Replies

I'm saying that why even talk of compromise till the borders are closed?

and don't think for a minute that the 11 million myth could not be 100 million in a generation ....then our whole culture is upside down in 20-30 years.

That is unprecedented outside military conquest.

Damn right I oppose that.

Our immigration policy prior to 1965 mirrored most other nations and was prudent and deliberate.

Like it should be.

Third world wishes to assimilate the first and it will probably eventually. It's happening everywhere. The third world cannot catch up culturally or economically so they are abandoning their nations to come to ours.

We can at least have it happen at a reasonable rate.

This dwarfs the Irish and Eastern European migrations of the mid 1800s...proportionately...dwarfs exponentially and we are no longer a frontier stealing the Indian's land as our NZ guest loves to point out.

Plus...those marches look more like they want to assimilate us ..like we owe them already....mierda in my view.

I'm saying that why even talk of compromise till the borders are closed?

But isn't that what Charles is saying in his article.. which was what original question was about? If I understand Charles, he says, build a wall FIRST... then we can consider other things. I myself would like to see an attempt to stop the flow of illegals first... and then I will be a lot more flexible the 11 million here. What I am afraid of is that the Senate will do just what they tried doing this past week in their "Bait and switch" skim. Basically bank amnesty and nothing done on the border, which it would mean, another 20 or 30 million in 10 years from now. And I have to tell you, unless we put a lot of pressure on the senate, they will find a way to get enough votes from the Rats and pass this thing.