http://www.progressivesforimmigrationreform.org/ Looks like some progressives are finally realizing that the negative effects of immigrationon depressing wages and increasing the cost of living in overcrowded citieshurt the poor more than anyone else. Peter Brimelow described the situation as such: "There are many powerful, quite conservative minded people who want open immigration because their employees will earn less, and their profits will be higher. There are really powerful interests. If you look at the economics of immigration, it's basically an attack by the owners of capital on the living standards of the working classthat's essentially what it is. I say this as a long time Conservative Republican. But I have to say is susceptible to very crude Marxist analysis." The recent waves of immigration have served as blood fodder for the parasitic land-vampires; as multiple immigrant families crowd into a single dwelling, they are willing to pay more than Americans, driving rents upward to the benefit of property owners in the cities. Furthermore, the displaced middle and working classes trying to flee the deteriorating immigrant neighborhoods fuels a construction boom benefitting wealthy land developers who build tract homes and privately planned communities. But it is much more expensive to have to build new buildings than to use the old ones that already exist, and often times the newly constructed buildings are not as nice (less spacious ceilings, not handcrafted, inferior materials). Of course, the wealthy can still afford to live wherever they want, and put their children into private schools if need be, if they want to live in the pleasant upscale enclaves in the big cities. In the state of California, the huge influx of immigration in the last few decades has exacerbated a water shortage, leading to salinization of agricultural soil, water rationing, and several other environmental problems. Several cities in the southern region have resorted to using treated sewage water to supply the tap water in the people's faucets. No wonder Southern Californians are so fond of drinking bottled water! The state has also forced retailers to only sell special "low-flow" shower spray faucets. These can be rather annoying, if you have never experienced them. There's just not quite enough water! It takes twice as long to scrub and wash your hair. When immigration creates shortages and progressive politicians have to resort to rationing because there isn't enough of a resource for everyone, that should really tell you something.
California is being overwhelmed by Hispanics, mostly illegal. The California legislature just keeps layering on the hurt for the citizens of California. Why do Californians keep electing officials that are screwing the State over? Are they gluttons for punishment? Immigration facts for California: http://www.fairus.org/states/California.
The existing RINO party seems to grasp that they had better "soften" their hard line on immigration reform, unless they want to forfeit any hope with Latinos and Asian Americans. Both sides on this issue seem to agree that a balanced, two-part approach is in order --- stricter enforcement and improved border security on one hand and a pathway to legalization on the other. It's an excellent plan except for that first part. We don't need "comprehensive" legislation. What we need is "realism"! Accept that millions of foreigners are living here illegally and are not going to "self-deport" --- and that we (and "they") will be better off if they gain the protection of the law. The Draconian measures needed to get rid of them all are no longer politically possibl;e, if they ever were. And they probably wouldn't work anyway. As G.K. Chesterton wrote that "Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried." Enforcement enthusiasts seem to think the same I true of their preferred option. From them, you would think every migrant sneaking across the Arizona border only had to get by an unarmed sitting in a folding chair and playing "Angry Birds" on an iPhone.
History has shown that when Republicans cater to Hispanics, it doesn't help them. Even when Reagan granted a limited amnesty back in 1986, it didn't help his numbers. The vast majority of Hispanics always vote for the Democrat. Democrats and RINOs are spineless (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s that couldn't care less about the rule of law and American sovereignty.
That argument seems to be self contradicting. If the future votes of Asians and Hispanics depend on the willingness of the political system to grant amnesty for people who commit multiple felonies, then the issue is only about getting as many co-ethnics into the country as possible. If your loyalty is to co-ethnics in other countries over your own country, than there is probably little in the Republican Party platform that would ever appeal to you. No matter how you slice it, if allowing millions of lawbreakers to get rewarded for their lawbreaking is important to you, you are going to be voting Democrat regardless.
