He said "No," but ducked the specifics of "why not," particularly in light of an issue position statement he says diverges from the Libertarian line (but not by much if you look at it):
The cliché is true, we are a Nation of immigrants. Sections of our economy depend on the service and hard work of those who find their way into our borders. This work is done in secret and under duress for both the immigrant and the employer. I want to streamline the work visa system, and enable thousands of immigrants from all nations to gain a visa easily and quickly. I would also include a correction period for all employers and immigrants who have been working and living in the US outside of the law to become compliant with the new visa program. The tax base would be increased, expense of deportation and persecution would be decreased, stress and loss of life would be tremendously decreased. There are solutions, but we have to be willing to stop and realize what we are doing today is not an answer.My position, a topic I've written about numerous times, is the same as GOA's, but I did not get a chance make it known on the air. Rather than repeat myself, I'm going to share the email Russn8r sent me after the broadcast:
Enquiring minds want to know. If he wants to address these questions, I'll post his answers. I would expect Russn8r to be watching, evaluating and weighing in, and I am not able to selectively soften his comments the way I just did to his email."Find their way into our borders.""Correction period" for employers and "immigrants" who have been "outside the law".Good grief, what a double-talking...
Jess Loban dodged the real issues, hand-waving about allegedly being "more right" than the typical libertarian, and about how we need a workable "guest" worker program and how states should be allowed to enforce their borders... Unless the invaders manage to break in, and then they get amnesty -- er uh, I mean a "correction period". So what does his support for border enforcement mean? Nothing. His answer was inconsistent with his website statement, and he doesn't explain how a "guest" worker program stops the native born citizenry's voting control of the USA from being overwhelmed by immigrants and their kids who will continue to vote overwhelmingly Democrat.
Would he limit legal immigration so that our votes are not overwhelmed?
Does he propose a true guest worker program where they really are guests and they have to go home?
If they're "guests" as opposed to guests who actually have to go home, would he make them second class citizens who can never vote, so that our votes are not overwhelmed?
Would he abolish birthright citizenship so that our votes are not overwhelmed by the children of the guests or "guests"?
That's not what his website says.
