The Obama administration has decided to abandon construction of a high-tech “virtual fence” along the Mexico-U.S. border, proclaiming it an expensive failure.
Just as most people expected it to be.
When the so-called Secure Border Initiative was announced back in 2006, President Bush called it “the most technologically advanced border security initiative in American history.”
“The American people are rightfully insistent on the fact that we solve this 30-year-old problem,” Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said. “And this is about a solution which we believe is going to do the job.”
Even at the time, though, most of those paying attention understood the project to be a purely political gesture by the Bush administration, which was eager to tamp down criticism of its immigration policy.
Bush was, and remains, an amnesty-promoting RINO. He was right on the War On (Some) Terror for about fifteen minutes there, and his love of country and honest respect and affection for its soldiers can’t really be gainsaid, unlike the Current Occupant. But beyond that, there ain’t a whole lot good to say about most of his policies — and especially the sham border “fence.” Anybody who ever believed it would either A) do what it was supposed to do, or B) ever be finished in the first place, was a schmuck on wheels.
I have to wonder, though: why is it that the dilemma here is always presented to us as either open borders and amnesty, or no immigration at all? Is there really anybody out there at all (beyond a handful of fringe lunatics) who truly believes those are the only choices we have? What the hell is so damned difficult about securing the borders FIRST, and then reforming immigration to streamline the process and make it easier and quicker for legitimate applicants to get in, that most of our Ruling Class can’t seem to comprehend?
Why yes, as a matter of fact that was sarcasm just now. Why do you ask?