[ek_hornbeck]

Most “Libertarians” pay lip service to Milton Friedman’s statement that you can have a welfare state or liberal immigration policy, but not both. I say lip service because the Bill Welds and Gary Johnsons know they won’t get rid of the welfare state, but they persist in supporting liberal immigration policy anyway. Talk about putting the cart before the horse.

[Ohioan]

Friedman's focus, of course, was on economics. While every thing does have an economic aspect; the value of the lost space--as the population has soared far above what seemed desirable as recently as the immediate post World War II era--cannot be easily quantified. The Founders, at a time when we really encouraged immigration, generally made a point of the less hectic, less crowded conditions, here. Many of us share that concept. Thus we grieve as the gridlock around our urban centers has grown very substantially, decade by decade.

One can reflect--as one must as a responsible citizen in a free society--strolling in a pasture, or even in a not crowded urban park; but as the population soars, that reflection is more & more challenged. One does not reflect very deeply in a bumper to bumper gridlock.

The duty of the United States Government must always be to its rooted citizenry; not to any foreign interest that might conflict with that first duty. Scratch an advocate of heavy immigration, and you will invariably find an internationalist, quite willing to deny the interests of his fellow citizens, while pursuing some humanist fantasy of a new world order.