Video: Hannity clashes with Geraldo over Newark illegal alien suspect
posted at 10:42 pm on August 15, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The full segment ran upwards of 15 minutes. I pared it down here to a cool five, being careful to include Geraldo’s immortal malaprop at Kimberly Guilfoyle’s expense. You’ll know it when you hear it. Oh, and he also coins a new word. You’ll know that when you hear it, too.
Second verse, same as the first: it’s not an illegal immigration issue, saith the mustache, it’s an issue of judicial incompetence in letting Carranza out on bail after he was charged with child rape. But wait — what about the fact that he could have been deported had the feds known about that earlier indictment, which they didn’t thanks to Newark’s sanctuary city policy? Wouldn’t that mean the three kids in Newark would still be alive? Hannity’s co-host fields that one: sure, but then he would have been loose on the streets of Peru instead of on the streets of New Jersey and we should have no preference between those two options. In other words, because the judge didn’t do his job on bail, ICE shouldn’t do its job with respect to deportation lest we end up exporting “our” problem, which of course really isn’t our problem at all. And that in turn means this really isn’t “about” immigration. Got that?
The punchline is that most cases involving criminal illegal aliens don’t turn on judicial incompetence. The FUBAR bail ruling is Geraldo’s very convenient “out” here; revisit Patterico’s “Deport the Criminals First” post and note how many of them were in for DUI and did their time, in full accordance with the law, only to kill when they got out. So far as I know, Geraldo doesn’t want DUIs to be deportable offenses at all. In fact, the most he’ll concede (at the beginning of the clip) is that illegal status should be a factor in setting bail. Which actually makes no sense — if there’s nothing wrong with being “undocumented,” why hold it against the defendant with respect to bail but not with respect to deportability? — but it’s his nod at being “tough” on a guy who stands accused of raping toddlers and shooting teenagers in the head. And so the question remains: What if Carranza had been in for drunk driving and been bailed out per proper procedures? Where’s your judicial incompetence excuse then?
Pathetic. And the most pathetic part is that Geraldo’s not even the one who comes off looking the most foolish here.
Update: Notice how no one, not even Hannity, pauses to reflect that if the immigration laws were being enforced, Carranza wouldn’t have been here to commit the initial child-rape offense either. (Assuming that he did commit it, that is; he’s only been indicted so far.) They’re all writing off child molestation as a free-bite-at-the-apple kind of thing, even though but for his presence in the U.S. it never would have happened. That sort of makes this “about” immigration, does it not?
Update: Here’s an idea for tomorrow night’s H&C. Invite the relatives of the three dead kids in Newark down to the set and have Kirsten explain to them why we should have no preference as to whether this degenerate was released onto the streets of New Jersey versus the streets of Peru.
Update: Debbie Schlussel catches something I totally missed. With about 10 seconds left in the clip, Powers refers to illegal aliens as … “law-abiding citizens.” Check, please.
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: 1 2 Next »
Hey, it’s Hannity. What do you expect.
Good Lt on August 15, 2007 at 10:47 PM
I wasn’t talking about Hannity.
Allahpundit on August 15, 2007 at 10:50 PM
This has occurred WAAAY too often for hte creed of “its not illegals fault” to be anything but a punch-line
Defector01 on August 15, 2007 at 10:51 PM
“Immigrationism”?
Anyway…Can somebody point me to good stats on crime rates of illegals (excepting immigration status)? Stories like this are interesting but I still don’t have a good picture as to the prevalence/scope of the problem of criminal activity by this group of people.
starflyer on August 15, 2007 at 10:57 PM
I forgot to mention that in the post; Geraldo brings it up too. Who cares what the crime rate is? He’s wetting his pants over the fact that New York is safe notwithstanding its illegal immigrants, which is a cold comfort to those three kids’ families. However safe it is, it could be safer.
Allahpundit on August 15, 2007 at 10:59 PM
Thank you.
hollygolightly on August 15, 2007 at 11:00 PM
AllahPundit, your friend, KP, said of illegal aliens “most of them are law abiding citizens.”
1) Not law-abiding. They are all breaking the law–they are here illegally. That’s againt the law.
2) Not citizens. How the heck are illegal aliens “citizens”?
Completely, annoyingly, flat-out wrong.
Debbie Schlussel on August 15, 2007 at 11:01 PM
She’s not my friend.
Allahpundit on August 15, 2007 at 11:02 PM
Immigrationism???? I guess I’ll just add that new word to my Geraldo’s dictionary
HarryStar on August 15, 2007 at 11:03 PM
Though I would say that is likely, I don’t think you can make a compelling argument via conjecture alone. Personally, I avoid a strong stance on this issue because most to all of the arguments either way are based on conjecture and anecdote.
starflyer on August 15, 2007 at 11:05 PM
Eh. I just figured the other ones were givens.
Good Lt on August 15, 2007 at 11:07 PM
There is a guy in Texas now that slammed into a couple and baby and they burned alive. The court only set bail at 30k a person for a total of only 90k. Hell, the pervert at ucla got a 150k bail set.
http://urbangrounds.com/2007/08/14/juan-felix-salinas/
Blake on August 15, 2007 at 11:10 PM
Oh, yeah, this guy also had a previous arrest for domestic violence.
Blake on August 15, 2007 at 11:12 PM
i’ve never wanted to be in a gang so bad in my life. if she’s banging it. I’m there!
lorien1973 on August 15, 2007 at 11:12 PM
I was pretty disappointed in KP myself. She’s a lib sure but she’s usually a fairly reasonable one. Not tonight.
RobertCSampson on August 15, 2007 at 11:14 PM
Good job AP in kicking KP to the curb. Must be the most foolish in your and my sight. Sad…sad…sad. So sorry.
mjkazee on August 15, 2007 at 11:15 PM
Can Guilfoyle sue him for calling her that? And would I get banned If I said that in a comment?
I thought I was gonna have a nice calm week with Colmsey on vacay. First Beckel the wild eyed. Now the legal illegals. Time to double up the BP meds
PowWow on August 15, 2007 at 11:16 PM
The answer is all of the above.
Compare the crime per capita in this country to what it was fifty years ago.
If the person is a child rapist keep them in jail, if they are an illegal alien detain them, if all of the laws are enforced, Americans are protected as much as they can be and that’s what must be done, that’s the responsibility of all who swear an oath.
One sanctuary city with a lowered crime rate, a protected nations citizenry does not make.
All laws enforced equals more innocent lives saved.
Speakup on August 15, 2007 at 11:16 PM
KP may be way wrong on this issue, but boy was she looking great tonight.
p0s3r on August 15, 2007 at 11:16 PM
Maybe, just maybe this was the shark jumping moment for Newark and all the other sanctuary cities.
SouthernGent on August 15, 2007 at 11:18 PM
We have a winner, The beautiful KP comes off as being the most foolish.
F15Mech on August 15, 2007 at 11:22 PM
Serve their sentence, on the AMERICAN taxpayer dime. How about you pay for it Geraldo.
OH DEAR! KP says ILLEGALS are LAW ABIDING CITIZENS! Say it isn’t so.
CrimsonFisted on August 15, 2007 at 11:27 PM
At least this issue is on some news networks and not buried elsewhere
William Amos on August 15, 2007 at 11:27 PM
Bottom line: If the perp had been deported in the first place, those three kids would still be alive. Is it about immigration? You bet it is!
thedecider on August 15, 2007 at 11:30 PM
I say we all get together and chip into getting Allah an I phone
Then he wont have KP withdrawls. And we probably wont see him for months (and no Rosie pics !)
William Amos on August 15, 2007 at 11:30 PM
When Hannity announce that Geraldo would be on TV I decided not to watch the show. Can’t see wasting my time for this crap from Geraldo.
Helloyawl on August 15, 2007 at 11:30 PM
Opps then Again it might drive Allah insane to get him an I phone
He would need a crate to get his bill
William Amos on August 15, 2007 at 11:32 PM
“Ineffectuated” at 3:50? Or am I hearing that wrong?
A toolish shill none the less.
SouthernDem on August 15, 2007 at 11:33 PM
OT: I was just looking at the picture of the Iraqi woman with the bullets. The new one is timestamped at 5:24 PM ET 8/14. However, the one Bryan capped is stamped at 6:58 PM ET 8/14. How is that possible?
amerpundit on August 15, 2007 at 11:39 PM
I believe Yahoo refreshes photos and stories every few hours
William Amos on August 15, 2007 at 11:42 PM
Based on this clip, Geraldo won the (isolated) debate.
Michelle made him sharpen his game.
Bad Michelle!
Christoph on August 15, 2007 at 11:44 PM
Michelle?
F15Mech on August 15, 2007 at 11:48 PM
So did you…
This term assigns the term criminal to only some of the..um…criminals
Please stop using this idiotic term.
DwnSouthJukin on August 15, 2007 at 11:48 PM
Immigrationism – Oh, great, another “protected class” to add to race, class, gender, sexual orientation, et. al. Speak ill of immigrants and Mustachio will haul you up on hate crimes charges.
eeyore on August 15, 2007 at 11:52 PM
That’s a term of art to describe illegals who have committed a crime independent of their immigration status. There’s no more elegant way to say it. Michelle herself uses the term. Don’t be such a literalist.
Allahpundit on August 15, 2007 at 11:54 PM
Yep……one of these ‘law abiding’ psuedo citizens needs to meet me at the auto body shop tomorrow morning at 7AM when I pick up the wife’s car and fork over the deductable.
It would have been nice if his ID, insurance card, registration, and VIN number were legit, but one can’t really blame him about that can they?
Limerick on August 15, 2007 at 11:54 PM
To be fair, I think the “In” was just a false start to the word.
A toolish shill none the less.
eeyore on August 15, 2007 at 11:55 PM
No matter who uses it, it helps the opposition to define people invading out country as poor helpless simpletons being victimized by you & me. It hurts us, doesn’t help.
PS: Didnt mean to come off as snotty as I sounded in the previous post.
DwnSouthJukin on August 16, 2007 at 12:00 AM
I believe she said “most” were law-abiding citizens (I’ll have to listen to it again). Of course there will be the outcasts who probably have a rap-sheet as long as my arm and should have been deported at the first offense. Then, of course, there’s the fact that our borders are not secure and our immigration laws are not enforced (not to mention the growing list of sanctuary cities), but, once again, I think you allow your bias against Kirsten to over-cloud your judgement of what she actually said. To be fair (Ugh! it’s getting harder and harder to defend the fair, Kirsten) there are many (illegal) aliens who are obeying the rest of our laws even as they violate our….oh, forget it.
thedecider on August 16, 2007 at 12:02 AM
Yes, but by definition none of them are. They’re here illegally, after all. How are they “law-abiding” and how are they “citizens”?
Allahpundit on August 16, 2007 at 12:03 AM
The silver lining:
Depending on what happens with the lawsuit involving Imus and the chick from Rutgers, Guilefoyle shouldn’t have too much of a problem getting a settlement from Geraldo for that one.
Damn, what a slip. I would be pissed if I was her. So over the top, and so uncalled for, even if it was accidental.
nailinmyeye on August 16, 2007 at 12:06 AM
Lets see Geraldo walk at night through some of the neighborhoods of these law abiding citizens.
EnochCain on August 16, 2007 at 12:14 AM
Hannity just has to enter these debates better prepared. He is the weakest debater the right has. With all of his money, all of the time to prepare for the show, with his advanced knowledge of his guests…you would think he would use that knowledge, money, and time to better combat Geraldo or KP. Next time Hannity should throw a few bucks at Debbie and ask her to give him some debate pointers.
That guy misses too many chances to bury his opponent.
right2bright on August 16, 2007 at 12:20 AM
They are neither. They are not “law abiding”, and they are not “citizens”. I really think her larger point was that most try to obey the law here and live peaceably. Look, I live in a sanctuary city where many, many Mexican immigrants (most are probably illegal) work. Despite the fact that I wish they would come here legally, we don’t make it easy on them. I understand they come from a much harsher life and a country that is filled with government corruption. I understand they want more for their families and their children. I agree (with Kirsten) that most of them really do try to live clean lives here. I also understand how long and difficult it is for any foreigner to become a citizen or get approved for a green card. I imagine that if I were in their situation and I had a family to feed and support, I would probably do the exact same thing – enter the country however I could and make as much money as possible doing whatever I was hired to do. It isn’t that hard to understand their plight. Of course we must control immigration. Of course we are offended at groups who seem to turn their noses at our laws – as we should be. Of course we become incensed when we discover illegal aliens breaking our laws; being repeat offenders, and not being deported as they should (made worse by the fact that every-day Americans suffer at their criminal hands). But Kirstens’ point is also understandable. If I lived in Mexico and knew I had to support my family, I would be looking for every opportunity to give my family the best life I could. If that means I work illegally in the U.S., so be it. After all, the U.S. isn’t so concerned about securing its’ borders and many U.S. employers are so concerned where I’m here legally or not. Where opportunity exists, opportunity will be exploited.
thedecider on August 16, 2007 at 12:20 AM
I suspect KP’s misstatement of fact was just that…a slip of the tongue worth noting but not debating. It’s not really relevant unless it becomes a tactic used repeatedly to win points in a debate.
starflyer on August 16, 2007 at 12:23 AM
Yuck! Bad grammar at the end of my post. Anyway, I think you’re taking Kirsten’s point and making more out of it than she intended in spirit.
thedecider on August 16, 2007 at 12:23 AM
Good point however…
Starflyer,
“thedecider” is already trying to dismiss, the fact that all illegal aliens have already broken the law in the first place.
Therefore it IS relevant IMO.
F15Mech on August 16, 2007 at 12:38 AM
Suppose some day the U.S. goes bust and Canada becomes the new “land of opportunity”. I have to feed my kids – my family must survive. Sure I’ll apply for citizenship or whatever work visa is required, but meantime, my family needs to eat and survive. You bet I’ll cross that border and take whatever job I can get. What makes my analogy any different from what many Mexican men face today? It’s not that hard to put yourself in their shoes. And if it’s the French-Canadian provinces I’m crossing in to, well, I don’t speak French and probably won’t understand what forms I’m supposed to fill out or understand the government slacker who’s repeating to me the same information he/she doles out on a daily basis and doesn’t really care if I “get it” or not. This is not a difficult issue to understand. We focus so much on the bad guys (who should have been deported at the first offense – but we should have been enforcing our immigration laws to begin with!) without seeing the bigger picture.
thedecider on August 16, 2007 at 12:38 AM
WRONG! I’m not dismissing that at all. They have, indeed, broken our laws by coming here illegally.
thedecider on August 16, 2007 at 12:40 AM
And I suppose in the same situation, you would simply let your family starve while you make sure you’ve dotted every “I” and crossed every “T” on those forms you need to fill out before you can “legally” work there.
thedecider on August 16, 2007 at 12:46 AM
Immigrationism: The widely held belief that nations have a fundamental right and duty to control immigration through the creation and enforcement of immigration laws.
Immigrationist: A person who supports enforcement of immigration laws.
Thanks for the nifty new words, Geraldo.
FloatingRock on August 16, 2007 at 12:47 AM
Ok maybe I misunderstood; you are saying KP’s points are wrong?
You cannot come to the USA illegally?
Is that what you are saying?
F15Mech on August 16, 2007 at 12:48 AM
you are = are you
F15Mech on August 16, 2007 at 12:49 AM
If we don’t secure our borders it could happen sooner than any of us might think.
FloatingRock on August 16, 2007 at 12:56 AM
I’m saying we should enforce our immigration laws. Cities should not be allowed to thumb their noses at our national immigration policy and refuse to cooperate with INS officials. There should be nothing we can refer to as a “sanctuary city”. Beyond that, I’m saying I can understand why illegal aliens are here. They are looking for opportunity that they cannot find in their home country. I believe it is a mistake to assume all illegal aliens are, necessarily, bad people. This is the point many on the left are having a problem articulating to those on the right. Kirsten’s point (in my opinion) is that many illegal aliens are simply looking to support and feed their families and it is wrong to assume all of them are bad people who are here to do us harm. Are they violating our laws? Yes! They are! But why are they here? They need to feed and clothe their families, and I would do the same in their situation.
thedecider on August 16, 2007 at 12:57 AM
Look, I don’t want to go against conventional MSM wisdom, but, you know, we (US citizens) really CAN deport them all (illigal aliens). The disposition of the illegals is only a factor of the patience of the majority. The majority is getting tired and restless.
And God willing (sorry AP), we will deport them all, lettuce, tomatoes, or no lettuce, tomatoes.
Hell with the lettuce, we’ll buy it from Mexico or Peru if need be.
I would rather bring in 10 million legal Nigerians, 5 million legal Cubans, and 5 million legal Chinese than allow this great soveign nation to be overrun by people to whom the law does not apply.
AZCON on August 16, 2007 at 1:14 AM
If you live around my neighborhood and are in need of a handout, please ask. If you ever try breaking into our homes you may end up weighing several grains heavier than when you started. If you live in NY or California you should be fairly safe, however.
Seriously though, I understand your basic point that some people are going to do whatever it takes to eat and survive, but you should also understand that people have a right to prevent you from taking what they have. There are right ways and wrong ways to feed and cloth yourself in a civilized society.
FloatingRock on August 16, 2007 at 1:17 AM
While I am not in the same situation am I?
When I was younger I worked 16 hours a day (two full time jobs) in order to provide for my loved ones. (There was not a country I could sneak into was there)?
I bettered myself via hard work.
One thing the press never mentions/talks about, is that among illegal aliens it generally takes about 3 generations to equal that of a single year legal immigrant.
How sad is it when the MSM only thinks that illegal immigrants are only good for picking lettuce? I personally have seen that they are better then that.
F15Mech on August 16, 2007 at 1:20 AM
Yes, there are, and those who do it the wrong way must be shown the door.
thedecider on August 16, 2007 at 1:21 AM
Right, or better yet we should prevent them from ever coming through the door or the window or down the chimney in the first place.
FloatingRock on August 16, 2007 at 1:32 AM
…And if in spite of our best efforts they still manage to get in then we have the right to deal with the problem in any way we deem appropriate.
FloatingRock on August 16, 2007 at 1:39 AM
If these illegal workers really are required by our aging population (to pay the social security taxes needed), our businesses (to pick cotton, lettuce, tomatoes, clean dishes, maid rooms, raise our children), our teacher’s unions (to keep a supply of bodies in schools to justify our jobs), our politicions(sp) for votes, our military for grunts, our Starbucks for latte-iens, our McD for night managers, so be it….
The US needs to consider seriously the annexation of Mexico, with all it’s oil and labor resources. How much of a bribe do the upper class of Spain/Mexico need to finally give up the “Silver Bitch”?
It will be a positive thing, bloodless. Puerto Rico, Cuba, Hispanola, and Central America in one complete grab for labor! Let’s do it while it is still popular!
Manifest Destiny, Baby!
AZCON on August 16, 2007 at 1:40 AM
Enforcing our laws and defending our borders in an age where we face a very real WOT is of paramount importance! Arguing over why illegal aliens come here, or are allowed to remain here, seems so trivial in comparison. There must be a compromise which our Senators have so far been reluctant to devise. I fully understand why many aliens come here, and support their reasons for doing so. I do not support immigration laws which can be re-interpreted to fit any particular political ideology of a local government which abuses such powers to redirect the spirit or meaning of said laws to fit political purposes. There must be one national law regarding immigration which must be upheld by every city and every state.
thedecider on August 16, 2007 at 1:46 AM
Lemme get this straight. We allow illegal aliens – who should not be on our streets at all – charged with crimes to post bail to secure their liberty while awaiting trial? Just what are they supposed to do legally here do while out on the judge’s pass?
A NO BAIL provision needs to be added to Newt’s bill.
T J Green on August 16, 2007 at 1:56 AM
Ouch.
- The Cat
MirCat on August 16, 2007 at 2:35 AM
AP,
Why do you keep publishing clips of that tool? Really, is there a personality on the airwaves more insipid than Geraldo?
Does he encourage and edify us? Does he enlighten us? Does he engage us with his acumen? Does he perform any social or intellectual task whatsoever that justifies the attention you give him?
paul006 on August 16, 2007 at 2:37 AM
The delusional judges and politicians are going to get us all killed.
profitsbeard on August 16, 2007 at 2:42 AM
I was taken by how racist, and bigoted, and prejudiced Geraldo came off in this appearance, and in numerous other appearances on television during the past few months, including during his Geraldo at Large program.
To me, he oozes animosity, cynicism, angst, and racism.
William
William2006 on August 16, 2007 at 2:52 AM
KP says that “people say” that if we deported all the illegal aliens we wouldn’t have any more crime. Who says that? “People” whom KP listens to, perhaps, but no rational, thinking person I know makes that claim. Another lib lie to promote the bigger lib lie.
windbag on August 16, 2007 at 7:41 AM
I don’t watch these idiots any more! Total waste of time! They keep prattling on but nothing changes…NOTHING!
sabbott on August 16, 2007 at 8:31 AM
This has been my argument here for a long time.
This IS an alien issue, unless you want mexicanization of this country- which Geraldo clearly does want.
It’s not about the one worker working for less than minimum wage- it’s about the 10 dependents who cannot possibly be supported by that worker. It’s about illegals protesting us on our soil. It’s about demands for cultural change.
I do not want this country to turn into Mexico.
No thank you.
drjohn on August 16, 2007 at 8:50 AM
Instead of coming here, maybe Mexicans disgruntled in their own country should try to fix their own problems. Why hasn’t anyone suggested this? Problem with corrupt govt? Well, do something about it.
If they are such hard workers, then why wait until you sneak here to work. Care about your own homeland. Apply all this so called hard work that Americans won’t do -to your own land. Maybe Mexico can have a bright future if their own people actually stayed around for a bit.
If Mexicans won’t come together to fix their own problems in their own country… what makes dems think Mexicans will help liberal issues here?
flipflopper on August 16, 2007 at 9:26 AM
Yeah, KP just destroyed any credibility she had left. I understand her being a Hillary tool, but the intellectual dishonesty is ridiculous. The woman is now officially ugly and a kool-aid drinking moonbat.
csdeven on August 16, 2007 at 9:30 AM
Geraldo’s eyes are all puffy. They look like he has been crying since shamnesty was voted down.
Bicyea on August 16, 2007 at 9:34 AM
exactly.
trailortrash on August 16, 2007 at 9:38 AM
This is a bit off topic, but it’s something I really want to share. I was at the Freedom Concert in DFW Tuesday night. Ollie was on stage and Sean was out in the audience with a bunch of family members of 4 men serving in Iraq who were saying hellos, I miss yous and I love yous to each other over a video feed. (nice!) Anyway, Sean was standing right in front of us, close enough to touch, so I got a long look at him.
This man is quite beautiful. The camera does not do him justice. He radiates kindness, poise, and authenticity, and physically, he just…glitters.
Mitt did a good short speech, as did Newt. It was a great experience to sit in the Nokia Theater with over 6000 flag waving right-minded fellow citizens. If you can catch one of these concerts, I highly recommend them!
RushBaby on August 16, 2007 at 9:41 AM
Geraldo is nothing but a braying ass. I intend to stop wasting my time watching or listening to someone who has obviously lost the capacity to reason.
oldleprechaun on August 16, 2007 at 9:45 AM
Neither part of that is true but I share your disappointment.
Allahpundit on August 16, 2007 at 9:47 AM
Heh.
Jaibones on August 16, 2007 at 10:00 AM
But, the Good News: she’s eligible once again for the good graces of the Moonbat Left.
Jaibones on August 16, 2007 at 10:01 AM
I just wonder how the viewers can watch this unwatchable crap. Not only are all four panelists noted imbeciles without an intelligent opinion on public policy between them, but there’s no one in charge and they all talk at the same time.
I wouldn’t watch Fox News if it was the only thing on, unless it’s Eric Burns or Brit Hume. Everything else is garbage.
OK, I watch O’Reilly to see that yummy dark haired lady, too…sometimes.
Jaibones on August 16, 2007 at 10:11 AM
Usually, I’m in the kitchen working magic when either O’Reilly or H&C’s is on. To “listen” (as opposed to watching) to either KP or Geraldomundo is eye opening. KP is coming on more and more with a shaky, unsure voice and not at all convinced of her position – Geraldomundo’s comments border on hissy fits and flailing. Listen to MM…she’s controlled, first hand and instant recall of facts, committed to the subject and not swayed by trivializing the facts. No matter how attractive any of the personalities are, what counts is what and how they say it. For an insight into their soul, read what they say.
24K lady on August 16, 2007 at 10:20 AM
I’d like to sit with Geraldo and do some Google searches with him. I’d search “State Most Wanted,” and “Sheriff Most Wanted.” Then, I’d like for him to explain to me, while I’m showing him the pictures and summaries, how his assertions about immigrants, Latinos in particular, stand up to objective facts: Aliens are disproportionately represented; Latinos are disproportionately represented; and, considering that most illegal aliens are Hispanic, illegal aliens must therefore be disproportionately represented. Geraldo’s arguments are so easy to disprove, it’s laughable.
If the incredible level of disproportion were not so glaringly apparent from even a cursory review of what is available, Geraldo and his La Raza friends might be able to multicult us into submission on this issue. But confronted with such overwhelming evidence, only the most politically corrected moron could maintain the position that it is unreasonable for us to point to immigration status as a salient point for discussion about the proper ways for us to confront crimes committed in the US.
Thanks to PC, I can’t find any law enforcement sites that actually make note of whether or not the suspects are illegal aliens, but a few do list nationality or place of birth. If you’re inclined to dig, there are often clues in the crime suspect summaries.
“May have fled to Mexico” is a pretty good indicator.
There are other good resources I’d like for Geraldo to consider:
Court TV Most Wanted
Fugitive Hunter’s Most Wanted
If you can spend even a little while perusing these sites and not start thinking that profiling isn’t such a bad idea, you just don’t have your head screwed on straight. If the profiling offends law-abiding legal citizen Hispanics, Muslims or any other ethnic, cultural or religious group, perhaps they should get a clue and start demanding that illegal aliens who share their traits be removed. If a bunch of British illegal aliens were disproportionately represented in crime stats and it started making reasonable people and authorities have honest concerns that led to their profiling me, I’d demand law enforcement action to make sure that all British illegal aliens were removed. The last thing that I’d ever do is start sympathizing with criminals just because we were ethnically or culturally similar. I have too much respect for my nation and its sovereignty for that.
Geraldo has none.
kdaddy on August 16, 2007 at 10:20 AM
I hate it when blondes say dumb things. Plays havoc with my fantasies.
JackStraw on August 16, 2007 at 10:22 AM
Geraldo tried the ” they were two years old when they got here” for the Fort Dix Six, and this murderer in NJ was eleven when he snuck in, so what does that mean? They wait ’til they’re old enough to join MS13 ( at 11 years old) or wait until they hit their teens to commit crimes?
It only supports the theory of “deport all of them regardless of age NOW”, as even the children are going to be trouble.
Simple FACT: If they were turned back at the border, they could not have committed any crime in the U.S., ever.
BUILD THE WALL.
shooter on August 16, 2007 at 10:36 AM
KP was definitely having a “blond” moment there.
My collie says:
CyberCipher on August 16, 2007 at 11:08 AM
I bet he has an illegal tending his mustache…
congsan on August 16, 2007 at 11:09 AM
I assume you are referring to her physical beauty? I don’t mean physically ugly. I see beauty that comes from rational thinking and honesty, and KP has lost it for me.
But her defending Geraldo’s position, was an exercise in supporting the left for the sake of the lefts ideology. I call that kool-aid drinking. I know she is suppose to take the left side of the issue, but she doesn’t have to BE a Colmes clone because of it.
csdeven on August 16, 2007 at 11:18 AM
And yes, I am disappointed. She was the light at the end of the tunnel for quite a while.
csdeven on August 16, 2007 at 11:19 AM
Maybe Jerry Rivers is running for President and will win with his friends the ‘undocumented aliens’(or undocumented Americans as that goof ball Reid says) votes. He’ll run on the ‘immigrationism’ line.
countywolf on August 16, 2007 at 11:57 AM
Geraldo keeps saying that New York is the safest city and implies it is because of sanctuary city laws. It is not the sanctuary laws that lowered crime in New York; it was the vigorous enforcement of the criminal statutes that lowered crime in the big apple not letting Illegal Aliens roam the streets with impunity.
Hannity should have argued that if New York enforced the Immigration laws that crime would be reduced even more than it is today. Those are the facts.
What was Hannity thinking by adding the former underwear model on his panel that Kimberly Guilfoyle would add anything to the debate? She is an open borders advocate and worked in a Sanctuary City that has special order 40 on the books, Los Angeles.
I know, I used to have to listen to her press conferences where she pandered to the Illegals in Los Angeles. Guilfoyle and Geraldo are both reconquista’s of the worst kind.
ScottyDog on August 16, 2007 at 12:16 PM
IMO, what is occurring is an invasion of sorts. Most of these foreign nationals are aware that there is a liberal poicy in place in the U.S. that allows them to enter and stay illegally. They are only responding to the lack of opportunities to commit crimes here(I live in Central America). What is most intriguing to me is that people in the U.S. are ignorant of the culture that spawns this garbage and pushes it onto another culture and counrty. Many of the “illegal immigrants” are life long, carreer criminals that are looking to maximize there potential, so to speak. If you don’t like waht is happening now just wait until you have to have private armed guards in the local burger joint or in your neighborhood.
One other thing, I have a biometeric ID card. It is a requirement of my recidency. It is issued to me by a third world country that is more aggresive in the prosecution and control of its borders and immigration laws than the U.S. Email me if you wish to see a photo of same. Bill
onebill1 on August 16, 2007 at 12:33 PM
Thanks for making me waste my coffee on the computer screen!
hollygolightly on August 16, 2007 at 12:33 PM
I agree. I think she’s doing her job by trying to represent the Democrats perspective and since the candidates are pandering to Kos, she is doing the same.
FloatingRock on August 16, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Where, PLEASE, is this on any other network (other than FOX)? After several Google searches, I can only find references within the blogosphere of the Hannity & Colmes segment.. particularly related to this site. Usually Mr. Narcissistic Will goes as far as to provide links to (in)credibly make his point… which is what exactly (here)? Again:
Why does this faux “contributing blogger” troll continue to post on every thread just to say the most obnoxious, off-topic, even controversially misguided CRAP for the sake of attention?! FTR Will, put up the first donation and I’m sure we’d all like to make AP happy; he deserves one for all his hard work; but please quit pandering, it makes you sound juvenile, especially when you assume he has an infatuation with KP or Rosie.. then to suggest you would be happy to not read/enjoy his omnipresent role here at HA. (Revisit the main page and count the entry logs; who do you think is the primary contributor to the site you frequent daily??
I understand the irony in heeding my own advice, but please, take notice: DON’T FEED THE TROLLS!
Further, as with other posts (such as The Onion News Network clips), isn’t it getting ridiculous that some just can’t understand it’s a satirical skit? It’s like a posting has to be made after two or so entries mentioning an “alert” be made to educate some folks who just don’t get it.
Here’s another quick point/example:
AP simply added the appropriate terminology to further identify the distinction of those who commit additional acts of criminal behavior after the act of illegally crossing our borders. It’s not a redundant point; it’s made to help some people understand that while ALL illegal aliens are obvious law-breakers by default, some go on to abuse our laws (with the help of activist judges and apologists) by seeking sanctuary, then committing more egregious, unconscionable acts of criminality. Some people just have to stop being overly sensitive and literal on the provided editorial content.
Maybe a sidebar link should be established to view “banned bloggers” or even “identified trolls”. Just a thought.
nationspatriotcom on August 16, 2007 at 12:43 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »