ShareThis Page
Letter to the editor: Why build the wall? |
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Why build the wall?

| Tuesday, January 22, 2019 10:00 a.m

Some of those who don’t want to build a wall say it’s too expensive. Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi and others on the left say we could use drones and electronic devices to do the same thing cheaper. Their thinking is shortsighted. If illegal aliens are detected crossing the border, they can declare asylum, then judges often release them and give them a far-off court datefor which many never appear. Conversely, it’s interesting that judges only give border patrol a limited number of days to hold illegals.

What about the cost? Justice system, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), food, clothing, shelter, education, medical care, disease, terrorists, crime … . Estimates indicate there are around 12 million illegals here already. Look at little Mexico (California), with its sanctuary cities — which are spreading across our nation. These costs are far above what a wall would cost.

The most damaging cost to America is the change in its culture. Latin Americans are ending up in our political offices. Recently elected N.Y. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is extolling socialism and calling for the abolishment of ICE..

I remember an episode of “Star Trek” in which the enemy said “resistance is futile.” Unfortunately, this is happening today, when the wall is derided as not needed. There are millions who would love no wall. Get out your wallets. We’re talking hundreds of billions already spent, and still climbing. Don’t forget to have your kids learn Spanish.

Paul Gernhardt


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.