Video: Week in Review with Michelle on The Factor
posted at 9:26 pm on June 1, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The O’Reilly Factor rolled out a new segment tonight, “Week in Review,” starring our very own Double M. She and Bill re-capped the stories of the week–immigration, Mexicans booing Miss USA during the Miss Universe pageant in Mexico City, and sex-n-drug proselytizing in Boulder High School. Click to play.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Her very own segment! And Michelle was perfectly prepared as usual. Congratulations again.
Zorro on June 1, 2007 at 9:37 PM
I see that Mr O Reilly buys into or rather should I say supports the BS that we “just can’t round up 12 million people”. I hope I’m wrong but it almost seemed like you agreed with him? We’ve been down this path before. Rewarding lawbreakers does nothing but encourage more law breaking. They created this mess and now are trying to insist we just can’t do anything about it and we MUST compromise. They are trying to change our culture and our country and tell us it is good for us and we will like it weather we want to our not. If this passes it will be the straw that breaks our nations back. If they get the vote we might as well leave the borders open. 3 million turned into 12-20 million. How many million will the next batch be? Deportation through attrition if it takes ten years.
Altura Ct. on June 1, 2007 at 9:53 PM
I’m curious as to what Bill thinks Michelle’s nuttier proposals are, with regards to immigration.
Krydor on June 1, 2007 at 9:54 PM
I think Michelle’s approach, given resources available, is well considered. Get rid of the criminal element first, then, as the reminder shows themselves over time, send them home as well. No need to do the major roundup except for the 600,000 or so most dangerous.
Zorro on June 1, 2007 at 10:01 PM
I don’t think anyone is expecting the government to round up 12 million people. This is, as Michelle says, just a strawman argument.
What we do want, however, is for the government to carry through with first get control of the border so no more illegals come here. Second to deporting those that we know are criminals. Third to deport those who are already under legal order to leave. Fourth is to work on forcing current illegals to either get into the process of becoming legal or make plans to leave in the future.
It’s not rocket science. It’s law enforcement.
And your killing me, Michelle, with that dark red lipstick… unghh…
Lawrence on June 1, 2007 at 10:08 PM
Illegal aliens get DWI’s and don’t get deported. This makes no sense. The judicial system should have been doing this sort of deportation all along. We’re not going to hunt down 12M people, but we should send back the criminal ones. I don’t know what the threshold would be, but DWI seems like as good a threshold as any.
Buck Turgidson on June 1, 2007 at 10:19 PM
You sour the milk the illegals have been sucking from the tit of government and they will leave on their own. Look at the town(s) around that meat packing plant that was raided, 99% left town.
TwinkietheKid on June 1, 2007 at 10:36 PM
Michelle is so right on in her perspective and commentary. Mexico’s cooperation with the United States is predicated on billions of dollars flowing from illegal aliens into their economy. If that cash flow as not present the equivalent of Chavez would be in power.
omegaram on June 1, 2007 at 10:38 PM
O’Reilly is completely missing the point on the deportation. No, you can’t deport 12 million illegal aliens at once. I don’t know of anyone who debates that. However, over years, with the help of local police departments, through enforcement of our laws, we can kick out a chunk, if only the illegals who have broken other laws.
His position seems to be all or none. Hey, if I can have 1.5 million fewer illegals living off of my salary each year, I say it’s a damn good start.
amerpundit on June 1, 2007 at 10:54 PM
Hey Michelle, when is Bill O’ going to pronounce your last name properly? He got it right at the end but usually butchers it.
Valiant on June 1, 2007 at 10:56 PM
First off it’s not OK when the government ‘will’ secure the border, it’s OK when the government ‘has’ secured the border.
Secondly if 1.3 million illegal aliens can be either deported or run out by 700 Border agents and local Law enforcement then I know 12 thousand Border agents and local Law enforcement can deport or run out 12 million illegal aliens.
The difference? Presidential will to get the job done.
I wish Ike were here. I like Ike.
Speakup on June 1, 2007 at 11:03 PM
This ‘illegals gone wild’scenerio is like a B-rated 50s horror movie. O’Reillys “We can’t possibly deport 12 million illegals ” and “thats insanity” comments are incredulous. These comments have been made by Chertoff and WH Spokesman Tony Snow. If we can’t simply deport them, then how is it possible to issue all the nessecary documentation to graduate each individual through the proposed immigration process. It ain’t gonna happen. It’s going to be business as usual. The repercussions are mind boggeling and quite frankley disheartning. So every time the ILLEGALS demonstrate they coerce the US Federal Government into action. Has anyone asked? What country are these people loyal to? Who leads them? What about the South American influence? What about the drug cartels? What about the connection between the drug cartels and the middle east? How can we control all these people who show contempt for the law and blantley disregard EVERYrule and regulation from the Federal to the State level all the way down to the local housing ordinances not to mention County occupational licenses. I am convinced 100% this is a totally calculated plan to bail out the US economy as it exists with all the over extended credit to China. To hell with the economy George let er ride we’ll just have to take the hit. Get Roe vs Wade overturned and we replace those lawbreakers with a viable workforce in 16 years! Ect.PS Michelle I like the Vampy look you little minx. LOL
sonnyspats1 on June 1, 2007 at 11:11 PM
Michelle might even be over-stating the point. Tracking down and deporting 600,000 might even be too much of a logistical nightmare. But that’s not important. If measures are taken to actually enforce the border, and reduce the constant flow of new illegals into the country, we can deal with those 600,000, and however many others, at whatever pace the system actually can handle.
The critical issue isn’t to do something with the illegals that are already here, it’s to stop the inverse-hemorrhage of more and more new illegals. If that core issue isn’t addressed, the problem will simply continue to worsen ad infinitum. The biggest flaw (of many) in the “shamnesty” bill is its apparent indifference towards this fundamental problem.
Blacklake on June 1, 2007 at 11:12 PM
Ditto. (twice if need be)
shooter on June 1, 2007 at 11:26 PM
O’Reilly pronounced her last name correctly at the end of the segment. Good for him.
frankj on June 1, 2007 at 11:27 PM
I think the border should be a military blockade. The problem is mainly in what happens when they get here. They treat and are treated like we are mexico and make no effort to adopt our culture. This cannot happen…it is the most important element of what made this country great.
A common goal based on god and country…there is no other way.
tomas on June 2, 2007 at 12:11 AM
Fox needs to ditch Greta “The Ghoul” Susteren with Michelle “Vampira” Malkin.
Better yet, can we deport Geraldo’s sorry ass?
omnipotent on June 2, 2007 at 2:21 AM
Deporting 12 million illegal aliens (or 18 or 20 million depending on who is counting) is indeed a straw man argument, as Michelle stated.
Why? Because it is not possible, especially in a country that protects civil rights.
One of the most vicious, inhumane, monstorous and criminal, tyrannies in all of human history, using a modern railroad system and cattle cars stuffed to the rafters with human beings, in deplorable, inhumane conditions, spent 12 years rounding up and transporting certain “undesirables” from all over Europe. Yet the best the Nazis could do is move 6 million Jews and a few more million homosexuals, mentally or physically handicaped individuals, Gypsies, and/or political dissidents.
If Hitler’s vicious and brutal regime, using the resources of a modern industrial dictatorship, and using tactics that nobody in America would tolerate under any circumstances couldn’t “internally deport” more than 8 million, then it is absurd to think that a democracy which guarantees human rights could accomplish a goal of removing 12 (or 18 or 20) million illegal aliens from the United States in any time frame that makes sense.
Michelle is exactly right about the straw man.
It is possible to deport the 600,000 that are already under deportation orders. But this is also not likely given the current “replacement” rate that our undefended borders generate.
Rather than even try, I would propose an alternate strategy.
1. Secure the borders. All 2000 miles along the southern border, which seems to be the problem today, and not just 700 that Congress authorized but not funded. Use fences, electronic detection, border police, the Army, or what ever it takes to secure the border from infiltration by illegal aliens.
2. Whenever the opportunity arises and an illegal is aprehended (whether by ICE raid or being arrested for something else) that illegal is held without bond (as a flight risk), deportation proceedings would commence immediately or immediately after a sentence is served for any crimes involved. And the individual gets immediatly deported thereafter.
3. Provide a employers a viable method of checking if employees are citizens or legal aliens who are entitled to work in the USA, and then arrest the corporate officers and management of those companies who continue to hire or employee illegal aliens. If there are no jobs here in America for illegals, then there is no incentive for them to sneak in.
4. Then, and only then, provide a way for the current population of illegal aliens to legitimize their residency in the United States, if they so choose, as either legal residents or “guest workers” using a verifiable methodolgy with appropraite safeguards. If they do NOT so choose, upon aprehension, they would be immediately deported.
5. The issue of anchor babies cannot be legislated unless the constitution is amended.
Sorry to burst the bubble of those who think there is a magic phrase in the 14th Amendment that would Congress to disallow citizenship for babies born of illegal aliens born in the USA. But that is simply not the case.
In fact, don’t even waste your time trying argue the 14th Amendment’s “subject to the jurisdiction” phrase applies to anchor babies, as the Supreme Court has ruled at least twice now that a person born in America IS BY DEFAULT UNDER JURISDICTION of the United States. Specifically:
“[e]very citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States.” (United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)),
and
“no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment “jurisdiction” can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful” (Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982))
Don’t waste OUR time trying to argue that “anchor babies” can be deported, because the US Supreme Court says that they can’t — because they ARE US Citizens SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION of the United States. Period.
Instead, instead either work to change the 14th Amendment to change the wording, or work to insure no pregnant illegals make it into the United States to have their children here using enhanced border security, or do what the old prayer admonishes: have the wisdom to know that there are somethings you cannot change or do anything about.
georgej on June 2, 2007 at 5:35 AM
I loved the segment, but I think it should have been longer. What FNC ought to do is host an hour long week in review program starring Michelle.
And to REALLY make it kick, why not put the Hamster in there as the chief correspondant to set up things with a montage of sorts. I’d suspect that it would be a ratings bonanza! :D
As for the content in question, I thought that Bill and Michelle gave an entertaining presentation to stories that many care about. It made for good television.
itzWicks on June 2, 2007 at 7:37 AM
You don’t have to deport hundred of thousands or even millions of illegals. You take the jobs and welfare away and they will deport themselves. You simply make it impossible for them to make a living in America and they will go somewhere else, not because they want to, but because they will not have a choice.
Stick it to the companies that are using illegals as a slave class.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on June 2, 2007 at 7:55 AM
It’s like fleas, another parasite,you take away the dog and they either die or go find another host…problem solved.
DoctorDentons on June 2, 2007 at 8:35 AM
Secure the borders first. Stop the bleeding.
Then worry about deportation
Chuck on June 2, 2007 at 9:17 AM
They can’t even stop 1 guy with a case of super TB from entering the country even when he hands them his passport. They expect us o believe they can secure the boarders – ha, ha, ha!!!!
The minute illegals are handed visas the Democrats, leftists advocacy groups and Liberal judges are going to insist they receive all the rights and benefits of citizens.
TheBigOldDog on June 2, 2007 at 9:20 AM
I think Michelle is well on course to take over the Factor.
wryteacher on June 2, 2007 at 9:50 AM
I think the government has been so feckless with any real enforcement that even deporting criminal aliens would at least be something but even that no brainer doesn’t get done.
There’s absolutely no reason in the world to think that enforcing the provisions in any new legislation will be acted on any more than laws are right now.
If this amnesty is shut down migrants are still going to keep coming by the million if we don’t send a very strong message that the invasion ‘will’ stop, it won’t.
If we don’t have the will to enforce strong employer sanctions, cut off social services and at least start deporting what is the message that we’re sending?
We have the right to define our own nation and the natural right to defend against being overrun which in this case of massive migration is factually the case.
Speakup on June 2, 2007 at 9:51 AM
After reading the entire Bill Immigration Bill (S 1348) all 790 pages, and being a follower and enforcer of our “nation of laws” I would like to offer the following recommendations:
a. The basic problem with our immigration policy that lays at your doorstep today is the result of years of liberal failure to “enforce” the laws they created. Therefore, re-examination of existing laws and enforcing them without exception for here forward is essential.
b. If the numbers of illegal aliens quoted in the bill are accurate rounding them up and/or asking them to return to their home (many may have used Canada and Mexico as the doorway) is not practical. Therefore, require them to come forward for the biblical censuses and to account for their actions, provide essential data that should have been collected if they had applied for a legal entry visa, their current occupation and address,
1. After passing an extensive background check, issued a valid identification (how about an orange/yellow card-between red (illegal) and green(legal). However, this card puts them at the bottom of the list of those who can apply legally for citizenship after those that are seeking legal citizenship. There is a penalty for not following the law but we know who they are and that their original intent of migrating to U.S. was for valid reasons except they did not posses the means to do it legally (or our system failed them).
2. This card would also clearly allow employers and law enforcement to identify those that warrant closer scrutiny while in this country. One strike and they are out.
3. If the business world wishes to hire these card holders they can do so and to comply with the demands of the left for a minimum wage are so high, pay these workers that wage until they are able to upgrade their status (either as their name moves to the top of the list of legals (green card holders) or have finally attained citizen.
c. Any person who does not want to come forward or submit to the background check are hiding something and deserve to be deported when found.
d. Make the State Department and Immigrations, Customs, and Boarder Control the authority/mandate to comply with the laws in granting entry visas to those who are worthy, not those who can just pay off the clerk. And have DHS maintain lists similar to the “No Fly” so those who violated the terms of these rules list to be detained and deported for a violation of their agreement with U.S. and enforce it. Likewise a “Selectee” list that contains the names of those who are allowed temporary entry (visitors etc.) and their reason for being here and exit date. The list allows monitoring their travels and to make sure they leave when they promised to do so and are deported (vice clogging our courts) when they do not leave or upon an infraction of our laws while here.
These suggestions may seem radical or draconian, but if the Government, was serving our nation and our populace, as a ‘nation of laws’ we owe it to those who have followed those laws the sense that we are not granting favors to those who chose to bend those laws to gain the freedom the ‘Statue of Liberty’ outlines below and remember ‘all you have to do is knock and entry will be granted’.
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
with silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
But at the same time are assuring that those who are here are here to enjoy and not destroy our freedoms.
MSGTAS on June 2, 2007 at 10:19 AM
If you use Newt’s plan of issuing a work card and let the major credit card companies administer it, you can enforce existing laws about employers hiring illegals.
There really are simple solutions for a problem that the government (Bush) tries to make complicated.
moonsbreath on June 2, 2007 at 10:58 AM
Since when are non-citizens who illegally cross our border entitled to trial by federal court, if that is indeed what Bill & Tony are trying to suggest? If you’re not an American citizen and have entered in violation of our border law, the cops should have the right to drive your ass to El Paso, shove you through the checkpoint back to your homeland, and nary a federal tax dollar be spent.
fusionaddict on June 2, 2007 at 11:22 AM
It sounds to me that not only has O’Reilly bought into the shamnesty bill, but he has also adopted the talking points of the administration to smear the conservative opposition to it.
ptolemy on June 2, 2007 at 12:01 PM
How about a higher tax rate on immigrants who came here illegally? $5,000 is a non-starter. It will be waived or extended, extended, extended. $5,000 should perhaps be the penalty per *year*, at least, for anyone with a lower middle class income. Why not a higher tax rate for LIFE and vigorous prosecution of tax evasion?
Anil Petra on June 2, 2007 at 3:27 PM
Don’t waste our time trying to argue that having Negroes educated in “separate but equal” schools is a violation of the Equal Protection clause, because the US Supreme Court held in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), that “separate but equal” railcars are legal under that clause. Now stop wasting our time, Mr. Brown, and get your daughter to the Negro school to which she’s assigned.The Supreme Court can change its mind. In this space, I’ve previously mentioned a diplomat, who works in an Embassy that is considered the sovereign territory of his home nation, and is considered immune from prosecution for most crimes. He is literally not ’subject to the jurisdiction thereof’.
That is manifestly false. The diplomat and immediate family residing within our borders is not “within the allegiance” of the US. If a diplomat’s wife is pregnant, and gives birth in a US hospital, she still retains that diplomatic immunity from our jurisdiction, and consequently the children born thus cannot be deemed to be US citizens.Have any children of foreign diplomats ever tried to claim US citizenship under the lex soli doctrine?
The Monster on June 2, 2007 at 10:30 PM
I want a damn preview button.
The Monster on June 2, 2007 at 10:30 PM
The blame is not just the President it all of those we elect to do their business on US.
MSGTAS on June 3, 2007 at 8:49 AM
Comment pages: