the pertinance of things ancient only proves the unchanging nature of humanity throughout our history. we are just as instinctual, carnal, and brutal in our nature as the first humans who ventured out of their cave dwellings so many thousands of years ago. today we mask our impulses with chemical imbalances, inadequate developmental environments, and an ever-increasingly porous social membrane—not to mention the vague misconception that technology in some way makes us more intelligent. technology is simply a tool that multiplies the effort applied to it; it is by no means a supplement of neurons which enhances the collective IQ of society. the concepts from which our present technology has been derived had their roots in the minds of the ancients, people who changed the world with their contributions, yet people nonetheless. with all of our supposed higher intelligence you would think that our so-called civilized world order could use our promethean gifts to rid the world of greed, starvation, and warfare, but instead it has only filled us with an aura of arrogance and self-righteous fervor. at the dawn of time we killed each other for land, riches, and glory. what has changed over the past ten thousand years? only the instruments with which we accomplish the task.

“The Petrilli has a polite way of saying, “you’re full of sh*t” Patriot. The reason that illegal immigration is an issue today is that it’s an easy wedge to drive between people on one side who are willing to bitch about the dime of tax money that gets spend on a poverty stricken child while turning a blind eye they to the sawbuck they spent lining Haliburton’s pockets this week in Iraq, and people on the other side who believe that human dignity is a worthy end, in and of itself.”

only inflate uneducated assumtions…for all of you, read jared diamond’s “collapse”...he talks about the success of america—how it’s prevalence has leaned on the porous membrane of immigration, how the flux of new peoples coming into and flowing out of america directly correlates to economic success.

should every immigrant be legal? sure. is that the reality of the situation—of course not. the fact of the matter is, we are living in the most successful nation on the earth. while not perfect, it operates in a beneficial manner…beneficial to the majority of it’s people.

That was a big sentence. I forgive you for not getting all the way through it.

I’ll simplify: You: “Brown people take money. Build wall!”

Me: “Brown people expensive to prosecute fabricated war against. Spend less on that.”

When there are no laws addressing a particular action, in this case immigrating, then the act cannot be considered illegal.

The native American argument is also one that is flawed as is “we are a nation of immigrants”. The reason why illegal immigration is an issue today is because to a great extent, America has become a welfare state.

Thus illegal immigration isn’t just a migration issue as it was in yesteryear, rather it has become a mechanism to redistribute wealth from the middle class to people who don’t belong in the country and the businesses that hire them illegally.

Before America became a welfare state, the issue of wealth redistribution was not a factor. Also prior to America’s version of socialism, there were no social programs attracting immigrants, legal or illegal. Those that chose to come to this country did so to build it and their futures, not to take from what was already there. Which was built and paid for by others.

There is a vast difference between “builders” and “takers”. The immigrants of old were builders, the illegal aliens of today are takers.

In terms of first person sources, there are lots of cases of early explorers reporting sightings of huge populations and large amounts of cropland – and then, when the next visitors came (sometimes decades later), they found a nearly depopulated area.

i.e., before Colonization of North America got going in earnest. The settlers were dealing with a remnant population that had experienced a catastrophe larger than the initial hit of plague in Europe.

My point though is more on the level of PR than on the policy level. If you want a rational decision, it won’t happen if we wait until people like Lou Dobbs get a real following.

Also: Name me a part of the Earth that hasn’t been invaded and had its population replaced or hugely changed – it doesn’t exist. Thinking that the Americas are somehow more heinous than anything else is a-historical.

As for “infectious diseases” and “criminal record,” I find it hard to believe any immigrant could make violent crime more of a problem in this country. As for diseases, I think they largely all exist here anyway, or are a result of situation-specific issues—such as malaria.

IMHO, we can deal with this semi-rationally now, or we can wait for some illegal immigrant to bring a disease across the border – or commit a high publicity series of crimes – and then deal with it irrationally. Like the country did with the near shutdown in the 1920’s.

Me? I’d rather deal with it semi-rationally now, rather than wait for a demagogue to seize on a convenient coincidence.