Still, I can't help but feeling that we're watching a paradigm shift in American politics taking shape - that Americans, by and large, are no longer going to put up with their country being treated as the door mat of the world.

I think that the liberals have long wanted to treat our country as a doormat. For far too long we've been complacent on the matter, but finally we are standing up and taking our country back. This is our house and nobody comes here to push us around.

Playing the race card as usual. Silly MSM...

This, first and foremost, a issue of national security. We have no way of discerning whether someone crossing the border is trafficking drugs, smuggling weapon, is a terrorist, is armed, etc. or just wants a chance at a better life.

Enter the citizenship/visa process. This process allows legitmate foriegns into the country to seek the American dream. I've been present at a citizenship ceremony where people of different races and origins all pledged their alligence to our great country, and it created this warm feeling inside me.

These illegal aliens never did that. They never promised to back and defend America, and they didn't have to wait in line or the hassle that their legimate counterparts did. Instead, they want to change our national anthem, call us racist, and try to damage our economy.

Yeah, it is tough to get in, it supposed to be. I think if we let everyone in that wanted to, we'd quickly have the same population issues that China, Japan, and India have.

This is not a hate-Hispanic message. It is a keep-America-strong one. One of my beliefs is, that if liberals didn't have the word "discrimination" in their vocabulary, they'd have a very poor party platform.

"with their country being treated as the door mat of the world."

Now MARK, how many doormats do you know of that preemptively attacks another country? I don't know what the diametric of doormat is, but that's what the Republicans have made us!

"For far too long we've been complacent on the matter, but finally we are standing up and taking our country back. This is our house and nobody comes here to push us around." -Limp

Ash - are you wondering if, like Dbog, Limp is also a Native American?

My thoughts exactly. Gee I hope dbog doesn't slam me again!!!!!!!!!1

"I don't know what the diametric of doormat is, but that's what the Republicans have made us!"

Sounds like an excellent ad for whomever the Republican candidate proves to be, thanks Ash. We are, however, far from "diametric" at this point but we're working on it. And no thanks to any Democrat you could name.

But on the geopolitical psychology involved here, Shelby Steele, racist-imperialist and notorious bloodthirsty warmonger, has a good explication on this in today's WSJ.

"taking our country back".

You need to take your country back from the corporations and the rich and powerful, they are the ones who are stealing your money and not putting up their fair share.

A poll? Sheesh...

Then again what else ya going to use eh?

Personally I'm with our local radio guys down here in LA. Let them boycott for a week, or a month. Imagine how much better traffic would be, the speed through lines everywhere, and how quickly we'd find out what companies are employing illegals and what one's aren't.

Of course I'm being facietious since I doubt they'd ever do it, but it's still an interesting thing to imagine.

Now maf my question to you and Ash is this, "is there no such thing as an American?" I mean if you can only be a "Native American" (which technically could be said to be Russian or Chinese if you follow the cultural migration theories) to stand up for "America" then what are all the rest of us? What are all the people who have been born and raised in this country and no where else?

Immigration is a great thing, we all admit that this country was built by immigrants. But shouldn't all countries have the right to control who comes into the country? Shouldn't they have a right to control their own borders? If not, then why have borders? Heck why have towns? Or allow private property? Where does it stop?

"however, far from "diametric" at this point but we're working on it."

Cheer up meg, when you nuke Iran you will have reached it.

Ash,

I suppose your perseverance for striving to retain the role of the heckler against conservatives, no matter the circumstance, merits its own brand of respect, but tongue-in-cheek hyperbole is never a very efficient way of debating issues. Stop changing the subject.

I'll try. But what is a tounge in cheek hyperbole?

Fair question Gozer. I think Americans are ones that are born in this country for one. My hyperbole (I think) is that the spirit of this great country goes back to the give me your tired, give me your poor...spirit. I know that is not possible now, but I do think it is disrespectful of those who came before us to develope an attitude that I'm in the door, but I want you out.

"Heading into a day of planned protests and boycotts for immigrant rights, just 24% of American voters have a favorable opinion of the people who have recently marched and protested for immigrant rights in major cities."
"What this could mean - and keeping in mind this is just a survey and may not be entirely accurate - is that it is safe for a politician to go out there and argue for strict border controls."

Mark -
I'm not sure it is safe for anyone to underestimate this.
I'm not sure that the implications are reaching everyone.
You pointed out earlier that only about 8% of illegals marched.
Mark, that's 8% of a people who last year were hiding in the back of a sweat shop or tenament, living in fear that someone would discover what they were and ship them out. Today, they wave flags and fists.
They have gone from "Please, no" to "Bite me".

Please consider these points.
1) They watch CNN. They will know if and when a decision is made to remove them by force.
2) They can buy guns.
3) 100,000 armed men, while not the millions the MSM is touting, is still the largest armed hostile force America has had on its shores since Appomattox.
4) Not all of them will fight - but not all of us will, either. They are being aided and abetted by the Radical Left, starting with ANSWER and working on down the food chain.
5) Most of America's troops are overseas, and cannot be brought home except with dire results.
6) If so much as one shot is fired, America's latin american enemies will have a field day. Bolivia, Venesuela, and, yes, Cuba, could intervene. Along with Mexico. No, not militarily, but politically?
7) The eventual victory will be costly. Damage will be high. The agency that would try to rebuild would be FEMA - and it's almost time for the return engagement of Katrina and the Waves.

You may not want to see this situation as simply one of Harden the Borders and Sweep the Illegals Away. The illegals may fight back.

I disapprove of these illegals because of what they feel they're entitled to, for breaking our laws, coming here illegally. We need a great big fence--electrified at the top, and armed guards every 20 yards on top of this fence.

Our borders must be enforced...

Hey, Keefer, I'm with you.

"Now maf my question to you and Ash is this, "is there no such thing as an American?"" - Gozer

Of course there is. People born here are "American," as far as I'm concerned.

Look, I don't disagree with the Cons here about the immigration issue - if you're not legal, then you need to go, and get in line. It's only fair. I wish Bush (or whoever is next, I'm hoping Biden .. no .. seriously) will secure our borders.

I just can't stand it when these same Cons can't even acknowledge the Native Americans - the fact that they were here first, and, like it or not, we stole their land. For the life of me, I don't understand why Republicans cannot simply *acknowledge* anything in the past (or present) that will give America a black eye. They will call you an "America hater" for even bringing it up.

Nationalism at its finest.

I do not see an impending state of war coming to pass over this issue, unlike Small Town Hick. Although over 1 million people demanded rights to which they are not entitled, the turnout was much lower than anticipated and predicted by the "leadership" of this group of people. Were they adamant? Si. Were they "in our faces?" Si. Were they successful? I think not. Most of the predicted economic impact does not appear to have occurred according to the reports I've heard. And there is an growing level of anger among the citizens - natural born and naturalized over these illegal trespassers' methods. Waving a Mexican, Honduran, or El Salvadoran flag to demand rights in America just doesn't go down well among the people upon whom they must depend to achieve this objective. They've shot themselves in the foot, politically speaking by their ill-advised actions. I, for one, will continue to hound my Senators, my Congressional Rep., and the President about this issue and what I am demanding that they do.

• Secure the border - (I'm with Keefer on his idea);
• Deny social services to anyone who cannot prove that they have a right to be here;
• Go after the greedy employers who short-change the illegal workers, their American counterparts, and the Federal and State Governments, to whom they are not paying any taxes in many instances. Fine the hell out of them, with an increasing amount with each successive infraction. Make the cost of doing business illegally so high that they'll also be forced to respect our employment laws;
• Make English the official language of this country for all official government business. As many people have already noted, we'll be saving a good deal of money in not having to print dual versions of each and every publication. That will also make it much harder for the illegals to suck up at the public trough, since the burden to communicate will be on them, not on the U.S. government;
• Compile a database to keep track of the various forms of fraudulent documentation to make it increasingly harder to get away with it.

The issue isn't one of immigration. It isn't an issue of Guest Workers, either. It's quite simply an issue of respecting the rule of law. Although I cannot entirely blame the illegal trespassers for doing everything that they can to get here, I am not sympathetic to the fact that on the one hand, they're willing and able to throw the law aside when they want to. Yet once here, they want their "rights" codified into law to ensure that their agenda is given the blessing of legality. Selective respect for the rule of law isn't respect for the rule of law at all. By their own words and actions, they've shown that it's really all about the rule of the mob.

I'm more irate at our political leaders for not enforcing the laws that are already on the books and for proposing a further dilution of the rule of law by considering caving in to the illegals' demands.

The time is ripe for the rise of a third political party to seize the moment on this issue. Rep. Steve King of Iowa is one such individual who I would be willing to consider supporting for President. He has a long record of trying to reform, but seems like a voice in the wilderness. Together, like-minded citizens can act as one to take the initiative on this issue and cast their vote of no confidence in our current slate of "representatives." We have the right, we have the means, to clear the slate of both R's and D's who have clearly failed us in many ways. This issue might very well be the tipping point that allows a third party candidate to make headway into the political structure.

Even if only a few seats in the House or in the Senate were to go for someone other than an R or D, the message would show both failed parties that the citizens of this country have had enough...

It's about time that someone represents the American voter for a change. Congressman King might just be the guy...

Is it just me .. or is anyone else really impressed that Dbog managed to insert bullet points into his post?

maf,

Next thing you know he will be making power point presentations! How boring and long would that be?

"electrified at the top, and armed guards every 20 yards on top of this fence."

Hey Keef, wouldn't the armed guards get electrocuted>

I too am wondering how D got the bullet points, though because I want to use em. ;)

"I just can't stand it when these same Cons can't even acknowledge the Native Americans - the fact that they were here first, and, like it or not, we stole their land. For the life of me, I don't understand why Republicans cannot simply *acknowledge* anything in the past (or present) that will give America a black eye. They will call you an "America hater" for even bringing it up.

Nationalism at its finest."

See, it's one thing to acknowledge the black marks of our past it's another to dwell on them. I don't know any conservatives or liberals who completely forget or ignore many of the bad things that have happened in the past. While I'm sure there are, they are by no means the majority so I'm trying to figure out where you're coming form here.

Did the Europeans kill and conquer their way across the globe? Yes.
Did they bring people from their home lands into a new country by the thousands? Yes.
Did we put our own citizens into internment camps because of their race? Yes.
Did we actually use nuclear weapons on another country? Yes.

My question is, so? Every country, heck every person, has things they regret and did wrong in the past. But do we have to constantly say "you can't do X because you did A" or "how dare you talk about X because you did A?" It's pointless and counter-productive.

To sound Christian for a moment, EVERYONE has Sin. This goes for countries as much as individuals. Constantly harping on what happened in the past, especially when it doesn't involve anyone who is still alive, makes no sense to me.

"I too am wondering how D got the bullet points, though because I want to use em. ;)"

On the MacIntosh Platform, one would press the "Option" key + The "8" key. I don't know about the Windoze platform, because I couldn't care less about that platform. I make my living on the Mac, so I know a few "secret keyboard commands." I'm honored that this extremely everyday keyboard command caught the attention of "the little people."

Maf + Ash = mental masturbation... nothing of significance to add to the discussion, so they resort to kvetching about "secret keyboard commands..." Nice job, girls!!

Dang it, just as I was going to bed, now I had to read this... Just some points, n-kay?

a) Native born Americans are getting older. The largest demographic group in history (baby boomers) is retiring (and starting to die off). Like any affluent society, they had smaller households than their parents (who really went to town after all the men came back from WWII and gave birth to this boom).

b) As a result, there are less young people in America who were born here or whose parents were born here.

c) The people who typically do lower wage jobs tend to be younger, stronger people... construction, landscaping, hospitality, restaurants workers etc.

d) The American Farm Bureau has declared that there is a shortage of farm labor that is costing them dearly and could end up sinking American agriculture. By 2012, Iowa will have 200,000 more jobs than it has people to fill them. Losing access to immigrants they say will cost them 9 billion a year and the would lose out to other countries who can farm cheaply.

e) The Construction industry, currently undergoing a huge reconstruction boom, and housing boom all over the country has been having labor shortages since the 90s. According to the Bureau of labor, a quarter of all construction jobs is done by immigrants... the number is probably a lot more if you include the undocumented ones.

f) Poultry and meatpacking... also having a serious labor crisis.

h) And that is with the immigrants we already have.

i) Any economist worth his salt will tell you that labor will flow to wherever there is demand. This is one of the main assumptions of free market economics. If you are a capitalist, you must agree to this... otherwise you are socialist and you don't belong on this blog.

j) Artificial barriers don't work. Even in East Germany, people were able to sneak across the border and that is with the commies guarding every single inch of the wall.

i) So, let me get this straight... there is a clearly documented labor shortage in construction, agriculture, poultry, meatpacking and hospitality (just read the trade pubs in each respective industry). Business leaders are begging for more workers. And we have a huge supply of labor just south of the border that is so easy to tap into. Yet we have this artificially convoluted process to get people in here to work. As any economist will tell you, labor follows jobs. So why not improve the system so people can come in, work, and then leave. Most immigrants don't want to leave their families behind permanently. The only reason immigrants stay here is because they risked so much to get here in the first place. No way in hell they're going to go back even for their own mother's funeral. So, actually, the current program encourages immigrants to stay. Isn't that the worst nightmare for some of you?

k) maybe we should stop all immigration, send back all the illegal immigrants and also watch entire industries grind to halt. Watch companies yank their manufacturing facilities out of this country to a country where there is more steady (and affordable) labor supply. They're already leaving us to go to India, China, Mexico, Brazil anyways. Why not just hasten the process. Also, we might as well close down most of our farm industry while we try to compete in the global markets for produce raised in countries where the labor is cheaper and more plentiful.

l) Guys, we can't have it both ways. We either allow immigrants to continue doing what they have done throughout the history of our country... which is provide cheap labor while allowing native born Americans to improve their standard of living. Or we can continue with our byzantine immigration codes that don't work and continue to benefit from the immigrant labor. You can't lower the speed limit on the highway to 20 mph and expect people not to speed. People need to get to work, products need to be transported... Let's raise the speed limit back to 55, but this time, make sure that every car is accounted for, inspected and is free of defects. Make the process more efficient, more accountable and yes, more consistent with our business needs in this country.

m) I'm totally hearing you guys... its probably frustrating to see what seems like an onslaught of immigrants taking over the country. The thing is it's not even that big an onslaught when compared to previous generations. The foreign born population is smaller than it was in the early 1900s when we had a huge immigration boom from Europe (and not all of them legal, mind you). From the Census, in the years of 1860 to 1930, there were more foreign-borns as a percentage of the population than there were in 2000. Sure, they were European, but they were still doing all the menial jobs... Why? Because they were young, strong and willing to work... plus the native born Americans were growing older, and doing quite well for themselves and their affluence allowed them to focus on other things like, say invent the light bulb or create new industries. Progress requires labor. Labor comes from immigrants. Whether you put barriers up to their entry or not, they will come, as they always have. Of course, as a country, we have been complaining about immigrants since the very beginning. Even Benjamin Franklin complained about all the "stupid Germans" invading Philadelphia.

The president is on the right track with a guest worker program. He is proposing it because it makes sense to business. Business makes sense to America. Why can't some of you see that?

Its called globalism people. Try to get used to it. It is here to stay.

"I'm more irate at our political leaders for not enforcing the laws that are already on the books and for proposing a further dilution of the rule of law by considering caving in to the illegals' demands."
I agree with dbog here. The issue is not anti-immigration, it's anti-ILLEGAL immigration. The government's apathy has created an entire population of non tax paying burdens and the goverment's answer to this issue goes something like 'well they're here anyway so, um what the heck, make em all legal - problem solved. (wow, that was easy!)' What are going to do with next million that the goverment ignores until they march down the street waving their country's flag?

If the immigration laws need changing, change them. But I don't beleive that it is in our country's best interest to tolerate those who break our laws.

I agree that the rule of law is important. However, the laws don't work and violate the most basic tenets economics which say that labor flows to where it is needed. The poorly designed system now is the equivalent of a straw when what is needed is a pipe. We desperately need labor. There is a giant pool of labor just south of us desperate to fill that need. The straw is the rate at which immigrants are allowed to enter legally (via regulation, red tape and bad policy).

You can't in essence hold signs at the border saying "we desperately need you now" but then make it so hard to get across legally that you force people to "go around." The rule of law is important, but when the laws don't make sense they are ignored forcing politicians to rethink the laws. The people are coming because there are jobs available. How can you judge them because "they broke the law" when you and I and our economy benefit from their labor, just like previous generations. There is no difference between a legal immigrant and an illegal one. They are both here for the same exact reason. The legal ones were just lucky enough or had the luxury of waiting around to get their legal status approved. The illegal ones did not have the luxury and further more were enticed over by promises of good jobs. Many other legal immigrants gained their status through amnesty back in the 80's (and before). So I guess you're ok with those legal immigrants then, since the law "made them legal?"

You can't have it both ways. You can either continue to allow immigrants to provide the labor that has built this country (and continues to do so, quite literally, since 25% to 30% or more of construction labor is done by immigrants, many of them illegal)... and continue to see our dominance in the world OR you can be a socialist and counteract the most basic economic force of labor supply by erecting artificial barriers and watch our country drop into a depression because we have a labor shortage, companies decide to leave the country to China or India, our products become too expensive to afford, more people lose jobs and less of our products can get sold on the global market.

A real free market capitalist is in favor of globalisation where goods and jobs flow freely to where they are needed most. Otherwise we might as well be Switzerland or Sweden... oh I forgot they're having labor supply problems too because their affluent citizens are growing old (like ours) and no one is around to do the jobs young people do. Looks like a job for immigrants.

I live near an area that has devolved from a typical suburban community into a third world country with hundreds of men congregating on the corners every day looking to be picked up for work. Houses tranformed from nicely kept family dwellings into filthy flop houses holding ten or more men per room. Scores of men on bicycles and hanging out on the streets where children once played. These are people who do not pay taxes, are not obligated to abide by our laws, and do not contribute to the community in any way.

This is not a racist issue, this is a quality of life issue. I don't care where they came from or what they look like. The people who live and worked here for all or most of their lives (whether they were born here or not) have seen the property value of their homes plummet. They feel the helplessness of beleiving that they were betrayed by their own government at every level. Needless to say, this frustration sometimes causes some people feel the need to take measures into their own hands. Not a good situation for all involved.

I understand the reasons they are here and I don't blame them for being here. I blame our government for not enforcing the laws it set and allowing this situation to fester until we can no longer ingnore it.

dbog= no sense of humor

I'm curious where you live Parker. I'm not saying that there aren't any downsides to immigration. The situation you describe is indicative of how many immigrants live when they come to this country, legally or otherwise. In past waves of immigration we have had similar problems. Sometimes it is right smack in front of our noses and other times it is in neighborhoods that are more isolated from the native population so it is less a bother. Sometimes its in trailers on farm land owned by their employers. Sometimes its in "the projects" or in inner city communities.

Either way, you have to acknowledge that immigrants have much lower income than the rest of us so it makes sense that they are going to share dwellings in order to share costs. The men are the ones most likely to come for work and so they shack up. The Chinese have done this, the Italians, the Germans... all have had to do this. Whether they are legal or not, is inconsequential to that point. They are here for the same reasons.

I don't believe people like you are racist (at least from your above comment). You're annoyed by what you see is a disruption of your way or life by immigrants. I do sympathize with that. I try not to be judgemental about this, because I don't have this problem. I live in a part of town where immigrants mow our lawns, watch our kids, help in rennovations and so forth, but they live in another part of town. We are starting to get more assimilated immigrants moving into our neighborhood... business owners, professionals and their families. They seem to fit in pretty well. Other people have different experiences and I understand that.

I agree with some of what you're saying, particularly the fact that recent immigrants tend to bring the property value down in certain areas. What I don't agree with is your assertion that they do not pay taxes and are not obligated to abide by our laws and that they do not contribue to our community in any way.

According to the IRS, illegal immigrants contributed $56 billion last year alone in W2 earnings. The Social Security administration says that 3/4 of illegal immigrants (or "other-than-legal" as they put it) pay payroll taxes. I'm not making this up.

Regarding illegality, we set people up to fail by setting such a high standard for immigration while still sending out smoke signals that we need the labor. Most immigrants would rather have gotten in here legally, but it just isn't feasible. The flow of labor to where it is needed most would slow to a trickle if everyone obeyed the immigration laws. 1/3 of construction jobs would halt. 80% of farming jobs would go unfilled... it would be a disaster. Economic progress requires labor. I would say that their contribution to our society greatly outweighs the negatives. Still, I don't think that the negatives are unimportant. We should try to address them as well. Maybe there should be laws that limit the amount of people who can live in a family dwelling.

The point is, the complaints people have about illegal immigrants are actually equally applicable to legal immigrants (except the one about them being illegal). The languages other than English... the neighborhood problems, the cultural disconnect... all are just as likely caused by recent legal immigrants as they are by recent illegal immigrants. Their legality is more of a technicality. More established immigrants tend not to have these issues in the minds of native-born Americans. It seems that many good Americans have lost sight of how this country was built, and how it continues to grow, with the help of immigrants.

Lastly, I agree with your very last statement...I blame the government too... for creating a system where the most readily available and willing supply of labor just south of us have a very difficult job entering legally when there is clearly a labor shortage in many different industries that requires their labor. We should enforce immigration laws... but first we need to make them more realistic. The guest worker program is key to that. It probably won't address the problem you are having, but it will ensure that enough people can enter legally to fill the jobs that are needed and who don't have to live in the margins of society.

"the complaints people have about illegal immigrants are actually equally applicable to legal immigrants"

I have to disagree with you. Legal immigrants are either documented aliens or eventually become citizens. They are more likely to be here living in family units. Paying school/property taxes. They are more likely to learn English and assimilate into our society.

"Maybe there should be laws that limit the amount of people who can live in a family dwelling"

There ARE such laws. But again, those laws are also being broken. Creating usafe and unhealthy conditions.

I agree that it isn't feasable to 'round em all up and ship em all back'. However I do support laws making it a felony to be here illeaglly and the enforcement of such laws.

I'm not sure where you are getting that information. According to the Census bureau, legal immigrants are much more likely than native-born Americans to live in a male-run household with no wife present and no children present. You are probably right, though, that illegal immigrants might be even more likely to live in these types of arrangements, but I don't see data that supports it either way.

Still, I don't see illegal immigrants breaking any more laws (other than the immigration-related ones) than other people of the same socioeconomic background. In fact, some studies show that they commit less crime overall. There are plenty of demographic groups in our country who commit more crime.

Regarding taxes... perhaps the illegal immigrants are slightly less likely to pay taxes than other immigrants or native-borns, but no less than any other group of lower-income earning individuals. People who live in the poverty level are much less likely to pay taxes than others. Still, the IRS claims that 3/4 of illegals pay payroll taxes.

I agree it isn't feasible (nor desirable from an economic standpoint) to ship the illegal people back. But before you make it a felony, we there are several things we should do:

a) have a system in place to allow the proper numbers of immigrants to come in to fill the labor shortages that this country has (aka guest worker),

b) make it an orderly, efficient process that allows us to have an inventory of all the immigrants in this country (aka improve the immigration process),

c) secure the borders better... with more people coming in legally than illegally thanks to the immigration reform, we will be able to better monitor the border and apprehend infiltrators. Build a wall if you think it will help.

d) we need to do something about the status of those who are already here. I think it is reasonable (arguably) to penalize them monetarily, have a probationary period, background check and then give them some sort of legal status once they have proven themselves worthy of staying in the country.

For native-born Americans to progress... and focus on the future, technology and an improving quality of life, we need to have laborers to fuel construction, farming, manufacturing and the many other industries that depend on illegal and legal immigrant labor. That labor right now, is coming from the south whether it be legally or illegally. There just aren't enough young native-born Americans to fill the jobs here... its a demographic issue and an economic one.

But, its actually a good problem to have... our country has advanced so much and made so much progress in the past 50 years that we need to bring people in to do some of the heavy lifting on the lower end of the labor spectrum. That's what has made a difference in our history compared to other countries...

PowerPoints are easy. I'm an expert with Adobe Photoshop.

My own suggestion would be:

First, close the border.

Second, pass a law stating that all those in the country prior to a certain date--perhaps the date of the border closing---have sixty days in which to register. Beyond that point, being here without being registered would be a felony. Anyone found here without proof of registration beyond that date would be deported, with a felony conviction, and never allowed to return.

Registration would require some proof of identity, fingerprinting, a photo, perhaps some other form of identification such as a retinal scan, a guilty plea to the infraction of entering the country illegally, an agreement to pay a fine at some later date, and a statement that while here the registrant has not been arrested. At this time, some form of interim work visa or visitor visa would be issued. The registrant is now legal, pending the outcome of a background check.

But anyone wishing to stay would have to apply for either a long-term work visa (say, six years, with proof of full-time employment) or a seasonal, renewable, work visa, allowing the registrant to work here for four or six months a year, for a period of six years. By calling the payment a "fine" instead of a "fee" we would be sending the message that there are penalties for breaking our laws.

During the background check required before the second level, some would be found to have arrest records, as their fingerprints would be on file even if they had given false names or merely failed to show up for court. These people would be sent home. That seems fair---they broke some other, more important, laws. Determination of how to handle this could be addressed, based on the severity of the laws broken---but this should not be allowed to pass unpunished.

At the end of the official (as opposed to interim) work visa period, each immigrant can choose to renew for another six-year period or to apply for permanent residency. Again, anyone found to have broken the law during the six-year period would be sent back to his country of origin, permanently.

Approval of permanent residency would depend on, among other things, an English proficiency exam.

However, no one who entered this country illegally as an adult (over the age of 18) would ever be eligible for citizenship. If someone did enter illegally as an adult and now knows he wants to become a citizen, he would have to return to his country of origin and start the process there, like everyone else does.

This kind of plan addresses many issues. It allows those who need to stay, to stay---as long as they have been law-abiding residents while they have been here. It respects the sacrifices of those who followed the laws, went through the process, and came here legally, by not giving the same rights and privileges to those who defied our laws and disrespected our country. It is humane and compassionate, allowing families to stay together, allowing people to make a decent living, and allowing people to come here for seasonal work and then return to their homes and families. It weeds out the serious criminals, and gets them out of our country. It establishes that we are a nation of laws, and that those laws must be obeyed, or there will be penalties. It rewards some degree of assimilation, by demanding a grasp of our language to achieve permanent residency status. It addresses the amnesty question by making sure that no one who is allowed to stay in spite of entering illegally can ever be a true citizen. It offers choices, and it establishes personal responsibility. And it allows the government to know who is here, to identify people living here, and to establish whether or not those people are criminals.

Does it create two classes of immigrants? Yes, it does. It permanently identifies those who showed no respect for our laws, by not allowing them citizenship. It shows respect for those who did respect our laws, by allowing them to apply for and receive citizenship. There are two classes of immigrants now---legal and illegal. It seems to me to be a much better solution to have two other classes---not eligible for citizenship (but still allowing the benefits of being here legally) and a more elite class of immigrant, one which recognized our nation's right to establish laws and its right to enforce them.

Um... most of what you say seems to make sense. I do think that perhaps, the second "class" of immigrant, should be able, at some point, to gain citizenship if they proved themselves. You provide a very detailed breakdown of how something like this could go down. Not bad. Obviously, it probably won't please everyone, but it is an acceptable compromise. Unfortunately, in politics, everyone can't have their way and compromises need to be made. Propose that to your congressman.

Thaks, Bye...

My idea has a place in it for those who came here illegally but now want to 'reform' and become citizens---they can voluntarily go back home and start at the end of the line. I think that is the only fair way to handle citizenship. Citizenship will always be as valuable as we make it, and making it available to people who start off by ignoring our laws and then demanding special treatment will devalue it faster than anything I can tnink of.

I'm putting together letters---real, on-paper, letters, as I think e-mail is too easily ignored---to send to congressmen from several states.

I am a problem solver by nature, and don't have a lot of patience for people who complain all the time but never offer any alternatives. I figure our congressmen gat a lot more negative input than positive suggestions, so I came up with this. And I have found very little objection to my idea from either side of the political aisle.

I believe in compromise---I just don't believe in capitulation.

I'm an expert in Photoshop, Illustrator, In-Design, Quark XPress, Filemaker Pro, and Adobe Distiller and Acrobat. I only dabble in PowerPoint and a few HTML programs... but enough about me.

It's all about Ash. An "expert" in Photoshop! Wow! I get it now... whatever you don't like to see in the world, you just "photoshop" it to your liking. Like logic. Like fact. You sure have some mighty filters and actions going on Ash!

"dbog= no sense of humor"

You just don't get it: You're the joker AND the butt of jokes all at the same time!

LOL!! LMAOROTF!!!

(Waiting patiently for your pithy repartée..)

Did you notice any other significant "secret keyboard commands?" that you might want to comment on?

Ooops!

I forgot to mention: you'll probably need to know how to access the foreign language accents once this nation becomes fully Spanish-speaking...

Awww, Dbog, how pleasant. Not surprised, coming from the same guy who makes a crack about another man's wife. Classy all the way around, you are.

dbog: gotcha

I guess that means you have no sense of humor, huh?

Did you just call me a democrat!?

LOL!!!

Almiranta... I must have misunderstood. I guess I thought you meant those illegals wanting citizenship as opposed to wanting a legal status as an immigrant, would be have to voluntarily leave. The two designations are not necessarily one and the same (being a citizen versus being a legal immigrant). My understanding of your plan was that people who came in illegally will be processed, assessed and penalized accordingly (and would be "asked" to leave if they show a criminal past here or in Mexico among other restrictions)... not that all 12 million undocumented aliens would have to leave prior in order to become legal again.

I think requiring all those who entered illegally to leave would wreak havoc on the system, would be unrealistic and really doesn't address the illegal issue. We have to do something about the status of the illegals... either we are for mass deportation or we are for selectively giving earned legal status to those who pay the fines, back taxes and prove that they are gainfully contributing to the community through work etc (e.g. the President's plan). Not addressing it one way or another will just maintain the status quo. I obviously favor the latter of the two ways because it is more realistic, more humane, less disruptive to our economy and more equitable for all parties. 12 million people is a lot of people to try to kick out, especially since many of them have been here for years.

Another important thing we should work on is how to make the process of immigration consistent with the needs of our country. The easy solution would be to do a detailed analysis of the labor needs of our different industries and only allow in as many people as is required to fulfill those needs, whether it is for seasonal work or longer term work. When those jobs are filled... we start restricting the immigration flow... of course in a free-market, this is a self-regulating system. If there is no labor demand than the labor supply (immigrants) will not go through the trouble of immigrating to find that their situation is no better here than in their home countries (except that they would be without their friends and family and support network that they have at home in addition to being penniless and unemployed).

We may not be on the same page as I had previously thought, but I still respect your opinion nonetheless.