<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[What Should They Be Called?&nbsp;Ctd]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[
<p>Ezra Klein&#39;s <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/10/illegal_immigrants.html" target="_self">two cents</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The people who need to be convinced of comprehensive immigration reform &#8212; which must include a path to legal status for illegal immigrants &#8212; are angry about illegal immigration. Trying to <a href="http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/10/what-should-they-be-called.html" target="_self">paper over</a> that won&#39;t help, and might actually hurt.</p>
<p>Better to confront it directly: Yes, there&#39;s illegal immigration, and yes, illegal immigrants should have to pay fees and learn English, but no, it&#39;s not good for American workers or the American economy to have 12 million illegal immigrants living in the shadows, and no, deporting 12 million people is not a realistic option. Put differently, there are two fundamental facts here: Yes, there are illegal immigrants, and yes, we need to find a way to make them legal residents.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I think that&#39;s the right balance. But it&#39;s far too sane and pragmatic a proposal to appeal to today&#39;s Republicans.</p>
]]></html></oembed>