Reading your comment on my last post, I sort of feel like the guy who had to go during a meeting, but then suddenly realized a lot of really important stuff must have went on while he was in the john. I mean, what did I miss?
You say securing the borders is the ultimate, numero uno, tippity top priority - and I've already conceded that. What do you want me to do, write it across the sky in letters of fire? By all means, lets do. Lets build a wall a mile high and a hundred feet thick, with moats, guard dogs, high powered rifles and loud speakers blaring BeeGee recordings 24/7.
You say a fence is the cornerstone of immigration reform. Okee ka-dokee, sign me up! I've already said it won't work, but maybe there are some fence guys out there who are a lot better than the guys who have been failing at this for the last 4,000 years. You know, the Great Wall guys, the Hadrian's Wall guys, the Maginot Line guys - those guys. But pay attention here. Try to get a mental picture of me cupping my hands around my mouth and yelling, "I don't disagree with the principle that nations have a right to secure borders".
I don't disagree with the principle that nations have a right to secure borders. There, I said it twice - along with the two other times I said it in my previous posts, that makes four. Wanna' go for five?
Picture a world in which we are beyond the question of the fence. In this world, we move on to the next step. Like this:
A: We have a fence.
B: What do we do now?
I'm giving you A. So stop complaining and get on with B. For starters, you can tell me why "CIRA was a crock". And please, don't tell me you've already unpacked that issue. You haven't. And besides, by your own rules, you claim we shouldn't be talking about the next step until we agree on the first. Have you been breaking your own rules?