LOL. Ditto.
You rely on the antiquated "public opinion" position on immigration and fail to comprehend the modern immigration issue between the dems and the GOP which is, simply, "permanent visas versus temporary visas"
You fail to understand how widespread this issue has become across the country. There are close to 2000 legislative initiatives that have sprung up in states and local communities throughout the land. Accompanying those initiatives have been grassroots organizations that transcend party and racial lines [I belong to one of them] who are becoming bigger and more active. It is the political elite who are just beginning to learn that "antiquated" public opinion is becoming a major force in this discussion and that those who ignore it do so at their own peril. It boils down to whom do you believe, the politicians or your own lyin' eyes?
As someone who has actually issued visas, I don't buy your simplistic distinction that this is an issue of permanent versus temporary visas. It has to do with sovereignty and national identity. Can we control who comes into this country and how? People are not widgets or units of labor. As Germany and many other countries have learned, you don't bring in "guest workers" and expect them to leave when the need no longer exists.
You, like many others, also have an antiquated view of immigration. As the world continues to shrink, and mobility increases, citizenship becomes more of a mental state rather than a physical state.
LOL. First, I have lived 25 years of my adult life abroad in 9 different countries. My wife is an immigrant. Your idealized version of a "shrinking" world where "citizenship becomes more of a mental state rather than a physical state" is pure hogwash. The nation state still exists and is thriving, i.e., the numbers continue to grow. Citizenship still means something in very practical terms whether it is voting, paying taxes, or being eligible for the draft. And there are political institutions, values, and culture that also matter in order to have a civil society. You can't have significant portions of the populace not part of a sense of shared endeavor and be successful as a nation.
Mexico is not giving all these immigrants to the US, they are merely "loaning" them
That statement is a keeper. Mexico isn't giving us anything. The fact that there are almost 11 million Mexican born residents of the US speaks of a failed country that cannot provide for its own people who are fleeing corruption and hopelessness. The fact that we have unscruplous businesses willing to exploit cheap, plentiful labor subsidized by the taxpayer regardless of the long term consequences to this nation is reprehensible.
"No other First World country has such an extensive land frontier with a Third World country. The significance of the long Mexican-U.S. border is enhanced by the economic differences between the two countries. “The income gap between the United States and Mexico,” Stanford University historian David Kennedy has pointed out, “is the largest between any two contiguous countries in the world.” Contiguity enables Mexican immigrants to remain in intimate contact with their families, friends, and home localities in Mexico as no other immigrants have been able to do."
As for the perm/temp visa, look to test vote in 2005. In that vote it was determined that 40 dems and 13 pubs would support a new guest worker program and amnesty onto the path for the illegals(McCain-Kennedy), while an additional 22 pubs would support the new guest workers and amnesty to guest worker for the illegals(Bush Plan).
With 13 plus 22 = 35 pubs supporting some form of comprehensive reform, it follows, that at any given time, the numbers could be massaged enough to get the required pub votes, depending on how many perm and temp. Which is exactly what happened with S 2611. There were not enough votes for cloture on McCain Kennedy, but if they massaged the numbers into Hagel-Martinez, 10 pubs woulds abandon Bush to support Hagel Martinez. In fact, Bush had to reluctantly abandon the Bush Plan.
Of course, now that the dems control Congress it is a different equation and if the dems can take the presidency next year, it will be another new equation.