Gloom: Sarah Palin supports amnesty for current illegals…..
In the form of a “Path to Citizenship”….. sigh…..
From the O Reilly Factor July 9, 2010..
PALIN: We’re not going to give them a free pass.
O’REILLY: So you make them register with the federal government.
PALIN: We’re not going to reward the bad behavior.
O’REILLY: And if they don’t register with the — say you gave them 60 days to register with the federal government. There’s a form at the post office they have to send in like a Census form. All right, say they didn’t do it.
PALIN: You deport them.
O’REILLY: OK.
PALIN: You have to get them out.
O’REILLY: So the ones that don’t…
PALIN: We don’t reward their continued bad behavior.
O’REILLY: …after period of time. OK, after a period of time…
PALIN: Yes.
O’REILLY: …the ones that don’t cooperate, you catch them, they’re gone.
PALIN: Right.
O’REILLY: Now, you have these people that register. You’re going to have millions of them. Then they register and they say, OK, we obeyed what President Palin told us to do. Then what? Do you give them green cards to work right away? What do you do with them?
PALIN: You know, there has to be that expectation that they will work and that they will contribute. Bill, it makes me uncomfortable that we’re even going down that path so far…
O’REILLY: You have to though.
PALIN: …when — no, no.
O’REILLY: You have to go down the path because it’s going to come up.
PALIN: American citizens who are here lawfully, they need to be the ones with the first shot at getting these jobs. We cannot make it easy on those who have chosen to be illegally here to disobey our laws. No.
O’REILLY: No, we can’t make it easy, but they’re here. And we can’t starve them to death. And if they can’t work, if they don’t have a green card to work, they’re going to be hosed. I mean, they got to pay rent, they got to buy groceries…
PALIN: Well…
O’REILLY: …this, that and the other thing. So this is where it gets very complicated, governor. You know, it gets very, very complicated…
PALIN: No.
O’REILLY: …because you are rewarding bad behavior. You’re letting them stay in the United States. And they came in illegally.
PALIN: Then let’s keep it — then we won’t complicate it anymore. Let’s keep it simple. And let’s say no, if you are here illegally, and if you don’t follow the steps that at some point through immigration reform we’re going to be able to provide, and that is to somehow allow to you work. If you’re not going to do that, then you will be deported. You will be gone.
That’s righty hero Sarah Palin coming out for a path to citizenship for current illegals, which would turn FL, NC, and VA permanently blue. Texas too. Goodbye, conservatism….
This is what I mean when I glumly state that the right in America is not ready to save us. They are clueless in fact.
[1]
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Sarah Palin, Rino….
She’s got all the code words and hidden loopholes McCain does, if you watch closely for them.
As far as I am concerned, it is fair to say that Sarah Palin supports amnesty, because I consider a path to citizenship the same as amnesty. The illegals want legal permanent residence, and she is offering it.
Amnesty.
What a sad state of affairs.
Sarah Palin is fine with amnesty, fine with 335 Evs for the Democrats, and has no more idea how to save this country than Hillary Clinton.
None.
Now, let’s have some excuses! Let the excuses begin!!!!! I bet I know what the first 3 excuses will be…….
[2]
In fact, she does not say “path to citizenship”, but the reality is, if you let them stay and work, if you give them legal status, they will eventually be given citizenship, and to pretend otherwise is well, naive.
So that deals with excuse #1….
[3]
Oh please, RWY, I saw that interview and Ted Baxter was trying to get her to talk about what she would do and she clearly did not want amnesty. She also was expecting to talk about border security……not her long term plans. You set the bar pretty high and you can read her mind too. Good grief, let’s throw Sarah under the bus. Great.
[4]
Those who worship everything Palin are really no better than the Obots who worship their messiah.
I’m actually amazes she’s been able to dodge such questioning for so long now. I guess questions about Bristol and Levi are of a higher priority.
[5]
I think you’re just looking for some Friday night fun stirring the pot. I have to go to a Church Social soon so others will have to entertain you. Have fun, buddy. Just make sure and get Marco elected, OK? If he loses it’s your fault.
[6]
The piece that is confusing to me — to what end does having an illegal ‘register’ do you? If they don’t we deport them? Well excuse me but we could deport them now. So why spend the effort on registration? Bureacratic ease? Snort. Don’t kid yourself. I would hazard to say the IRS probably has most of them already in their databases under an alias.
Very disappointing. If the Feds did what AZ wanted to do, a good percentage of the illegals would selfdeport. Seal the border, get tough, deport at every opportunity. You want to appeal you situation? Fine, we will set up counslar courts in their home countries. They can appeal there.
[7]
Those who worship everything Palin are really no better than the Obots who worship their messiah.
Oh, I get it. If you defend Palin you worship her. That’s a nice way to set up an honest discussion, eh? That is a left wing tactic. You’re better than that, mpt. Be specific.
Anyway, like I said, have fun tonight guys. See ya’.
[8]
When polls are done dealing with illegals, there is overwhelming support for no CIR.
However, when the question is phrased something like, “Would you be in favor of giving an opportunity for citizenship if the person has been in this country a long time, is gainfully employed with no criminal record?” Asked in those terms around 7 in 10 approve of allowing these people a so-called “path to citizenship.”
Palin’s answers just show the complexity of the problem, and that she is viewing it more broadly than just black and white terms.
So, you can “gloom” all you want to. But, whatever solution is eventually worked out, it will probably be one that won’t go as far as some of you are demanding.
I continue to think, in my RINO fashion, that if the border were competently sealed, employment monitored so there could be no hires without proper documentation (employer sanctions and fines), all criminals deported, and social services denied to non-documented people, you would see much of the problem dissipate on it’s own, where people would actively seek legitimate citizenship or simply leave and go back home. Basically this would be acknowledging and enforcing current laws…like AZ was attempting to do. I also think that the majority of the racial problems experienced here — gangs, leeching off entitlement programs, etc. — are from the latino riffraff, and these should be ones that should leave first!
[9]
Look, you can all reach whatever conclusion you want. You can excuse it, or not excuse it, it’s a free country.
What you cannot say, at least with any credibility, is that she does not support amnesty, she clearly does.
I don’t like O’ Rielly, but he has exposed her in a very honest and open fashion: He asked her questions, pinned her down, did not let her wiggle and penetrated her code words and whining.
He got the truth out of her, and the truth is she supports amnesty.
[10]
See my comments in the weekly Price of Freedom article….
We have too many R politico types still gaming for personal political ambition….
They agree to crap like this to be “reasonable” so that the leftist media types wont shred them (which they will anyways in an election against a true lefty)….
The leftist politicans know exactly what they want – slavery and perpetual power thru unlimited government and crap like this plays exactly into their hands since it essentially agree with the leftist premise that their is no real rule of law and that there is NO LIMITS in the power of the state over you
[11]
Why do criminals (ie illegal aliens) need a path to anything but deportation and/or jail?
What is so freakin’ “complex” about that?
you dont reward criminal behavior….period
[12]
I continue to think, in my RINO fashion, that if the border were competently sealed, employment monitored so there could be no hires without proper documentation (employer sanctions and fines), all criminals deported, and social services denied to non-documented people, you would see much of the problem dissipate on it’s own, where people would actively seek legitimate citizenship or simply leave and go back home.
That’s not a RINO position, that’s my position, and there is no need to offer a path to citizenship. That’s my whole point.
OOPS
*****************************************
where people would actively seek legitimate citizenship
Jan, is that what you support? You support a path to citizenship for current illegals? If so, then you are not interested in any sort of political victory for conservatives at all, because under such conditions it would be impossible.
So tell us, are you a supporter of path to citizenship, (which is clearly amnesty) or not? Once and for all, tell us clearly.
*****************************************
All this enforcement can be done, without sinking the country. And Sarah should be smart enough to know that, and she could have said that, but she of her own free will chose not to, and started in with her amnesty talk.
Asked in those terms around 7 in 10 approve of allowing these people a so-called “path to citizenship.”
And that is what would destroy our country, and that is why we are completely screwed, because the American people do not have enough common sense to come in out of the rain.
There is some evidence to support that Americans want enforcement without a path, if you ask the question in other ways. So the Jury’s still out on that….
Palin’s answers just show the complexity of the problem, and that she is viewing it more broadly than just black and white terms.
This is where you are wrong. It IS a black and white issue, you either offer a path to citizenship or you don’t, you either invite 40 blue states or you oppose it.
We cannot have this both ways anymore. We must decide one way or the other, that is the whole point Jan, and Sarah Palin has decided, and she has made the wrong decision.
We need someone else.
So, you can “gloom” all you want to. But, whatever solution is eventually worked out, it will probably be one that won’t go as far as some of you are demanding.
Yes. But as I’ve said many times before, it does not matter who gets what percentage of what they want. What matters is whether America remains a Free Republic. If path to citizenship goes thru, it will not remain so, so each person must decide for themselves whether they will cling to their political correctness and watch America disappear, or whether they will drop the PC pose and fight for their country.
No hiding, no excuses, no rationalizing, nowhere left to run and put your hands over your eyes.
O Reilly did the country a favor: He made Sarah Palin answer straight up, and she of her own free will came up with “immigration reform”…
Sorry Sarah. I am sorry you did that.
[13]
Oh, I get it. If you defend Palin you worship her. That’s a nice way to set up an honest discussion, eh? That is a left wing tactic. You’re better than that, mpt
Wait. Let’s focus on Sarah Palin’s words, and nothing else. No one forced her to say we had to offer immigration reform.
She came up with that one all by herself.
[14]
Very disappointing. If the Feds did what AZ wanted to do, a good percentage of the illegals would selfdeport.
Exactly right. Do the enforcement gently over time, and offer nothing else. No path to citizenship, just a gradual tightening.
There is no need to do what Sarah suggests. This is typical of all amnesty supporters, they invent solution that goes the wrong direction, they insist on solving a problem with amnesty, that would solve itself without it.
And they know that.
[15]
Either we are a Nation that believes in the rule of law or we don’t.
Every time we change the rules we undermine the rule of law and that we are a nation of laws. When we say it is too difficult or it is impossible, we are coping out. In essence we are saying laws don’t matter. Why have borders, why enforce any laws, as it is too difficult to enforce.
Laws are for people who will follow the rule of law. We have people in this country that don’t believe in the rule of law because it is too difficult or it does not apply to them. Laws only matter for those who are willing to follow.
In the past we enforced our laws on immigration. Reagan came along and was promised certain things for amnesty. The democrats later said it cost too much, it was too hard, we could not do it. Thousands of excuses but very few willing to uphold the law.
Which laws are next that we just don’t have the fortitude to uphold – drugs, prostitution, gambling, child sex, etc. Where does it end.
It ends in one place, the loss of your nation.
No nation has lasted the test of time. Nations rise and nations fall.
Will you do what is necessary to preserve it for your children and grandchildren. Or will you allow decay to set in to setup the eventual demise of this once great nation.
The choice is yours, you can continue to drink and party as nothing is going on or you can take up your position to repel those who mean harm. For me, I will continue to man the walls until the horde over runs my position.
[16]
So the question is this:
Can we afford to support Palin, hoping that with a GOP house and Senate, she can be pushed into doing the right thing and signing off on enforcement, while holding off on amnesty, and letting the illegals leave?
Or will she take the Bush route, and go with the Senate, become corrupt like Bush did, refuse to enforce the border laws, and hold enforcement hostage to amnesty like Bush did, and like Obama is doing now?
It’s an important question, and she better answer it…..
[17]
So, you can “gloom” all you want to. But, whatever solution is eventually worked out, it will probably be one that won’t go as far as some of you are demanding.
One of the things that really irritates me about you Jan, is that you seem to love compromise with leftist ideology more than adherence to the law, and you seem to love the illegals more than you love Americans, and you seem to take great delight in informing conservatives and border hawks they will never get what they want.
Is that what you’d condescendingly sneer to the hundreds of thousands of victims of violent criminal behavior by illegals? Is that what you’d so arrogantly sneer to the 17% unemployed who need to feed their families?
That they can’t get what they want?
That’s not very thoughtful, Jan, nor, may I add, very patriotic. It’s not for me to wish ill on people, but perhaps you should direct your tender mercies to Americans and not illegals. God know there are enough of them who need it.
[18]
RWY, Old Friend. I saw that interview and it was horrible. O’rielly would not let her talk about securing the border. She has stood firmly with Governor Brewer and will continue to do so. I have heard her say on many occasions that once the border is secure, we will consider what has to be done.
SECURE THE DAMN BORDER.
[19]
If you watched the BOR interview, and I doubt that you did, you would realize it was ambush journalism at its worst. BOR asks Palin a complicated question and interrupts her every time she started to answer. Then he followed up with two “analysts” that were sure to be critical (a liberal woman and Dana Perino, who represents the Ruling Class of the GOP). BOR is hardly a fan of Palin as (in his mind) she threatens his “star” status at FNC.
Jan Brewer is fighting to defend Arizona and Sarah Palin has supported her since day one, when she could have just as easily have sat it out like every other potential 2012 candidate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7Kj8jgkcrg
Brewer and Palin are actually trying to do something. Yahoo, what have you done other than b!tch, whine and cry?
[20]
Agree……
Palin needs to hone her interviewing skills.
O’Reilly engages in ambush journalism.
Palin, like everyone else, is looking for a workable solution. She obviously hasn’t found it yet.
In my view, the answers involve a secure border, a limited number of legal immigrants, and assimilation.
As to those who are currently here,
No documentation means no job, no free health care, education, food stamps, or anything else.
Most will self-deport and find themselves on the other side of the secure border.
[21]
Don’t watch BOR.
But this is where Sarah HAS to get better on her interviews. She needs to be more forceful, make her statements and not get side tracked. It makes her look weak and not secured in what she believes.
She should tell BOR, wait a minute and let me tell you what I believe. Point 1, boom, boom, boom. Point 2, boom, boom, boom. Point 3, etc. And if BOR goes off, say hey wait a minute, you want me to stated a point on that question you asked, let me tell you. If you are going to jump around from question to question without me giving adequate answer, then you are not making any sense to the folks.
Someone should tell Ted Baxter, that lets go slow so that folks get it and you can get it since multi tasking seems to be beyond you. I want to go point by point so that folks are clear where I stand.
Problem with BOR is that he thinks he is one of the Ruling Class looking out for the little people (better known as the folks).
[22]
I put this whole statement in blockquotes because it expresses a generalized plan to our immigration problems very well. Palin, like so many people, are looking for a plan that is workable. Nothing is perfect,though, as someone will find fault with most ideas people offer. They will either be too soft or too extreme, depending on the side a person supports.
[23]
One of the things that really irritates me about you Jan, is that you seem to love compromise with leftist ideology more than adherence to the law, and you seem to love the illegals more than you love Americans, and you seem to take great delight in informing conservatives and border hawks they will never get what they want. —> rwy
My POV is not ideology, it is just how I look at things. I have nothing against latinos as a people. Being here illegally, though, is a burden to our country, and this is what I am focusing on. Productive people I have no problem with. It is those who want something for nothing, and who are here illegally, who I want to escort out of here.
The ones with families, jobs, property, links, who pay taxes and SS, those are the ones who are worth looking at “creatively,” and getting on board with documentation and some encouragement for citizenship in this country.
[24]
Palin needs to be blunt and put BOR in his place- “Bill, will you please stop interrupting?” “Bill, if you’re not going to let me answer, why are you even asking the question?”
There’s a thread on newsbusters.org about Rick Sanchez today. Sanchez interviewing an AZ state legilator said, “What is your beef with illegal immigration?” The legislator should have said, “What part of illegal don’t you understand? You sure have your Ron Burgundy moments, don’t you?”
[25]
Guys, this is not ambush journalism at all.
Nobody made Palin say immigration reform, nobody made her say the quotes I bolded.
The ones with families, jobs, property, links, who pay taxes and SS, those are the ones who are worth looking at “creatively,” and getting on board with documentation and some encouragement for citizenship in this country.
Ok, you support amnesty then, that explains a lot.
Yahoo, what have you done other than b!tch, whine and cry?
This is what happens to you when you think with your sack, and not your brain, old friend. I won’t hold the sour grapes against you.
[26]
I put this whole statement in blockquotes because it expresses a generalized plan to our immigration problems very well. Palin, like so many people, are looking for a plan that is workable.
Endless streams of PC horsecrap.
There is a solution that is already workable, with all the legal framework and infrastruture in place.
Enforcing current laws. Thats what works, and what keeps Americans safe.
Jan, you are really going downhill.
[27]
I don’t like Bill O Reilly either, I can’t stand him. Yes he wanted Palin to come out for amnesty. Yes he is a spineless bloviator.
The fact remains:
Palin said she supports immigration reform with a defacto path to citizenship, and the fact remains that is amnesty, and will usher in 50 years of socialism, and makes the whole 2010 election a moot point if it happens.
Yes, my point is valid, that the right has NO IDEA what to do to save the nation any more than the left does, and they are all cowards and prisoners of PC.
And yes, we have amnesty supporters on this blog.
[28]
In your world rwy, amnesty is anything other than deportation. One doesn’t take a look at individual circumstances, you just round up everyone, criminals, good people, working people, lazy worthless ones, and dump them all into one big truck south of the border.
[29]
rwy
Some issues we agree on and others you are way too extreme on, IMO. Immigration is something that we simply go round and round on. If you were President, and had your say, I really do believe that you would alienate far more people than you would attract.
[30]
No Jan, lying does not become you.
I would enforce the law as my sworn duty, I would send back the illegals, like every other country on earth does.
Legals are welcome and we can have a debate about how many we should let it each year.
Jan, you have been very kind and sweet in the past, and I apologize but I am really getting fed up with you.
You don’t get to say you love America when you spit on the laws, you don’t get to sit up on your white horse when you think the laws that protect Americans can be ignored in favor of your group hug nonsense.
You are part of the problem, honey, look at what your policy has done to your state.
Just look at it.
[31]
Jan, you just dont get it, and you never will. So be it, I wash my hands…..
[32]
rwy
My personal viewpoint is very different from the state of CA. But, I also choose to differentiate from productive v unproductive, from users v givers. Enforcing the laws already available to us, plus looking humanely at cases which merit such consideration, would vastly improve our illegal immigration problems —> period.
There is no absolute answer for everyone!
[33]
Let the record show that Sarah Palin is for immigration reform and a thinly disguised path to citizenhship, by her own words.
Let the record reflect that in the middle of a depression with 17% unemployment, sinking wealth and massive debt, she is for adding millions of illegals to the worker rolls to compete with poor Americans who are increasingly desperate for their jobs.
Let the record reflect that she loves the conventional beltway immigration viewpoint far more than she loves the hardbitten American families who are out of work.
Let the record reflect that she cares for the Presidential oath of office not one bit more than Bush did.
Let the record reflect that Sarah Palin’s position on amnesty is very similar to McCain’s.
Let the record reflect that her supporters (See the hotair thread) lie about it, attack those who point it out, and misrepresent her position.
Let the record reflect that most R voters have no idea about any of this and think she will save us all. And when you point it out to them, they shrug, as they did when they nominated McCain, which led directly to the current state of affairs.
And they call themselves patriots. I can think of a word that ends in iot, that is a better description.
Sarah, can I have a refund on my copy of going Rogue? I think I am done with you, dearie.
[34]
i truly do NOT know why this is such a tough question for ANY politician worth a damn to answer.
it doesn’t matter if you, as a politician, think ANYONE should ever have a “path to citizenship” or not.
ALL Palin had to say was: “The entire question of ‘Immigration Reform’ is MOOT until and unless the border is secure. Period. Otherwise no matter what we do, we will have an identical problem 15 years from now. So after the border is secure…THEN I will determine how to deal with those whow remain within our borders illegally”
problem solved.
[35]
Not at all. You can’t make this stuff up as you go along because you want to.
The law tells her precisely how to deal with them, and as POTUS it is her sworn duty to “see that the laws are faithfully executed…” Article 1.
She is not only ignorant of her duty, but also disdainful of the suffering of America’s unemployed.
There is only one way to deal with current illegals, and not see Texas, FL, NC, and VA flip to blue.
And once that happens, good luck winning elections.
The constitution is not a suicide pact. But the Republican party is getting there…
All Palin had to say was “immigration reform is out of the question.”
[36]
If there is any politician who can be brought to understand the ultimate consequences of “path to citizenship” it is probably Palin. I would not surprised to see here “evolve” here views over time as she comes to realize that it will be a big disconnect between her and many potential supporters. However, to me, it is still more than a bit disconcerting that she was maneuvered pretty easily by BOR into espousing what sounds suspiciously close to a “path to citizenship” stance.
She, along with any other potential ‘12 GOP candidates need to put their cards on the table with regards to illegal immigration. Seems like too many politicians, R and D alike, seem to get away playing both sides of the issue without ever really stating where the stand. Pisses me off to no end and I hate to see Palin appear to play the same game.
[37]
Justrand, if you saw the interview you would know that, in effect, that is just what Palin said.
It is easy to say what someone should have said three weeks after the fact. I am really disappointed in you. Somehow I think Palin is a better hope for this country than RWY, and all his lapdogs.
[38]
What is amazing to me is that the lesson of CA is right there in front of God and everyone, and yet people still don’t get it.
More than anyone else, people from CA should be saying “Reagan did this, Reagan’s amnesty turned CA blue and we are no longer a functioning state.
“Don’t do this to your state. Don’t be like us.”
But they don’t. They prattle mildly about how we have to fair to ILLEGAL ALIENS. American families? Jobs? What’s that all about?
It really bends your mind if you let it.
[39]
What is amazing to me is that the lesson of CA is right there in front of God and everyone
So sad. So true.
[40]
The point is Bruce, that a path to citizenship wrecks the country and makes the Dems the dominant political party for the future.
And Sarah just endorsed it.
You can say whatever you want about me, I could give a damn.
Some people are fools because they are not keen enough to figure it out. Some are fools because they desperately want to be fooled.
Don’t be a fool.
I was a fool for Bush, and for the R party for 22 years. No one can claim more loyalty to the Rs than I.
I was on the phone at a Bush phone bank in 2000, for 10 nights before the election, calling people until 10pm. In a state Bush won by 537 votes.
Look how he repaid us.
Bruce I know how you reacted when I told the truth about Tony Snow, how offended you and everyone here was when I repeated his words.
I guess you have a vision of the R party that will not go away. Well you are entitled to see what you choose to see.
My eyes are open now, that’s all I’m saying. If you don’t like me reprinting Sarah’s words, and taking them for their plain meaning, then I’m sorry.
[41]
There is no absolute answer for everyone! SOS
[42]
This is not a change she said a similar muddled remark in 2008. I really don’t get act of surprise here?
[43]
Bruce, my comment was not specifically about what Palin should have said…although she was the latest to fall for this particular interview trap and so I used her name (hey the thread is directed at her). The “trap” is ever allowing the conversation to focus on the 20+ million illegals HERE, versus the 20+ million MORE illegals that will wind up here soon if we don’t secure our borders.
and no, being on vacation, and having just got home for the evening, i didn’t get to watch the interview…just read the posted transcript.
I DO understand that SOME resolution needs to be found for the 20+ million that are allready here…and Palin and all politicians need to express mindfulness of that. My suggested comebck for her, et al, would work just fine…so here it is again [slightly amended...i'm more wake now]:
“The entire question of ‘Immigration Reform’ is MOOT until and unless the border is secure. Period. Otherwise no matter what we do, we will have an identical problem 15 years from now. So after we truly begin to secure our borders, and remove all incentives to hire illegals aliens in the first place…THEN I will determine whether any of those who remain within our borders illegally EVER deserve a chance to join our nation”
it doesn’t slam the door…but it makes it clear that that is the ultimate intent
[44]
but unlike “some” here…and elsewhere…I am not giving up on Palin, i just wish she would be more ready with better ways to re-direct the interview.
If you want to vote only for people you agree with 100% then you’re gonna have to run for office!
[45]
I don’t think she’s a RINO, but if she is then she’s a hot RINO. Sorry to be shallow when the future of our nation and our way of life is on the line, but she still does it for me.
[46]
That’s what I mean. We have amnesty supporters here at BJG.
That’s what I mean when I say the right is not prepared to save the country, nor is it even really conservative.
The current laws resolve what happens to current illegals just fine. What is this talk of a “resolution” (lol, amnesty) that must be found for them? liberalism…
THEN I will determine whether any of those who remain within our borders illegally EVER deserve a chance to join our nation”
You don’t get to determine that, the law does. Your job as POTUS is to enforce the law, you don’t want to do it, don’t take the job. Unless you’re going to do has Obama wants and start issuing executive amnesties.
Nice.
The country is screwed.
I have always had a sneaking suspicion that many of the posters here are not really serious conservatives and do understand the way out of the mess we are in even as we go under.
So, I consider it my job to push people to make up their minds one way or the other about these issues, and stop hiding behind slogans and platitudes.
And it reveals very interesting things, doesn’t it?
The R party is not conservative, that we know. Now, we are finding out the “conservative wing” of the GOP is happy to propose amnesty. Hey Reagan did it right? And iut worked out so wonderfully for CA. The “inner libertarian” in Reagan wanted amnesty, yes? And now look, all the libertarians who want small gov, have a fat chance of getting in in CA right? lol. Yet Nick Gillespie is over at Reason Mag, shilling for more open borders.
Done. We are done.
For the record, we have amnesty supporters at BJG. Several.
[47]
“If you want to vote only for people you agree with 100% then you’re gonna have to run for office!”
That wouldn’t work for me because I often disagree with myself.
[48]
That’s what I mean. We have amnesty supporters here at BJG.
In the above poster’s POV, amnesty is like a closed vault. Any aberation from his tightly woven definition throws another automatically into an “amnesty supporter” category — a pardon, especialy for political offenses— the implication being such a “forgiveness” offering is for anyone and all.
As has been brought up again and again, Reagan had a mass amnesty program, during his presidency, as a way to quickly remedy and bring large numbers of illegals into a legal status. It not only did not work, but made the situation worse. And, it’s his immigration legislation that is always held up as a template for anyone’s comments that even hint of any “exceptions,” other than throwing all illegals out of the country.
Most people here at BJG, including myself, believe in securing the border first, closing off entitlement programs to non-citizens, implementing policies requiring documentation before anyone can work in this country, and deporting criminals as basic starting points of any immigration policy. And, most agree that just doing these initial steps would significantly reduce the numbers of illegals here, as many would self-deport.
The divide though, on this blog occurs when dealing with the more stable population of “illegals,” ones who have integrated and assimilated into this country, have become taxpayers and contributed to society, rather than take away from it. Do you treat them the same as transient illegals, criminals, gang members, ones who protest in the steets while carrying Mexican flags and burden our infrastructure? Is there no way to differentiate and treat groups of people differently — the ones who help versus the ones who are hindrances to our country?
My son got his first speeding ticket a few weeks ago. Because of his “good” record he was given the opportunity to purge the offense if he took traffic school. If he gets another ticket within 18 months then he has no “second” chance, his driving record will record a point and higher insurance premiums will follow. This is an example of “good” behavior rewarding a person with a less harsh punishment and the opportunity to redeem themselves.
[49]
You’re no different than the AZ judge, Jan…
You’re setting aside the law to make yourself feel good. You’re telling everyone who obeyed the law they’re a chump.
You’re a liberal activist on this issue. Plain and simple..
And as your strategy has destroyed CA, so now you’d like the whole country to go the same way. And “most posters here at BJG”…
Nice of you. Seriously.
[50]
The divide though, on this blog occurs when dealing with the more stable population of “illegals,” ones who have integrated and assimilated into this country, have become taxpayers and contributed to society, rather than take away from it. Do you treat them the same as transient illegals, criminals, gang members, ones who protest in the steets while carrying Mexican flags and burden our infrastructure? Is there no way to differentiate and treat groups of people differently — the ones who help versus the ones who are hindrances to our country?
Jan, the problem is that when you treat one group of people who have broken the law differently from another group of people who have broken the very same law, you end up with the liberal/progressive messes we have had for the last 100 years in this country. It is unavoidable that the processes of picking “contributors” versus “burdens” gets mired in politics. Who makes this determination? It’s almost certain any such determination will ultimately settle on what political power is gained in the process, not which illegals have been successful in adding to our society versus those who subtract.
I’m with RWY in that the best strategy is to support politicians who vow to enforce our border and enforce our current laws. Any hint of “amnesty” in the future will just make what is already a terrible situation even worse.
[51]
You’re no different than the AZ judge, Jan…
How? None of my comments have had anything to do with that ruling.
You’re setting aside the law to make yourself feel good.
I am following my own conscience and values, which apparently aren’t yours.
You’re a liberal activist on this issue.
I like & respect many people I meet in the latino community. Their values of family, God, hard work match my own. My husband and I have been American sponsors for a father and his son for years now. We and they are working within the system to finalize their citizenship, discovering along the way many unnecessary bureaucratic potholes that legal immigration presents to people. This is what I think needs to be refined and changed. I don’t label these kinds of concerns either liberal or conservative. They are merely an interest in helping good people obtain entry into this country legally, while not enabling the vast majority of those who are here as “users.”
And as your strategy has destroyed CA,
Who are you to assume this — God?
[52]
Jan, you are proving my point.
I am following my own conscience and values,
Yes, and in doing so, setting aside the law. That’s also what the left does.
I like & respect many people I meet in the latino community
lol. That’s not the law. See? You’re a liberal on this issue.
[53]
You really dont get it at all. What a joke.
[54]
mp
I’m with RWY in that the best strategy is to support politicians who vow to enforce our border and enforce our current laws.
All my comments on immigration have said the exact same thing.
Any hint of “amnesty” in the future will just make what is already a terrible situation even worse.
Being more solicitous to those making a concerted effort to assimilate into this country would be showing the capacity to reward those doing the right thing and punish those doing the wrong thing.
Being punitive to everyone, however, only builds undue resentment towards following any laws or practices already in place. It is like a parent who over-disciplines a child — eventually all you get is a rebellious child who is receptive to nothing you have to say.
[55]
So enforcing the law is “over discipline”?
Jan, you are digging yourself in deeper and deeper.
It’s really a lie to say enforcing the law is punitive to everyone, because those who immigrate legally would not be affected.
[56]
Yes, and in doing so, setting aside the law. That’s also what the left does.
I think in any situation one follows a given law through the filter of their own values and conscience.
In the example of our Immigration laws, I have been explicit and am following the law by going through legal immigration with these men. It’s been costly and exasperating, with tons of unnecessary flaws and hassle. But, they are patient, as are we, and are working our way through the labyrinth called the immigration system.
In the case of Nazi Germany, soldiers were only following the law, weren’t they in killing Jews? Currently, Sharia law still exists in Muslim countries. Did you catch the 18 year old girl with her nose cut off on the cover of Times? That was “legal” in that country. Laws are there to regulate behavior. But, to blindly follow any law, without first checking in with your conscience and values, is not a failsafe method in doing what is really right and fair.
[57]
It is like a parent who over-disciplines a child — eventually all you get is a rebellious child who is receptive to nothing you have to say.
lol. So the child gets to decide how much discipline he will receive.
lol, you really are a California stereotype.
[58]
Laws are there to regulate behavior. But, to blindly follow any law, without first checking in with your conscience and values, is not a failsafe method in doing what is really right and fair.
Thats liberalism.
So what you’re saying is that our immigration laws are unconstitutional, or that they are the same as the Nazi extermination laws?
Jan you sound like the La Razas.
[59]
I think in any situation one follows a given law through the filter of their own values and conscience.
And Elena Kagan agrees with you.
[60]
So, Jan, this is what you do. You follow the current law, while you work for a new one.
So, are you ready to enforce all the current immigration laws without exception, while you work for amnesty?
What will you do if amnesty is defeated? Refuse to support current law?
[61]
…to go even further about laws..
We have tenants who have had trouble paying rent. The “law” says we can evict them. For those tenants, though, who have shown effort and consistancy in the past about rent payments, we work with them — sometimes for a year’s length — giving them time to turn themselves around. For those, who are just playing the system and are irresponsible, we deal with by the “law.”
It’s separating the eatable wheat from the non-eatable chaff.
[62]
But, to blindly follow any law, without first checking in with your conscience and values, is not a failsafe method in doing what is really right and fair.
Why don’t you do what is right and fair by the American people and legal immigrants, BEFORE you cry a river for the illegals?
[63]
The law says you CAN evict them, not that you MUST. That’s not the same thing.
Jan, you are up a creek with this.
[64]
rwy — you distort my words to suit your own rhetoric.
I don’t support blanket amnesty for the masses, like Reagan did.
I do support a reconfiguation of the immigration bureaucracy making it more streamline and fairer to those wishing citizenship here. I’ve seen some people easily obtaining documentation who are lazy and unproductive people, while others, who display good work ethics/habits are strung out forever!
You’re a no-holds-barred debater, rwy, throwing out left-wing zingers as a way to color your points. And, that is all they do — add color but no content.
I’m off to be productive, as this is just a rehash that goes nowhere.
[65]
Boy the responses to this thread weren’t predictable or anything.
[66]
Yes. Jan does not support certain kinds of amnesty, but she does support other kinds of amnesty, and I say that the result will be the same either way, and she simply does not care.