False argument : Ad hominem. Just had two over-easy, thanks. Just because I shilled for Newt, as far as you know, doesn’t render my point either true or false. It will, however, give you an excuse for not having to address the issue and do the hard work of thinking.
All you are doing is accepting Newt's word that he is serious about border security as he simultaneously shills for amnesty and a guest worker program. Shall we look at the history of those inside the Beltway who have done such?
Simpson-Mazzoli was supposed to secure the borders after amnesty and it didn't.
We were supposed to build a thousand miles of border fence. RINOs such as KBH blocked most of the construction.
McCain added secure the borders first to his call for amnesty. And hasn't done squat to facilitate border security.
Both Obama and Napolitano have declared the border to now be secure when it is not.
Yet you would have us believe that a consummate Beltway insider such as Newt is vastly different from his brethern, and we can trust him this time around. Yeah, sure...
So I am the one looking at the long and sordid history of amnesty pimps in this country and their rank insincerity about securing the border. I am the one actually thinking and evaluating history. You, to the contrary, are in campaign shill mode, which means you will attack anyone who questions the veracity of your candidate.
Bite, zombie, bite.