[Lakeshark]

People have tried to answer, but you won't listen, nor does it appear you care to. You seem to have your mind made up.

You're quoting an interview done when she was McCain's VP candidate in 2008. Her answer was following his positions, which was her job to do.

Since then, she's given numerous interviews where she makes it clear she does not support McCain's 2008 campaign points, and she says multiple times she is against illegal immigration. I've heard them, people have quoted them on this thread, and you could find them if you cared to.

But you don't, you just want to misrepresent what her position is.

[Engineer_Soldier]

You're quoting an interview done when she was McCain's VP candidate in 2008. Her answer was following his positions, which was her job to do.

Absolutely negative, soldier. That's a no-go! It would have been her job as an American (which comes first before politics) to say, "This is where I disagree with John. Although we are on the same team, some of our opinions differ. So, although John is for amnesty, I am not. So, if he dies while in office, I will adamantly oppose amnesty for those who never belonged in our country and who would turn our country into another socialist country."

[Man50D]

You're quoting an interview done when she was McCain's VP candidate in 2008. Her answer was following his positions, which was her job to do

Then she put aside her own convictions opposing amnesty for illegals for McAmnesty? Party over principle is not a ringing endorsement.

Since then, she's given numerous interviews where she makes it clear she does not support McCain's 2008 campaign points, and she says multiple times she is against illegal immigration.

Oh I see. She was against amnesty, before she was for amnesty while McAmnesty's running mate, only to oppose amnesty after the 2008 elections.

Where does she stand now that she is once again supporting McAmnesty? Is it her job to oppose a more conservative candidate in support of MacAmnesty?