[Soul Seeker]

Not that it will ever penetrate your head, but the poster in #8 is correct.

J.D.'s opponent ran as a hard liner on illegal immigration and Arizona voters overwhelming approved amendments that took a hard line against illegal immigration.

Ergo, J.D.'s stance on illegal immigration was neutralized because his opponenet took the same position. So if you wish to prove enforcement is a loser, you'll have to take a look at the intiatives on the ballot. And given they went the border enforcement crowd's way, YOU seem to find yourself embarrassed in the conclusion amnesty is a peferred path by the American people.

[Dane]

Ergo, J.D.'s stance on illegal immigration was neutralized because his opponenet took the same position. So if you wish to prove enforcement is a loser, you'll have to take a look at the intiatives on the ballot.

Really a person whose first vote in the 110th Congress(Mitchell) will be for nancy pelosi had a tougher line on immigration.

LOL!

[narby]

if you wish to prove enforcement is a loser ...

The Repubs lost a large percentage of hispanic voters this election. With votes so close, like J.D.s, in a state with a heavy hispanic population, it's not hard to make the case that the unworkable "enforcement only" position cost him his seat.