VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Exposing the 'secure our borders' lie

Las Vegas Review-Journal ^ | 07 feb 10 | VIN SUPRYNOWICZ

[rellimpank]

President Barack Obama said some interesting things in his Jan. 27 State of the Union address. They're interesting not so much because they're lies, but because the political class -- the kind of people who field lobbyists in Washington and file lawsuits for the ACLU and edit major American newspapers -- was so confident that these utterances were lies that it simply ignored what might otherwise have been some earthshaking developments.

For instance, the president said, according to the White House's prepared transcript: "We should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system -- to secure our borders, enforce our laws, and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nation."

I agree with that. I suspect Jim Gilchrist of the border-watching Minuteman Project could happily agree with that.

The only people who don't agree with those words are Barack Obama and his liberal cohorts in Congress.

The words are designed to convince an unsophisticated rube -- the kind of person out in televisionland who still believes the president speaks plain English and means what he says -- that Mr. Obama wants to "secure our borders." How would we do that? Since trained military personnel are expensive and currently mostly busy overseas, the most cost-effective way to "secure the border" would be to use a reliable, century-old technology.

I haven't talked with Mr. Obama about this personally -- he hasn't dropped by. But I have talked with my own liberal Democratic Nevada congresswoman, Shelley Berkley, on the topic

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Barky lies.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Since trained military personnel are expensive and currently mostly busy overseas, the most cost-effective way to “secure the border” would be to use a reliable, century-old technology.

---

He’s talking about land mines, the first I’ve heard the idea.

[La Lydia]

Direct hit on Obama’s weasel-words on immigration. We learned a couple of years ago that “comprehensive immigration reform” means granting amnesty to tens of millions of people who have defied our laws and entered our country illegally. There is no “reform” involved. And “comprehensive” simply means surrender. But he cannot impose “comprehensive immigration reform” on the country by decree (much to his sorrow). It has to come from Congress, and we need to keep an eagle-eye on what is happening there. One of the things Congress has done is tinker with the law, around the edges, to allow the gradual provision de facto amnesty to more and more groups of people, such as: Haitian illegals, Central American illegals repeatedly being granted temporary protected status (TPS) so they cannot be deported even when identified as illegals and detained. They are set free. Under Congress’ law, TPS can be granted by the administration without the administration having to return to Congress for permission, so Congress can say: “It wasn’t us, it was them.”