Re: Immigration talks rouse hate

On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:40:16 GMT, "Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:

>
>"ZeD" <zed@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>news:hdits3dsiut8uokdpmmjkkdk7t95cgpm4m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:25:27 GMT, "Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"ZeD" <zed@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>news:218ss3p5370tttbjifa0jpthddsmc00d68@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>><JS>
>>>>>
>>>>>Do not put words in my mouth.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, there are those that would want fewer legal immigrants, but I am

>>>>>not
>>>>>in
>>>>>that camp. The only limitation I want on immigration quotas is purely
a
>>>>>numbers game. There are very smart people that know far more about
this
>>>>>sort
>>>>>of thing that I, and they set the annual quotas to keep the flow of
>>>>>immigrants managable from an economic perspective. There may or may
not 
>>>>>be
>>>>>other criteria that sets the number, and I must defer to the
officials 
>>>>>on
>>>>>whatever number they come up with.
>>>>>
>>>>>I have to assume that if the goal is to curtail illegal immigration, 
>>>>>then
>>>>>the quota of legal immigrants must be substantially increased.
>>>>
>>>> Bull****!
>>>>
>>>
>>>You missed it. I said IF the goal is to do one thing, the way to do it
is 
>>>by
>>>doing another thing. We could build a moat and wall around the country
>>>instead of increasing the quotas and stepping up the processing of
>>>paperwork.
>>>
>> I missed nothing. You said that the only way to decrease illegal 
>> immigration
>> is to increase legal immigration.  Later in your statement you say the 
>> opposite.
>>
>
>That's what you heard, but not what I said.
>
>
>
No, I read it.

"...if the goal is to curtail illegal immigration, then
the quota of legal immigrants must be substantially increased."

Must it be? as in no other way?