It always amazed me that this issue is defined as dem v. repub, lib v con. In truth, it is an econ. strata issue—the lower strata should be for controlling illegal immigration for obvious reasons, and the upper income strata (presumed to have control over means of production) should be against it for the same reasons.

Thus, the economic reasons hold no sway with the elected Worthies, who instead fight over a future pool of . . . .voters?

Yes, voters. Just as in the days of Tammany Hall, the dems want to allow more immigrants with the expectation that, as poor, multihued immigrants they will vote democratic, while the GOP opposes unrestricted immigration for the same reason.

Same thing with unions. One would think that they would be against immigration, but instead they view immigrants as a new source of membership.

Thus, the average blue collar worker is being sold out by the democrats and unions. It is in their interest to keep immigration controlled, but the two institutions in which they place their faith for more and better paying jobs also wants to cultivate their competitors.

?

[251] stu

Had me going for a second. The littlest Deplume is much cuter.

Anyone already here that is not successful is lazy and not seizing the endless opportunity available or we can’t take any more immigrants because we’ve hit the wall. GM is crushed by labor cost but we can’t get immigrants to do the work for less.

The laws in place to ensure that illegals get health care, police protection and education I personally think are necessary. The cost of preventive measures outweigh the reactive ones. We can either spend the money up front or we can do damage control with emergency hospital care, and an out of control prison population.

As far as emergency care goes- here’s a doozy:
9 patients made nearly 2,700 ER visits in Texas
Hospital trips of 5 women, 4 men over 6 years cost taxpayers $3 million
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29998460/

If you are a law abiding American citizen who has seen your standard of living greatly eroded due to competition for jobs/resources from illegal immigrants, it is small comfort to say that, well, it has always been like this and you just have to deal with it.

Our government owes a duty to its own citizens first and foremost and there is nothing racist in saying so.

(McGreevy Humor)

Kettle1: Your point is in 1900 the US was still expanding within its own border. I am not sure about that completely. One of the reason, I hear Euro zone and Japan is not growing is due to its restrictive Immigration policies. The natural birth rate is declining and aging. The advantage US has is due to immigration, US’s birth rate is kept about 2% (required to keep population same), and that is helping economy grow. Without it, US would start looking very similar to Europe or Japan.

“Stu you look toppy.”

Is that a come on?

That’s wonderful. DJIA isn’t even back to where it was on February 9th (8270).