Yes, I agree with you in every respect but I still think the notion of granting amnesty to 12 million or more illegal immigrants is as equally a bad idea.  The focus on the costs of illegal immigrants is misplaced. If allowing 12 million immigrants into the country is good then why don't we allow 24, 48 or 96 million illegal immigrants into the country. There is no objective basis given this line of argument to stop at 12 million. Given the current structure (e.g., the gross inequities of the tax systems) and direction of this country (expansionist military-based policies) I, for one , am not willing to cosign for growing our population this large.

Yeah. I saw his piece today. I guess it's just as self serving as others. Which reminds meof a piece in the Outlook Section of the Wash Post today. In it, a hispanic law professor was making some weird argument that some Americans, today, are descendants of illegal immigrants of sorts. He actually squatters, He noted that the federal govt had plenty of squatters, ineffect, on federal lands which required, ultimately, military intervention for ejection of the squatters. I blew his piece off because if he was honest about his thesis he should have used, as an example, the original europeans pilgrims to this land, and others, to legitimately make his case, rather than simple federal land squatters. But I suspect if he had used this example, as I suggest above, his piece would not have seen the light of day!

But I suspect if he had used this example, as I suggest above, his piece would not have seen the light of day!

You're right. It would not have been printed in the Washington Post.