Your mistake is assuming that it's possible to shut off the border. It's not.
Oh sure, it's *possible*, with some draconian measures. But with a republican congress all you got was a partial fence and more (corrupt) border agents. In what fantasy land do you think those draconian measures required to shut the border are ever going to happen?
That being the case, the best compromise is some kind of legal status for mexicans, so we can track them, send the bad ones home, and give the legal ones motivation to assimilate.
Your option is essentially "more of the same", and we see where that got us.
Where did I say such?
You can never completely seal a border.
But you can get it 90 percent airtight. As opposed to the feeble excuse of border security that is exercised now.
But with a republican congress all you got was a partial fence and more (corrupt) border agents. In what fantasy land do you think those draconian measures required to shut the border are ever going to happen?
Draconian?
How about practical? We are fighting a war against terrorism (or what should be properly labelled as a war against Islamist extremists), but we leave our borders open?
Your option is essentially "more of the same", and we see where that got us.
Another GOPologist chimes in.
It wasn't the fault of borrow-and-spend pubbies driving earmarks to record levels.
It wasn't the fault of corrupt pubbies hoovering in the K-street cash.
Nah, BLAME THE PRINCIPLED CONSERVATIVES FOR HAVING THE NERVE to say the pubbie leadership was heading for a fall.
It's not like we are dealing with a bunch of peasants here ~ no we are not ~ they're smart and slick and aggressive.
You can't compromise with them.