Dave, I feel that immigration is an asset to this country, and I am not looking to deport anyone other than people who commit serious crimes in this country after they do their time. However (You knew there would be a however) I do believe in tight borders for security reasons. We owe that to all residents regardless of arrival time. Another thought is that Your blaming the right wing is political nonsense. I live in an area where almost everybody is far left of Me and almost all are far more restrictionist than Me.

All of us that our origins are not from a Native American Tribe came to this great country through the process of immigration,  legal or illegal?  Nevertheless I think we should allow workers to migrate during harvesting seasons by awarding them the temporary legal documents needed to work and be taxed.  It is vital to our security that we know who this workers are,  and from there we can weed out other elements that can harm us as a country.
  For our permanent residents, sons and daughters, fathers, mothers, spouses.  These are the folks we need to reform immigration for, to unite families split through the process of deportations.  To award certificates of citizenship for the children of legal immigrants when they turn into adulthood so they can vote and make a choice to serve their country.  These things will encourage legal immigration, and we will see a sharp downward spiral of illegal immigration.

What's interesting is his reference to deportation as our only answer, without mentioning how effective attrition through enforcement strategies are. All we need to do is enforce our current laws and the problem will solve itself.

Further, after correctly mocking how inefficient the I-9 forms are, he makes no reference to the stripping of E-Verify from the stimulus package. E-Verify terrifies the criminals offerering illegal employment. Why? Because it works.

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I am neither Republican nor Democrat. I am an Independent. I dislike both parties pretty much equally, although at times, for different reasons.

For the record, attrition through enforcement does not include mass deportations, which Nadler makes reference to. The heart of any ATE strategy is to enforce current laws and turn off the magnets that draw illegals here, such as free health care, free education, free incarcerations, and free welfare (BTW, they aren't free), and most importantly, the illegal jobs being offered to entice them to come here. This in turn causes the illegals to voluntarily return back to their homelands. No need to deport.

I am in agreement with Nadler on on the facts, just not what should be done about them. As I stated, right now, E-Verify is the most successful Govt. program that cracks down on illegal employment. Our Govt. no longer represents the American citizen. They represent BIG business, hence why E-Verify is not permanent and why it was stripped from the Stimulus package. This needs to change.

What Nadler does not address is that most immigrants who came here want our borders enforced and want our immigration laws enforced, including Hispanics. Sadly, the debate has somehow made Hispanic immigrants/citizens into law breaking scofflaws, which I do not support, nor do they themselves. I think we will see more groups like "You Don't Speak For Me!" in the near future.

I do not beleive that Republicans are anti immigrant whatsover. I beleive that many are anti illegal alien, but not immigrant.

I believe what this country needs more than ever is a viable third party.

I think we might just be on the same page factually at least. I also agree with you on the widow penalty as well, FYI.

It seems to me that there's something missing from this discussion - namely, any mention of "racism." What is it that distinguishes Richard Nadler's perspective from the anti-immigrant crusaders who have hijacked the debate around immigration and succeeded in framing it in terms of "law and order"? The latter are the same folks who jump to assure you that they are not racist, but have no compunction about using dehumanizing terms like "illegals" to refer to human beings. Most Latinos aren't fooled by the oft-stated refrain by restrictionists that they are not against immigrants, just "the illegals."

Most Republicans are savvy enough to understand that they are shooting themselves in the foot by alienating large numbers of Latino voters, right? So why do they persist with the race-baiting "law and order" rhetoric - referring to undocumented peoples as "criminals" and "invaders," etc.? Why dehumanize people in this way? What's the trade-off, considering that you are alienating a large block of people who can make or break the Republican party in future elections?

I have some Republican friends and they don't talk the way the restrictionists do (or it would be "acabo" for me). So I know that there are intelligent, moderate Republicans out there. They sound more like Mr. Nadler in that they don't demonize undocumented peoples nor attribute every societal problem to the presence of noncitizens. So, who are these people who are hijacking the debate? Many of them - not all - have ties to white supremacist groups. In fact, I came over here from Dee's blog (Immigration Talk with a Mexican American) just to get away from them. Most of the "antis" who haunt her site will tell you without any shame that they are proud "white nationalists," and Dee has exposed their links to white supremacist groups. So, the question for me is how did these racist groups manage to hijack the Republican party when it is clearly not in the best interests of the party? And I think there's a name for it: racism. Historically, many whites have been willing to make this trade-off - even against their own best interests - if it helped them to maintain a sense of racial superiority.

I know it's considered "impolite" to bring this subject up. But Attorney General Eric Holder said something recently that got me thinking (and I have my own issues with Holder). He said that we are "essentially a nation of cowards" when it comes to talking about race.

"If we're going to ever make progress, we're going to have to have the guts, we have to have the determination, to be honest with each other.'' I think he's right, and I believe that racism is at the root of the contentiousness of the immigration debate - this is my honest opinion. And I think we must find a way to talk about this.

Lisa, if you overstay a visa or hop a fence to enter this country, then you are an illegal alien. That is the proper term. You can call it whatever you like, you can grand stand all you like, but it is the correct term. Undocumented, which is inherently false, because they are very fraudulently documented with stolen identities, is a misnomer that only obfuscates the truth.

I have no problem whatsoever with the word illegal, because it is truthful.

I would also add that there are plenty of racist organizations, et al, La Raza, who attack us and refer to the majority of American citizens who want our laws enforced as racists and xenophobes.

That sadly is the only card they can play, because they certainly don't have the moral, ethical, or legal high ground to even execute an even remotely valid argument. It's always kill the messenger. And that is what's sad.

Race is also irrelevant because the majority of Mexican immigrants are by far are the same race as the majority of U.S. citizens, Caucasian. White supremacists are an extremely small, hysterically laughed at group of idiots with no relevance in this country.

Lisa; You can inject race into just about any issue, including housing, war, voting rights, abortion, prisons, healthcare, education, etc.  Immigration is not about race.  Except of course if housing, war, voting rights, abortion, prisons, healthcare, education, are also about race.

Thank you Elliot, Charlie and Wire.  How does race intersect with the immigration issue - if you brave enough to face it squarely? I think Dave Neiwart said it best in his blog "O'Reilly declares war on New York Times after it calls him out on immigration":

"What usually raises questions of racism is how readily the discussion turns to how Latinos are polluting or diluting white culture, how they're bringing crime and disease, turning America into "a third world cesspool," how they're "invading" the country. In other words, it isn't talking about immigration that makes people hear racism; it's talking racist crap that does.

The favorite whine of O'Reilly, Dobbs, Malkin, and the right-wing nativist cohort is that "it's not fair that you can't discuss illegal immigration without being accused of being racist." But the problem isn't discussing illegal immigration. Indeed, I think everyone involved would love to have a discussion on immigration without racism rearing its ugly head.

But racism is rearing its ugly head when O'Reilly and Dobbs and Malkin and the whole pack of "immigration reformers" treat white-supremacist propaganda as reliable information and parrot talking points from those white supremacists as well.

Pointing out that they're doing it isn't the problem. Pretending that they're not is."

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/

Here we go again politicizing the issue. The illegal alien disaster is not a political problem. It doesn't have a color. Is an American problem. Anyone, democrat or republican that tries to put this in a political perspective, is not an American. At the same time, that ridiculous claim that a tough immigration policy will make that side of the aisle lose "latino" votes, is ridiculous and false. I came from South America. I am not from there anymore, I am an American now. I only love, protect and sleep under one flag, the American flag. And God knows that I will protect with my life the constitution of The United States and will protect with my life the interests of my people, the American people. Therefore, I am absolutely against illegal alien immigration, and YES, I am a LATINO (although that term is misused, but I came from South America) and like me, there are millions across the nation, speaking out, and getting in touch discussing the issue. An American citizen who segregate himself into a minority claiming to belong to a different group and defend a crime against America, doesn not deserve to carry the American citizenship anymore.

At the same time, liberals and the drive by media continue to put this illegal alien issue in the same package with "Immigration". This problem is already out of our immigration system. It is out of hand. The debacle is so big, that we need to deal with the crime as a separate issue. We have "immigration" problems, and we have in paralell the "illegal alien" problem.

This is not about color, race. This is about right and wrong. Are there great illegals out there? of course there are. And we should have a system that allows people like them to come here. Real potential Americans. In the meantime, unfortunatelly, they are inside the same bag, trapped, with no solution. Of course we need to resolve the problem. But they are being harmed and frustrated with all the socialist liberal open border agenda coming from the media, and extremist racist latino groups who shouldn't be in this country.

DISCLAIMER: I know there are high probabilities that this post will be deleted, but as always, as a legal backup and precaution, I have a print screen.

I don't want to go too far off topic here (nor do I think it helps to debate extremists).  So, I'm going to give David Neiwert the last word for the "pro" side, and then you "antis" can rant to your heart's content. Here's what Neiwert has to say in his blog "White supremacism lies at the root of the 'respectable' nativist right":

"We've known for some time -- ever since the Southern Poverty Law Center first reported it back in 2002 -- that there was a web of interests and backgrounds that connected some of the most prominent conservative anti-immigration "think tanks" to white-supremacist organizations, all revolving the activities of an environmentalist-turned-nativist named John Tanton.

Despite the overwhelming evidence, though, that this was the case, these groups -- particularly the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), and NumbersUSA -- have continued to enjoy mainstream respectability, in large part because they have continued to deny the connections to Tanton and to each other.

Now, the SPLC has definitively established the connections, thanks in large part to reporter Heidi Beirich's intrepid investigative work digging through Tanton's own papers and examining the groups' leaders records. One can only hope the report will finally persuade genuine conservatives and thoughtful Republicans that they would want nothing to do with either these organizations or their largely fabricated disinformation, which disguises a hateful, white-supremacist agenda."

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/


Hopefully, this gets us back on track to the original issue.

Just thought I'd share this.  Check out Para Justicia y Libertad for a great blog debunking the myth of the "Reconquista":

 http://xicanopwr.com/2008/06/revisiting-la-reconquista-a-nativist-creation/

I think to have a mistrust or fear of beings different from You is a trait inherent in all species. We are the species most capable of observation of that trait and rising above it. This country is ahead of many countries in that endeavour, but from what I hear There are some in front of Us. That's fine. I did not mean to imply Americans were not still on the evolutionary path re: this subject. Two points though. Mexicans are Caucasians, so what is this race persecuting them? and "supremacists" are present in any race and they are mostly just a disgraceful, ineffective, tiny minority in this nation.

Just on a side note. I continue to believe that within all the illegal aliens, there are great people who really are a great additon to this nation. However, they are being harmed by the liberal media, democrat politicians, and specially these latino or hispanic organizations pushing for amnesty. They need to understand that American people WILL NOT tolerate that. Period. There is nothing politicians, National Guard or Police can do. We are not talking here about a couple million people. We are talking about over 12 million! That is more than a whole state. Trying to push for that is simply destroying any value in the idiosincrasy of Americans. The way to deal with the problem is not being demanding. Remember that ANY South American or Central American country has 10 times tougher border and immigration enforcement policies.

I think if the latino community and illegal aliens stand up against those racist organizations like La Raza, Aztlan or any of them, they will get a much better response and sympathy from the American society and from the law.

Alex
They are being harmed by people that think like you.  If you went to school, or even if you didn't,  you can think of Ethical Arguments in favor of converting illegal immigration into Legal immigration. Can't you?