Instead, my hunch is there's room for an argument saying that the modern GOP won't ever get serious about staunching illegal immigration because their main supporters large corporations, like the supply of cheap labor.

Just so. This is the best argument the Democrats can have on this issue. The question is whether the leading candidates are willing to alienate big buisness by hitting this point hard. I have my doubts....

I agree; Dana's suggestions--while I think it's the humane and reasonable approach to the real problem--is going to ring entirely hollow to most voters, who I think view the problem as if we've failed to put a lock on our front door.

It would be trivial to pick through the investments and associations of major Republicans to find links to corporations that have been tagged for hiring undocumented immigrants or that rely on such labor, and use those linkages to make an argument for why Republicans are systemically unwilling to actually crack down on the cause of illegal immigration: Employers who want to undercut wage, benefit, and safety regulations.

Now we're getting somewhere. Time to start planting the seeds on this one ...

Do you honestly think that anyone for whom illegal immigration is the NUMBER ONE issue is going to vote Democratic anyway?

Talk about getting tough on employers of illegal immigrant, and talk about being in favor of a path to citizenship if an immigrant waits their turn, pays a penalty and keeps paying their taxes, blah blah blah (i.e., support the comprehensive reform package that failed awhile back) and this issue goes away.

I know it's this week's Beltway concern, but not every issue is a loser for Democrats. Theres 30%-40% of the vote we arent' going to get under any circumstances, and the xenophobes who think immigration is the number on problem this country has are among those.

Read this page if you trust Ezra on this issue. The most important part is the link to my wiki in the first update, which extensively documents who was involved in those marches.

As for this post, a massive amnesty isn't "humane" because it will encourage even more illegalImmigration, resulting in even more BorderDeaths, MixedStatus families, and all the other negatives. And, it will enable us to keep a huge portion of Mexico's former working population and help out the crooks that lead that country immensely.

So, when you actually think it through - something Ezra can't do - it's only "humane" in the most superficial sense.

As for those corporations, please do it. In fact, you can start with him: youtube.com/watch?v=T5Dp7FaKIJo Or, try this: youtube.com/watch?v=ElAvo8EM4uk

Then, you can move on to the racial power groups that are funded by large corporations (for some unknown reason):

discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=153

I could probably write a book - nay, a tome - about what Ezra doesn't know about this issue.

"I could probably write a book - nay, a tome - about what Ezra doesn't know about this issue."

But wouldn't you concede that we as a nation should try to work toward some resolution (*not* dictated by coporate cheats), or should we just let it hang around forever and rip up the electorate like other dumb-butt issues (like, say, abortion), that are particularly pernicicious because they create cultural schism along racial lines?

(Personally, I don't think I have much of a dog in this fight. But it does hurt my ears when little rich white kids have too much of an opportunity to get all morally righteous on the rest of America).

Just wondering.

The "resolution" is to simply enforce our current laws. The harder part is how to get there. However, that's not that hard: we simply discredit those who support illegal immigration, including politicians, church leaders, pundits, etc. Once they realize they have to choose between supporting illegal activity and their careers, the problem will start to be solved.

brewmm, you do realize that most poor people vote Democratic right?

Who the fuck do you think this issue is primarily resonating with? The fat yuppie who makes 60k a year and votes Republican, or the guy who works at 7-11 for 20k a year?

That is why this issue goes so badly for Democrats. Were they smarter people, they would realize that for most Americans this is a matter of economic survival. But they aren't smarter people, and they are capable of seeing this issue only through the lens of race and ethnicity.

Before this post scrolls away, here's one of those corporations that Ezra can look into: TysonFoods.

Oh, wait, they have a leftwing connection so I guess we can forget that. In fact, they've just recently joined with ACORN and a local "A"CLU chapter to support "immigration". Those groups just love "immigration", and they're working together to encourage more of it.

Sigh. This is why Democrats lose the tax and spend argument. Sure, Republicans borrow and spend, but most voters will take the person who says he wants to cut your taxes but won't over the person who comes out and tells you straight out he'll raise your taxes.

Same goes for immigration. Republicans aren't serious about the issue, but if voters have to choose between a party that's not serious but says the right things vs. a party that straight out wants amnesty, they'll take the Republicans.

The right thing to do is to actually, you know, solve the illegal immigration problem to the point where it's not a huge issue anymore. Democrats solved welfare that way in the 90s. It went from a top 10 issue working against the Democrats in every cycle to a nonissue thanks to welfare reform.

The Democrats need to get a plan to secure the border. Period. Then the electorate will be more open to amnesty. Voters just don't want to have to revisit this issue every 20 years or so.