It's a complex subject which I'll look at in depth someday. Today I'd simply like to quote The Economist on a totally different matter:
At bottom the argument between Arizona and its critics is political. The stated aim of 1070 is to reduce the number of illegal immigrants, mainly by enforcing federal laws which local politicians accuse the federal government of neglecting. Although Mr Obama is in fact deporting more illegals (a total of about 400,000 a year) than George Bush did, that cuts little ice in Arizona because people know his eventual hope (or at least the one he dangles in front of Hispanic voters) is to give illegals a pathway to citizenship, not kick out as many as possible. Mr Obama’s policy was also Mr Bush’s, and is probably the only humane way forward. But in Arizona “amnesty” has been turned into a dirty word. [my italics]Obama's administration is deporting 400,000, that's four hundred thousand illegal immigrants a year, and the Israelis are agonizing, correctly or not, about deporting fewer than one thousand. Interesting, isn't it.