Wednesday, January 16, 2019

The Dick Turdbin advocates for the wall


I listened to a bit of the Attorney General nominee Barr’s hearings yesterday.  I caught the Dick Turdbin’s questioning. At the end Turdbin said that 90% of the fentanyl seized at the border is seized at points of entry.

Trudbin is lying sack-o-crap, but let’s accept his point as if he accidentally swerved into the truth for the first time in his worthless life and accepted that truth.  Because he’s a monumental douchebag, Turdbin probably doesn’t know that he proves PDJT’s case for a wall with his 90% statistic.

First of all, the Dick, we shouldn’t be bragging about where the highest percentage of drugs are seized.  We have a horrible drug problem.  More people are dying from opioid overdose than car crashes.  Whatever we are catching seems to be a pittance of what gets by.

Noting where we seize the most illegal drugs during an epidemic is the wrong metric.  It’s like the defensive coordinator bragging about holding the opposition’s all-pro running back to 20 yards on 10 carries when they trail 35-7 at the half. The dope is clearly looking at the wrong metric.

Where are the drugs getting in?  Can we assume that because 90% of what we seize is snatched at ports of entry that we are doing a good job of interdicting the flow at those points?  I don’t know.  Maybe.  

If that’s true, wouldn’t it be cool if there were some way to channelize the all of the border traffic into those ports of entry?  What could we do to force people to use our ports of entry rather than just strolling across an open border?  Could we put some kind of obstacle at the most likely avenues of approach into the country and force traffic toward the ports of entry where we are most successfully controlling the flow of drugs into the country? 

Chuck and Nancy act as if that kind of talk is crazier than betting the Bengals to win the Super Bowl in the pre-season.  It seems commonsense to me.

The metric that would mean something is what percentage is the 90% that is seized of the whole.  If the 90% that is seized at ports of entry represents only 10% of the total coming into the country we have a problem. Where/how is the other 90% of the total illegal drug wave getting in?
 
Could it be filtering in across a long unsecure southern border?  I suspect that it could.  Again, could some kind of a barrier help to stem the flow and force the mules back toward points of entry?  I suspect that it could.

Thanks, the Dick, for the promoting the wall.

1 comment:

The Griffin said...

It's night time. A guy looking for something. When asked he says he is looking for his car keys. Says he thinks they are 50 or so yards away. Why is he looking here then? Light is better here under the street lamp. Hey Turdbin! We don't know many people, drugs, weapons, hit men, landscapers, etc, are getting in. But the light is better at the ports of entry. Ols saying, you don't know what you don't know.