical those campaigns will be.

Senate loser Beto O'Rourke told MSNBC's Chris Hayes, "Yes, absolutely — I'd take the wall down."  Hayes was questioning O'Rourke about a tweet from GOP rep. Dan Crenshaw, who posed a question to Beto, asking "If you could snap your fingers and make El Paso's border wall disappear, would you?" 

Fox News:

Asked whether El Paso residents would support that move in a referendum, O'Rourke replied, "I do."

He continued: "Here's what we know.  After the Secure Fence Act [of 2006], we have built 600 miles of wall and fencing on a 2,000-mile border.  What that has done is not in any demonstrable way made us safer.  It's cost us tens of billions of dollars to build and maintain.  And it's pushed migrants and asylum seekers and refugees to the most inhospitable, the most hostile stretches of the U.S.-Mexico border, ensuring their suffering and death."

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and other Democrats, including then-Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, supported the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which authorized the construction of some 700 miles of fencing at the border.  As of 2015, virtually all of that fencing had been completed, according to government figures.

"More than 4,000 human beings, little kids, women and children, have died," O'Rourke continued.  "They're not in cages, they're not locked up, they're not separated — they're dead, over the last 10 years, as we have walled off their opportunity to legally petition for asylum, to cross in urban centers like El Paso, to be with family, to work jobs, to do what any human being should have a right to be able to do, what we would do if faced with the same circumstances they were."

The 4,000 dead chose to attempt illegal crossings of the border.  Hadn't they ever heard of an American consulate in the countries they started from?  You don't have to make a dangerous attempt to get here illegally and then petition for asylum.  You can do it in the air-conditioned comfort of a U.S. embassy or consulate.

But O'Rourke's argument is a straw man argument.  Tugging at our heartstrings by describing dead women and children and trying to blame the U.S. for their deaths is typical.  In Beto's world, and the world of most Democratic candidates for president, preventing a human tsunami at our border is "immoral" — that anyone who wants to live and work (?) in America should be able to.

If O'Rourke would "absolutely" tear down existing border walls, he will absolutely lose any election he stands for as a candidate, including senator, representative, or dog-catcher.  Given that both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton supported the construction of additional border barriers in 2006, and that Beto and other Dem hopefuls in 2020 oppose it, just how radical do you think these candidates will be if they oppose border protection supported by those two far-left liberals?

Here's a glimpse at just how much 2020 Democratic candidates for president will pander to the open borders crowd and just how radical those campaigns will be.

Senate loser Beto O'Rourke told MSNBC's Chris Hayes, "Yes, absolutely — I'd take the wall down."  Hayes was questioning O'Rourke about a tweet from GOP rep. Dan Crenshaw, who posed a question to Beto, asking "If you could snap your fingers and make El Paso's border wall disappear, would you?" 

Fox News:

Asked whether El Paso residents would support that move in a referendum, O'Rourke replied, "I do."

He continued: "Here's what we know.  After the Secure Fence Act [of 2006], we have built 600 miles of wall and fencing on a 2,000-mile border.  What that has done is not in any demonstrable way made us safer.  It's cost us tens of billions of dollars to build and maintain.  And it's pushed migrants and asylum seekers and refugees to the most inhospitable, the most hostile stretches of the U.S.-Mexico border, ensuring their suffering and death."

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and other Democrats, including then-Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, supported the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which authorized the construction of some 700 miles of fencing at the border.  As of 2015, virtually all of that fencing had been completed, according to government figures.

"More than 4,000 human beings, little kids, women and children, have died," O'Rourke continued.  "They're not in cages, they're not locked up, they're not separated — they're dead, over the last 10 years, as we have walled off their opportunity to legally petition for asylum, to cross in urban centers like El Paso, to be with family, to work jobs, to do what any human being should have a right to be able to do, what we would do if faced with the same circumstances they were."

The 4,000 dead chose to attempt illegal crossings of the border.  Hadn't they ever heard of an American consulate in the countries they started from?  You don't have to make a dangerous attempt to get here illegally and then petition for asylum.  You can do it in the air-conditioned comfort of a U.S. embassy or consulate.

But O'Rourke's argument is a straw man argument.  Tugging at our heartstrings by describing dead women and children and trying to blame the U.S. for their deaths is typical.  In Beto's world, and the world of most Democratic candidates for president, preventing a human tsunami at our border is "immoral" — that anyone who wants to live and work (?) in America should be able to.

If O'Rourke would "absolutely" tear down existing border walls, he will absolutely lose any election he stands for as a candidate, including senator, representative, or dog-catcher.  Given that both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton supported the construction of additional border barriers in 2006, and that Beto and other Dem hopefuls in 2020 oppose it, just how radical do you think these candidates will be if they oppose border protection supported by those two far-left liberals?