Gratitude? Maybe she should be thanking me since I have been fighting this battle for years. You miss the point. Laura doesn't fully understand the immigration problem. Illegal immigration is only part of it and not the most important part. We could stop illegal immigration tomorrow and still have the country go down the tubes because of our legal immigration policy.
Virtually nobody is in favor of halting immigration totally. That's why most Democrats and GOP compromisers like Graham, McCain, Rove and President Bush pretended people like Laura didn't distinguish between legal and illegal immigration! If it were only up to you people against ANY immigration to fight amnesty, you'd be up you-know-what creek!
You are not very well informed. I have never said that I am against immigration. My wife is an immigrant and so was my grandmother. I want the legal immigration polices changed so that we have a merit based system that serves the needs of this country. I want the number of legal immigrants to be reduced from 1.2 million annually to 300,000 a year per the Jordan Commission recommendations. I want to end extended chain migration and confine it to the nuclear family. I want to end birthright citizenship, i.e., anchor babies. I want to eliminate the visa lottery program that brings in 50,000 people a year.
Stop whining.
LOL. The problem is people like you [and Laura] who are uniformed about immigration and the long term impact it is having on this country. I suggest you become better informed. One question: What should we do with the 12 to 20 million illegals in this country?
Bush's America: Roach Motel by Ann Coulter Unlike Laura, Ann gets it.
So in the face of a de facto amnesty bill with bipartisan Beltway support that legalizes at least a dozen million illegal border-crossers, what's the priority? Stopping that legislation, or putting on a seminar about why legal immigration is just as bad or worse?
You are not very well informed. I have never said that I am against immigration.
There is nothing in what you have written in your previous responses that would give anybody the clear signal that you are in favor of legal immigration. This is what you wrote in post 43 (bold mine):
You again, from post 46:
...She doesn't know beans about legal immigration policies, e.g., chain migration, visa lottery program, the demographic impact, the importation of poverty, etc. To Laura, all legal immigration is good. It isn't and is far more dangerous and difficult to resolve, especially when you have people like Laura spitting out such bromides rather than using her platform to educate people about the issues.Her discussions with Tony were about illegal immigration and amnesty. Big difference.
On top of all of that, you misstated the facts you referenced. You wrote in post #46 that legal immigration brings in 1.2 million a year. Here's the Center for Immigration Studies page you linked to (bold mine):
If the amnesty bill had passed, it would have been game, set, and match for this country as we know it, mainly due to chain migration. However, we are being destroyed piece by piece through legal immigration, which now brings in 1.2 million people a year. The demographic impact is enormous.
OOPS! The 1.2 million aren't ALL legal, like you said -- it's the combination of legals and illegals minus either or both that have left the country -- "net immigration," which is the amount to which the endless charts and graphs on that page are referring. Like you said, "big difference."
Currently, 1.6 million legal and illegal immigrants settle in the country each year; 350,000 immigrants leave each year, resulting in net immigration of 1.25 million.
So much else of what you write about Laura is twaddle. "She doesn't know beans about legal immigration policies, e.g., chain migration, visa lottery program, the demographic impact, the importation of poverty, etc.," you wrote. Maybe if you hadn't "stopped listening to her a long time ago," you would know such subjects were a regular feature of her highlighting of the immigration issue. And PLEASE don't compare her unfavorably with Ann Coulter, whose rightness on many issues is counterbalanced by her childish need for constant attention, which she gets by making gratuitous asides that are certain to offend. To wit: In the Coulter column you linked, it wasn't enough for her to take on Ted Kennedy for the way he has transformed the demographics in the nation through his immigration legislation spanning five decades; she just HAD to write "If only the U.S. Senate had had an 'Irish Need Not Apply' sign!"
For all your supposed superior intelligence and better grasp of the issues, you don't know how to communicate them. Laura does. That's how she became the most popular female political talkhost in history. That's how she topped the New York Times bestseller list with her latest book. And that's how she helped rally millions to take on President Bush, Ted Kennedy, and Lindsey Graham to shove shamnesty and the DREAM act down the throats of the pols, pundits, and media figures (like the majority of the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal and Fox News' All-Stars) who wanted to shove it down ours.
Again: If what you want is to slow legal immigration to under half a million a year, you're not going to have a prayer of accomplishing that until you slow down efforts to increase illegal immigration. Laura helped do that for you. So I have no idea what you're bitching about.