That's my biggest problem with the whole thing...that and what I see as being insufficient attention being given to actually defending our borders against future ILLEGAL entry. I have a major issue with rewarding these "claim-jumpers" while law-abiding foreigners have been trying fer years to gain citizenship the legal and proper way, and they're still out in the cold.
"Look at who folks at FAIR, VDARE, and CIS are making common cause with: radical environmentalists and zero-population growth types."
I disagree with both groups on almost all the issues I can think of, but they are correct if they believe in defending our borders. It sucks their background can be used to discredit the perfectly-defensible position of being Anti-ILLEGAL Immigration, but that doesn't discount the validity of my position.
"Those who oppose the President's plan to deal with this issue and who do not support such things as white supremacy and eugenics need to speak out pretty firmly about this. But that does not seem to be happening. What else can I conclude but that at a minimum, people who appear with these folks don't see a problem with those links?"
Well I, for one, hereby reject White Supremicism and Zero Growth Advocacy...I think America's got plenty of room fer more folks, but they need to access the bounty of this Country in a way that respects the Laws and Customs of this Nation!!
FReegards...MUD
Don't fall for the "guilt by association" gambit- it's just a logical fallacy that avoids dealing with the meat of the issue.
Guilt by Association is a class of fallacies in which a proposition is considered invalid because of a circumstantial association with a disliked person, group, other entitity, or concept. Alternatively, a proposition considered to be negative is affirmed by such an association.
http://www.sierrafoot.org/soapbox/fallacies/guilt_by_association.html