I have been reading your immigration comments for years.
You oppose Amnesty, but rarely, if ever, in detail.
Do you want the DREAM Act “children” deported?
Do you want illegals deported who provide an income or essential care to a legal household?
Do you support annual E-Verify for all employees?
Do you want enforcement of civil and criminal sanctions against employers who hire illegals?
I cannot recall that you have ever expressed an opinion on our current policy of creating 1 million new citizens per year.
Do you support that number?
Do you support family re-unification (a.k.a. chain migration) that results in almost 1.5 million new Green Cards each year?
Do you understand that if we “Convert” just 2% of white voters to the Conservative cause, that would result in more votes than “Converting” 10% of Hispanics?
Alright, let's continue.
If you[ve been "reading my immigration comments for years" you evidently missed the plan I posed:
a. Secure the border
b. Enforce the current laws regarding employment and visas.
c. Include E-verify in the enforcement process...enforce civil and criminal penalties on employers...make illegal presence in the country a felony, rather than a misdemeanor (as it is now).
c. Cut off all government-sponsored welfare to non-citizens.
d. Wait an unspecified period (say, 3-5 years), see what's left. My presumption is that the vast bulk of illegals will have self-deported. Address the small remnant appropriately -- but under no circumstances, nor at any time, would citizenship be conferred to any person who was here illegally.
I have rarely commented on our legal migration policies, other than to note that Teddy Kennedy is the man responsible for the unholy mess they are. Personally, I would favor a moratorium on all legal immigration, pending a full review and accounting for the impacts of our current policies.
Eventually, in my opinion, it would be best to have a strictly limited immigration policy that reflected the best interests of the country. I.e., acceptance of a limited number of healthy, capable immigrants with needed skills. In other words, pretty much the pre-1965 policy.
Did I pass muster?
What annoys you, I suspect, is my support for legal Hispanic immigrants. I have worked with and have many friends in this community. And I know that most of them object to amnesty for illegals.
Nor do I have a particular animus for the bulk of illegal Hispanic immigrants. If I were in their place, I might well do as they did -- seeking to find a better life for my family.
Instead, my animus is reserved for the people who created the immigration mess via their own corruption and/or indolence and now want to take the easy way out...refusing to fix it, because that would be "hard".
That would be Teddy Kennedy, the Democrats and those Republicans who are, as you put it, "soft on immigration" -- as you accused me of being.
Take it or leave it. I'm done with the thread.