Amazing how “conservatives” are so eager to cede our sovreignty to foreigners. Our way of life is slowly being destroyed, and republican look to gain political advantage instead of fighting. Criminals who should be arrested and deported. Few nations in the world tolerate this lawlessness on their borders. The solution is not some complicated problem. Build a wall, put huge fines on any business caught hiring an illegal immigrant.

Marco Rubio is not a conservative, he cannot be trusted, and anyone who thinks he’s the future of our party is naive. He’s a traitor to our cause and he’s shown that repeatedly.

He is the personification of why the future of the conservative movement, if it has a future, is not in the republican party. Our nation is doomed if we continue down this path.

And no, hispanics have shown repeatedly, regardless of what polls say, that the real poll, their votes, have little or nothing to do with immigration. They voted for Kerry, Gore, and Obama, in spite of very pro-hispanic republican candidates. What hispanics want for the most part, sadly, is, free stuff.

The solution to eliminating the black market labor is to eliminate, not reform, the minimum wage and add a legal guest worker program. Let the free market decide the going rate for any and all jobs and we’d all be better off.

Right on, “legal guest worker program” … but you realize that the Democrat solution takes us AWAY from Guest Worker and towards ‘if they are here then no matter what make them citizens’ … so the cycle renews itself.

I know Freedom’s…but I thought the plan included verbiage about a guest worker program which is really a win/win for everyone if you ask me. They work, they get paid, and go back to their home. No harm done..unless we don’t have a tracking mechanism…and we don’t so the cycle continues ad nausem.

I think we’re letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. Republicans can’t just turn down every issue and then threaten to shut down the govt. You gotta pick your battles. Holding out on immigration until we have a Republican president and supermajorites in the House and Senate is not realistic, especially when holding out turns more and more hispanics against us.

Some people have made comments that the real problems are rooted in the entitlement culture and the minimum wage. There’s truth to that, but does anyone think we’re going to see a repeal of the minimum wage so long as Obama resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave? You think we’ll get em next time with more talk about self deportation and 47%? Not gonna happen.

It’s too early to say what we’re looking at legislation wise, but let’s not crap all over Rubio because he stood in at a press conference.

Bravo Erick for your bravery in confronting the reality that Rubio’s plan will do nothing to solve the underlying, systemic issues at the heart of immigration policy.

Of course you are right to note that the determination of “border security” is always going to be subjective to an extent, so as long as there is a Democrat in the White House (hopefully only the next four years) and Republican governors of Texas, Arizona etc. there is going to be a fight over who gets to define “secure.” However, I am not sure that an “impenetrable” border is the same thing as a “secure” one. Surely there are measures that can and should be taken, perhaps not as a precondition for enacting the McCain-Feingold bill, but undertaken nevertheless. I for one think the best solution is not moats or walls but the most fearsome deterrent on Earth: United States soldiers. Fortify our borders with troops (or state National Guard) and watch illegal immigration plummet.

Sorry, but you could put put every troop we have on the border and illegal immigration will not plummet until we have taken away the incentives for illegal immigration. All the walls, guards, threats, etc will not do a thing to slow down the flow of immigration. What will take it down to nearly zero is to stop the Amnesty talk, end all welfare for a non citizen, end anchor baby rules, take away the jobs, etc. Until we do that we will continue to revisit the massive amount of illegals in our country and crossing the border. Sort of like wild cats, as long as you feed them they will continue to be at your home, stop the food and they move on.

To me the two most important words you wrote are…. “Rubio’s Plan”.

Sounds like a great way to export class warfare … only problem is, it redoubles it at home.

Mexico’s border with the U.S. is around 5 times larger than Israel’s West Bank wall and it’s Israel’s major national security priority. As a consequence, their military arms that boundary which is necessary to make a wall something more than a temporary roadblock. This won’t be cheap. Of course we can invest in the wall, the military or police, and the surveillance but it’s going to add to our deficit at a time when Congress is unwilling to make any reasonable spending reductions.

Immigration in my 5-page 84-point plan “To Fix It All”
69. Make English the official language of the U.S.
70. Require valid Social Security # and NOT Employer Identification Number (EIN) for all individuals on 1040 tax return. EIN s/b valid on business returns only; not to be used by individuals in lieu of SS#.
71. Require illegal immigrants to provide or pay for their own interpreter.
72. Require illegal immigrants to pay for past welfare services received to qualify for citizenship or work visas.
73. Deport illegal immigrants who are guilty of a crime or felony in addition to the original crime of illegal entry.
74. Deport illegal immigrants who vote or attempt to cast a vote.
75. Deport illegal immigrants for failure to file tax returns or failure to pay wage
income or sales taxes.
76. Charge illegal immigrants for back taxes, tuition, and welfare benefits received or face deportation.
77. In lieu of increasing retirement age from 65, increase co-pay percentage or increase Medicare charge an additional $100 per month for retirees and beneficiaries.

Request full plan from albertmaslar2@gmail.com

I’m waiting for the moment when Rubio trots out his “embellished” life story.
It’s one thing to forget, it’s another to tell lies, and then, when you’re discovered, twist it into “but we hoped to….so that counts”.

Let’s dial this back a tad, shall we? Marco Rubio is wrong on immigration. That makes him fallable, not treacherous.

Rubio lied about imigration reform repeatedly while in the FL legislature. NALEO was crowing that they had him in their pocket before the election, and I see no reason not to believe them, based not only on his immigration performance but on other subjects. Miami is Chicago with sunshine instead of snow: the politics are filthy. In 2009, Rubio skated to victory by claiming he’d never support amnesty –check out his quotes– after sitting on legislation to protect legal citizens while in the state house. Specifically, he said that we should never accept any other action until we just enforced the laws. He’s flipped on that now. Big surprise: he flipped before. He’s untrustworthy, and he would be far, far less able to do harm if so many in the conservative media weren’t pathetically excited by his identity. Glad to see RedState is emerging from its Lena Dunhamesque Rubio haze.

I would be hard indeed to quantify the harm done to our nation’s freedom and prosperity by the progressive agenda over the last 100 years – income tax, direct election of senators, Social Security and Medicare not being means tested, the Great Society, and so on. All have had unintended (I’m being euphemistic here) consequences, and the solutions proposed by the wizards of smart never address the underlying causes. Instead they tinker around the edges, cementing each into place even more securely and exacerbating the underlying problems. The only effective solutions are ones that work toward dismantling – with appropriate and sensible time frames – each in its present form, such as you propose.

Unlike, say, things like Medicare Part D for people like Rick Santorum or the clip with Pelosi for Gingrich, Marco Rubio’s flawed approach to immigration reveals a deeper fundamental flaw in his mindset and character. This is a man who has done nothing at all to advance real substantive Conservative ideas in public debate on the federal level, whose eyes have been fixed on the White House since he was in Tallahassee, and whose only virtue is showing up to vote and giving nice speeches and pretty-sounding interviews with airheads. It’s an issue of trust. Can we trust someone with neither experience nor fresh ideas, with leadership of the nation, just because he ran against Charlie Crist and he casts votes to look nice without actually contributing to shape the outcome in our favor?
I know many of you don’t agree with me on the fiscal cliff deal vote, but the fact is that Marco Rubio voted to grandstand, for even higher taxes with virtually no spending cuts, without actually shaping the outcome or persuading his colleagues, or even contributing much in the media circus which is his second home. He voted to look nice. He didn’t vote to advance our principles. He’s a big part of the problem- politicians who go to Washington promising change and who don’t deliver are worse than those who don’t make flashy promises but actually get things done, whether in terms of legislation, messaging, strategy or policy development.

I’m amazed that we can send people to the Moon, but we don’t have technology to secure our own borders. BTW, I’m a Democrat, who will try very hard not to be offensive to anyone here. I also like Eric and wish he were staying at CNN. I may not support his political views but he’s very intelligent and kind to everyone. Gonna miss you, Erick.

Republicans who vote for Democrat issues as they would vote, can be seen as Democrat LITE. So, how would this bring special interest groups to the Republican side?

Wouldn’t they rather vote for a REAL democrat instead of a fake one? This does NOT bring any new voters to the republican cause from the progressive voter roles. BUT it does increase the cost and scope of government, which is antithetical to conservative ideas. I do have to agree with E.E., it is the wrong plan.

I agree with you that we shouldnt give politicians credit for grandstanding… for example, voting 34 times to repeal Obamacare in a show vote and then voting for a budget that FUNDS it. That’s showboating. REAL conservatives roll up their sleeves and use leverage to advance the cause.

Senator Rubio probably honestly believes he is advancing the GOP with his immigration position. I prefer the other Hispanic Republican Senator’s position:

‘I appreciate the good work that senators in both parties have put into trying to fix our broken immigration system. There are some good elements in this proposal, especially increasing the resources and manpower to secure our border and also improving and streamlining legal immigration. However, I have deep concerns with the proposed path to citizenship. To allow those who came here illegally to be placed on such a path is both inconsistent with rule of law and profoundly unfair to the millions of legal immigrants who waited years, if not decades, to come to America legally.’ — Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas),

I know it sounds cruel but I still believe if we had ENFORCED penalties and made the penalties so strict employers would fear to break them the illegals would go home. If we weren’t so stupid as to have a government provide health benefits, education benefits and all other incentives the illegals would return home. If I were God and in control instead of Obama with his halo, I would confiscate any business employing illegals. There would be no second chance or reprieve. Bet it would only have to happen one time in the US.
There would be an e verify so legal status could be checked. We would have a guest worker program. We would hunt down every person with a Visa that didn’t leave and that we have “lost”.
We would expedite our legal immigration program.
We no longer have a rule of law and we have good laws that aren’t enforced.
If I were God I would throw a lightening bolt into Obama for trying to usurp my position.

If you google the Jordan Commission on immigration, they have a good top-line description of what immigration system should do. The sad thing is that if Barbara Jordan came back to life today, she could give the same testimony given 16 years ago – nothing she said that needed to be fixed is fixed.

http://www.utexas.edu/lbj/uscir/032995.html

You are correct that amnesty = ‘ what to do with these 12 million people?’ is NOT reform of our immigration system.

Reform would mean fixing our broken immigration system so that those we want in the US should be allowed to come and be here legally, those who we do not want here should not come and if they are here without permission they should leave.

We all know what’s going on. The Republican party feels its on the precipice of oblivion so it needs to do something to increase popularity. Naturally, hispanics make an attractive demographic to target. So the thinking is that if comprehensive immigration reform is championed by a hispanic Republican, the hispanics will be drawn to the Republican brand.
Of course, that’s foolish. Hispanics aren’t drawn to Democrats becaus of immigration, they’re drawn for the same reason all the other demographics are: government programs. Hispanics in our country mostly come from socialist type countries. So what do you think they’ll gravitate towards? The Dems know that they simply need to get the people eligible to vote and then promise them government programs. That is all that’s needed to secure that vote.
I have sympathy for illegal immigrants. They came from a impoverished, corrupt country that is rife with criminals. They look across the Rio Grande where they see life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We claim they are law breakers and yet we practically roll out the red carpet for them to come here (and by we, I mean the U.S. not necessarily you and I specifically). Yeah, if I were in their shoes I’d come here too.
Putting up a fence is a nice thought, but unless somebody patrols the fence it wont work. And Dems wont do that. It also doesn’t solve the problem of Mexico, itself.
Frankly, we ought to just pull our troops out of the Middle East and take over Mexico. Ok, I’m being a little cynical on that last one.

Eric:
It is easy to say what you DON’T like but what is your bi-partisan approach to solving the immigration issue on a comprehensive level? Conservative voice need to stop complaining and start contributing.

1. Amnesty/Path to Citizenship/Documentation (whatever you want to call it), we must provide a way to get the millions of undocumented workers/illegal immigrants into the mainstream system (documented in some way and paying their fair share of taxes). It is mind-boggling that some suggest we deport 12 million people that are here and, mostly, working to support themselves and their families. America will not create another “Trail of Tears.” So conservatives need to get past this issue. The millions that we have allowed to live and work here are not going anywhere. The solution must be to get them documented, into the mainstream. Benefits/entitlements are a privilege of American citizens. We must not allow the 12 million newly documented workers the privilege of citizenship without the requisite responsibilities. A path to citizenship must eventually be created for the sake of fairness but not as a first step.

2. Border Security – This issues needs to be expanded to border and port security as both are in our national security interests and both have gaping holes in the current setup. This will take much more time than the documentation phase. I understand the cynicism of the Republicans who were burned on the “promise” of security in exchange for amnesty under Reagan. We do not want that to happen again. Unfortunately i do not know what the solution is given a divided congress and President who picks and chooses which laws to uphold.

3. Enforcement – The system, whatever immigration approach we implement, must be enforced. Congress must no only pass the law to establish the approach but the enforcement mechanisms as well. Both must be funded to make them viable. Documenting the millions here already is pointless if we continue to allow people to cross the borders. A new guest worker program is pointless if the enforcement mechanism is not in place to ensure the workers leave at the end of their visa. Again, with the broken legislature we have today, I do not know of a solution here that will stick. All we can do is work to get common-sense legislation in place. If the Administrative branch does not uphold the law, then we must hold it accountable by every legal means at our disposal.

4. Quotas – How many legal immigrants should we allow into the country in a given year? Certainly while we are documenting the 12 million here already, we should reduce the number of other immigrants seeking to enter the United States. I do not here anyone addressing this in the current immigration reform discussions.

Those are the big 4 components that I see need to be thoroughly vetted and legislated.

Both plans (Rubio’s and Obama’s) cover all 4 of those things. Are people even looking at them, or just assuming that they contain nothing beyond the amnesty portion?

Loren…you are right…but then O and the Dims would lose their voting base. This country’s younger generation has learned the nanny state concept and is not going to give it up. You are right…I agree 100%…now how many in the GOP will back a bill? In fact, with the little tyrant..Reid…it will sit on the shelf.

I love it that our new Texas guy is already stepping out there! He is an experienced attorney and former judge who uses the “rule of law” in most of his discussions about difficult issues.
Did you see his response to the latest liberal gun control stunt?
From his website: “Senator Cruz sent a letter to two major banks that are being bullied by Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel over working with gun manufacturers. Senator Cruz invited the banks to move their business to Texas and urged Mayor Emanuel to keep his radical gun control north of the Red River.”
Go, Ted, go!

we went around in a circle. First gsandlen wholly underestimates the problem by making a apples to oranges comparison. Specifics and not more general bs. Kodachrome and arxdei get it. Also, I hope you realize that I wasn’t quite serious about landmines or mgs onionman, I included the venerable T-1000 in to try to make that clear.

Why do garrisons work? Why does surveillance work? Because they’re manned and they’re armed. There are two paths to this issue. One is passive and one is kinetic. Passive stuff is things like a Great Wall of Texas. Kinetic is military or militarily equipped forces actively patrolling the area. One of the reasons soft minded people would be for a fence is because that fence isn’t going to kill anyone. If we do put troops on the border and really try to make it secure, people will die.
As far as land fortifications goes, they are worthwhile to some extent, but it’s a medieval tactic. Remember the Maginot Line and how well that worked out? Modern Mobility renders permanent fortifications obsolete.

I feel that the problem at its most base is this, Mexico is a corrupt-narco state. Most Mexicans coming here are a kind of refugee from the gang wars and government corruption in their land. I get the feeling from some of the guys I work with that they would much rather be back in Mexico, but that it’s a violent narco-state and they are therefore unable make a living or raise a family there.

Now I am about to go out to outer space, but here it is. If we had spent 1 Trillion dollars starting a war with the Narco state, murdering the cartels, jailing corrupt officials and rebuilding Mexico instead of Iraq. We and Mexico would be much better off today.

Erick is right again as usual. Also, while the media constantly refers to Marco Rubio as a contender for POTUS in 2016, let us remember he is LESS eligible to be President than Obama is (neither of his parents were citizens when he was born). Ditto Bobby Jindal. We need a workable immigration system, and a SECURE border. We don’t have even the plans for either at this point. First, let’s demand enforcement of Title 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1621. It has been on the books since ’96, let’s demand enforcement. Second, A moratorium on all H-2 visas until we get people back to work in this country. If we do these two things, we will see state and local budget deficits decrease and we can watch our friends and neighbors start working again. THEN we can start at reforming our current immigration mess.

I was very disappointed in Rubio’s plan. I had hoped for something other than the usual nonsense we had from McCain and Bush. It’s not conservative, is the problem I have with it.

Let’s review in light of our principles, of which the first is that NO reform can EXPAND the scope, power, or duties of government. PERIOD. Ideally it should shrink these powers by consolidating, reorganizing, terminating, or sending to the states where possible. Rubio’s plan, just in the reading, expands the duties of government.

Secondly, the reform should not damage the poorest, weakest and most vulnerable in our society. In this case, the people most damaged by amnesty are those who are struggling to enter the workforce — young, unskilled people with no work experience. This is especially a problem for African-American men. Ironically it’s labor unions and black Americans who are most threatened by amnesty, yet they are key to Obama’s coalition.( If we were smart, we would exploit this potential split. But, of course, we’re not smart.) Cesar Chavez, who unionized farm workers, was opposed to illegal immigration, demonstrated against it. His organization turned in people who broke immigration laws. He understood the threat.

Thirdly, we need to understand that the grand bargain border control/amnesty argument is a sham. ANY such agreement will follow the path of Simpson-Mazzoli and other immigration “reforms”.

Border control is simply not the issue. The fact is the only countries that control their borders are totalitarian dictatorships, which require absolute control of their populations. The problem we have is twofold: The Hart-Celler inmmigration bill of 1965 (I think) changed the basis of our immigration policy drastically and much of our trouble stems from this (this is legal immigration). The other problem is our economy and our educational system, to some extent our culture. If the economy can’t function without low-paid unskilled illegal workers there is something seriously wrong with the economy. Similarly, our educational system used to produce people who were a trained workforce once they graduated from high school. If the jobs have changed (and they have) then our system needs to change.

To sum up — it would be a very big mistake for Republicans to go along with this plan.

Ted Cruz is an awsome Constitutionalist and Rubio would be wise to befriend him.

There is no way, Barack Obama is going to allow the border to be secured before allowing amnesty. Although the Dems will not allow Senator Rubio’s common sense proposal to pass, I think the Republicans need to continue to pursue a solution; aggressively push it as far as they can and somehow make the American public see that Barack Obama is the obstructionist, not them. STOP letting the liberals frame the argument!!!

Agree that it’s highly unlikely to eliminate the minimum wage. It’s hurting young people and I care abouth them more than illegals.

Marco Rubio Comment: Another example is in agriculture, where a stable and affordable domestic supply of food is critical to our national security and our quality of life. Agriculture has always required a significant work force from abroad, but we do not have a system through which growers and dairies can bring a workforce legally into the U.S.

My Response: I challenge this assessment of the agricultural
field. My little community of LaPorte, IN always imported migrant workers to harvest their crops. As a youth, I could not get a job (this was 1965) with the local farmers market as they already had enough workers that had migrated from Mexico to perform this work. These workers have taken up permanent residence in the community as they have throughout the United States. I say that the reason there are not enough workers for the farmers is the move from migrant farm worker to other work, construction, drug dealing, etc.

Marco Rubio Comment: In an ideal world, we could go back to 1986 and rewrite the immigration reform efforts implemented then to account for these issues and to ensure that real enforcement measures would be implemented. But in the real world, we cannot do that. We have to deal with what we have in the best way possible and make sure that this never ever
happens again.

The principles I have proposed to deal with this issue are not perfect, but I believe they create a framework for dealing with this reality in a responsible and reasonable way. And I think conservatives have already won important concessions from Democrats that we can build on to shape the actual legislation.

My Response: How many times do you have to be taken to the wood shed by the democrats and their partner the national media before you realize that the democrats are not interested in working with the republicans on anything? Just as soon as you make an agreement they run to their buddies in the national media and trash you for
your conservative ideas. You need to take the view point of the democrats, The democrats are your enemy and the country cannot survive if they survive. The democrats trash the conservatives consistently in private and public and you expect them to work with you? Get serious. Run on your principles, which will stand on their own. You do not need democrat light or a compromise as every time you compromise you lose part of your principles. That is why you will continue to lose elections. You don’t lose elections because you are not liberal enough. The national media will not like you no matter what. Even if you turned democrat, you would not be accepted.

Marco Rubio’s Comment: Erick’s final objection is that the plan does nothing to address the real problems with immigration – in other words, the black market for low skilled labor, long delays in the system and so forth. This is not accurate. Our principles call for the creation of a guest
worker program that, when effectively implemented in conjunction with a workplace verification system, would wipe out the black market for low skilled labor. And as the principles call for, any modernization effort would have to address the long delays in the system, which a modernized agricultural worker program and STEM visa reform would do.

My Response: Aren’t there enough laws already on the books that make this illegal? Why do we need more laws on the books to make law enforcement enforce these laws? What guarantees do we have that these new laws will be enforced if the current laws are not enforced? This appears to be more government hocus pocus. Mr. Rubio is not the first person who has a good heart that says that he will now do what others were not able to do. The problem is the group (Senate, Congress, Executive Branch and Judicial Branch) has gotten us to this point with the same argument. The group is the problem and that is why they need replaced every year to live under the laws
under which they expect us to live. The real problem is that they, as a group or individual, believe that they are above or around the law, but not under the law.

I can even understand the budget votes, government shutdown and default and all that nonsense, which would definitely have some impact, although we can certainly argue about the trade-offs.

What boggles me is that there is no timed bomb going off if Marco Rubio doesn’t get his amnesty, and yet some are treating it like, say, the only alternative before an automatic full amnesty.

If all we wanted were the words “enforcement” and “security” and “control”, we would have voted for McCain-Kennedy long ago.

One thing the Hispanics have proven to be adapt at is creating Nations of Crime, Corruption, Poverty and Misery. With the latest Amnesty alone with chain immigration it will not take them more than 25 years to transform this Nation in another Mexico and Third world Slum. Obama told us he wanted to transform this Nation and he is and will. It may tale a 30 to 50 years before the Mexican flag fly’s over the White House!

He’s either tricking us or incredibly naive. I know we all want to like Marco, but Schumer, Durbin and Menendez do not have Republicans’ or Americans’ best interests at heart. Can we agree on that?
Hopefully Marco will get it.

‘staff, what do you think of my latest moral and legal argument for my non-voting amnesty now position, independent of attempts to build fences or “force” non-Ikes and TRs to secure the border, that I explain at the link below? more later…http://www.redstate.com/gsandlapper1/2013/01/31/selective-amnesia-common-law-require-non-voting-rights-amnesty-now/

Great Society liberals (White) destroyed black families. Thus they destroyed any hope of prosperity because single mothers raised multiple kids by multiple absent fathers on their own just perpetuate and accelerate the poverty cycle…

Mostly caused by aid to dependent children that put the women in the breeding business and Black men in the stud service business. Blacks withstood hundreds of years of slavery and Jim Crow laws as a proud Race of Family and Church but have proven to be no match for While Liberals and Turncoat Blacks vote buying schemes. Just reduce people to poverty and dependent on the Government and you have a Democrat voter for life. Liberals have perfected it with the Blacks and Hispanics and now Obama and the Democrats are spreading it to the rest of the population. So in a very years this Nation will be a Third World Slum controlled by the Socialist/Democrat party of Northern Mexico!

You said it, the founder of Planned Parenthood Sanger was an unabashed racist who created what she called the Negro Project with the intent, as she put it, “Colored
people are like human weeds and are to be
exterminated.” Her sterilization dreams for the black community are going as planned and it is not only disgusting, it is shameful.

You can stick with that position and the GOP will be guaranteed another landslide loss in 2016. The GOP is seen as anti-women, anti-immigrant, pro-rich, old white guy party despite the fact that there are two Indian American governors and high profile minorities in the party. Any time a GOP candidate or representative opens their mount about religion or rape, you just have to cringe because you know that what follows will be the most asinine comment you’ve ever heard. The GOP needs to lighten up on the social conservatism and get back to small government, pro constitution, pro freedom positions and get that message out. If the current GOP image doesn’t change, there will never be another GOP president again. The GOP is in serious danger of becoming a completely irrelevant regional party with no power on the national stage. Is that what you want?

I don’t now where you have been for the last two years. Rubio’s position on immigration reform has been out there at least that long. He’s making it more specific now, but not different. I agree that he’s wrong, but he hasn’t changed, and he IS a true conservative.

Here goes: It’s secure when we no longer worry about terrorists carrying a suitcase bomb crossing it. It’s secure when the number of “benign” illegal entrants still getting through are inconsequential in the economies of both the border states and the remainder states, including those like Iowa and Nebraska who seem to like them as factory workers.

When the border is THAT secure, we can then start to address what to do with those already here. A really simple answer to THAT problem is to give them some fines, some penalties, then allow them to stay with NO prospect of ever becoming citizens.

If we start trying to address both prongs of the pitchfork at the same time, we will be rolled by the Democrats right into a blue country, and the border will never be secure because it won’t suit the Democrats’ purposes.

See the next installment of Brief and Direct, if I can get it typed.

“Is immigration a top priority right now or should we table it and fix our debt?”

No, it’s not, and yes, we should. Marco should take his tag-alongs and get off the Capitol steps. See:

http://www.redstate.com/flagstaff/2013/02/02/brief-and-direct-beware-the-shiny-objects/

I don’t think the labor unions care now, at least not the leadership of the SEIU, and pretty soon it’s going to be the only union that matters (I wonder what LUR has to say about that). At this point, unions look at illegal immigrants as likely members.

Flagstaff, I hope you got to read Kimberly Strassel’s article on WSJ titled:
“Immigration’s Poison Pill: Big Labor Unions have long used Democratic allies to kill any reform that includes a guest-worker program.” In reference to one point on Loren Heal’s comment:

“2. Get rid of all immigration quotas. No more country quotas, no more employment quotas. Make the unions squirm, and make the President demand less immigration.”
.
Regarding Heal’s comment, to get rid of all immigration quotas, doesn’t square with our soverign rights, much less will make the prez squirm as the unions are in his Party’s pocket, more than ever, due to the prez and won’t sign onto no quotas ever. The idea is, well, idealistic, but not realistic.
.
On the WSJ article, “the highly cynical reason for the unions’ opposition. Big Labor likes to suggest that its beef with guest workers is that they “steal” American jobs, an argument designed to appeal to populist fervors. This is hokum. Labor unions are hugely in favor of giving today’s 11 million illegal immigrants a path to citizenship, a move that would free up these shadow workers to “steal” far more American jobs than any guest-worker program.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323701904578276232797685750.html?mod=hp_opinion

Strassel was ‘subscriber only,’ but I thank you for providing support for my comment.