Posted on 07/09/2010 8:33:42 PM PDT by sinanju
My opinion of Sarah just took a dent. She was on Bill O'Reilly's show and he quizzed her about her opinion, in his overbearing fashion, on how to deal with the illegal alien problem.
I'm afraid it seemed instantly obvious that either she has not spent five minutes looking into the issue and talking to people who actually know something about the problem or she has and is keeping her real plans secret a la Chris Christie.
She did not bring up any specifics or actual ideas and plans and basically let Blowhard Bill lead her around by the nose for seven minutes. They then concluded with some meaningless cheery sentiments about the mama grizzlies and concluded. BOR moved on.
I realize she is busy building up chits playing kingmaker and tweeting and all that but I would like to at least see and hear some evidence that she is doing some serious policy formulation and (if she does run for prez) will have a battle plan on day one.
Appearing on Bill's show for barely enough time to smile and chirp for less than ten minutes is decidedly discouraging to people like myself, who desperately want to take her seriously.
"So you've closed the borders, now you have ten million people sitting here looking at you, what are you going to do about them?" "Make them register?"
"Well, I, uh.."
She should not have set herself up like that. Bill barely gave her enough time to recite the Pledge of Allegiance but she could have gotten her message across if she had had a message.
Not good.
True.. opposing forces should be manipulated and/or baited into over-reaching.. thereby making them make mistakes or sound stupid..
Don’t you be talking about the Mama Grizzly LOL
For what reason do you not hear her so no amnesty? Is there anything about her that you do like?
Excellent point Mr. Silverback. Don’t you love it when human beans take one half a phrase and base their total opinion on those few words. Thank you Lord, I am old enough to not expect total perfection and raise my blood pressure about the small stuff.
Palin was being interviewed about her immigration position on national television, but was incapable of providing any "level of detail" regarding her position.
It turned into another "famous for being famous" celebrity interview.
“NO AMNESTY!” -Sarah Palin on July 11, 2010
Where’ve I heard that before???? OH yeah....GWB and Juan McCain!!
There are many ways to make it difficult for illegals to live here. I think that the states, counties and towns could have done a lot more of this but everybody was looking to Washington to do its job. Now we know Washington is the problem and we cannot trust them as far as we can through them. So now the states and communities are really going to fight back. Ye haw!
Amnesty would be a complete disaster as it would tip the political scales so far in the democrat direction that we may end up with a one party country. People have to realize that numbers mean power. Look at the power that the illegals already have - and they can’t even vote! The Dems and part of the republican party are on their hands and knees pandering to these people. What is it going to be like if they are legalized and can vote? It would be pandering as we have never seen before. The illegals will demand that they bring all of their relatives over which will only further bloat their voting block. Our children will be second class citizens, you can be sure of that.
Registration is not amnesty. She did not say anything about registering equating to staying. Registering is saying “I am here.” She absolutely did not say all persons registering would get to stay.
Yes, she did say anyone who had entered illegally had to be working to stay here, but given the unemployment rate, Americans needed the first chance at the jobs. You asked how would that work. I can think of several ways, and I’ll be sure and send my suggestions to Governor Palin.
My grandfather had a relative come to America at the same time he did. My grandfather was single, but his relative brought his family with him. One of their children did not pass the health inspection on Ellis Island so the mother went back home with the children. The father stayed here, worked, sent money home and visited when he could. Years later, when his work was over, he went back home. We have had standards before. Registration provides a means to apply those standards. Registering is not necessarily amnesty and a path to citizenship. It can merely mean you can stay here and work for “x” amount of time.
And as many troops as it takes means as many troops as it takes. And completing the fence means completing the fence.
"Registered" illegal aliens could stay in the country, work and apply for citizenship. Under amnesty illegal aliens could stay in the country, work and apply for citizenship.
Yes, she did say anyone who had entered illegally had to be working to stay here, but given the unemployment rate, Americans needed the first chance at the jobs. You asked how would that work. I can think of several ways, and I’ll be sure and send my suggestions to Governor Palin.
Would it be like this?
Employers would have to track and report all job applications by citizenship status. After a yet to be determined threshold is established, the employer would have to offer the job to the "registered" illegal alien only after all qualified applications by citizens and green card holders had been processed and rejected, and/or after a given period of time had passed without the receipt of applications from citizens or legal residents. The clock would begin running upon proof of publication for the position offered, which would have to be published in a federally acceptable media of recognized general circulation. Federal standards for acceptance and rejection of such applications would have to be established and administered by agency regulations written pursuant to the as yet non-existent statutes. Any hire not compliant with the new federally approved rules and not approved by the appropriate federal agency would be subject to fine and/or criminal prosecution. For example, if the employer did not give the job to a federally approved and qualified citizen applicant, the employer could go to prison. On the other hand, if an employer refused to hire a registered illegal alien when no qualified citizen applicants were available, the employer could also go to prison.Or is this yet another secret plan?Every new hire would be subject to review by the agency charged with regulating all American employment practices. If either a citizen, legal resident or "registered" illegal alien objected to a specific hire, that hire would be stopped pending an agency review and protest decision. Where the bypassed employee disagreed with the agency determination, appeals could be made to the GAO or the local federal district court, except where a diversity of citizenship/residence issue was raised and a change of venue was permitted.
Well, well, another reader of Michael Steele’s Big Book of War is heard from!
Obama was still taking constituent calls about potholes when this war was started by hirabist barbarians driving more than a kiloton of combat power into office buildings in two of our cities. This isn’t Obama’s war, it’s America’s war, and it’s a long and global war. And it’s one we must win unless we want our descendants to be slaves to a moon god.
“Conservatives” trying to score points off of “Obama’s war” are Code Pink with more body hair and fewer venereal diseases.
Nope, you’re trying to have it both ways. Intellectually sloppy. Besides the fact that knowing exact troop counts and construction timelines is not a level of detail a person should have to lay out at this point. It’s like the press asking Geraldine Ferraro about what throw weights for nuclear missiles she would want to see at arms talks.
Way short of that. Zero details and a complete failure to provide even a rudimentary picture of her nonexistent plan.
Yeah, just look at Ireland, Israel and Poland and compare it them to Mexico. Ireland, Israel and Poland are civilized countries. You do not see the massive corruption and dysfunction that you see in Mexico. All nations are not alike.
He owns this war just as much as he owns our health system (though past Republicans contributed to its socialization. Obama has not only embraced this war (far more than Bush or McCain), he has escalated it, deployed more troops there, and appointed the last three commanders. HE IS THE FRIGGIN COMMANDER IN CHIEF AND IF YOU SUPPORT THIS WAR, YOU ARE BACKING HIM.
Are you willing to expand your "America's War" claim to other issues? For example, are you willing to argue that Obama is not responsible for the deficit because Bush also ran deficits thus they are "America's deficits?" Sorry, but that won't wash.
You understand perfectly. Democracy would become hell!
How did we miss that one? Yikes.
It should be obvious Palin was using the words “diversity” and “progressive” in the way they are meant to be used, outside the context of political correctness.
Used in this way, progressive is what the Founding Fathers did. They helped society progress from tyranny to liberty. And diversity means having conservative feminists.
Palin was showing them the fact that when conservatives speak, the words actually mean what they say—not the exact opposite as happens when liberals use them.
And of course: World peace!
You’re having trouble making your point, sugar.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.