To paraphrase Michelle Malkin, why does immigration reform have to be tied to the government’s Constitutional duty to control our boarders?
It doesn’t ever. It isn’t a trade. Let’s secure the borders and then we’ll secure the boarders.
Now mind you I'm not sure about this, but here is what I think he's doing.
Perhaps he knows full well that demanding a secure border before any citizenship or amnesty will be the poison pill that prevents any bill from passing.
Then the GOP can claim it tried in good faith but the Dems refused to secure the border.
Don't flame me, I'm just interested to see if I'm being unreasonably hopeful or if it is plausible.