Jophiel wrote:
My point was that going after illegal aliens presently in the United States does nothing to prevent future terrorists from entering the country. Katie was mentioning the illegals in the country being a liability and, in the same breath, going on about the "safety of our children". I was pointing out that one has little to do with the other.
And my point is that you've chosen to focus on opposing the entire issue, but mention only the worst bill proposed by the House on this issue. Let's ignore what President Bush proposed. Let's ignore two bills in the Senate. Nope. We'll look at one bill proposed in the house and protest the entire issue on that one bill.
Can you not also see that by blanketly opposing "immigration reform", you end up blocking not only the "bad" bills like the one house bill, but also the "good ideas" that are out there and which a majority of people who actually live in border states agree with?
I saw a poll last week (I'll need to dig it up) that stated that 4/5ths of Californians polled agreed that a guest worker program was a good idea and would be a viable solution to border security problems while still allowing immigrants the opportunities they desire. Yet, interestingly enough, instead of focusing on the solutions that are overwhelmingly popular, it seems as though the issue is being hijacked to make it seem to be broadly opposed to immigration reform of any kind.
I've got not beef with the rallys. I do have a problem with how they'll be interpreted by the policy makers though. Heck. The Dems are already lining up to get in front of any camera they can find and proclaim the rallies to be defacto opposition to any and all Republican proposed solutions. Which will only result in all of us losing on this issue. Including those who are marching right now.