Having observed his gaffe, let's talk about the bigger issue. Are nations entitled to control immigration, control who gets to join their citizenry? Some hold the view that any control of immigration is racism or bigotry. I disagree. I am of the opinion that controlling immigration is an inherent right of nations and has been so for centuries.
I believe it makes sense to favor the immigration of individuals who bring money, scarce skills or both. It likewise makes sense to favor the immigration of those whose native culture will be a good fit with the dominant culture of your nation. In short, favor the immigration of individuals who will be assets, not liabilities.
Allowing the immigration of poor, unskilled individuals just because they would be better off economically living in your nation than wherever they come from is irrationally self-destructive, particularly if their cultural values are antithetical to yours. It is smarter (and cheaper) to help them where they live than to bring them here and burden the social services and criminal justice systems with them.
Immigrant populations which routinely engage in honor killings, polygamy, female mutilation, theft or child molestation as aspects of their cultures, or reject education, are simply not good fits with developed nations. Excluding them as immigrants is logical. Admitting them as residents and subsequently using the criminal justice system to modify intolerable aspects of their behavior is not sensible.
