Most latinos and myself don't want large amounts of people trying to get in. We don't want to find out that they're advertising in China, or Yemen that you can walk across the border and apply for asylum in the USA and they'll get you there for $xxxxx.

Sure. But, as albaby argued with Dope, the data show that something like 60% (if memory serves) of asylum-seekers were approved. That's without counsel. They stood in front of a judge and made their case without a lawyer, and it was accepted. So I think your characterization is a little unfair. Not completely inaccurate. Just that a lot of those people were adjudicated to have legitimate claims.

Just what do you think my characterization is? Do you actually want the cartels advertising in China that they'll get you to the US border for say $30k? Is that as bad characterization, because I read an article and a fellow paid for him and his daughter and I posted it here. Do you want people from Yemen flying into Nicaragua, because it was advertised that the border was a short hop away and all you had to pay was airport tax?

There are polls here in Florida showing latinos favor mass deportation of illegal immigrants, with an exception for long termers.

And as for us taking asylum seekers - that's fine, but I also support that they apply in interim countries that they pass through if they aren't in danger in that country. I think 30% of the world might qualify for asylum and we cannot take them all, but I'm sympathetic.

Nice pot shot though. (I thought it was 40%, and questioned the criteria. I'd like to see how they do it)