Palin: 'Special Interest' Amnesty Bill Rewards 'Rule Breakers'

Big Government ^ | June 15, 2013 | Tony Lee

[DoughtyOne]

As I have said to others, if you know of an interview she has conducted where she expresses a change of mind, link me to it.

Until then this is her stated policy to my knowledge.

I am glad she came out against the current bill.  I would certainly like to hear more on the subject.  I'd like to know how it differs with her policy, or if she has in fact changed her policy.

If she wants to lead us, then I think a bill of this importance would warrant more than one sentence in twenty-two minutes.

To clarify, so you support a path to citizenship for undocumented (illegal aliens) immigrants?

I do because I understand why people would want to be in America. To seek the safety and prosperity, the opportunities, the health that is here. It is so important that yes, people follow the rules so that people can be treated equally and fairly in this country.

http://archivo.univision.com/content/content.jhtml?cid=1716304&pagenum=2

[DoughtyOne]

Worth a decent chuckle huh. LOL Thanks...

[DoughtyOne]

So anything Biden says, we can basically discount it, because he’s just the VP you know. Right?

Come on folks? Be honest with yourselves. If she has changed her policy, please link me to an interview where she explains her new views.

If she has changed her policy, I would like to know. Others reading this thread would like to as well I’m sure.

[DoughtyOne]

You said, “He refuses to believe she came out against this bill” or words close to this.

I responsed with, “Please link me to one post I made the refutes the fact Palin came out against it.”

All you had to do was post a link to an interview where she voices a change of policy. That’s not so hard is it?

Instead you post some diatribe about me refusing to admit, hating her, days and days and days of my posting what Palin said in an interview...

Come on LakeShark, you’ve changed, remember?

[DoughtyOne]

I responsed with, “Please link me to one post I made the refutes the fact Palin came out against it.”

Follow-up should have been something like...

All you had to do was link me to a post I made denying Palin came out against this bill.

I didn't make one...

[jeltz25]

do you really think it’s feasible that all 12,000,000 will go home? Can you really envision any scenario under which that comes even close to happening? Please explain how you see them going home? How will it happen? How long will it take? There are 12M illegals here now. Under your plan, how will that # go down to say even 6M? Let alone say 0?

The last in-depth interview isn’t really as you make it out to be. It’s from 2010 with BOR and here’s the relevant part:

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…

(She’s uncomfortable even talking about letting people stay, which BOR brought up, and kept interrupting her and forcing her to answer, badgering almost)

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.

That first shot needs to be fleshed out more, but that’s not exactly a pro-amnesty stance)

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.

(So here she seems to indicate taht yes, some will be allowed to say. At some distant point, AFTER the border has been fully secured and some other things have happened. Much, much tougher than the instant legalization Rubio and the GOP is pushing. And after that, no citizenship. She never mentions it. She mentions some sort of work status for those who’ve followed all the steps. And honestly, I’d bet most won’t follow the steps. And those people will be “deported” in her words. Right there she’s talking about deporting millions of illegals.)

O’REILLY: OK, we’ve established that.

PALIN: But let’s look at case history.

O’REILLY: Yes, we’ve established that.

PALIN: Let’s look at what, you know, political hero Ronald Reagan tried to do with 3 million illegals all those years ago.

O’REILLY: He botched it though, governor. Reagan botched it.

PALIN: Exactly.

O’REILLY: He botched it.

PALIN: That’s what I’m saying. So we learn from history. We won’t do what he did.

(Won’t repeat Reagan’s mistakes)

I’d like to hear more as well but she never supports a path to citizenship in this interview. She fully supports fully securing the border, completing all fencing, militarizing the border, etc... BEFORE any other steps are even considered. She does seem to support a 60 day period that illegals would have to register at some point for some kind of guest worker program(anyone who doesn’t register during that period will be deported). So yes, she does seem to support some # of folks being allowed to remain as workers, but again, only after US citizens have gotten first dibs. (i’d like to hear more about that, maybe she means no registration until say unemployment is back below 5%)

The bottom line seems to be that she calls for fully securing the border before anything else. Then at some point implementing some guest worker program to deal with those already here in some fashion. She never mentions citizenship and never says she supports it.

She’s also now said that she does not support the current bill.

I’d like to hear more, but that’s where we are.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/transcript/how-sarah-palin-would-tackle-illegal-immigration?page=2#ixzz2WK9fIJX3

[KC_Lion]

Sarah makes her position clear to those who STILL don't get it Ping!

LARS: The amnesty proposal that was defeated in Congress — in your view, was that amnesty for illegals and would you back amnesty for a path to citizenship, as the current president calls it?

SARAH PALIN: No, I’m not for amnesty. Let’s ratchet this down quite simply to remember what we’re referring to. Illegal aliens are called “illegal” for a reason. We need to secure our borders and I am not for amnesty. And there are humane ways to deal with the 11-13 million illegal aliens who are in our country right now, but if they’re not going to follow the rules, they need to get out.

http://blogtown.portlandmercury.com/BlogtownPDX/archives/2009/12/03/sarah-palin-on-the-lars-larson-show

[Democrat_media]

Sarah Palin is against this monstrous Amnesty bill.What about that don't you DoughtyOne understand ?the bill must be stopped or the USA is done.Call Congress tell them to stop this Amnesty bill.Sarah would veto the bill.

“Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin said the Senate's “special interest” immigration bill rewards “rule breakers” and was not the way to rebuild a conservative majority in America of people who want to restore the country's founding principles”

Run Sarah. Sarah Palin for President 2016

[Lakeshark]

It actually starts with me entering in at #179. Here is your answer to my post and your continued assault of what YOU claim she believes, what you tried to prove in every succeeding post that she believes. Anyone can follow the entire thread and it is filled with your assurance that she supports McCain, this bill, and amnesty; it reeks from every post you make. Anyone can follow our conversation and see what you were saying: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3030890/posts?page=180#180

[DoughtyOne]

There’s nothing wrong with her objecting to this bill.

If she no longer supports Pathway and Instantaneous Legalization, I wish she would make a policy speech and let us know about it.

She hasn’t. It’s best to address it now in-between elections. I’m doing it.

If you are a member of a support group for her, please pass along the idea that she needs to correct some mus-perceptions out here.

Thanks in advance.

[DoughtyOne]

Okay, in that post I stated that she agreed with McCain on immigration. The fact is that when I posted that it was before her speech today. I can’t read her mind. I can only go back and find her interviews and go by what she voiced in them.

I have never said she supported this immigration bill.

Her prior stated policy granted pathway and instant legal status. That is what McCain supports.

Since her statement today, I have not said she supported this bill. And even prior to that, I did not say that she supported the bill. I stated that her prior policy statement seemed to be pretty close to what is in this bill. I believe that to be accurate.

Simply saying you don’t want to reward lawbreakers doesn’t cut it when you voice objection to this bill for Palin, because she has actually said she won’t reward illegals, but then says in the same interview that by registering they are instantly legal.

If they don’t register, they have to leave. If they do register they can stay and work.

Palin can’t have it both ways.

She has still left it very vague what her true beliefs are. She doesn’t support this bill, she says, but her last interview of record says she supports a policy very similar to this bill.

The fact still stands, that you claimed I denied she came out against this bill, and I never said that. I listened to this morning’s speech, said some nice things about it and left it at that.

Once again, you’re being the old LakeShark. THIS is why I wasn’t buying into the game you were playing in the last day or so.

[Lakeshark]

I guess reading your own words has driven you to silence, or perhaps you are figuring out how to double down once again....

You might want to think about it for a while.

[Democrat_media]

This is THE Amnesty bill

Sarah Palin is against it

so Sarah Palin is against Amnesty

Logic 101

call Congress. stop the Amnesty bill

[machogirl]

ANYONE here illegally gets NO CITIZENSHIP. Period. Enforce the laws, let them register for temp visa work, or for RENEWABLE TEMP VISAS, without ANY subsidies of ANY KIND. NO WELFARE, NO BENEFITS, REgister for these RENEWABLE Temp Visa/Temp Resident. That’s it. Period. No FALSE ID’s, NO BENEFITS, PAY TAXES, PAY fines (heck if they can pay a coyote 5000 bucks to come over, they can afford the fine). Fines are based on how LONG they have been here, payable every year or NO VISA renewal/NO Temp Resident renewable. Register for Selective Service and If they break ANY LAWS. Enforced Deportation with Felonies upon Illegal Return.

In any way, shape or form, they deserve NO CITIZENSHIP, AT ALL. The most they get out of disobeying our laws (which demonstrates no citizenship and thumbs their nose at breaking our laws) is a TEMP, RENEWABLE (UPON CONDITIONS MET) Visa/Temp Resident. NO RELATIVES BROUGHT IN.

Breaking the laws of a Country that you supposedly desire to be a citizen of, IMHO makes you INELIGIBLE TO BE A CITIZEN.

[Lakeshark]

Oh, I guess you DID say that stuff after all. Thanks for admitting it.

Yep, that old wascally wakeshark, just horrible in showing what you actually said.

Horrible.

[machogirl]

please excuse my caps, but i am ticked at these TREASONOUS politicians.

[DoughtyOne]

LOL, it’s kind of comical when you think you’ve scored, and you can’t even remember what the request was.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3031761/posts?page=33#33

[Josh Painter]

You’re obsessed. Seek professional help.

[Josh Painter]

Is there some part of “if they’re not going to follow the rules, they need to get out” that you can’t understand?

http://blogtown.portlandmercury.com/BlogtownPDX/archives/2009/12/03/sarah-palin-on-the-lars-larson-show

[DoughtyOne]

Let me see, if I agree with Palin and say so over and over and over again, I’m not obsessed. If I disagree and spend less than 24 hours discussing it on two or three threads, I’m obsessed. And if I respond to folks who disagree with me, I’m obsessed because I’m making so many posts on the subject..., never-mind that I’m simply responding.