Posted on 11/03/2009 3:37:32 PM PST by Amerisrael
There is still confusion over whether Govenor Palin supports amnesty for illegal aliens.
In this article read at Newsbusters, Palin does support a "pathway to citizenship" for illegal aliens.
But what is not clear is if she supports a pathway to citizenship only "after" they return to their country of origin. And then, get in the back of the line to come to America "legally" for citizenship.
Or, if she supports a pathway to citizenship while illegals are still here. Without first requiring them to return to there country of origin.
Does anyone have an answer to that question?
Excerpt from Newsbusters:
"So, what else is in the Hotair story? Let's take a look:
"Do you then favor an amnesty for the 12 or 13 million undocumented immigrants?"
Palin: "No, I do not. I do not. Not total amnesty. You know, people have got to follow the rules."
"Looks like Governor Palin doesn't support amnesty."
"To clarify, so you support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants? "
Palin: "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."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
This is the same set of pre-election interviews done in 2008. She was trying to parrot McCain as she was his running mate. Every month someone on this site comes up with a reference to these McCain influenced interviews and ignores everything she has said since she has been on her own.
Someone has gone to a lot of trouble to try to make her look bad to the people who support her. I’m thinking RINOs here.
I’m sorry you were so obviously taken advantage of by this. I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt.
Not total amnesty
___________________________________________
This needs to be clarified...
And also the “pathway to citizenship” thingy..
Someone needs to ask some different questions...
” I hate hearing the phrase, “well we can’t just send all 12 million back to where they came from”. “
Yet somehow, if 12 million of us decided to refuse to pay our taxes, I’m confident that our rulers would manage to find a way to prosecute all 12 million of us.
There can be no pathway to citizenship for the 12 to 20 million illegals in the US without amnesty.
This talk of doing it legally, and going home and coming back legally is a lot of deceptive nonsense, or a severe display of ignorance. Not saying what Palin means, or doesn’t mean, but...
Nations have immigration quotas and most have far more people applying than will ever be admitted legally. And there are large numbers in line in Mexico and all nations, already far ahead of any illegals who might “get in line”.
Few if any of the illegal aliens would ever become legal by taking a place in line with all those already seeking a legal immigration slot. Saying otherwise is the height of dishonesty or ignorance.
Unless we just gave the home countries of the illegals a one time, big increase in their legal immigration slots, which would be amnesty by any other name.
All this talk of going back and coming legally is nonsense, and could never happen for the overwhelming majority of illegals.
I’m as against amnesty as anyone else - but I say don’t rush her to answer. Give her a chance to REALLY hear the grass roots on this issue - being from Alaska she probably didn’t have to deal with illegals much - and then being with McCain was - a disaster.
We have three years until the next presidential election, and at least a year before we even need to think about our nominee - she will have to answer to us on this issue, and she has to know that. There is no hurry.
But for tonight - let’s see if she can pull off the win in upstate New York for us (after having disposed of the RINO) - and if she does, let’s celebrate BIG TIME, and then come back to this issue a bit later.
What we are trying to find out is Palin’s views, not as McCain’s running mate, but her own exact views. That’s why this was posted. To try to get this question answered.
How about "Leave, and if we don't catch you here again and don't find that you've committed crimes other than your having entered illegally, we won't try to extradite you"? I wouldn't mind that sort of amnesty.
As it is, most "amnesty" programs are more like "If we catch you stealing money, we'll give you some papers so you can keep on taking money." They're not about amnesty--more like indulgences.
The allocations are almost certainly reduced based upon estimates of illegal immigration, are they not? So if illegal immigration were cut to nearly zero, we could let in a lot more legal aliens. How many people are in queue to enter legally? If we kicked out five million illegals and let in five million people from the queue, what effect would that have on the queue?
That's an easy mistake to make. Actually, the announcements for president and primary campaigns will be kicking off in about 15 to 18 months, early 2011. Then the primary debates will be in the Summer and Fall of 2011, less that two years off. Iowa and New Hampshire are just over two years away.
So, all the discussion of issues, and clarifications, will be taking place about 18 months from now, early 2011. We'll know who the nominees will be in about 28 months or so, March or April of 2012.
Anything short of enforcing the law, which is deporting those here illegally, is amnesty.
I’ve watched southern California be transformed from American suburbia into a province of Mexico in all but name. Entire neighborhoods, in fact entire towns, change completely in a remarkably short amount of time. Older Americans leave these neighborhoods for areas where English is still spoken. Young Americans cease moving into these neighborhoods because they turn into alien places with bad schools and gangs.
Mexico wouldn’t tolerate this sort of crap for one minute, and in fact their immigration laws are strictly enforced.
In Mexico, Mexican politicians put Mexico first. In America, American politicians put Mexico first.
I don't think so. The legal and illegal immigration are handled separately, AFAIK. We get many legal immigrants from Mexico and other Latino nations. I believe they have among the highest quotas for legal immigration.
And the crap begins.
Living 20 miles north of the largest and busiest port of entry in the world, San Diego - Tijuana and know first hand about illegals,
I support Sarah Palin all the way.
My first concern is having a candidate who understands we are at war, we would have more attacks such as 9/11 if wern’t taking the fight to the enemy on their grounds.
Sarah is also a major supporter of Israel and had the flag of Israel in her office as Gov.
Many people on FR are in denial when it come to the IslamOfascistsand and their war against America, Israel, and all who arn’t Muslim.
I would like to see every part of the U.S. swept for the over 12 million illegals. That should take thousands of people around a few years or more to do. Am sure the MSM will support this along with the majority in Congress, the Liberals.
Am sure all the businesses will give up their illegals along with those who hire them to clean their homes and do the yard work.
This would be great but we take the focus off the war,
the illegals will be the least of our problems.
There are some on FR supporting Libertarians who are open border, you might want to check in with them and knock off
the PDS
“That’s an easy mistake to make...”
No, what I also said was that we have at least a year before we have to start choosing sides...let’s give her that year, and if she RINOs out on this issue - or refuses to answer, she’s through.
” Dirty work with good pays ... “dirty” job means that the Legal Lazy Hippies in Lower 48 don’t want to take.”
That’s a load of crap. A lot of my neighbors worked in Alaska to build the pipeline, to run provisions, to work on the fishing boats. This “jobs Americans won’t do” is the sort of BS Dubya pushed to try to force amnesty through.
That is the current legal pathway to citizenship. Get it?
Sorry, I didn't read carefully enough. I've seen so many people say we have three years etc., that I probably react too quickly now.
Unfortunately Hoffman apparently takes the Bush/McCain position on immigration.
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/014662.html
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
I see some of the anti war Liberaltarians on the thread
along with those whose candidates were many days or weeks behind Sarah Palin supporting Hoffman.
Now that this may be a victory you are now trashing Hoffman
also.
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.