Pelosi and the wall

Never before in the history of American politics has an issue like whether or not to construct a barrier between Mexico and the United States been able to expose the hypocrisy and dishonesty of the Democrats and their propaganda partners, the media.

Americans just experienced the most extended government shutdown because Democrats altered their assessments as to the importance of border security they now say is not a crisis and a waste of taxpayer funds.  

In the recent State of the Union address, President Trump maintained his position that America's safety demands a physical barrier.  The childish nonsense spewed by Pelosi that the wall is "immoral" somehow passes as an acceptable counter to the well established facts carefully presented to the nation and Congress by the president.

Where else but the Twilight Zone or Washington, D.C. politics could an irrational statement go unchallenged by the media?  Not a single newspaper reporter or cable network crew has ever asked the fundamental question as to exactly how a border wall is immoral.  That silence is disturbing but proves beyond all doubt that the motivations behind being against the wall are generated by a revolting and grotesque kind of politics.

A similar response came from Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, who was in favor of a fence when he voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006.  The act authorized around 700 miles of fencing at certain strategic areas at the border between the United States and Mexico.  It also authorized the use of advanced technology.  In 2009 and 2013, Schumer reinforced his support for a fence.  

Playing with semantics, Schumer stated that he never wanted a wall and declared that a "fence works" when interviewed recently by CBS2's Marcia Kramer.  

However, when Trump declared that the border barrier did not have to be a wall and could also be a fence, Schumer inexplicably continued to refuse to fund the president's border barrier request.  Once again, the media did not press him on it.

If by immoral, Pelosi means that because its purpose is to help stop people from entering the country illegally, then to use her reasoning, all methods, no matter how advanced or inconspicuous, would also be immoral. 

To further that point, if Pelosi indeed sees barriers as immoral, then it stands to reason that all current barriers should be torn down in the same manner, much like when the "immoral" Berlin Wall was demolished. 

The lies of Pelosi and Schumer are staggering and can continue only because a corrupt and deceitful media conglomerate supports them.  The only way Pelosi could prove she is sincere in her belief that the border wall is immoral is to be consistent and demand from Trump that all forms of border barriers between Mexico and the United States be dissolved.

Imagine Pelosi channeling the strength of Reagan, when, in 1987, he demanded that Gorbachev tear down the wall.  She could stand before the entire House and, in a booming voice, proclaim, "President Trump, tear down our walls."  It would be her defining moment.  The only difference would be that President Reagan spoke those words to help unite humanity, while Pelosi's declaration would serve only to accommodate the demise of America.

Never before in the history of American politics has an issue like whether or not to construct a barrier between Mexico and the United States been able to expose the hypocrisy and dishonesty of the Democrats and their propaganda partners, the media.

Americans just experienced the most extended government shutdown because Democrats altered their assessments as to the importance of border security they now say is not a crisis and a waste of taxpayer funds.  

In the recent State of the Union address, President Trump maintained his position that America's safety demands a physical barrier.  The childish nonsense spewed by Pelosi that the wall is "immoral" somehow passes as an acceptable counter to the well established facts carefully presented to the nation and Congress by the president.

Where else but the Twilight Zone or Washington, D.C. politics could an irrational statement go unchallenged by the media?  Not a single newspaper reporter or cable network crew has ever asked the fundamental question as to exactly how a border wall is immoral.  That silence is disturbing but proves beyond all doubt that the motivations behind being against the wall are generated by a revolting and grotesque kind of politics.

A similar response came from Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, who was in favor of a fence when he voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006.  The act authorized around 700 miles of fencing at certain strategic areas at the border between the United States and Mexico.  It also authorized the use of advanced technology.  In 2009 and 2013, Schumer reinforced his support for a fence.  

Playing with semantics, Schumer stated that he never wanted a wall and declared that a "fence works" when interviewed recently by CBS2's Marcia Kramer.  

However, when Trump declared that the border barrier did not have to be a wall and could also be a fence, Schumer inexplicably continued to refuse to fund the president's border barrier request.  Once again, the media did not press him on it.

If by immoral, Pelosi means that because its purpose is to help stop people from entering the country illegally, then to use her reasoning, all methods, no matter how advanced or inconspicuous, would also be immoral. 

To further that point, if Pelosi indeed sees barriers as immoral, then it stands to reason that all current barriers should be torn down in the same manner, much like when the "immoral" Berlin Wall was demolished. 

The lies of Pelosi and Schumer are staggering and can continue only because a corrupt and deceitful media conglomerate supports them.  The only way Pelosi could prove she is sincere in her belief that the border wall is immoral is to be consistent and demand from Trump that all forms of border barriers between Mexico and the United States be dissolved.

Imagine Pelosi channeling the strength of Reagan, when, in 1987, he demanded that Gorbachev tear down the wall.  She could stand before the entire House and, in a booming voice, proclaim, "President Trump, tear down our walls."  It would be her defining moment.  The only difference would be that President Reagan spoke those words to help unite humanity, while Pelosi's declaration would serve only to accommodate the demise of America.