Dorks.

First a joke:

One morning a husband returns to his lake cabin after several
hours of fishing and decides to take a nap. Although not familiar with
the lake, his wife decides to take the boat out. She motors out a
short distance, anchors, and reads her book, enjoying the peace and
quiet. Along comes a game warden in his boat. He pulls up
alongside the woman and says,

"Good morning Ma'am. What are you doing?"
"Reading a book," she replies, (thinking, "Isn't that obvious?")
"You're in a restricted fishing area," he informs her.
"I'm sorry officer, but I'm not fishing, I'm reading."
"Yes, but you have all the equipment. For all I know you could start
at any moment. I'll have to take you in and write you up."
"If you do that, I'll have to charge you with sexual assault," says the woman.
"But I haven't even touched you," says the game warden.
"That's true, but you have all the equipment. For all I know you
could start at any moment."
"Have a nice day ma'am", and he left.



MORAL: Never argue with a woman who reads. It's likely she can also think!



Brilliant execution.

As for the title:

Our senate has voted to seriously consider building a 500 some-odd mile fence accross mexico, or something.

Duh.

What the hell makes them think that it would help, work, or even be the slightest bit effective?

As much as I think the issue needs consideration and 'fixing', they need to approach it intelligently.

I don't know how many of you have actually considered the fact, but it's almost turning into a new civil rights moment in history.

I can't shake the fact that it's turning into an us and them mentality that is so much like so many others in our country's past.

I want to see the issue fixed, but there has to be a better, smarter, more friendly way than putting up a jynormous fence and lining it with the Army National Guard.

I mean, c'mon. That's practically a play out of the Communist handbook, and we don't want that, do we? I jest, but seriously, what really makes sense to you about that?