The Clinton-linked Center for American Progress has issued a desperate cry for help: "Don't Abandon Comprehensive Immigration Reform".

Initially, you might be confused. Did the GOP write this? Or, did they write it for use by the GOP? Or, are the GOP and Democrat positions on immigration so similar that it's difficult to tell the difference?

I stopped reading it when they violated Godwin's law with this:

...there are certain crucial facts that tend to get lost in the shuffle when the discussion shifts to an enforcement uber alles approach

One shouldn't discount what they say just because of that, consider this instead:

Mass deportation of the undocumented population, advocated by Buchanan and others, even assuming 20 percent would leave voluntarily if such a policy was enacted, would cost at least $206 billion over a five-year period. [Goyle & Jaeger, "Deporting the Undocumented: A Cost Assessment," Center for American Progress, July 2005]

As discussed at the link, the CAP study is little more than a joke. Buchanan may hold that view, or they may be misrepresenting what he said.

But, most importantly, what of the 80%? Does CAP assume that all of those would be put on trains and sent back to Mexico and other countries? What if some of them resisted deportation? What percentage of the total number of illegal aliens would - perhaps heeding calls from Communist groups like ANSWER - decide to reclaim their supposed ancestral lands? Aren't there enough illegal aliens in enough metropolitan centers - and haven't Americans been cowed enough - that some of them would be able to hold parts of our cities? Would, for instance, Maywood, CA offer itself as a refuge for would-be deportees?

How exactly could the U.S. defend its own territory in such a case? All our military forces are far outnumbered by the foreign citizens who are here. If a large number of illegal aliens resisted deportation it would inevitably result in martial law and (literally) tanks in the streets.

CAP's response - if they were ever serious enough to provide one that addressed the actual issue - would probably be that such a scenario must be avoided at all costs. They would, in other words, have admitted that due to policies they've supported we've been invaded and we have no choice but to surrender.