I agree with the first part. I was not saying technology *caused* illegal immigration, rather that it makes immigration less important b/c it makes it easier to move value across borders.

The part about a social safety net leading to immigration doesn't ring true to me. I think automation has had more impact on the domestic labor market that trade and immigration combined.

I think it's completely caused by what you said: turning a willful blind eye to our immigration laws. It's almost our official policy to just look the other way.

Barry Obozo uses the US Constitution for toilet paper.

Big amen on the hammock reference.

Prior to the 17th amendment, Senators were selected by the legislatures of the separate States and sent to Washington to represent the best interests of their State. How different would Harry Reid's conduct be if he answered to his Governor and the legislature for his actions? He could truly love his President and all he stands for and still be out of work, midterm, if he forgot the best interests of Nevada.

This is one of the changes from the first Progressive era, W. Wilson and friends. Approximately 100 years later this is the result of 1 change to the US Constitution. The founders knew what they were doing. The Union of the States may never have happened without a check in the system to protect State's rights. Appointed Senators was that check.

Absolutely right. I should have included that as well. Those are the two Washington motivators, with a few (very few) exceptions.

If only it could be so, although, power is often at least as important as $$$$$

The need to win votes trumps any rational action to be taken on our borders. The fallacy behind this is the classification of ethnic groups as having one mind. The ultimate answer is to make an elected office a duty rather than a gift of automatic wealth. Then, getting re-elected would be less important than doing the right thing.

Save your breath, he's on a anarchist kick right now. I guess the gay thing got boring. (it did for the rest of us)

I'll stand in the gap with you.

The ruling parties are nearly identical in their approach to enforcing laws. Dems want them to get here and vote and Repubs want them to get here and work. If illegal aliens were forbinnen from voting, Dems would close the border tthemselves.

Technology did not put between 10 and 30 million illegal aliens into this country. That was done via a willful blind eye being turned to our immigration laws. Had those laws been enforced, much of our illegal immigration problems would not exist today.

"Doing the jobs Americans won't do"... That is only possible today because our entitlement system has grown from a safety net to a hammock.

Again, I will say "Cloward and Piven" strategy: overwhelm the system to make it collapse. The invasion has nothing to do with children except as tools.

There are adequate laws already passed. We don't need any new regulations. Just enforce what we have NOW. One day China will wake up and decide the US is a good place for millions of their escess population.

I'm not proposing more immigration law, and as you suggest we should simply enforce those laws we already have on the books and the problem to a large extent would be resolved.

Unfortunately, NEITHER side of the aisle seems to want enforcement of those laws.

You are correct sir!

Preventing government from attempting to control the culture... That's precisely what our Dear Leader is attempting. By flooding the US with people who have no historical context of this country, he is able to then steer it to what he wants. Which is a culture of dependency. Do you want to live in such a culture? I do not.

Culture does change over time, but it is over tens of years. Dear Leader is attempting it over his remaining 2.5 years in office.

It seems to me borders and nation states have less meaning today because of technology. That's uncomfortable for some and it has it's pros and cons; but it's happening, and no one has a serious plan to turn back the clock. Instead our plan is to look the other way. We say we have immigration laws, but we have 15 million people living here illegally. We've created an underclass.

I essentially agree with you on opening the borders to non-violent people, but I don't know if it should be 100%. I'm for doing it slowly. We should have some form of limited amnesty for people who are here illegally already UNLESS there is some easy way to find them and deport them. It's very unfair I'm saying to partially restrict immigration but then let people who sneaked in stay. I just don't have a better program.

I would rather restrict immigration and enforce the laws better than just look the other way. Looking the other way is a horrible policy. The more things that are illegal but not enforced, the easier it is for corrupt officials to accuse anyone they don't like of a crime.

Essentially open borders AND maintain the culture. You can't have it both ways. New immigrants need to assimilate to the current culture and adopt it, which takes time. Flooding the country as our Dear Leader is doing undermines the ability to assimilate and retain our culture.