Ann Coulter Rips Marco Rubio Over Inmigration Reform.

[Benvolio]

You're just repeating horse manure from people like Rush Limbaugh. Illegal immigrants can't get welfare and they can't vote.

They do get welfare, including food stamps, health service at emergency rooms etc. That and the vote is what Obama's "reform" is all about. Rush illegals to citizenship and allow/encourage more to come.

[xbuzzerx]

They do get welfare, including food stamps, health service at emergency rooms etc. That and the vote is what Obama's "reform" is all about. Rush illegals to citizenship and allow/encourage more to come.

Then you can thank your party for making our victories possible since they've done far more to enable and incentivize illegal immigration than anyone else.

[GiancarloC]

They do get welfare, including food stamps, health service at emergency rooms etc. That and the vote is what Obama's "reform" is all about. Rush illegals to citizenship and allow/encourage more to come.

Bullsh*t argument.

Most people who get welfare are in.... republican states. We're talking about citizens. Not immigrants.

And immigration is DOWN. It's in DECLINE. People are leaving this country.

[Benvolio]

Yup.

At the height of the Irish/Italian immigration period, there were more foreign-born people in the U.S. as a percentage of the population than today. There is no 'invasion.' Anymore than there's an 'invasion' of the UK by Muslims or Asians or any of the rest of this alarmist, nativist, reactionary rhetoric that's literally been around for millenia.

In college I had a professor put a transparency up on the screen as we came in. It was a quote talking about how "we're being invaded by hordes of immigrants who have totally different language and customs, do not adopt ours, harm our civilization and are nothing at all like the previous immigrants who worked hard and contributed." The professor asked everyone to guess what the quote was talking about, and everyone, naturally, thought it was about hispanic immigration.

She revealed the rest of the transparency and it was a Roman Emperor talking about Britons.

None of this shit is anything new.

So, how has the Roman Empire done since the Emperor said that? You persist in ignoring the effect which immigrants have on our existing poor and unemployed.

[xbuzzerx]

So, how has the Roman Empire done since the Emperor said that?

Here we go with the "we're like modern day Rome" crap.

Rome fell from the inside and it had nothing to do with immigrants. It had to do with heavily concentrated corrupt oligarchy which had lost all touch with reality. You know, the place that Mitt Romney wanted to take us.

[frankfrank]

It is hard to support the poor and unemployed when they flood into the country by the millions, and any support provides an incentive for more to come.

Yeah, because if not for those filthy Immuh-Grunts, there would be no poor or unemployed people in this country...not at all. Yup.

[Just_Believe18]

Benvolio, how will you feel when Marco Rubio potentially becomes the Republican 2016 presidential nominee?

[Benvolio]

Benvolio, how will you feel when Marco Rubio potentially becomes the Republican 2016 presidential nominee?

It will be the final proof that we have gone past the tipping point, the point of no return.

[Benvolio]

Yeah, because if not for those filthy Immuh-Grunts, there would be no poor or unemployed people in this country...not at all. Yup.

Without massive immigration, we could have solved poverty decades ago. With immigration we never can. Every year there will be another million or two. Any progress against poverty, however unlikely, will only encourage more to come.

[xbuzzerx]

Without massive immigration, we could have solved poverty decades ago. With immigration we never can. Every year there will be another million or two. Any progress against poverty, however unlikely, will only encourage more to come.

Please, pass me some of whatever you are smoking. Immigration has always been wanted and encouraged as a way to help KEEP wages down, and has always been selectively preferred for by big industries that use a lot of unskilled labor for exactly that purpose. Go back 100, 150 years and this SAME discussion was going on about the Chinese, the Irish and the Italians. Stopping any of them from coming in would not have eliminated poverty. Dream the feck on.

[Benvolio]

Please, pass me some of whatever you are smoking. Immigration has always been wanted and encouraged as a way to help KEEP wages down, and has always been selectively preferred for by big industries that use a lot of unskilled labor for exactly that purpose. Go back 100, 150 years and this SAME discussion was going on about the Chinese, the Irish and the Italians. Stopping any of them from coming in would not have eliminated poverty. Dream the feck on.

So you agree that immigration keeps wages down. We are making progress, albeit slowly..

[GiancarloC]

Without massive immigration, we could have solved poverty decades ago. With immigration we never can. Every year there will be another million or two. Any progress against poverty, however unlikely, will only encourage more to come.

Same old tired argument. Same old attacks used against prior immigrants. And Xbuzzer brings up the Chinese. Chinese immigrants (mainly undocumented) suffered horrendous abuse in this country and that's part of the dark history of California. One that should never be repeated. The Chinese immigrants laid the framework for much of the gold rush and economic boom in the West. Never mind... factual arguments don't apply to the emotional rhetoric being tossed around.

By the way poverty was declining in the 1990s, a period of major immigration. Oops there goes that fucking argument!

[xbuzzerx]

So you agree that immigration keeps wages down. We are making progress, albeit slowly..

Incorrect. The fact that industry that uses unskilled labor hires it instead of paying enough of a dignified wage that people with ANY better option will actually take that job is what's relevant.

Americans WON'T go out and pick fruit or harvest crops for 70 hours a week, or put the same hours into the back of a kitchen, for minimum wage (or less) with zero benefits. Immigrants by and large are not doing jobs Americans will consent to do for the wages big business insists is all the more they can pay for it. Immigrants fill a critical gap in the workforce that wouldn't be there if living decent wages for very difficult work was actually paid.

Place blame where it's due.

If Americans did these jobs, even for a WEEK, even if you could force or convince enough hard-up Americans to do it, unions would spring all the hell up all over this country overnight. You can guarantee it. And we know how you feel about unions-- and how the REpublicans and conservatives in general feel about them. So stop talking out of both sides of your mouth and actually say something that makes the slightest bit of sense.

[GiancarloC]

Some Americans think its beneficial to inflate money in Wall Street and create bubbles so they can ride a temporary wave of prosperity. They would never pick fruit (asides from the dingle berries from the GOPs ass). They like to push paper so they can create a fake sense of wealth. Oh wait... that's the message of the republican party... fake wealth.

Immigrants on the other hand are working hard in this country to make a wage and often send it back home.

[Benvolio]

The reason the jobs pay so little is because floods of immigrant will take the jobs. Without the immigrants, employers would have to pay more. Not to long ago Americans were construction workers, carpenters, roofers, taxi drivers, etc. Now immigrants do that work for low wages and we have untold millions of unemployed Americans.

[xbuzzerx]

The reason the jobs pay so little is because floods of immigrant will take the jobs. Without the immigrants, employers would have to pay more. Not to long ago Americans were construction workers, carpenters, roofers, taxi drivers, etc. Now immigrants do that work for low wages and we have untold millions of unemployed Americans.

They would slowly be forced to pay more, as workers formed unions and demanded it, and voted Democrat. Also as a result business costs and the end pricepoint of goods and services would go up--- something you'd no doubt blame on the unions and Democrats and be very much against.

So your whole little "Democrats want the immigrants coming in to bolster their votes" thing is sorta unravelling here.

[GiancarloC]

The reason the jobs pay so little is because floods of immigrant will take the jobs. Without the immigrants, employers would have to pay more. Not to long ago Americans were construction workers, carpenters, roofers, taxi drivers, etc. Now immigrants do that work for low wages and we have untold millions of unemployed Americans.

Thanks for posting more falsehoods... have any more?

[FuryOfFirestorm]

Gosh, it sure would be nice if someone backed up their racist bullshit with actual facts instead of repeating the same tired xenophobic crap over and over...

[Just_Believe18]

It will be the final proof that we have gone past the tipping point, the point of no return.

But will you still vote for him over the white Democrat presidential candidate?

[opinterph]

• Democrats seem to want more Hispanic immigration.

Democrats want continued large scale immigration, including Hispanics and preferring non-whites. Immigrants tend to vote Democrat.

I question your use of the term “continued large scale immigration.” Though more than a million persons obtain legal permanent resident status in the US each year – that represents an annual increase of only about one-third of one percent of our total population. I also note that no particular source country is particularly overrepresented in the total. [DHS]

It seems to me that you may be engulfed in a fear that is based on the perception of a crisis that doesn’t exist.

You have mentioned a “tipping point” and I sense you intend that term primarily to imply that the inclusion of new citizens from other countries affects voting outcomes in the US. The basic thesis being that allowing new citizens to vote changes the dynamics of predictability in such a way as to increase the likelihood that newly elected politicians may sponsor a more favorable view toward immigrants than in times past.

With respect to the effect of those voting outcomes on the Republican Party, I think a better term is catch-22. After years of denigrating immigrants and using their presence as a wedge issue in order to motivate the base of their Party and thereby win elections, the Party must now face the reality of change. The fact that immigrants may be more likely to vote for candidates of the Democratic Party probably relates more to the history of their experience than any scurrilous intention they foster toward one party or the other. The catch-22 for Republicans is that they cannot expect to again reject immigration reform, without further alienating their appeal to Hispanic (and other minority) voters. And yet, if the millions of undocumented residents are somehow afforded an eventual path to citizenship, there is no logical reason to expect them to subsequently embrace the Republican Party. So while the citizen Hispanic vote continues to grow as a percentage of the whole, the inclusion of what are now undocumented Hispanics carries the likelihood of merely accelerating the disparity of support they demonstrate between the parties in national and some state elections. It is quickly becoming a no win situation for the Republicans and should remind them that short-term goals to win elections should take into account longer-term realities.

This is nothing new.

[opinterph]

• The broader questions about immigration include poverty and unemployment.

Historically, and continuing today, immigration has facilitated discrimination against African Americans. Since 1865, the US economy expanded incredibly, creating millions of jobs, but that expansion did little to benefit blacks, because of discrimination, because the massive immigration provided whites to take the jobs.

I applaud your concern for Black Americans and hope you will continue to use your activism to promote policies and objectives that provide help or offer remedies for the obstacles many African Americans face in their effort to fully participate and share in the bounty of our society.

While it is true that new immigrants to the US are more likely to experience poverty than native-born citizens, it is my impression that their assimilation does not result in any remarkable or enduring change to overall poverty levels in the US. Accordingly, I encourage you to provide a credible source that shares or promotes a viewpoint similar to your suggestion that immigration has a profound or notable effect on poverty in the US.

[Benvolio]

I question your use of the term “continued large scale immigration.” Though more than a million persons obtain legal permanent resident status in the US each year – that represents an annual increase of only about one-third of one percent of our total population. I also note that no particular source country is particularly overrepresented in the total. [DHS]

It seems to me that you may be engulfed in a fear that is based on the perception of a crisis that doesn’t exist.

You have mentioned a “tipping point” and I sense you intend that term primarily to imply that the inclusion of new citizens from other countries affects voting outcomes in the US. The basic thesis being that allowing new citizens to vote changes the dynamics of predictability in such a way as to increase the likelihood that newly elected politicians may sponsor a more favorable view toward immigrants than in times past.

With respect to the effect of those voting outcomes on the Republican Party, I think a better term is catch-22. After years of denigrating immigrants and using their presence as a wedge issue in order to motivate the base of their Party and thereby win elections, the Party must now face the reality of change. The fact that immigrants may be more likely to vote for candidates of the Democratic Party probably relates more to the history of their experience than any scurrilous intention they foster toward one party or the other. The catch-22 for Republicans is that they cannot expect to again reject immigration reform, without further alienating their appeal to Hispanic (and other minority) voters. And yet, if the millions of undocumented residents are somehow afforded an eventual path to citizenship, there is no logical reason to expect them to subsequently embrace the Republican Party. So while the citizen Hispanic vote continues to grow as a percentage of the whole, the inclusion of what are now undocumented Hispanics carries the likelihood of merely accelerating the disparity of support they demonstrate between the parties in national and some state elections. It is quickly becoming a no win situation for the Republicans and should remind them that short-term goals to win elections should take into account longer-term realities.

This is nothing new.

NO, my tipping point is not Democrat vs Republican. We have passed the point that any politician who attempts to limit immigration will likely lose. We have lost our ability to limit it. With it we lose our ability to make progress against poverty.
With it we have lost our ability to preserve a free enterprise economy. Immigrants being poor are amenable to class/race warfare and socialism and the last election demonstrated the acceleration of that warfare.
I am not allowed to speak of the damage to the culture which made us a great nation.

[Rolyo85]

That culture would be the culture of slavery, segregation and xenophobia, yes?

[opinterph]

We have passed the point that any politician who attempts to limit immigration will likely lose. We have lost our ability to limit it. With it we lose our ability to make progress against poverty.

It remains unclear how you determine “immigration causes us to lose our ability to make progress against poverty.” If true, there must surely be a source somewhere that develops this concept and uses facts to support the supposition.

[Benvolio]

It remains unclear how you determine “immigration causes us to lose our ability to make progress against poverty.” If true, there must surely be a source somewhere that develops this concept and uses facts to support the supposition.

If we cannot limit immigration coming into the country, we make progress against poverty. Any progress will be wiped out by presence of new arrivals, willing to work for low wages. Here is a link I posted earlier this morning, but which for some reason does not appear. http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...book-of-charts
Here is anotherhttp://cis.org/node/3876
Here is another.http://www.catholic.org/national/nat...y.php?id=48520

[Benvolio]

If that were what American culture is about, immigrants would not want to come here by the millions.

[Rolyo85]

If that were what American culture is about, immigrants would not want to come here by the millions.

Because it isn't anymore, regardless of the troglodites who want to return us to that time.

[GiancarloC]

If we cannot limit immigration coming into the country, we make progress against poverty. Any progress will be wiped out by presence of new arrivals, willing to work for low wages. Here is a link I posted earlier this morning, but which for some reason does not appear. http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...book-of-charts
Here is anotherhttp://cis.org/node/3876
Here is another.http://www.catholic.org/national/nat...y.php?id=48520

And look at the right wing crackpot websites that are cited. Poverty is mostly started within. It's not immigrants causing poverty, but the rich in this country. Also low wage jobs are needed... unless one wants to pay many times more for fruits and vegetables, and other products.

[xbuzzerx]

If we cannot limit immigration coming into the country, we make progress against poverty. Any progress will be wiped out by presence of new arrivals, willing to work for low wages. Here is a link I posted earlier this morning, but which for some reason does not appear. http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...book-of-charts
Here is anotherhttp://cis.org/node/3876
Here is another.http://www.catholic.org/national/nat...y.php?id=48520

You never addressed my point about how for wages to ever go up even in the crappiest, hardest jobs, if we somehow put up a concrete wall and stopped 100.0% of all immigration somehow, it would only ever happen through collective bargaining and the formation of unions. Something I know you have loudly denounced in previous discussions. I'm curious how you think these jobs will simply rise to dignified wages on their own if you remove immigrants, something we have absolutely no reason to believe will happen.

[Benvolio]

You never addressed my point about how for wages to ever go up even in the crappiest, hardest jobs, if we somehow put up a concrete wall and stopped 100.0% of all immigration somehow, it would only ever happen through collective bargaining and the formation of unions. Something I know you have loudly denounced in previous discussions. I'm curious how you think these jobs will simply rise to dignified wages on their own if you remove immigrants, something we have absolutely no reason to believe will happen.

No, in economics, it is called the law of supply and demand. When the supply of available labor is low, employers will be forced to pay more to get the job done. They will eventually be required to recruit from the huge number of people who have given up on getting jobs.

[xbuzzerx]

No, in economics, it is called the law of supply and demand. When the supply of available labor is low, employers will be forced to pay more to get the job done. They will eventually be required to recruit from the huge number of people who have given up on getting jobs.

And this is bunk because real wages have fallen for 30 years for about 70% of the workforce (yes including jobs way too specialized for "illegal immigrants" to be doing for minimum wage). It hasn't even kept up with inflation and cost of living increases, let alone risen because immigrants are not competing for most of these jobs.

Or in short, and Opin was oh so nicely pointing this out to you, you're stating a belief over and over again for which there is utterly no proof in the real world.

Also in your world did trickle down work?

[Benvolio]

And this is bunk because real wages have fallen for 30 years for about 70% of the workforce (yes including jobs way too specialized for "illegal immigrants" to be doing for minimum wage). It hasn't even kept up with inflation and cost of living increases, let alone risen because immigrants are not competing for most of these jobs.

Or in short, and Opin was oh so nicely pointing this out to you, you're stating a belief over and over again for which there is utterly no proof in the real world.

Also in your world did trickle down work?

The vast oversupply of cheap labor at the bottom creates competition for the next level, then the next level etc. And the legal immigrants are not all low income worker. Some are educated and function at high levels and have the benefit of affirmative action and anti discrimination. Meanwhile, America is confronted with increased foreign competition, while technology enables employers to escape some of the US burdens placed on employers.

[xbuzzerx]

The vast oversupply of cheap labor at the bottom creates competition for the next level, then the next level etc. And the legal immigrants are not all low income worker. Some are educated and function at high levels and have the benefit of affirmative action and anti discrimination. Meanwhile, America is confronted with increased foreign competition, while technology enables employers to escape some of the US burdens placed on employers.

No it doesn't.

It doesn't matter how many people are available to pick fruit. That doesn't make any more people qualified for nursing or physical therapy jobs tomorrow. And those wages have fallen too in real terms.

The onrush of technology largely explains the gradual development of a "two-tier labor market" in which those at the bottom lack the education and the professional/technical skills of those at the top and, more and more, fail to get comparable pay raises, health insurance coverage, and other benefits. Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households. Since 1996, dividends and capital gains have grown faster than wages or any other category of after-tax income.

From the CIA World Factbook

Source Link: https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/us.html

[Benvolio]

Not all immigrants pick fruit. They do many kinds of work, specially construction. When was the last time you rode in a taxi not driven by an immigrant? If an American con no longer make a living driving a taxi, he competes for a higher paying job. Not nursing, perhaps but truck driving, etc.

[xbuzzerx]

Not all immigrants pick fruit. They do many kinds of work, specially construction. When was the last time you rode in a taxi not driven by an immigrant? If an American con no longer make a living driving a taxi, he competes for a higher paying job. Not nursing, perhaps but truck driving, etc.

So Benvolio tell me, who has a vested interest in keeping wages low?

Could it be the party dedicated to trickle down economics and unionbusting? Or am I just thinking way too literally?

[GiancarloC]

Not all immigrants pick fruit. They do many kinds of work, specially construction. When was the last time you rode in a taxi not driven by an immigrant? If an American con no longer make a living driving a taxi, he competes for a higher paying job. Not nursing, perhaps but truck driving, etc.

Baloney. A lot of immigrants do other work that keeps food costs down. Just think about it next time when ordering a big mac.

Have anymore baloney for us to respond to? By the way, capitalism operates under cheap labor. If labor was all very expensive, prices would be higher. One can't have their cake and eat it too.

[chrisrobin]

Not all immigrants pick fruit

Agreed. They pick vegetables - like tomatoes. Wait, are tomatoes vegetables? I think they are a fruit in the berry family. The lovely and talented consort of the late Sir Ronald of Reagan said that ketchup was a vegetable... But how can a vegetable product be made from a fruit?

Meanwhile, back to the topic. I met an immigrant who was an M.D. His specialty was ear, nose and throat. He took this position because U.S. doctors want to be eye specialists only. That sounds familiar: immigrants taking jobs that Americans won't do. Whaddaya know!

[Kulindahr]

I'm glad to see that you're finally recognizing that the wild Eyed Liberal Republican known as Dwight D. Eisenhower is no longer our Nation's President!

Instead we have a wild-eyed liberal Democrat doing Eisenhower redux.

[Kulindahr]

Who employs illegal immigrant labor and reaps a financial benefit from having undocumented workers they aren't paying payroll taxes on, JustMe5?

I'll give you a hint. In general it's not Democrats.

It's "people, my friend".

[Kulindahr]

Yup.

At the height of the Irish/Italian immigration period, there were more foreign-born people in the U.S. as a percentage of the population than today. There is no 'invasion.' Anymore than there's an 'invasion' of the UK by Muslims or Asians or any of the rest of this alarmist, nativist, reactionary rhetoric that's literally been around for millenia.

In college I had a professor put a transparency up on the screen as we came in. It was a quote talking about how "we're being invaded by hordes of immigrants who have totally different language and customs, do not adopt ours, harm our civilization and are nothing at all like the previous immigrants who worked hard and contributed." The professor asked everyone to guess what the quote was talking about, and everyone, naturally, thought it was about hispanic immigration.

She revealed the rest of the transparency and it was a Roman Emperor talking about Britons.

None of this shit is anything new.

The same complaint was raised in the Roman Senate after Julius Caesar conquered Gaul.

[Kulindahr]

They do get welfare, including food stamps, health service at emergency rooms etc. That and the vote is what Obama's "reform" is all about. Rush illegals to citizenship and allow/encourage more to come.

I took a guy to the human services office the other day to get food stamps. Guess what he had to provide?


Sorry, you missed it: they required proof of citizenship.

[Kulindahr]

I am not allowed to speak of the damage to the culture which made us a great nation.

THe culture which made us a great nation was one where welcoming newcomers was an integral part of the understanding of liberty.

[Benvolio]

The same complaint was raised in the Roman Senate after Julius Caesar conquered Gaul.

Rome lost its republican form of government at that point and never recovered it.
Sorry you missed this, Kuhl.http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/19/us...participation/

[palemale]

When was the last time you rode in a taxi not driven by an immigrant?

Last week.

[Benvolio]

THe culture which made us a great nation was one where welcoming newcomers was an integral part of the understanding of liberty.

Perhaps, but that was the old assimilationist, melting pot culture, which is being replaced with diverse, divisive, multicultural America. It will not work as well.

[Durango95]

First of all, to quote the HP as a source for an open discussion of immigration reform is like quoting the Pope for an open discussion on abortion.

I cannot stand Ann Coulter. That being said, she is correct on this issue. Marco Rubio is being a Cuban first and then an American second.

My thought is this. Before pushing for reform, why not trying enforcing the laws already on the books and see how that works. The immigration laws haven't been vigorously enforced for any lengthy period of time...ever. Immigration has become a political football. Republican administrations look the other way because immigrates are cheap labor for the big agribusinesses and hotel chains. These guys use the catch 22 "day labor" which allows them to submit a 1099, which let's be clear is vague at best. Democratic administrations look the other way because immigrates are quickly assimilated into the nanny culture where they queue up for taxpayer financed freebies. Democrats are the party of giveaways. Therefore, these people are more than likely to vote for Democratic candidates even though they technically are not capable of doing that legally in this country. (see last year's election)

I agree that immigration needs to be reformed radically. Most of today's problems come from Hart-Cellar and all the amendments to it through the years.

No other country in the world is as lax as is the U.S. with immigration policy, no one.

[GiancarloC]

Ann Coulter doesn't know her ass from the ground on this issue. Marco isn't trying to be a Cuban before an American, that's just a silly logic. I don't think the reform he is proposing even goes far enough. The immigration laws on the book are inconsistent and treat some immigrants in a poor light.

Democratic administrations look the other way because immigrates are quickly assimilated into the nanny culture where they queue up for taxpayer financed freebies.

Oh is that the case? I heard Bill O'Reilly talk about how Obama was giving things away, but I still didn't get my gift card. What's this nanny culture you speak about? I don't see any of these freebies.

Democrats are the party of giveaways. Therefore, these people are more than likely to vote for Democratic candidates even though they technically are not capable of doing that legally in this country.

Bullshit. They are not. The republicans are the party of giveaways, especially to their corporate buddies. And most immigrants work many long hours and aren't looking for a freebie. They'd rather work for their money.

Thanks for the right wing rhetoric.

No other country in the world is as lax as is the U.S. with immigration policy, no one.

Nonsense. America isn't lax at all, and European countries were actually more lax providing numerous amnesties. Spain no longer does this as often, but they provided many amnesties the last decade to immigrants.

It's always nice seeing someone describing immigrants as people who just want freebies and are lazy. Yeah, as if I didn't hear that crock before. Were the work permits (deferred action signed by Obama) freebies? Nope. They actually cost quite a bit of money. I know because one of my friends applied for one and had to pay the government several hundred. Freebies... yeah... typical. Attack the groups that work the hardest.

[xbuzzerx]

Rome lost its republican form of government at that point and never recovered it.

That was because of Roman versions of George W. Bush leading the empire.. not because of immigration.

First of all, to quote the HP as a source for an open discussion of immigration reform is like quoting the Pope for an open discussion on abortion.

I cannot stand Ann Coulter. That being said, she is correct on this issue. Marco Rubio is being a Cuban first and then an American second.

My thought is this. Before pushing for reform, why not trying enforcing the laws already on the books and see how that works. The immigration laws haven't been vigorously enforced for any lengthy period of time...ever. Immigration has become a political football. Republican administrations look the other way because immigrates are cheap labor for the big agribusinesses and hotel chains. These guys use the catch 22 "day labor" which allows them to submit a 1099, which let's be clear is vague at best. Democratic administrations look the other way because immigrates are quickly assimilated into the nanny culture where they queue up for taxpayer financed freebies. Democrats are the party of giveaways. Therefore, these people are more than likely to vote for Democratic candidates even though they technically are not capable of doing that legally in this country. (see last year's election)

I agree that immigration needs to be reformed radically. Most of today's problems come from Hart-Cellar and all the amendments to it through the years.

No other country in the world is as lax as is the U.S. with immigration policy, no one.

I'm totally with you on "enforcing the existing laws would be more than enough to seriously cut down on 'the problem'." I'm not with you on the part where you parrot Bill O'Reilly talking about how the reason people vote Democrat is all the giveaway freebies. Aside from a public college level education (which my parents have paid California taxes since before I was born) I have no real idea what giveaway you think Democrats en masse get for their vote, and I find the assertion both as disingenuous and offensive as me saying Republicans only vote Republican because they're going to get 39 virgins at the gates of Heaven from God when they die, even if they vote their own job overseas in the meanwhile.

[Durango95]

Thanks for the DNC talking points. Like there is a lack of those on this forum.

[GiancarloC]

There are no freebies given. The deferred action Obama signed into law granting permits wasn't a freebie. I forget how much that was but I need to ask my friend again. I think the government wanted $350, not to mention how much he had to pay an organization to help him through the process of filling the paperwork. $350 is a lot of money for someone who doesn't make a lot of money. Public college level education isn't free either... it is supported by tuition that keeps on going on up.

The freebie argument was just another way to slander Obama voters... many of whom work long hours and are being accused of being lazy. Just because they don't make as much as the guys who sit in multi-million dollar homes voting for republicans.

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks for the DNC talking points. Like there is a lack of those on this forum.

Thanks for giving me the Bill O'Reilly insight. And I'm not even a democrat. I'm not registered for any political party.

In CE&P... we like to see proof for ones argument. Thanks for not presenting any.