Mexican Invasion
See other Mexican Invasion Articles
Title: Sarah Palin Takes Stand on Immigration, Palin Enters Immigration Debate, After Endorsing Arizona Illegal Immigration Law
Source:
abcnews
URL Source: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sara ... -arizona-law/story?id=10707136
Published: May 22, 2010
Author: By KRISTINA WONG
Post Date: 2010-05-22 16:20:34 by WhiteSands
Keywords: Palin, Arizona, SB1070
Views: 32862
Comments: 111
Sarah Palin had been heretofore fairly silent on the issue of immigration. This week for the first time, however, she has been outspoken, making at least five recent public statements on the issue and coming out in full support of Arizona's controversial new immigration law. She even encouraged other states to adopt similar laws. "I think every other state on the border should emulate what Arizona has done," she said on FOX News Wednesday night. "Jan Brewer, the governor of Arizona, has taken upon herself, her state government, to do what the feds should have been doing all along and say, 'No, we're going to secure this border.' "From there, then, once that is taken care of, we can deal with those who are here illegally and we can figure out all that immigration reform that needs to take place. Yes, other states should do what Arizona is doing," she said. She posted on her Facebook page Tuesday about immigration for the second time in a week. "Arizonans have the courage to do what the Obama administration has failed to do in its first year and a half in office, namely secure our border and enforce our federal laws," she wrote. "And as a result, Arizonans have been subjected to a campaign of baseless accusations by the same people who freely admit they haven't a clue about what they're actually campaigning against." A Palin spokesperson declined to comment for this story. The former Alaska governor sparked controversy Saturday with her comments at a campaign event for Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer. "Now this state has enacted a law -- it mirrors the federal law -- which allows police to ask those they otherwise have stopped to provide a driver's license or other verification of legal presence. I think for most American people the reaction to this would be, 'Why haven't the police already been doing that?'" Palin asked the crowd. She encouraged the Highland Park High School girls basketball team the week before to "go rogue" after school administrators canceled its participation in an Arizona tournament, citing safety concerns and the state's new immigration law. She later posted on Facebook: "These boycotts of Arizona will not help the state or lead to positive change. Economic and political boycotts of our nation's 48th state will hurt all Arizonans, including all members of the Hispanic community." Palin's back-to-back flurry of comments marked her public entry into an issue that had not previously been a prominent part of her conservative mix of issues, which included energy, fiscal conservatism and small government. "She had actually been fairly positive about immigration reform as a vice presidential candidate," said Frank Sharry, executive director of America's Voices, a liberal-leaning immigration reform group that immediately criticized Palin. "When she decided to embrace the Arizona show-me-your-papers law, we thought it justified criticizing her for embracing a law that institutionalized racial and ethnic discrimination," Sharry said. A Palin Change of Heart? As a vice-presidential candidate, Palin told Spanish-language television network Univision during an interview Oct. 26, 2008, "There is no way that in the U.S. we would roundup every illegal immigrant ... there are about 12 million of the illegal immigrants. ... Not only economically is that just an impossibility but that's not a humane way anyway to deal with the issue." Her GOP presidential running mate, Sen. John McCain, had taken a similar stance, arguing for a comprehensive immigration plan, a multi-faceted approach that includes border patrol, a crackdown on illegal hiring, legalizing immigrants already in the United States and creating a more flexible immigration system. The Arizona law and its more stringent provisions were not part of the national debate at the time. But Palin came out last Saturday in clear support of Arizona's new law, which would be the most robust in the nation in terms of targeting people suspected of being illegal immigrants. The law is set to take effect July 29, barring any successful legal challenges. Sharry said Palin's comments risk alienating Latino voters, the fastest-growing group of voters, from the Republican Party. Latino voter registration grew 54 percent and turnout grew 64 percent from 2000 to 2008, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Republican President George W. Bush and Republican political strategist Karl Rove had made inroads with Latinos in 2000 and 2004 in key states such as Florida, Sharry said, where Latino voters backed Bush over Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts by a 12 point margin in 2004. But, Sharry said, "The Republican party has now become branded among Latino immigrants as the 'party that hates us.'" According to a report by America's Voices, Latinos will make a difference in 42 races in 12 states in the upcoming 2010 mid-term gubernatorial, Senate and House races: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas and Virginia. "Someone like Sarah Palin or John McCain or Mitt Romney should stand up and say, 'Stop the madness, stop the political suicide,'" Sharry said. Alfonso Aguilar, executive director for the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles, said liberals were trying to use the Arizona law to unfairly attack Republicans, when it's really Democrats who have failed to act on immigration laws. "They know Latinos are mad at them [Democrats], so they're trying to use Arizona to drive a wedge, to say, 'You know what, Republicans don't like Latinos," Aguilar said. "Sadly, they know that the reason why we have the law in Arizona is because Barack Obama has not dealt with immigration as he said he would during the campaign. He has absolutely failed the Latino community." Aguilar said that although he doesn't support the law, reaction to it has been exaggerated. "I'm not a fan of Arizona law, but to say that the bill will lead to systematic and mass discrimination is an outright lie," he said. He added that attempts to pit Latinos against Republicans would backfire within the Latino community. "Latinos don't like to be treated in a condescending way," he said. "They're not going to respond to those tactics, and I think it's going to backfire."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
Why is Dr Ron Paul hiding on this issue?
----------------------------------------------------------- Juan McAmnesty endorses it too, I've heard.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
Why do you post a thread about Palin, and make your first comment about Paul? Obvious to anyone. You're starting an anti-Paul thread.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
Who cares? Tell us : What is Sarah wearing? WhiteSands posted on 2010-05-22 16:09:43 ET
You should start a facebook page: Badeye's wife and employee, or how I kept the "I'm not dependent on government" company afloat.
Making the world safe for United Fruit.
Palin needed a teleprompter to make her speech in AZ. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INZRT0-AWuY
Being a Republican means you get to choose your own reality.
Holy Cow!!! Two hot topics, Palin, and the AZ law, and this thread is only up to 6 posts!!!!! And even you don't want to bump it. No worries. I got ya covered. Here's a bump. Wouldn't want anyone to miss your anti-Paul screeching.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
Palin isn't a Harvard educated lawyer. Maybe that fookin idiot, Obama, isn't either? Sneakypete, have you ever been married? Said things you later regretted?
I think the so called 'political experts' in both parties make a big mistake viewing the Hispanic vote as being 'monolithic' as the black vote actually is. It isn't. And as such, you can 'buy it' as both sides seem to believe. As for where does Paul stand on this, there is plenty of time to see in the coming weeks and months. He just won the primary five days ago. As for the lack of posts, no big deal, its the weekend. some of us have lives off the internet. I' just waiting for the grass to dry out enough to get the yard work done, for example. Then an afternoon ride on the bike.
For approximately 72K, BP Oil bought Owe-bama. And as President, he let them Spill, Baby, Spill! Its documented.
I guess this means she was for illegal immigrants before she was against them. Nobody can say she isn't decisive. She makes up her mind as quickly as her RINO advisers tell her what to think,and doesn't waiver until it is politically expedient to do so.
"I adore John McCain, support him 100 percent and will do everything I can to support his reelection. As everyone knows, I was honored and proud to run with him. And Todd and I were with him in D.C. just a week ago." (Sarah Palin,Dec 2009) ************************************ DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Me) I don't know or F ing care. (Mad Dog posted on 2009-12-26 16:36:33 ET,post # 105 http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=5510&Disp=114#C114)
Her position is not inconsistent. One can believe the immigration laws should be enforced yet still think there should be a reasonable path to citizenship. Ask Lou Dobbs.
Hasn't she made a plug for Facebook yet? That seems to be her sole purpose here.
'Reasonable' is one of those easily malleable words .... a lot like 'comprehensive'. Ever since Lou Dobbs's wife was shot at he's a changed commentator.
Making the world safe for United Fruit.
Sneakypeter, you still seem to be carrying wood for Palin! Sneakypete, have you ever been married? Said things you later regretted?
Her position is not inconsistent. Yes,it is. Unless you consider being John McLunatic's personal parrot is being consistent. One can believe the immigration laws should be enforced yet still think there should be a reasonable path to citizenship. Close,but no cigar. My question to you is are you purposely muddying the water by making the absurd claim that illegal aliens should be put on any path other than one heading back across the border,or is it that you don't understand what the word "reasonable" means? There is nothing reasonable about rewarding somebody that broke out laws to come here by making them citizens. "REASONABLE" immigration is where we only allow people into the country who we think will become Americans and contribute to the greatness of America. We don't need any more stinking anchor babies! Ask Lou Dobbs.
"I adore John McCain, support him 100 percent and will do everything I can to support his reelection. As everyone knows, I was honored and proud to run with him. And Todd and I were with him in D.C. just a week ago." (Sarah Palin,Dec 2009) ************************************ DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Me) I don't know or F ing care. (Mad Dog posted on 2009-12-26 16:36:33 ET,post # 105 http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=5510&Disp=114#C114)
Scenario: A boy comes to the US illegally with his family when he is 15. He goes on to finish school here and works and pays taxes for 20 years. At that time, it is discovered he is not documented. Your position is that he should be sent back to a Country that he knows nothing because there is no possible position other than being a total hardass on the illegal immigrant issue?
And how is this MY problem? Seems to me he should take it up with his parents. Your position is that he should be sent back to a Country that he knows nothing because there is no possible position other than being a total hardass on the illegal immigrant issue? No,my position is he is here illegally,and we should treat him the same way we treat anybody else that is here illegally. Namely,we should deport his ass. And don't get all teary-eyed on my over him not knowing anything about Mexico. Chances are the SOB speaks better Spanish than he does English,anyhow. Let him take his ass back home and apply for a visa if he wants to come back. BTW,what do you think the response of the Mexican government would be to a American citizen in the same position as your mythical 15 year old? They would put him in prison and then deport him.
"I adore John McCain, support him 100 percent and will do everything I can to support his reelection. As everyone knows, I was honored and proud to run with him. And Todd and I were with him in D.C. just a week ago." (Sarah Palin,Dec 2009) ************************************ DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Me) I don't know or F ing care. (Mad Dog posted on 2009-12-26 16:36:33 ET,post # 105 http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=5510&Disp=114#C114)
You bet they would, and that would happen only if he lived long enough to be deported. My thinking is, if he was brought here at 15yrs of age, and he's been here for another 20yrs, then he shouldn't have a problem going back and applying for citizenship, I mean, surely he's assimulated enough to ace any test they give him? And I've heard whinning about the cost, BS! If they can pay some coyote $1500 to smuggle them, they can afford the cost of legal citizenship! jmo!
No,my position is he is here illegally,and we should treat him the same way we treat anybody else that is here illegally. Namely,we should deport his ass. Well, that's just peachy. He came illegally so just deport him because he got here illegally. Never mind that just about "crime" has a statute of limitations. No, just lump him in with all the genuine illegal criminals. Your rhetoric is just that. In fact, if you actually knew someone in the position I stated, I don't think you are such an asshole that you would recommend the position you stated.
You bet they would, and that would happen only if he lived long enough to be deported. So because the Mexican government is a bunch of assholes, we should be too? My thinking is, if he was brought here at 15yrs of age, and he's been here for another 20yrs, then he shouldn't have a problem going back and applying for citizenship, I mean, surely he's assimulated enough to ace any test they give him? It's not a matter of just passing a test. He'd have to obtain permanent residence first. Very difficult. The main reason folks talk about a path to citizenship is to get these folks in the system instead of manipulating it. I doubt most would even accept this so called amnesty because as it is, they can work under the table, declare just enough income to max out on EITC, and receive every form of welfare possible (TANF, WIC, food stamps, etc.).
He came illegally so just deport him because he got here illegally. Duhhhh! Never mind that just about "crime" has a statute of limitations. BullBarrack! Guess what,Buckwheat. He is COMMITTING A NEW CRIME EVERY DAY HE IS HERE ILLEGALLY. Even if it is it your understanding that the statute of limitations is a half-hour,1 atomic second after that half-hour expires,he or she just committed the same crime again. No, just lump him in with all the genuine illegal criminals. Why not? He IS a criminal.
"I adore John McCain, support him 100 percent and will do everything I can to support his reelection. As everyone knows, I was honored and proud to run with him. And Todd and I were with him in D.C. just a week ago." (Sarah Palin,Dec 2009) ************************************ DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Me) I don't know or F ing care. (Mad Dog posted on 2009-12-26 16:36:33 ET,post # 105 http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=5510&Disp=114#C114)
There are really two very distinct issues here: 1.) How do we stop new illegals from getting in? The answer isn't that hard -- build a wall and patrol it. The Great Wall of China was originally built between 500 BC and 1500 AD to keep various invaders out. Surely we can do the same thing today. 2.) How do we get rid of the illegals who are already here? This is the hard part. Most current solutions (GOP and DEM alike) would turn America into a POLICE STATE, with mandatory ID cards linked to your finger prints and DNA on file. F-THAT. Looking at the greater perspective, illegals are a far lesser evil than a police state. My view is that we need to build a wall, with armed guards along the way to keep new illegals out. Then we have to find a way to make the illegals who are already here whole. Since they came illegally, maybe they can only get permanent residence status, instead of citizenship -- so no voting ever. That would be their punishment for coming here illegally.
The crime would be that he crossed the border illegally. Living here is not a crime.
Yeah, it is. You're displaying your ignorance of immigration law.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
really? Display the code. Maybe i am.
Again? How's much distance have you covered on that hamster wheel you're running on? Send them back to the country where they are a citizen, thereby making the citizens of the United States, and those who came here legally "whole". That would be their REWARD for coming here illegally.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
Display the code. No. You go do your own homework.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
So, your view is that we shouldn't attempt to keep new illegals out, but we should try to expell those that are alreay here? It's backwards and retarded. Your "solution" will not solve anything, but it is a totalitarian's dream. All Heil.
Your reading comprehension sucks.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
Yes, it is a crime, a crime of 'trespassing' and 'theft'... We are a Sovereign nation, and nation of laws, and he would be old enough now to understand, he may not like it, but we have laws and we demand they be enforced. The time of foreign nations dictating to us what our laws 'should be'...IS OVER!
I noticed you neglected to answer these: Get back to me when you've got an answer for these.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
No, your ability to write an English language sentence sucks. For example: How's much distance have you covered on that hamster wheel you're running on? What the hell does that mean??? NOTHING.
You are the one that needs to learn how to read. I made two points: A.) I will not go along with turning this country into a POLICE STATE. B.) I propose a pragmatic approach. After the wall is built, the people who are here illegally can get permanent residency (because we don’t want to turn this country into a police state) but as a punishment they will never be allowed citizenship and voting rights.
You STILL haven't answered this: Second time you've ducked it.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
The fact your IQ limits you from understanding it is not my fault. Others will understand.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
You are for comprehensive reform. You would screw the citizens of this country, and those who came here legally to be Americans. Fuck off.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
You are for comprehensive reform. Yes, I want to solve the issue. Fuck off. Merry Christmas.
(jwpegler)Yes Then here is your answer: Fuck off. No more debate. No more spin. No more back and forth. You want comprehensive reform? Fuck off.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
(WC)You would screw the citizens of this country, and those who came here legally to be Americans? (jwpegler) Yes.
(sneakypete)DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Mad Dog's reply) I don't know or F ing care.
We Are Not A 'Police State' If We Enforce Our Immigration Laws, and you just feed that lie every time you repeat it. This 'Police State' you other's fear so much happens ONLY when you give up your STATES RIGHTS and hand them over to the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. NO SIR! We DO NOT need REFORM in any shape or form, we need to ENFORCE the laws we already have...we don't need more laws or the FEDS dictating what laws can be enforced and what laws we should IGNORE! JMHO! Watch this short video, and if you have any SHAME at all as a natural born citizen, Bow your head!
Comments (41 - 111) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Toss: ADL,CAIR and the Vatican into the pit they belong in.
#2. To: WhiteSands (#0)
Sarah Palin Takes Stand on Immigration, ... After Endorsing Arizona Illegal Immigration Law
#3. To: WhiteSands (#1)
Why is Dr Ron Paul hiding on this issue?
#4. To: WhiteSands (#0)
#5. To: WhiteSands (#1)
Why is Dr Ron Paul hiding on this issue?
#6. To: WhiteSands (#0)
#7. To: WhiteSands (#0)
#8. To: go65, WhiteSands (#6)
Palin needed a teleprompter to make her speech in AZ.
#9. To: WhiteSands (#0)
#10. To: WhiteSands (#0)
This week for the first time, however, she has been outspoken, making at least five recent public statements on the issue and coming out in full support of Arizona's controversial new immigration law.
#11. To: sneakypete (#10)
#12. To: Wood_Chopper (#7)
Holy Cow!!! Two hot topics, Palin, and the AZ law, and this thread is only up to 6 posts!!!!!
#13. To: no gnu taxes (#11)
(Edited)
Her position is not inconsistent. One can believe the immigration laws should be enforced yet still think there should be a reasonable path to citizenship
#14. To: sneakypete (#10)
Nobody can say she isn't decisive. She makes up her mind as quickly as her RINO advisers tell her what to think,
#15. To: no gnu taxes (#11)
#16. To: sneakypete (#15)
. My question to you is are you purposely muddying the water by making the absurd claim that illegal aliens should be put on any path other than one heading back across the border
#17. To: no gnu taxes (#16)
Scenario: A boy comes to the US illegally with his family when he is 15. He goes on to finish school here and works and pays taxes for 20 years. At that time, it is discovered he is not documented.
#18. To: sneakypete, no gnu taxes (#17)
(Edited)
BTW,what do you think the response of the Mexican government would be to a American citizen in the same position as your mythical 15 year old? They would put him in prison and then deport him.
#19. To: sneakypete (#17)
Your position is that he should be sent back to a Country that he knows nothing because there is no possible position other than being a total hardass on the illegal immigrant issue?
#20. To: Murron (#18)
BTW,what do you think the response of the Mexican government would be to a American citizen in the same position as your mythical 15 year old? They would put him in prison and then deport him.
#21. To: no gnu taxes (#19)
#22. To: WhiteSands (#0)
#23. To: sneakypete (#21)
#24. To: no gnu taxes (#23)
Living here is not a crime.
#25. To: Wood_Chopper (#24)
#26. To: jwpegler (#22)
My view is that we need to build a wall, with armed guards along the way to keep new illegals out.
Then we have to find a way to make the illegals who are already here whole.
Since they came illegally, maybe they can only get permanent residence status ...That would be their punishment for coming here illegally.
#27. To: no gnu taxes (#25)
really?
#28. To: Wood_Chopper (#26)
(Edited)
How's much distance have you covered on that hamster wheel you're running on? Send them back to the country where they are a citizen,
#29. To: jwpegler (#28)
So, your view is that we shouldn't attempt to keep new illegals out, but we should try to expell those that are alreay here?
#30. To: no gnu taxes (#23)
Living here is not a crime.
#31. To: jwpegler (#28)
Send them back to the country where they are a citizen, thereby making the citizens of the United States, and those who came here legally "whole".
That would be their REWARD for coming here illegally.
#32. To: Wood_Chopper (#29)
Your reading comprehension sucks.
#33. To: Wood_Chopper (#31)
That would be their REWARD for coming here illegally.
#34. To: jwpegler (#33)
Send them back to the country where they are a citizen, thereby making the citizens of the United States, and those who came here legally "whole".
#35. To: jwpegler (#32)
(Edited)
No, your ability to write an English language sentence sucks...What the hell does that mean??? NOTHING.
#36. To: jwpegler (#33)
(Edited)
#37. To: Wood_Chopper (#36)
(Edited)
#38. To: jwpegler (#37)
(WC)You are for comprehensive reform.
#39. To: All, (#36)
(Edited)
#40. To: jwpegler, ALL (#33)
(Edited)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]