[george wythe]

Get ready for the usual hyperbolic anti-immigrant knee jerkers.

They believe that only statistics that support the anti-immigrant side should be posted. No rational debate should be allowed.

[Luis Gonzalez]

I'm ready.

[dennisw]

They believe that only statistics that support the anti-immigrant side should be posted. No rational debate should be allowed.

We are discussing illegal immigrants so please don't call them "immigrants", thus equating them with people who come here legally

[brytlea]

Any rational person understands the difference between immigrants and illegal aliens. Into which column do you fall?
susie

[inquest]

No rational debate should be allowed.

Rational debate doesn't begin with ad homs right in the title. That and the fact that the article can't distinguish between Hispanics and illegal aliens make the article worthy only of derision.

[TheLion]

"Get ready for the usual hyperbolic anti-immigrant knee jerkers."

I'm proud to be pro anti-illegal-immigrant....we all want legal immigration.

[investigateworld]

I guess I shouldn't believe my lying eyes when I saw my little county build and open 6 brand new welfare centers,at 100,000 feet plus lease a old K-Mart center to process the welfare checks for the newly legalized citizens in 92-93.

Even though they were using Federal money, they got waivers from the Davis Bacon Act as the pressing need was so great. Plus I was on the union negotiating committee at the time. The percentage of funds going to social service (welfare) practically tripled.
Dam these lying eyes!

[adam_az]

"Get ready for the usual hyperbolic anti-immigrant knee jerkers."

You're an ass.

Stop confusing IMMIGRANT with ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT.

Then I'll stop calling you an ass. Ass.

[tertiary01]

Get ready for the usual hyperbolic anti-immigrant knee jerkers.

They believe that only statistics that support the anti-immigrant side should be posted. No rational debate should be allowed.

No, it just makes it hard to concentrate on your side of it when they are demonstrating in front of one's house.

[Beckwith]

Get ready for the usual hyperbolic anti-immigrant knee jerkers.br
Speaking of jerks, you left the word anti-ILLEGAL out of your pejorative.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

They believe that only statistics that support the anti-immigrant side should be posted. No rational debate should be allowed.

There is a principle that trumps the statistics from both sides, and that is our country's sovereign right to get rid of anyone we have not invited in.

[curiosity]

They believe that only statistics that support the anti-immigrant side should be posted.

The statsitics, when honestly presented, by and large support the anti-immigration side. This piece is a textbook example of spinning the stats.

For example:

Princeton University sociologist Douglas S. Massey reports that 62 percent of illegal immigrants pay income taxes (via withholding) and 66 percent contribute to Social Security.

Okay, that's nice, but what about how much do they pay, and how does it compare to the amount they use in government services? Without the comparison, this statistic means very little.

Economist Larry Kudlow praises Hispanic entrepreneurship: "According to 2002 Census Bureau data, Hispanics are opening businesses at a rate three times faster than the national average. In addition, there were almost 1.6 million Hispanic-owned businesses generating $222 billion in revenue in 2002."

That's also nice, but irrelevent. I doubt those opening businesses are illegals. Most hispanics are not illegal aliens, and that's what the House bill addresses.

Total crime and property crime in California are half what they were in 1980; violent crime has fallen more than a third. The state's Hispanic population during that time has increased 120 percent.

Classic example of the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. Correlation is not causation. Crime fell dramatically nation-wide during the 1990's, both in places with high and low immigrant populations.