In article ,
D Peter Maus wrote:

Telamon wrote:
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...
No, you are. Mexico does not authorize anyone to break US law.
I'm no fan of closed borders or fences... but you're dead wrong on this
one. The Mexican government prints survival pamphlets for border
crossers,
and supplies them with food, water, and other supplies to help them get
across safely. If that is not a form of authorization, then grass is
purple and the sky is green...
The only pamphlet is (was?) one that warns border crossers of the hazards
of
doing so. They know people are going to do it, so they are giving them
some
precautions, not instruction.

Mexico does not provide water and food. Many US humanitarian organizations
do that, on the US side, with water stations that are replenished often.
This is to prevent people who are already there from dying... again,
knowing
they will come no matter what.

Mexico has no national policy of encouraging migration. What Mexico has is
an unsustainable rural economy based on the ejido system that forces
people
to migrate either to big cities of Mexico or to the US.

Yes, there are people on both sides of the border supporting illegal
immigration including president Bush and a number of members in congress.



Have you noticed that there is always a cataclysmic reason for the
decisions David supports.

AM HD is the last hope of AM Radio. Without it, it can't survive.

Illegal immigration is the last hope of a people forced to live in an
unsustainable economy.

All rights and privileges are the last hope of immigrants illegally
coming to this country forced to live amongst us.

There are times he sounds more like a professional lobbyist than a
broadcaster. A highly paid shill for the cause du jour. Johnny Cochran
without jewelry.

Except for his citizenship, I've never heard him renounce anything.


It's called framing the argument. A debate tactic. A very shallow form
of conversation.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California