"Are ordinary people required to have tobacco bulges in their cheeks?"  Yes...and skidmarks in their tighty-whiteys (or is that uptighty whiteys?

Blackberries:  $150 "cultural elite" toy.  

Brand new Dodge Ram 3500 p/u with chrome nekkid ladies, "truck balls" and a bumper sticker saying "I'd rather be cummin than strokin" right next to the big oval "w'04": $32000 "normal folks" toy.

Oh, and don't forget the $250 GPS on the dashboard and the $550 glock in the glovebox.  Normal folks.  They never spend any money on frivolous @#$%.

Are ordinary people required to have tobacco bulges in their cheeks?

Depends. Which ones?

"Are ordinary people required to have tobacco bulges in their cheeks?"

Only in America. It is a form of code.

Look, this reporter is an idiot, but should we think he is wrong about the experience of people who live on this side of the border? Is he wrong that reporters in large part want a "sellable" angle? I can overlook his "ordinary people" quote and realize that we got to do something about the border and illegal aliens.

Yes, we have to do something about the border and illegal aliens and, yes, we have the right, as does any sovereign state (although our recent and past history strongly indicates that we really don't respect the sovereignity of other nations) to close our borders. But what exactly is it that is so troubling to those folks who live on this side of the border about illegal aliens? And, why are they so not able to get their government and their president to address their concerns?

We have a porous southern border and what it would take in terms of resources to make that border less porous is more than their government is willing to commit to expend at this time. After all, there is a war to be waged against uppity Iraqis who simply will not bow down to our military aggression and there are the tax breaks, which reduces federal revenues, and have led to record deficits.

Given all this, it seems, at least to me, a little bizarre for folks who really do have better things to do with their time and energy, trying to ride herd and round up a bunch of poor, bedraggled Mexicans and Central Americans in the middle of the night. The economy of this country feeds on cheap labor. Wal-Mart's extensive use of products manufactured in China under conditions that carry an odor of slavery for many, many workers there underscores this fact.

I have read several studies produced by the Russell Sage Foundation that clearly show that many of the owners of businesses located within the inner-cities actually prefer to hire Hispanic workers rather than black Americans. Part of my interpretation of these findings, aside from the ongoing racial discrimination that blacks deal with everyday, is that these businesses would prefer to hire illegal aliens especially if they have brown skin than American citizens if they have black skin.

I believe that policy makers in Mexico and other Latin American countries are well aware of this fact and it plays a role in their calculations about immigration issues with regard to the United States and their desire to do something about the surplus labor in their own countries. Presidente Fox simply made the mistake of publicly expressing in an inelegant and blunt manner what he and other political leaders in Mexico and Central America have adopted as part of their strategy to convince policy makers here to allow more immigrants from their countries to enter the United States.

And, why are they so not able to get their government and their president to address their concerns?

Because a bloc of voters opposes any effective action as a primary issue.  The "they" in this quote usually find some other issue to be more important come election time.  Politicians end up seeking a low profile, and doing very little.

The real problem is not cheap labor,  the real problem is illegal immigrants collecting taxpayer funded services.  The real solution is something like "anyone from anywhere can come to America by posting $3000.  If that person commits a crime, applies for welfare,  or demands emergency health care funded by taxpayers, that  person't $3000 will be used to transport them as soon as  possible back where they came from, with a three year wait to try again.  After 20 years of self-reliant residency, the immigrant will qualify to apply for citizenship."

As Americans, we benefit from most Mexican immigrants.  We lose on a set of them which comes here just for welfare.  We need to allow those we win on, and bar the losers.  It's the winners who currently put pressure on the border, if they had a legal way to cross, they'd take it.

 The social consequences of such a solution are interesting to contemplate. We would expect organizations to arise which would protect such immigrants from actually facing the consequences of unfunded emergency health care, for example, by paying for the service.  They would fund more $3000 bonds for more immigrants, and be there for those who found themselves in desperate situations.

"We lose on a set of them which comes here just for welfare."

What percentage of illegal immigrants from Mexico and Çentral America do you suppose come to the United States to collect welfare benefits? And do you believe that this percentage is higher than the percentage of Russian emigres who come to the United States, albeit legally, to collect welfare benefits?

"The real problem is not cheap labor, the real problem is illegal immigrants collecting taxpayer funded services."

Despite the fact that many of these Hispanic immigrants are here illegally, if they are working and paying taxes on their earnings then they are not ripping-off American taxpayers because they are paying taxes too.

Despite the fact that many of these Hispanic immigrants are here illegally, if they are working and paying taxes on their earnings then they are not ripping-off American taxpayers because they are paying taxes too.

And we should legalize such immigrants.

What percentage of illegal immigrants from Mexico and Çentral America do you suppose come to the United States to collect welfare benefits?

I don't know, but I do know that the burden faced by many cities and states, including California, is substantial.

"And we should legalize such immigrants."

Why should their illegal entry into the country be legalized simply because they have found gainful employment? This only puts a step or two away from relegating others to a lower level of citizenship or taking away their citizenship altogether if they can't find employment.

  "And we should legalize such immigrants."

Why should their illegal entry into the country be legalized simply because they have found gainful employment?

That's not what I had in mind, although I can see how it read that way.

We should make it legal for hard-working, taxpaying Mexicans to immigrate to America. 

"We should make it legal for hard-working, taxpaying Mexicans to immigrate to America."

We don't require Cubans or Russian citizens of the former Soviet Union to be hard-working or tax paying. Why should hold Mexicans or, for that matter, Haitians, to such standards. Aren't they as good as Cubans or non-Muslim Russians?

Generally, we should compete for skilled, hardworking people and leave the criminals and welfare recipients behind.  There's a middle ground of unskilled, but hardworking, well behaved people.

Sometimes, it is determined that the national interest justifies accepting people from some country without such discrimination.  The history of Cuban immigration is pretty wild, including many murderers and rapists allowed in.  Maybe the price we paid for the perceived national interest was too high.  If we have kept out the 10% of Cubans in the Mariel Boatlift (1980) who were criminals, we'd surely have been ahead.

"Sometimes, it is determined that the national interest justifies accepting people from some country without such discrimination."

So this is why folks fleeing Fidel got a free pass but folks trying to put distance between themselves and Papa Doc and his Ton-Ton Macoutes were put on hold. National interest. I'll have to remember that.

Then there's the "Russian Mafia".

"Then there's the 'Russian Mafia'".

I thought we issued visas to them whenever they asked. It was my understanding that it was in our national interest to replace the aging Italian Mafia with new blood.