[Don]

Originally Posted by Ayatollahgondola

First of all, I think you might be quite presumptuous to say that most Americans are anti-immigrant. I mean, I understand why you feel that way, but I doubt the majority of Americans do. You probably were affected more negatively than most, but if you lived in other areas where immigrants maintain a higher degree of assimilation or have higher standards to begin with, you'd likely find your neighbors and co-workers think well of immigrants, and would reject your attitude. That doesn't mean to say they would support continuing high levels of immigration, but it is my opinion that they would find your solution overly harsh or unneccessary.
I do see your point about the misnomer of legal immigration, and agree somewhat. the term legal immigration does not mean the same thing to all, but your probably right that some have latched on to the term for propaganda-esque purposes. Maybe not though. It's their opinion, so I'll let them defend.

This one though:
You also have some double standards. If you don't want our cities transformed into stinking slums by anyone, then it is not entirely pure to single out immigrants. I think I undertand what you meant there, but it does point out the need to adhere to your own standards of reference, lest you be thought a fraud also. lastly, you have singled out muslim and mexican, so your scope has narrowed quite a bit. I doubt you'll find much support for such narowly tailored immigration controls. If I understand you correctly, you want zero levels of immigration from those demographics. It wouldn't fit in well here I think.

I think there would be a huge amount of support for zero immigration, especially from third world countries.

Sen. Chris Dodd of Conn said the US has a real umemployment rate of 20%.

Question: What is the proper number of "legal" immigrants you would like to see admitted into the US in order to compete with unemployed Americans for jobs, housing and public benefits?