Audio: Rudy Giuliani and Laura Ingraham on immigration
posted at 10:05 am on August 23, 2007 by Bryan
This clip is from yesterday’s Laura Ingraham Show. Giuliani explains and defends his record as NYC mayor vis a vis illegal alien policies, and hits on the WSJ editorial that I discussed yesterday. If you’re having a hard time figuring out why Giuliani is leading the pack right now, just listen to this interview. He makes a very compelling case for his candidacy, even to a somewhat skeptical person like myself.
Here’s the segment. Control+click to have it pop up and play in a new tab.
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
and Julie, this squares with being the mayor of a sanctuary city how?
corona on August 23, 2007 at 10:17 AM
OT: I like the new Headlines feature.
amerpundit on August 23, 2007 at 10:23 AM
Uh … duh.
See: “illegal.”
Professor Blather on August 23, 2007 at 10:28 AM
I heard it yesterday and was not impressed. “We should end illegal immigration” was a stupid thing to say. It’s not going to just stop.
I’d rather my candidate say that we are going to enforce the laws, build the fence, militarize the border, and take out the trash.
Tru2my2 on August 23, 2007 at 10:33 AM
I can’t wait to find one.
amerpundit on August 23, 2007 at 10:36 AM
One that can actually win, that is.
amerpundit on August 23, 2007 at 10:36 AM
Wow, went to archives for that Guiliani pic…he still had hair!
BigAnge on August 23, 2007 at 10:51 AM
Beside throwing the employers that hired illegals into jail, the best way to make them leave is to deny them all the welfare benefits and kick their kids out of public school. If their kids are out of school, Momma can’t work, therefore Momma & kids will go back to country of origin and live “large” there. That is if Dad decides to send money back home.
Wuptdo on August 23, 2007 at 10:54 AM
What’s with all the BS that we didn’t have the technology back then? Securing the border is not rocket science or something that requires some esoteric mathematical algorithms. Countries that are far less advanced than us have been able to secure their borders just fine. What it takes mostly is will.
Even if we couldn’t have completely, 100% stopped every attempt at illegally immigrating here, we certainly could have cut the problem down to a small fraction of it’s current state.
thirteen28 on August 23, 2007 at 10:59 AM
Thank God for Rudy:
A rational man. The second coming of Capt. Furillo.
tommylotto on August 23, 2007 at 11:06 AM
That’s good, but you know what’d really get illegals out? Have a program that for every illegal you turn in, you get one year off your federal taxes. See something, Say Something.
I also like the idea that every non-violent offender caught would have to automatically spend a year or two working in Iraq or Afghanistan building infrastructure before being sent home. Violent offenders get to clear mine fields.
Make being illegal so onerous that they’ll want to leave.
Then we also have to explain why being a citizen is a privilege and not a human right.
Iblis on August 23, 2007 at 11:08 AM
Is it just me, or does Laura Ingraham look sexey as hell in that dress.
Masscon on August 23, 2007 at 11:16 AM
Name a country with land boarders as long as ours that had complete control — and totalitarian states where people want to get out — not in — do not count.
tommylotto on August 23, 2007 at 11:16 AM
“There’s no doubt about it. We should end illegal immigration. And I strongly hope whomever is President after me finally does something about it.”
saint kansas on August 23, 2007 at 11:16 AM
Sounds like “political speak” for blanket legalization. Giulliani needs to clarify that statement. The word should doesn’t imply action but more just an opinion without substance.
captivated_dem on August 23, 2007 at 11:17 AM
Sorry Bryan, I am not compelled — yet. He just doesn’t feel right, at the moment. Obviously, we’ll have to see who the final two choices are. If it’s between Hiz Honor and say Billary, well of course it’s the Mayor.
countywolf on August 23, 2007 at 11:29 AM
The only thing I’d change would be switching reporting illegals to reporting business that hire illegals.
I have nothing against illegals and don’t really blame them. If I lived in Mexico, I’d sneak across the border, too.
Take away all incentives and they’ll quit doing it. There should be prison time for any business owners who hire illegals. And I’ll take that year off my taxes for reporting them.
Professor Blather on August 23, 2007 at 11:38 AM
Every time Rudy starts to get a little momentum some “stupid” fact gets in the way. The leadership from all points in our country sux. The potential leaders we have to choose from doesn’t suggest any improvement in the near future. It’s either war or appeasement. Nothing in between.
volsense on August 23, 2007 at 11:53 AM
Rudy suffers from Geraldo Syndrome.
moonsbreath on August 23, 2007 at 12:02 PM
Rudy does make a compelling arguement. But when he said he would identify every single illegal alien in the country. That is a little too authoritarian for me.
Laura let him walk on his past statements. What technology do we have now that we did not have then? ID’s? Fences? Actually checking Social Sec numbers. That some ground breaking technology right there! C’mon she let him walk. That was almost a Clinton interview, soft, soft, soft.
Rudy has his negatives with the base, the base votes. Alot of would be Rudy voters won’t make to the primaries, not a slam dunk for Fred. Get your game face on Fred.
1) Rudy wanted criminal illegal aliens deported?
If you look at Rudy’s record you could make the statement that he didn’t try all that hard to get them deported. Rudy was an arm twister, a ball breaker, and he stepped on the neck of many a person that tried to stop his agenda. He forced the state of New York to merge the administration of the New York police and the other police departments. He tried real hard to deport illegal aliens. Sending in the names to ICE was the most he could do…
2) Which state can he win that Goerge Bush didn’t? All of them. Nobody is going to vote for Hilary. If Rudy makes he would be a landslide victor.
Questions for Guiliani for a non softball interview:
1. You are for ending illegal immigration, what then?
2. Will you grant amnesty for the people here illegally?
3. What is your stance on in state tuition for illegal aliens?
4. What is your stance on the Dream Act? (The Dream Act provides legal cover for Governors from prosecution form their own citizens for providing in state tuition to illegals, shhh)
5. If a bill reaches your desk that makes gay marriage a right will you sign it?
6. If a bill reaches your desk that ends all funding to any organazation that provides abortions will you sign it?
Those questioins will draw the line between Fred and Rudy. Rudy will be hard pressed not to expose his pro-illegal stance. Rudy is not for deporting illegal aliens, just the “criminals.” Coming here illeglally is not a serious enough crime to warrant deportation.
Theworldisnotenough on August 23, 2007 at 12:25 PM
Given the tounge-bath he’s given to illegals, sanctuary city policy and pro-amnesty stance I’m pretty sure that when Rudy talks about “ending illegal immigration” he means he simply wants open borders.
See, you can end illegal immigration! Just make all immigration legal! Problem solved!
Hollowpoint on August 23, 2007 at 12:25 PM
Good gravy. My post is littered with errors. Apologies fellow Hotair readers.
Theworldisnotenough on August 23, 2007 at 12:27 PM
He’s already stated quite clearly that he’s in favor of a “path to citizenship” via a process almost identical to Bush’s shamnesty bill.
Hollowpoint on August 23, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Rudy is going to use “ending illegal immigration” as a pretext to amnesty. Listen to what he says and what he does not say.
He never says he will start deporting people. I have never heard him say that.
Listen to his answer about sanctuary cities. He only supports denying funds if the city doesn’t report criminals. His definition of sanctuary is alot different than the bases definition. Rudy told his city workers to not check immigration status. I do not want that policy in the White House.
If elected he will use enforcement first as a pretext for amnesty and Fred better ask him about it in the primaries.
Theworldisnotenough on August 23, 2007 at 12:33 PM
I’d have to disagree with you here. I have a lot of friends from Mexico who are here legally.
I myself come from the Phillipines and had to wait years to get a visa.
The one thing I do have in common with my friends is a college education.
Bottom line: there is a way to come here legally. It’s just a matter of respecting the law and, by extension, the country. Without that, you get… illegals.
redzap on August 23, 2007 at 12:47 PM
Bryan,
Unless Fred changes his approach to this race (and I don’t see that happening any time soon), Rudy has the Republican nomination.
bnelson44 on August 23, 2007 at 12:53 PM
This guy is a creep. He is only a hack politician that will form an opinion or answer to a question based on his assessment of what the popular response should be. He does not truly respresent anything that conservatives hold dear.
Ask him how small the government would become under his administration. If he says he would reduce it by 50% that would be a start. Then what about reduction in taxes and elimination of the death tax. Would he really leave us alone? Can we keep our guns and use them? Would he prosecute employers of illegals and eliminate the anchor baby problem?
davidcaskey on August 23, 2007 at 1:01 PM
Illegal immigration, regardless of what country the illegal alien comes from, is at the root, lawlessness. It is anarchy. It is breaking the law, and expecting something “good” in return, like wages, like future USA citizenship. It is always morally wrong to reward illegal behavior or unethical conduct with “good things,” like USA citizenship, or wages, or free health care.
The interest in the relationship between illegal immigration and criminal illegals is that lawlessness and anarcy are at the root of both. And both groups could have been 100% preventable if George W. Bush took seriously USA’s open and porous borders in the same way he contantly complains about Pakistan’s open borders with Afghanistan.
If USA policy is merely to deport only criminal illegals (meaning “violent” criminals), instead of every illegal alien, then should we really be surprised in the future when a non-criminal illegal alien commits a crime for the first time?
After all, the Fort Dix terrorists were once illegal aliens of the “non-criminal kind” of illegal aliens. They were illegally living in the USA for years before attempting their crime in Maryland. It took only one potential act to move them from the category of “non-criminal illegal alien” into the new category of “criminal illegal aliens.”
The problem of trying to separate “criminal illegals” from “non-criminal illegal aliens” is that it is a fallacy.
Tomorrow a “non-criminal illegal alien” could commit a crime. Or 5 days from now. Or 15 years from now. I understand that the logistics of law enforcement cause us to focus exclusively on the “criminal illegal alien.” I am just raising a point that many of the now criminal illegal aliens were in fact once considered to be “non-criminal illegal aliens”, and have been living peacefully (but illegally) in the USA for years and years before comitting their horrible crimes.
ColtsFan on August 23, 2007 at 1:01 PM
The way to end illegal immigration is to make it legal …duh.
The way to end violence is to ban lawful gun ownership …duh.
Rode Werk on August 23, 2007 at 1:14 PM
A key point of Rudy’s “ending illegal immigration” plan is to increase legal immigration. This is just what Kennedy wanted to do with the “grand compromise”. A reporter asked Kennedy where he came up with the new guest worker numbers in the bill. He replied that they estimated the number trying to sneak in every year and decided that was a good number. That way, they’re not sneaking in, all they have to do is raise their hand and say “can I come in?”. Sure!! The more the merrier!!
I can’t even believe Rudy the RINO is leading in the Republican polls. He’s pro-abortion, anti-gun, and pro-ILLEGAL immigration.
Paul the American on August 23, 2007 at 1:51 PM
Rudy certainly needs a little clarification on what he means on ending “illegal immigration”.
Not the worst candidate the Republicans could offer, still certanly no where in Rommney’s league in my opinion.
MarkB on August 23, 2007 at 1:58 PM
I wouldn’t classify Rudy as a RINO, Rudy is a liberal who is probably as far left as Kennedy, Hillary, or Obama, his only difference is his stance on the GWoT. It’s almost like calling Leiberman a Republican.
I believe Rudy would turn his back on the party much faster than Bush did, probably within minutes after he won the election.
As far as the campains are going I don’t know who I will vote for, but I know who I won’t vote for, and Rudy’s near the top of the list.
Rode Werk on August 23, 2007 at 2:27 PM
Sounds eerily familiar, I support illegal aliens but I’m gonna stop it from happening.
We’ve had the fox watching the hen house for decades now, just exactly when does that cycle stop?
Enough bait and switch, enough half truths by omission.
Do they go home or not Rudy?
What else of what you’re telling us is not quite all there is to the story?
Speakup on August 23, 2007 at 3:15 PM
And any politician who approves of what you describe is himself lawless, anarchist, and putting himself above the law. Any politician who wants to give a vote to these invaders is intentionally disenfranchising the current voters. What name for these politicians-
- leader of the invasion
- invasion facilitator
- or co-conspirator?
Message to Rudi – if you want to get the criminals off the streets why not start with the ones we absolutely know for a rock hard fact are criminals: all the people who illegally crossed the border and all the people who are working illegally in this country – oh and the criminals who are illegally hiring these criminals too.
entagor on August 23, 2007 at 3:31 PM
I cannot believe the paranoid crap I am reading on this thread — He said we should end illegal immigration — you guys interpret that to mean open boarders and amnesty. You guys are insane.
Just because he kept a policy of not reporting illegal as MAYOR does not mean that he would keep the same policy as POTUS. To think that is irrational. As Mayor he had no authority to deport. He could not get rid of the 400,000 illegals in his city. He wanted the feds to start by deporting the crminals, but he could not even get the feds to do that. So, he was rational — I know that does not compute with a lot of you fredheads, because your candidate never had to make the tough choices of an executive, just which sleazy organization to accept money from to lobby for. Rudy could either have gangs of illegal kids roaming the streets committing crimes, or those same kids in school learning English and given an opportunity to assimilate and be a productive member of society. He could fight violent crime or have immigrant communities decend into kaos with codes of silence.
Listen to him. He is the Pizza man. All he needs to do now is hop into bed with Joyce Davenport.
tommylotto on August 23, 2007 at 3:48 PM
Rudy went all the way to the Supreme Court to defend his Sanctuary policies and LOST.
He defied the ruling and kept the Sanctuary policies in place in NYC.
By definition that makes him a criminal and he is in violation of 8 USC Sec. 1644 (“No local ordinance, rule, or measure shall stop law enforcement officers [Including State and Local law enforcement officers] from enforcement of this section”)
Rudy Guilianni is a member of the CFR and once gave a speech to the United Nations extolling the virtues of a One World Order just like George Bush’s daddy. In addition, since he left NY at Mayor he worked on the NAFTA Superhighway.
Diane Grassi, NAFTA Superhighway Has Giuliani As Key Player:
At the center of negotiations for multiple legs of the Superhighway Corridor throughout Texas, is none other than Rudolph Giuliani’s law firm which landed the Comprehensive Development Agreement for a widening of Interstate-35, now referred to as the TTC-35, in addition to the Master Development Plans for State Highways 121 and 130 among other legs of the TTC. All negotiations for Cintra were and are presently handled by the law firm, Bracewell & Giuliani, LLP, of which Republican Presidential candidate, Rudolph Giuliani, has been a senior executive partner since March 2005. His law firm is the exclusive legal counsel for Cintra. Bracewell & Giuliani is comprised of 400 attorneys, based in Houston, TX with offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., London and Kazakhstan.
Cintra joined with San Antonio, TX-based Zachry Construction Corp. to help land the contracts, in which Zachry owns a 20% interest. The Cintra-Zachry proposal for TTC-35 includes a private investment of up to $6 billion in upfront payments for the complete construction, design and operation of a 316-mile toll road between Dallas and San Antonio, giving Cintra the right to set tolls and keep toll road profits for a period of 50 years, as it will for each road it has contracted.
Most interesting to the whole story is not only has Mr. Giuliani’s involvement in the NAFTA Superhighway not ever having been publicly addressed, but how a foreign company is awarded the building of a mass highway system, versus maintaining it, for the first time in U.S. history, and negotiated by the law firm of the top Republican candidate running for President of the United States. And truly disturbing is how such will not only have national and homeland security and sovereignty implications but how it is deliberately being kept away from the Halls of Congress.
Giuliani fancies himself as an expert on homeland security issues and a law enforcer. And he has amassed quite the portfolio since 2002, earning $20 million in that year alone, by selling himself as such. He owns Giuliani Partners, Giuliani Safety & Security and Giuliani Capital Advisors. In March 2007 he sold Giuliani Capital Advisors, a former Ernst & Young finance company he purchased in 2002, to Macquerie Infrastructure Consortium. Not coincidentally, it is a partner of Cintra’s in its shared operations of toll roads in both Indiana and Chicago, IL.
We should have seen it coming when Giuliani enacted Special Order 40 in 1994, during his tenure as Mayor of New York City, in ordering law enforcement officers to no longer check the legal status of suspects caught violating the law.
We should have seen it coming when Rudolph Giuliani single-handedly decided that illegal aliens were not lawbreakers and also quit upholding the law. And unfortunately we now do see it coming. But sadly, he may now actually be handed the opportunity to no longer defend and abide by the U.S. Constitution of the United States of America.
ScottyDog on August 23, 2007 at 3:54 PM
Third option- he could let the police refer them to the feds for deportation, but thanks to Rudy they were prohibited from doing so. He actively interferred with government efforts to deport illegals and thus his crime-fighting rhetoric rings empty.
He’s in favor of amnesty, and had this to say about illegal aliens:
Rudy’s blather about wanting to make illegals feel safe to report crime is the same BS excuse all the other sanctuary city officials use- the fact is that they just want to protect certain politically correct criminals from prosecution.
Hollowpoint on August 23, 2007 at 4:26 PM
This page at the Wash Times doesn’t open up anymore.
Giuliani eyes citizenship path for illegals
The Washington Times – Aug 15 10:13 AM
Republican presidential hopeful Rudolph W. Giuliani yesterday said he would grant a pathway to citizenship to some illegal aliens already in the country but would stop future illegal aliens by finishing the border fence and bringing expertise to the job.
Get a clue, we’re mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore.
Speakup on August 23, 2007 at 4:45 PM
That’s a great picture of Rudy, althoug I prefer this one.
Big S on August 23, 2007 at 4:55 PM
Are you intentionally ignoring the point? The fed was not deporting anyone!!!. He could refer all day, it would do no good. The feds were not even deporting the felons let alone the school kids.
tommylotto on August 23, 2007 at 6:04 PM
You, sir, are an idiot. Special Order 40 was issued to the LAPD, not the NYPD. What are you some kind of propagandist spreading lies. If you listened to him with Laura, he actually reversed exactly that. Under Dinkins, the NYPD was told to not report illegal alien criminals (similar to Special Order 40 in LA). Giuliani reversed that and required the NYPD to report illegal alien law breakers.
I suspect the rest of your screed is full of similar nonsense.
tommylotto on August 23, 2007 at 6:10 PM
The point is that Rudy forbade city workers from calling the feds, and fought to make sure they were eligible for welfare and other social services. He forbade the cops from even checking someone’s immigration status- I guess we’ll never know how many the feds would’ve deported, including the 9/11 hijackers.
He even went so far as to flout Federal law when he lost the court case he brought to keep his sanctuary city policy alive:
So tell me, tommylotto- are you in favor of the “sanctuary city” policies of cities who prevent their employees from reporting illegal aliens to the INS or not? If so, which other classes of criminal should city governments harbor and protect?
Hollowpoint on August 23, 2007 at 7:44 PM
First, you are wrong. He encourage the cops to report any illegal alien suspected of a crime and he repeatedly complained to the INS (now ICE) that they were not deporting said criminals. The feds were not doing their job. What he did (actually what Koch did) was a reaction to the fed’s failure to act. Why should he stir the 400,000 large hornet’s nest and cause kaos in his city if the feds are going to do nothing with the lists that Rudy would have provided?
I am not in favor of illegal immigration or sactuary cities. I think in an ideal world all illegals should be stopped at the border. If they manage to get through they should be reported and deported. I agree, you agree, even Rudy agrees with that. However, for the past 40 odd years we have not been living in that ideal world. The feds did not stop them at the boarder. The feds did not prosecute the employers. The feds did not deport the illegals. When Rudy takes over NYC he has 400,000 illegals living and working in his city and the feds (who are responsible) don’t care. Rudy asks them to at least deport the criminals — the feds won’t do that. Nevertheless, after the feds (who are the true illegal alien enablers) do nothing for years and allow the problem to get totally out of control, they still insist that Rudy provide them with the names of illegals that they will not deport — even though that will result in a long list of negative consequences for his city, and an even longer list of illegals that the feds will still refuse to deport.
tommylotto on August 23, 2007 at 9:26 PM
Here is Executive Order 124 (Warning: PDF), signed by Mayor Koch. It’s the same law, with the same justification, that Giuliani continued and supported as Mayor.
Big S on August 23, 2007 at 9:30 PM
OK, you’ve gone beyond spin into intentional dishonesty.
Rudy thinks illegals should be deported? Did you read any of the quotes where he welcomed them to NYC? How is forbidding city employees from reporting illegals to the feds consistant with a desire to see them deported? Where he wants to grant amnesty to those already here?
You say that Rudy encouraged cops to report illegals that committed a crime- you mean a crime like crossing the border illegally? Falsifying documents? Misdemeanors? Those sort of crimes count?
You’re suggesting that the federal government wasn’t doing enough to deport illegal aliens- fair enough… but refusing to report illegals and forbidding police and city officials from doing so is an anti-illegal immigrant stance?
Please- show me where Rudy complained that the federal government wasn’t doing enough to deport illegals, including those who otherwise didn’t have a criminal record. Show me that none of the illegals reported to the federal government by NYC were taken into custody.
Rudy’s position on illegal immigration is indefensible by anyone who wants immigration law enforced. Period. No amount of dishonest spin from the likes of you can change that.
Hollowpoint on August 23, 2007 at 9:59 PM
Not to gang up on you, but here you go.
Big S on August 23, 2007 at 10:05 PM
Thanks for more dirt. He starts out with blaming the federal government for “not dealing with immigration, which has unfortunately led to results like Proposition 187 in California”.
He goes on- “3,000, maybe 4,000 prisoners that we have in city jails are technically illegal or undocumented aliens.”
He also said that state and local governments can’t deal with illegal immigration… yet he himself dealt with it by protecting them from being reported to immigration authorities.
So, he was against California’s pro-enforcement, anti-illegal Prop 187, and clearly is only interested in the federal government taking the criminals off his hands… even though he made sure police were forbidden from directly contacting immigration authorities, instead making them submit them to a designated employee who no doubt filed the paperwork in the big circular file bin on the floor next to their desk.
Want to battle the whole “comprehensive immigration bill” fight again? Fine- vote for Rudy. He’ll make sure it returns with his full backing.
Hollowpoint on August 23, 2007 at 11:08 PM
And for good reason. In case you haven’t read it, let me introduce you to some of the niceties of P.187:
This law does a couple of things that you should be uncomfortable with:
a.) It effectively “deputizes” all state workers who interact with the public as federal immigration officials, whether or not they are trained to do so, and instructs them to use their own subjective judgement to determine whether somebody should recieve medical care, police protection, or education.
b.) It allows them to render such a verdict independently, on the spot, and without due process.
Big S on August 23, 2007 at 11:54 PM
Rudy is pro illegal alien period.
Is it not obvious he is using “enforcement” as a prelude to amnesty? Seriously does anyone here beleive Rudy is going to deport anyone besides illegals that commit crimes against people? Anything less, identity theft, fake ID’s etc gets a free pass. Then when he thinks he can sell it he’ll start lobbying for the
“path to citizenship.”amnesty. He won’t even publicly support workplace enforcement. Why? Because the next step is a ticket home, and he does not want to deport illegals, just “criminals.”Theworldisnotenough on August 24, 2007 at 3:22 AM
Huh? Can you produce a quote to substantiate your claim.
If Rudy wants to deport illegals it is news to me, he always prefaces deportation with “criminal.” Not once have I heard him support workplace enforcement. He has said he will identify every illegal in America but he has yet to say he will deport them, just the criminals.
Theworldisnotenough on August 24, 2007 at 3:32 AM
See the link provided by Big S on August 23, 2007 at 10:05 PM. In 1995 he was complaining that the feds were not enforcing the boarder, not deporting, etc. He was complaining that the influx of people was a tremendous strain on the local municipalities. He said that if the feds would just do its job in this area it would be the equivalent of a sizable federal grant. Obviously, he wants the criminal aliens deported first (that’s just logical), but he sees the stopping all illegal immigration as if it were a grant — that’s a good thing.
The problem with party politics is that it is run by simpletons with simple ideas. Illegal immigration — bad. Gun control — bad. Gays — bad. Abortion — bad. Rudy is a conservative but also a reasonable man and approaches these issues as such — not as a pandering wackjob red meat fanatic. He may not appeal to your miopic view of issues. He is nuanced, but just like Capt. Furillo he is the ultimate reasonable man and anyone who listens to him can see that. That is why he is waaaay ahead of all the other contenders. He is utterly trauncing them in all the big states and is most likely going to be the Republican nominee. And that is a good thing, because he is the only one who is polled to be able to beat Hillary.
I cannot believe you guys are being so disingenuous about the positions of your next Republican president.
tommylotto on August 24, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Oh sweet, sweet irony. I wonder if you’re even capable of recognising it.
Rudy welcomed illegals to NYC- he said he wanted them there.
Rudy wants to grant amnesty to illegals- he’s made that clear.
Rudy forbade police and city officials from directly reporting illegals to federal authorities- even those convicted of major crimes.
Rudy fought to make sure that illegals were eligible for government benefits.
There’s no “nuance” here. Only a hypocrite pandering to a politically correct criminal underclass. You can’t claim that the feds should do a better job of deporting illegals when you actively harbor and protect them from being reported.
Once the general public learns more about RINO Rudy and his illegal alien lovin’, his numbers will drop. Most of his supporters (other than dishonest, unreasonable worshippers like yourself) aren’t that strongly in favor of him and can easily be flipped once they realize he’s simply a Democrat who’s running in the wrong primary.
Hollowpoint on August 24, 2007 at 11:28 AM