Just for the record, I don't hate anyone, except Commies.
What many others and I object to is the simple fact many Hispanics are coming here illegally. They are criminals by their very presence here. Are politicians are not doing anything about it. I believe it's because many of them are bought off by interests who are profiting by the presence of illegal aliens.
That's what I have a problem with. I believe that some here on FR who don't what to hear it have a vested interests and ulterior motives as well.
I agree but many of them could just be naive.
What's rally happening is that we're just importing in more democratic voters. Here's a good article.
Clinton’s Subtle, but Historic, Redefinition of U.S. Immigration Policy Commentary by Ira Mehlman Federation for American Immigration Reform Spokesman January 10, 2001 The Clinton Administration is now a part of history, and historians are just getting started assessing the Clinton legacy. There will be plenty to keep them busy. There were remarkable successes in managing an unprecedented period of economic expansion, the first budget surpluses in three decades, and of course there were notable failures in the area of health care reform and personal integrity. Among the records set during the Clinton years was the largest sustained wave of immigration in America’s history. Some 10 million new immigrants arrived in the U.S. during his presidency, and by the time he left offices there were nearly 30 million foreign born residents, accounting for more than 10 percent of the population. But perhaps more significant than the sheer numbers of people who settled here during the Clinton years, was the dramatic redefinition of the purpose of immigration policy and the relationship between immigrants and their adopted country. Two subtle, but significant shifts occurred during the last eight years that are worth noting: U.S. citizenship was turned into a political commodity, and immigrants became America’s “customers.” After losing control of both houses of Congress in the 1994 election to the Republicans, Clinton embarked on a program to reshape the electorate in a way that was more to his liking. In addition to using his considerable powers of persuasion to win back public support, he set about creating a new American public. The administration directed the Immigration and Naturalization Service to mint new citizens in time to vote in the 1996 elections. Under the direct control of Vice President Gore, the Citizenship USA program was tasked with naturalizing as many noncitizens as they could possibly find in time to participate in the next election. The plan succeeded. Democrats have eliminated the Republicans’ majority in the Senate and have significantly eroded their advantage in the House. An analysis of voting patterns across the country shows that voting by new citizens has been the deciding factor in numerous elections, and in nearly every case, has broken to the Democrats’ advantage. That immigrants are playing a significant role in American politics is nothing new. What changed during the Clinton years is that altering the political landscape became an objective of immigration policy. In much the same way as employers have used immigrants to change labor market conditions to their advantage, the Clinton Administration used them to create an electorate more to their liking. The second subtle, but important, change that occurred under Clinton was a redefinition of the relationship between immigrants and the American nation. One of the priorities set forth by Clinton’s INS commissioner, Doris Meissner, was to improve the agency’s “customer service.” Certainly no one who has ever dealt with INS would dispute the need for improvements in the way the agency treats those who are going through the immigration process. But Meissner’s repeated description of immigrants as “customers” was more than a matter of semantics. The choice of words reflected a very significant change in attitude. In the past, immigration was seen as policy designed to serve the interests of the nation. As such, there was a general belief that it was the responsibility of the immigrants to go the extra mile to accommodate themselves to the social, cultural and linguistic norms of the country. As customers, that relationship is reversed. It is the nation that must bend over backwards to accommodate the “customers,” and provide whatever services and programs they need. Under the customer model, if immigration creates overcrowded schools, or exceeds the capacity of public health care system, you don’t reduce immigration. Instead you build as many schools and emergency rooms as the “customers” require. Under the customer model, it doesn’t matter whether immigrants have marketable skills, or that more than one-third have less than a high school education. It becomes the nation’s obligation to deal with the needs of the immigrants. Very often it is the subtle policy changes of a presidential administration that define its legacy. Clinton’s subtle manipulation of immigration policy could prove to be among the most long lasting imprints he leaves on America.
I don't know why GWB doesn't see that he's making his re-election more difficult in 2004 by continuing this policy.
Then you are not in the percentage I mentioned, either.
And, just like with the last poster who felt compelled to tell me that I wasn't describing him - I think the whole border system needs serious revamping, ASAP.