Back of the Envelope

I've been staying out of the immigration debate. I've said some stuff on it before, mostly to the tune that the worker visa isn't really a bad idea, but it's tricky to implement. And having absorbed more of the debate before, it's obvious that the enforcement side is really, really tough, and we do a terrible job of it. In other words, I'm torn between the two sides without any substantial investment in either, which makes me just dead tired of the debate and the amazing level of venom involved. I really think that Jonah Goldberg gets it right in his USA Today article:

Conservatives normally take great pride in the caliber of our intramural debates. But this is a shameful moment.

Oh, to be sure, there are racists, bigots, xenophobes and the like among the critics of immigration reform. Of this I am quite sure. I am also certain there are people who believe that the marketplace is the highest source of values, and the bottom line is the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong.
...
But you know what? Even if these are the overriding motives for all of the combatants in the debate over immigration reform, none of them is publicly using these arguments to justify his position. No one — of any consequence at least — is saying we need to keep the Mexicans out because they're racially inferior. No one is openly pushing amnesty as a vital first step toward the nullification of the U.S. Constitution.

Perhaps chief among the many problems with these sorts of accusations is that they help no one, advance nothing. Only those already convinced cheer the unsubstantiated charges of villainy. Indeed, crying racism to delegitimize an opponent's legitimate arguments is typically a left-wing tactic, and conservatives do not color themselves with glory by mimicking it.

So can we please calm down and discuss this more rationally, and without the name-calling?