The Democrats are going to have to get smarter on immigration matters if they're going to take advantage of Republican weakness. I'd suggest moving even closer to the position of, for instance, Nativo Lopez. The DNC really should hire him as a consultant on immigration matters.
This comment will probably be deleted like my earlier comment on another thread was, but those who try to conflate those words are actually those who favor illegal immigration and try to call it "immigration" in order to mask that.
Of course, there are millions of illegal aliens who are not similar.
And, should this site really be supporting those who want to enter this country illegally?
As long as there are illegal aliens, those illegal aliens will be much more likely to suffer not just worker abuse but workplace deaths.
There are only two solutions to that: make anyone who comes here a citizen, or enforce our immigration laws.
The same goes for the border deaths. It's not those who want to enforce our immigration laws that are responsible on our side for those deaths, it's those who oppose our immigration laws. Millions of people know that they can come here and live as illegal aliens, and they'll receive protection from "liberals" and corrupt businesses. That encourages them to come, and some die trying.
If our immigration laws were enforced, fewer would try to come, and there would be fewer border deaths, fewer cases of worker abuse, and fewer cases of workplace deaths or injuries.
This may have escaped your attention, but one of the key differences between the current marches and the anti-war marches is that many or most of those currently marching are not citizens of this country. They are in fact citizens of other countries, primarily Mexico.
In fact, the Georgia rally mentioned above was organized by a former Mexican Consul General.
While it's always good to "think different", what do you think most Americans will think of a political party that embraces foreign citizens marching in our streets demanding rights to which they aren't entitled?
What do you think most Americans will think of a political party that embraces such marches even when they're organized by a former government official of a foreign country?
It's massively subsidized labor. The businesses pay a small price, and then pass the costs on to consumers. Lettuce wouldn't be so cheap if growers had to pay the full price for their labor.
It's also a sign of economic weakness to have an economy so dependent on foreign serf labor.
And, controlling illegal immigration isn't just done at the border: it needs to be done at the workplace, something that Bush is particularly weak at except when doing it for show (WalMart) or at military installations.
Only some libertarians and some far-left groups will come right out and admit that they favor massive illegal immigration.
Most of our leaders will claim that they oppose massive illegal immigration, but then they take steps that encourage millions more illegal aliens to come here. We've got millions of illegal aliens here now, and they didn't just fall from the sky: they came here and were allowed to stay here because of policies enacted by our leaders.
Whether that's because of design or because of incompetence or some combination depends, of course, on the individual leader.
Around 3/4 of Americans - Republicans, independents, and Democrats - oppose illegal immigration. They may not agree with Gilchrist on everything, and they may not support citizen patrols, but they don't support illegal immigration. Are you calling their position "extremist anti-immigration"?
If Kerry had supported actually enforcing the immigration laws, which states would he have lost?
And, which states would he have won? (Hint: job losses in Ohio and Prop. 200 in Arizona).
Somehow I don't think being supporters of massive illegal immigration is going to serve the Democratic Party very well.
I'm not aware of widespread stances by Republicans that are "anti-immigration". Nor am I aware of widespread "anti-immigrant rhetoric".
I am aware of a lot of supporters of massive illegal immigration attempting to mischaracterize opposition to illegal immigration as "anti-immigrant", but when someone does that aren't they basically lying?
--] "In the case of Katrina, there was huge fleet of school buses the mayor could have dispatched to aid in evacuating people unable to leave on their own. Instead, the buses sat in parking lots that later flooded, making them unusable when tens of thousands were stranded in the flooded city." [--
Obviously, if anyone is concerned with niceties like licensing or requisition notices, then that would tend to point towards part of the failure involved here.
--] In scripted appearances being recorded now, officials such as Mayor Ray Nagin, local Red Cross Executive Director Kay Wilkins and City Council President Oliver Thomas drive home the word that the city does not have the resources to move out of harm's way an estimated 134,000 people without transportation." [--
Everyone in the world is related to someone who was a migrant. Humans moved out of Africa, Europeans moved out of the steppes, and on and on.
However, the United States is what is referred to as a "country". Countries have things called "borders". As even a brief glance at a history book will show, if those countries don't enforce their borders, they cease to be countries and they become the territory of another country.
We can't just have people moving here and declaring themselves citizens or permanent residents. Least of all because most of those people are coming from Mexico, and Mexico has specifically stated that having millions of their citizens in our country gives them political leverage over our country.
So, if "liberals" want to be seen to be supporting Mexico's antagonistic goals, have at it. Very few people trust your abilities to protect the U.S. anyway, might as well drive even more people away from your party.
Once again: if you actually want to find out what's going on with this issue, visit my immigration categories. I cover this issue very closely and, even though you will probably disagree with me you will definitely learn things you never knew about.
The original post makes the mistaken assumption that "Latinos" support massive illegal immigration. That's false: 47% of "Latinos" in Arizona voted for Prop. 200.
If you want to understand this issue, see the nine immigration categories at my blog as well as the posts at the Immigration Blog. No, you probably won't like either site, but, then again sometimes the truth is difficult.
I note also that even the DUmmies are ahead of some on this thread.
What does everyone think of the plan to turn the U.S., Canada, and Mexico into an EU-style superstate? Here's Senate testimony from an American University professor outlining the plan. No, I'm not joking, read the link.