(08-10-2018, 10:14 PM)jj82284 Wrote:

(08-10-2018, 07:56 PM)mikesez Wrote: I think that a lot of the voices wanting  punish illegal immigrants are the same voices that hire them and don't want to do e-Verify.  Obviously e-Verify is an imposition on the liberty of employers to hire whomever they want. It's not a purely libertarian idea.  Ideally, in my opinion, we would make it easier for people with skills that employers want to come and stay permanently if things work out.  But they should be doing it above board so that everyone knows the right amount of taxes was collected.  And no one gets benefits until they become a citizen.  
I think a lot of the reason we don't want surges of immigrants is because increasing the supply of labor depresses wages, but I think that effect is stronger for temporary immigrants and weaker for ones that want to stay.  The temporary stuff is what I'd like to see them do less of.  There are a lot of H1-B people working with computers on Jacksonville's southside and I don't think them coming and going without laying down roots, getting married, and buying houses does anyone any good.
I'd also want the children of immigrants to not be citizens unless they specifically apply to be citizens, but that might require amending the constitution.  Maybe it'd be as simple as saying, citizenship alone isn't enough for a kid to qualify for welfare; one parent has to be a citizen too.  But that sounds mean.

I'll take your word for it that "she said conservatives won't debate her about issues".  I hadn't heard that.  I don't know if she meant pundits or other candidates.  I don't know if she meant that she specifically should be in the debate or that someone should debate in her place.  But suppose she meant pundits and that she would personally debate them.  Fine.  It was a stupid thing for her to say in that case, because there's no way that she ever intended to stage a debate between herself and any pundit.  No candidate would.  It's equally stupid for them to call her out on it, and her replying with the sexual harassment angle was well-deserved.  Worst case, her mouth wrote a check she had no intent of cashing.  She might be guilty of braggadocio, but not cowardice or stupidity, not for this anyways.

The sexual harassment angle was deserved?  

And candidates give interviews all the time, which was part of Shapiro invitation.