"Sue" sounds a lot more plausible than "shoot". Though addictive, roast beef and cheddar sandwiches probably don't have crack in them.

Re: Humanitarian Aid. I did misinterpret what you said.

Also, I wouldn't equate giving immigrants rights with giving them citizenship, nor would I equate it with open borders. My point is: they're here, they will continue to come here, and the country as a whole benefits from them--even depends upon them in many cases, so why not reform our laws to acknowledge these realities. This, in my mind, would be the best way for the government to provide for its citizens. Laws based upon ideological grounds with little regard to feasibility-- take The Prohibition Act, for example--, tend to breed corruption and lawlessness.

@ZOUR

"Most every business thrives on illegal immigration, either directly or indirectly." I thought I qualified this by the subsequent sentence:
"Regardless of legal status, people need to earn and spend money to live here." All I'm saying is, illegal immigrants help, not hurt, the economy, and that these benefits are not confined to one particular segment of the economy, like agriculture.

I am not in favor of humanitarian aid to illegal immigrants as you are, however I am in favor of immigrant rights. Give these people rights, and they will no longer be exploited, or at least exploited as much. If people are honest and hard working, I want them in this country. I see this as the simplest solution to a macro problem, that in a lot of ways is not the problem it is made out to be.

I get the feeling, and it may or may not be right, that you do not want migrants here because you don't say anything to the contrary, and beause you say, "it has negative effects on the local populace." I live in the southwest. I am working class. I have seen the negative effects first hand. All I'm saying is the benefits far outweigh the costs, and that maybe some of these negative effects would be negated if people felt they had the law to protect them.

Lastly, I just want to add that not all migrant labor is exploited. Many are paid fairly, pay their taxes, and live their lives just as you or me.

RE: ZOUR
Most every business thrives on illegal immigration, either directly or indirectly. Regardless of legal status, people need to earn and spend money to live here. Contrary to popular belief, people who are here illegally are not eligible for welfare.

The article you cite seems particularly biased against illegal immigration. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that illegal immigration has existed since well before the 1950's. Seems like maybe illegal immigration isn't the dire threat to the country that some make it out to be.

It's scary, the level of hatred I see on the interwebs everyday. The Mexicans are the new Jews.

I don't see what the big deal is. They probably just wanted to make sure she wasn't packing a snuke in her sniz.

As others have stated, there is no meaningful competition amongst high speed internet providers in the United States. If there was, we wouldn't be debating the ramifications of net neutrality, we'd be comparing which ISP offered the most mbps for the lowest monthly fee. Price per mbps in countries in Europe and Asia where actual competition exists is a small fraction of what it is in the states. This is why the internet in these places is on average ten times faster (give or take) than it is here. For a cheap American bastard like me, this sucks to no end. For the sake of American competitiveness in a global economy, this sucks quite a bit as well.