Our side has the better arguments. Check this out from Charles Krauthammer (who apparently didn't get the Fox News memo to pledge fealty to Kennedy-Bush-McCain):
The whole column is here.
Why am I so suspicious about the fealty of the reformers to real border control? In part because of the ridiculous debate over the building of a fence. Despite the success of the border barrier in the San Diego area, it appears to be very important that this success not be repeated. The current Senate bill provides for the fencing of no more than one-fifth of the border and the placing of vehicle barriers in no more than one-ninth.
Instead, we are promised all kinds of fancy, high-tech substitutes -- sensors, cameras, unmanned aerial vehicles -- and lots more armed chaps on the ground to go chasing those who get through.
Why? A barrier is a very simple thing to do. The technology is well tested. The Chinese had success with it, as did Hadrian. In our time, the barrier Israel has built has been so effective in keeping out intruders that suicide attacks are down more than 90 percent.
Fences work. That's why people have them around their houses -- not because homeowners are unwelcoming but because they insist that those who wish to come into their domain knock at the front door.
If you want to know where a debate is and is going, look at both the arguments being made and the people making them.
In the current, raging immigration debate, the forces opposing "Comprehensive Reform" have the facts and the goods. And the people bringing it are, in large part, conservatives who are active in deed and donations.
Yes, the supporters of Kennedy-Bush-McCain are persistent and well-funded. And they could pull it off.
But they won't.
Be ye encouraged.