In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, former MEChA leader Antonio Villaraigosa informs us about the response to his recent involvement in the illegal immigration marches:

The letters and e-mails have been overwhelmingly negative, maybe 500 to 1, maybe a little more... But I think we're elected to do what's right, not necessarily what's popular.

Yes, but 500 to 1? Maybe - could it be true - AV is wrong?

The interview is one tiny little step more tough than interviews that might have been seen in past issues of Pravda, or, closer to home, Robert Hilburn interviewing Bruce Springsteen. Like this:

Q: Illegal immigrants place some burden on city services, whether it's fire or police or sewer or whatever. Is there any way to measure the cost that the city of Los Angeles pays to care for people who are here illegally, and is that a cost worth paying?

A: I don't know what the cost of providing services to the undocumented would be, but I do know this: The responsibility for those costs is the federal government's, and for more than a decade I have maintained that the federal government, which receives the Social Security and income taxes generated by these immigrants, should reimburse cities and counties for any expense incurred.

Needless to say, the LAT doesn't press that point. Civic leaders can't just pass the buck, especially when they make the situation even worse. Shortly after being elected alcalde, AV went to Mexico and implicitly promoted illegal immigration. He also came out against California border patrols.

He then avoids the LAT's question about the burden on the LAUSD, and then claims that he supports enforcement of our immigration laws:

A: For many years now, I have said that every country in the world has immigration laws, we have every right to have immigration laws, and, as a nation founded on the principle of the rule of law, it is our responsibility to enforce those laws and to have consequences when our laws are broken.

Finally, I've said that while we have every right to enforce our immigration laws, that in a great and good America founded on the backs of immigrants, we must enforce those laws in a humane and constitutional way.

His solution is not to enforce the current laws, but to change them to match the desires of those who support massive legal and illegal immigration by enacting something similar to Kennedy-McCain.

And, we already enforce our immigration laws in a "humane and constitutional" way. (Perhaps he's thinking of how he and Mexican president Zedillo helped block Prop. 187). Those who support illegal immigration - including Antonio Villaraigosa and the L.A. Times - are automatically supporting worker abuse, corruption, and all the other negatives that illegal immigration automatically includes.