Just recently I've complained about the presidential "debates" not featuring any questions or any real questions about immigration matters.

Now, just as I revised my opinion of the MSM, I must revise that after reading the transcript of yesterday's Democratic debate put on by AFL-CIO. Yes, the debate featured only one question about immigration and the question and the answer were the only parts of the entire debate with any instance of "illegal alien", "undocumented", or "immigr*", but that's made up for by the sheer toughness of the question that the AFL-CIO moderators allowed to be asked (those of you who are prone to having Soviet Union flashbacks may want to look away):

JORGE MULASANO (hotel worker): I’m from Argentina, and six months ago I proudly became citizen of this great country. (Applause.)

My concern is for those undocumented workers that established roots here. And my question would be, in your future, if you’re going to create a path to the citizenship for those workers.

MR. OLBERMANN: Congratulations, Mr. Mulasano.

Senator?

Now, that's a tough question; historians may remember that when a similarly tough question was asked during the 19th Plenary Soviet, Igor Blotchnik - acting in the same role as Keith Olbermann - was almost banished to the gulags for even acknowledging it.

Needless to say, Obama responded to this question by supporting enforcing our current laws in order to encourage many current illegal aliens to leave and many fewer to come here in the future. He said we needed to do that for the best of the U.S., as unpopular as it may be in certain quarters. He then went on to disclose that "path to citizenship" is just a euphemism for amnesty and that "back of the line" is a sham as well: illegal aliens will get to remain here and will at the very least disrupt the line if not cutting in front of others depending on the specifics of (what he called) a "scam".

Wait, who am I kidding? He simply responded to that question with his standard blather, and I'll bet if you did a search you'd find him saying something almost word-for-word identical with what he told the union audience.