DOUGLAS V. GIBBS<---------->RADIO<---------->BOOKS<---------->CONSTITUTION <---------->CONTACT/FOLLOW <----------> DONATE

Monday, February 08, 2016

Mexico To Trump: Wall THIS

by JASmius

Or, "usted y la pared estúpida que usted montó adentro en la mierda".

Now look: Do we need a border wall?  Yes, we do.  Do we also need to collapse and/or fill in with cement the myriad of tunnels that have been dug underneath that border?  Yes, we do.  Do we need to control and even close that border?  Yes, we do.  Is runaway illegal immigration a dire economic and national security threat?  Yes, it is.

Is browbeating Mexico into building and footing the bill for said wall in any way a practical or intelligent way of getting it constructed?  No, it is not.  It is, in point of fact, an act of stupidity that can only produce the opposite result of that ostensibly being sought.

This really should not have to be explained.  Anybody who is in the slightest degree a mature, well-adjusted, reasonably intelligent and informed adult human being (which is to say, not a "populist") should be able to grasp this fact.

For those who are not (i.e. the "populists," who will not listen to reason anyway, but I'm soldiering ahead in any case), former Mexican president Felipe Calderon has taken y'all to school:

There's no way Mexico will shell out a "single cent" for the "stupid wall" Donald Trump vows to build across the nation's southern border, a former president of Mexico declares.

In an interview with CNBC, former President Felipe Calderon slams the "GOP" [candidates]'s oft-stated wall-building promise as "completely crazy." "The first loser of such a policy would be the United States," Calderon said. "If this guy pretends that closing the borders to anywhere either for trade [or] for people is going to provide prosperity to the United States, he is completely crazy."

"Mexican people, we are not going to pay any single cent for such a stupid wall," he declared in the Saturday interview, the outlet reports. "And it's going to be completely useless."

That middle paragraph is gibberish, as (1) the only prosperity that's being generated from the Reconquista is south of the former border; indeed, Calderon sounds like he's vaguely threatening us if we dare to reassert our own national sovereignty by cutting off his country's gravy train.  But the rest of it is entirely reasonable, and ALL of it is to be expected.

Which leads to the core point of everything that Donald Trump says, which is that he doesn't mean a word of it, and all of it has one intent and one intent only: to get him what he wants at the time he says it.  Which is why the expiration date of any given Trump comment can be measured in hours, minutes, or even seconds.  Even this site's owner keeps waxing lyrical about liking what Trump says even while acknowledging that he's got less credibility than one of Bill Clinton's condoms.  To which my incredulous reply is always the same: How can you like anything Trump says when you can't rely on the sincerity with which he ever says it?  The same man who vowed to round up and deport all thirty million illegal aliens from this country soon thereafter said that he'd let almost all of them back into the country, defeating the whole point and purpose of that impossible, horribly optic undertaking.  Understand what this means, Trumplicans: He's mocking you.  He's making fun of you.  He's ridiculing you.  He's humiliating you.  He's laughing hysterically at what absolute and utter suckers and marks you are.  To your faces.  He's been doing it for the past eight months and he continues to do so the longer he remains as an unwitting Clintonoid mole in the Republican top tier.

And you all keep slurping it right down like proverbial doggie treats because, I can only conclude, you want to be fooled, mocked, made fun of, ridiculed, and humiliated by the ultimate New York liberal.

You want to believe....

...even though at least some of you have to know better.

Exit thought: If we want to control the border, wouldn't it be helpful to have the Mexican government's assistance in that endeavor?  Or at least not be stuck with their overt hostility?  I'm the last person to extol the wonders and virtues of "diplomacy," but isn't that what we need in this instance instead of caustic, buffoonish assclownery?

No comments: