Thursday, April 6

Hewitt: No Fence? No President Frist.

Everyone is going back to issue number one--a real, physical barrier for our borders. This whole virtual fence things sounds like a child's imaginary friend--sounds nice, but its not real. I would think that most legal immigrants are in agreement that this is going to be a big issue both in 06 adn 08. People are watching, listening and reading. We won't forget, and I expect the blogosphere will make sure of that.

We are tired of being tossed around every few years like political scoring points, as both parties try to gain more votes. Its pandernig. What most legal immigrants want is a final and effective solution to this problem.

This from Hugh Hewitt:
I interviewed a Customs agent yesterday who again confirmed the obvious: Fencing along high traffic areas of the southern border will greatly reduce illegal immigration into the country, thus bringing control to the enduring problem and greatly enhancing security against terrorists and narco-criminals.

The House bill passed provisions authorizing 700 miles of real fence for those high traffic areas.

The new version of the Senate immigration bill does not appear to include any fencing (and spare me the talk of "virtual fences." Israel isn't building a "virtual fence.")

He quotes New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman:
Personally, I favor a very high fence, with a very big gate....Good fences make good immigration policy. Fences make people more secure and able to think through this issue more calmly
Immigrants are even more sensitive to the feeling of insecurity, and we are the ones that feel the heat of the backlash when people loose their cool--on both sides.