Video: Michelle knocks Maverick’s Shamnesty on Cavuto

posted at 4:50 pm on January 24, 2008 by Bryan

The segment begins, appropriately, with John McCain talking about illegal immigration in a way that must have a demagogue like John Edwards glowing with silky green envy. Edwards the lord of the ginormous manor gets to talk about his father working for the mills to make an unconvincing case that he’s a man of the people; McCain talks about a US soldier who was captured and murdered by al Qaeda, whose wife turned out to be an illegal alien, en route to using our emotions to tug us toward amnesty for all illegal aliens (though he won’t admit that it’s amnesty). Out of the 12-20 million cases of illegal aliens taking up residence in the US, the case McCain cites can’t even account for a meaningful blip in the statistics. It says nothing about what we should do about border security. It just misuses the murder of a valiant soldier by terrorist scum as an excuse to leave the nation’s back door open to the same kind of people who killed him along with the millions who had nothing to do with it. If McCain had any shame, he wouldn’t use that story to argue that, essentially, US immigration law doesn’t mean anything because one soldier was married to an illegal alien. But he uses it nevertheless.

Michelle’s first point, about being tired of McCain telling us who he won’t enforce the law against, is spot on. That is why law-and-order conservatives are beyond annoyed with McCain. And then she gets going strong from there.

By the way, John McCain has picked up some notable support lately…from Mother Jones.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

From an article by Thomas Sowell today:

The media have dubbed him a “maverick,” which is another way of spinning the fact that he is headstrong and unreliable.

Senator McCain’s teaming up with Senator Ted Kennedy on immigration, and with equally left-wing Senator Russ Feingold to violate the First Amendment in the name of “campaign finance reform,” are classic examples of a loose cannon.

Senator McCain is not a bad man. He has some admirable qualities. But there are plenty of good people who would be dangerous in a job for which they are not suited.

Back in the 18th century, Edmund Burke said that some people “may do the worst of things without being the worst of men.” The White House is not the place for that.

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 6:53 PM

Señor McCain es un asno arrogante.

Entelechy on January 24, 2008 at 6:31 PM

I would like to know if he has much Gold in his teeth?

Don’t ask me why, I just need to know.

Tuco on January 24, 2008 at 6:53 PM

Igor, FYI, here was my entire quote:

And the argument against illegal immigration isn’t just that illegals commit a higher percentage of crimes then legal citizens (though they do). Its that the difference between an illegal committing a crime and a legal committing a crime is that one of the two was 100% preventable.

Thats the point.

You can see where he cut it off.

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 6:55 PM

Igor, dedalus’ response was to my quote. If you go up and read my quote you will notice he “forgot” to put the second half of my quote in. As a result he didn’t respond to the obvious point I was trying to make (the same point you just made).

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 6:51 PM

Well, I hadn’t read your post prior to you pointing it out, but evidently we did reach the exact same conclusion. Of course the percentage of the outstanding warrants for illegals in LA county is an even more compelling point.

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 6:56 PM

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 6:30 PM

First off, we all need to get one thing straight: John McCain is NOT for amnesty.

There. He’s even said himself…and “amnesty” means many things to many people. All he’s saying is we can’t start deporting people UNTIL the borders are secured.

JetBoy on January 24, 2008 at 6:58 PM

I’ve harbored a theory for a long time about the cost of housing convicted illegals in this country. I believe there are ways and means to get Mexico to house their own exported criminals – in Mexico. It could be a win-win for both countries. There must be a method where we could pay Mexico to house them based on the sentence handed down here, yet have the ability to confirm those criminals are still in jail there. Chances are, their families would follow them back down to Mexico/Central or South America thus relieving the U.S. of taking care of them too. This could be a growth industry for Mexico. I’d be willing to bet hard money the crime rate in the U.S. would fall next to zero from those illegals still in the country.

24K lady on January 24, 2008 at 6:59 PM

Well SOMEONE is taking care of business:

http://www.wjla.com/news/aploader.html?js=ktul&id=490644

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 7:01 PM

Don’t ask me why, I just need to know.

Tuco on January 24, 2008 at 6:53 PM

I don’t know him. But you remember the gold you’re about to recover, when his grimace turns into a wide grin. This will show that greed is your overriding emotion, displacing all others.

Entelechy on January 24, 2008 at 7:03 PM

I’d love for you to take a walk through Macarthur Park in Downtown LA one day. The park and surrounding community are bursting at the seams with drugs and crime. The controlling gangs in the area are MS13 and ultimately the Mexican Mafia. Neither of these illustrious organizations discriminates against illegals.

Sounds like a job for Rudy.

JiangxiDad on January 24, 2008 at 7:04 PM

First off, we all need to get one thing straight: John McCain is NOT for amnesty.

There. He’s even said himself…and “amnesty” means many things to many people. All he’s saying is we can’t start deporting people UNTIL the borders are secured.

JetBoy on January 24, 2008 at 6:58 PM

This is like saying: “I’m not for robbery. I said it myself. “Robbery” means many things to many people. But please hand over all your valuables. Oh, and here’s a receipt for all of them. You see, if you get a receipt it’s not robbery at all.”

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 7:04 PM

Yes, in any language “John McCain” means “Don’t vote for me, I’m a loser.”

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 6:50 PM

Hopefully Juan will be singing this song soon.

I’m a loser
I’m a loser
And I’m not what I appear to be

Of all the votes I have won or have lost
there is one vote I should never have come across
It was a primary in a million, my friends
I should have known it would be Florida that got me in the end

I’m a loser
And I lost an el Presidency that was dear to me
I’m a loser
And I’m not what I appear to be

Although I talk and I act like I’ve been surging all around
Beneath this smirk I am now wearing a frown
My tears are falling like rain from the sky
Is it for my el Presidency and myself that I cry

I’m a loser
And I lost an el Presidency that was so dear to me
I’m a loser
And I’m not what I appear to be

What have I done to deserve such a fate
I realized my amnesty game was up but it was by then too late
And so it’s true, conniving comes before a fall
I’m telling you so that you won’t lose all

I’m a loser
And I lost an el Presidency that was dear to me
I’m a loser
And I’m not what I appear to be

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 7:06 PM

First off, we all need to get one thing straight: John McCain is NOT for amnesty.

There. He’s even said himself…and “amnesty” means many things to many people. All he’s saying is we can’t start deporting people UNTIL the borders are secured.

JetBoy on January 24, 2008 at 6:58 PM

JetBoy, what about what McCain was saying before it became a political dirty word? For example, In 2003, McCain told the Tucson Citizen that “amnesty has to be an important part of any immigration reform.”

I believe it is clearly innacurate to assert that John McCain is NOT for Amnesty. It clearly is. Ask yourself this. If his position in regards to “comprehensive immigration reform” has not changed, then he must still think that Amnesty is an important part? No? If his position has changed is he a flip flopper or has his position just evolved over time as he has learned more and more about the issue? I think if you think about it carefully you will realize that McCain is just taking you for a ride – my friend.

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 7:09 PM

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 7:06 PM

Good song! I hope he sings it soon.

“I’m John McCain, I was a pain, I lost your vote, I’ll move to Spain.”

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 7:10 PM

First off, we all need to get one thing straight: John McCain is NOT for amnesty.

JetBoy on January 24, 2008 at 6:58 PM

Technically I suppose he is not for amnesty as he wants the illegals to pay a few thousand dollar bribe to get to be z-serfs on some plantation run by his campaign contributors and supporters.

So you see, it is actually much worse than amnesty.

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 7:12 PM

I believe it is clearly innacurate to assert that John McCain is NOT for Amnesty. It clearly is. Ask yourself this. If his position in regards to “comprehensive immigration reform” has not changed, then he must still think that Amnesty is an important part? No? If his position has changed is he a flip flopper or has his position just evolved over time as he has learned more and more about the issue? I think if you think about it carefully you will realize that McCain is just taking you for a ride – my friend.

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 7:09 PM

John McCain is for Amnesia even more than for Amnesty. He is counting on people not remembering what he said a couple of years ago and what he did six months ago.

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 7:12 PM

All he’s saying is we can’t start deporting people UNTIL the borders are secured.

JetBoy on January 24, 2008 at 6:58 PM

What he is really saying is – bend over again fools!

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 7:13 PM

MB, please find that point-by-point listing you have on serfdom (where U.N. doesn’t care, types of Mexicans coming here, etc.) That s/b posted on every amnesty-related thread, because it illustrates items few know, or have thought about in those terms. Thanks ahead.

Entelechy on January 24, 2008 at 7:15 PM

To illustrate how insane our current situation regarding illegal aliens is consider this. I currently teach at a small rural county. Approximately 10% of my students this year are illegal aliens (11 out of 117). These types of numbers are not uncommon and in many other areas of the state they are much higher. Everyone, from the principal on down, is aware of the alien status of these students. If I file a report with ICE considering the status of these students the school would have grounds to dismiss me immediately. However, if I had reasons to suspect a student was being abused at home and did not file a report with DFACS the school would also have grounds to have me dismissed. Therefore, to sum it up, to report one type of crime I can be dismissed but to not report another type of crime I can also be dismissed. What a crazy country!

dawgyear on January 24, 2008 at 7:17 PM

John McCain is for Amnesia even more than for Amnesty. He is counting on people not remembering what he said a couple of years ago and what he did six months ago.

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 7:12 PM

Heh – very true. The internet has made life more difficult for politicians. Amen to that. Now if we could only get the media to use it and do their jobs we’d be in business. Here’s hoping our easy information age comes back to haunt the Clintons.

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 7:17 PM

Technically I suppose he is not for amnesty as he wants the illegals to pay a few thousand dollar bribe to get to be z-serfs on some plantation run by his campaign contributors and supporters.

So you see, it is actually much worse than amnesty.

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 7:12 PM

Very well said MB4. And you are tapping into one of the most underreported, least talked about elements of illegal immigration. Slavery part deux.

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 7:19 PM

If you go up and read my quote you will notice he “forgot” to put the second half of my quote in.

Sorry about that. I was attempting to be brief not misrepresent.

Two points in response:
1.) Crimes by illegals are 100% preventable if there are no illegals. It’s a long and complicated road to get the number down. 100% is unattainable given that anyone can overstay a visa.
2.) We shouldn’t develop immigration policy for millions based on McCain’s one example, nor should we extrapolate from the brutal Newark murders that the majority of illegals are violent or that we will suddenly be safe if we could deport them all. NYC is a sanctuary city that has seen its murder rate plummet with perhaps the largest illegal population in the country.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 7:22 PM

To illustrate how insane our current situation regarding illegal aliens is consider this. I currently teach at a small rural county. Approximately 10% of my students this year are illegal aliens (11 out of 117). These types of numbers are not uncommon and in many other areas of the state they are much higher. Everyone, from the principal on down, is aware of the alien status of these students. If I file a report with ICE considering the status of these students the school would have grounds to dismiss me immediately. However, if I had reasons to suspect a student was being abused at home and did not file a report with DFACS the school would also have grounds to have me dismissed. Therefore, to sum it up, to report one type of crime I can be dismissed but to not report another type of crime I can also be dismissed. What a crazy country!

dawgyear on January 24, 2008 at 7:17 PM

Unreal. Orwellian. Sad. Frustrating. F’ing McCain.

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 7:22 PM

MB, please find that point-by-point listing you have on serfdom (where U.N. doesn’t care, types of Mexicans coming here, etc.) That s/b posted on every amnesty-related thread, because it illustrates items few know, or have thought about in those terms. Thanks ahead.

Entelechy on January 24, 2008 at 7:15 PM

I long ago got sick and tired of the sleazy chuck-and-jive shamnesty politicians of which John McCain has been the chief ring leader. The reason that Republican supporters of “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” want it is so that they and/or their campaign contributors can have serf labor. They would probably prefer actual out-and-out slaves but that is illegal.

The reason that shamnesty Democrats want this is so that those who are now illegal can become legal and vote for them. Many of them probably also want to do this for the same reason that shamnesty Republicans do too.

Does anyone think that many of these shamnesty politicians really care one wit otherwise for the illegals.

Does anyone think that any of the shamnesty politicians are going to invite these Mexican Indios and Mezclados to join their elite/exclusive golf clubs?

Come to live in their gated communities, other than as servants?

Invite them to their yachts, other than as low paid deck hands and/or servants?

Invite them to their cocktail parties?

Introduce them to their daughters?

The big majority of the Mexicans who have come here/will come here are Indios and Mezclados, not the Spanish descendant light-skinned ruling class of Mexico. This is a form of ethnic cleansing by Mexico’s ruling class.

So the shamnesty politicians like John McCain are aiding and abetting and facilitating ethnic cleansing.

If the U.N. were not such a joke, they would all be standing trial for trying to reintroduce a form of latter-day-slavery in the United States and for the mass ethnic cleansing of Mexico.

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 7:23 PM

Heh – very true. The internet has made life more difficult for politicians. Amen to that. Now if we could only get the media to use it and do their jobs we’d be in business. Here’s hoping our easy information age comes back to haunt the Clintons.

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 7:17 PM

Well unfortunately the Internet has limited power in Presidential elections. The Blog consensus for Fred translated into very little electoral support. And where is the Hsu story now? That alone would be enough to sink any non-MSM supported candidate, and yet Hillary has the cajones to raise the “slumlord” issue with Obama!

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 7:24 PM

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 7:09 PM

You quote McCain as saying “amnesty has to be an important part of any immigration reform.” But let’s put that quote back in it’s full context:

“Amnesty has to be an important part because there are people who have lived in this country for 20, 30 or 40 years, who have raised children here and pay taxes here and are not citizens. That has to be a component of it.”

And it does. We can’t just let people live here illegally, turning a blind eye to it for decades, and all of a sudden say “pack your bags”.

THAT would only be hypocracy defined.

JetBoy on January 24, 2008 at 7:26 PM

Unreal. Orwellian. Sad. Frustrating. F’ing McCain.

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 7:22 PM

Orwellian indeed. Some crimes are more equal than others. McCain takes “double talk” and “double think” to a new level. Think of Orwell’s books as not warnings but manuals.

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 7:29 PM

Therefore, to sum it up, to report one type of crime I can be dismissed but to not report another type of crime I can also be dismissed. What a crazy country!

dawgyear on January 24, 2008 at 7:17 PM

Not too different from George Orwell’s “1984″.

It’s deju vu all over again.
- Yogi Berra

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 7:30 PM

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 7:22 PM

Ok. If it was accidental, no problem. Sure, 100% is an exagerration but you understand the point right? Cracking down on illegal immigration will not eliminate all illegal immigrants. But it will eliminate many. And from that many, murders (crime in general) will be diminished.

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 7:30 PM

And it does. We can’t just let people live here illegally, turning a blind eye to it for decades, and all of a sudden say “pack your bags”.

THAT would only be hypocracy defined.

JetBoy on January 24, 2008 at 7:26 PM

We can’t let Catholic Priests practice pedophilia for years and then all of a sudden pretend to notice it. We can’t have slavery for hundreds of years and then pretend we don’t like it and just abolish it. Perish these thoughts!

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 7:31 PM

“Amnesty has to be an important part because there are people who have lived in this country for 20, 30 or 40 years, who have raised children here and pay taxes here and are not citizens. That has to be a component of it.”

And it does. We can’t just let people live here illegally, turning a blind eye to it for decades, and all of a sudden say “pack your bags”.

THAT would only be hypocracy defined.

JetBoy on January 24, 2008 at 7:26 PM

Thats not hypocracy, thats just doing what we should have been doing all along.

If someone commits a murder. Gets away with it and then 20 years down the road the police come accross DNA evidence proving the murderers guilt, its not hypocritical to lock them up. Its just doing what should have been done from the start.

I don’t care what McCain modifies his statement with. The modification is meaningless. He said straight up that Amnesty must be part of immigration reform. It is hypocritical for him to claim now that “comprehensive immigration reform” is not Amnesty. That, my friend, is the definition of hypocracy.

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 7:36 PM

Cracking down on illegal immigration will not eliminate all illegal immigrants. But it will eliminate many. And from that many, murders (crime in general) will be diminished.

Sure. Prioritize the deporting of illegals who have a criminal record, either here or in their home country. There’s something like 12 million illegals here. Deporting someone other than the soldier’s widow would be a good place to start.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 7:43 PM

Sure. Prioritize the deporting of illegals who have a criminal record, either here or in their home country. There’s something like 12 million illegals here. Deporting someone other than the soldier’s widow would be a good place to start.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 7:43 PM

Impose TOUGH, and progressively TOUGHER employer sanctions. Fine a couple of small employers with HEAVY fines, enough to put them out of business. Make a couple of CEOs of large employers go to prison. Introduce an easy to use SSN verification system. The problem will resolve itself in no time at all.

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 7:46 PM

There are two kinds of people in the world, my friends. Those who don’t let Bandido Juan tornillo them any more and those who are complete idiotas.

Tuco on January 24, 2008 at 7:46 PM

If someone commits a murder. Gets away with it and then 20 years down the road the police come accross DNA evidence proving the murderers guilt, its not hypocritical to lock them up. Its just doing what should have been done from the start.

Should there be no statute of limitations for any crimes?

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 7:52 PM

There are two kinds of people in the world, my friends. Those who don’t let Bandido Juan tornillo them any more and those who are complete idiotas.

Tuco on January 24, 2008 at 7:46 PM

Well, my friend, there are actually three. The third kind are illegal aliens. They know what Juan means and they like it.

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 7:52 PM

Sure. Prioritize the deporting of illegals who have a criminal record, either here or in their home country. There’s something like 12 million illegals here. Deporting someone other than the soldier’s widow would be a good place to start.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 7:43 PM

dedalus, the problem can be solved by border enforcement, cracking down on employers and all the while continue to fight crime the same way we always have. Anything short of that is slavery part 2. Makes me sick. We are a nation of laws. Lets keep it that way:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=al5Fwmowc8k&feature=related

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 7:53 PM

Should there be no statute of limitations for any crimes?

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 7:52 PM

Come on now. You get my point. We are talking about hypocracy. And for provable homocide I don’t believe there is a statute of limitations. But I’m not a lawyer. I just play one on Hotair.

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 7:54 PM

Impose TOUGH, and progressively TOUGHER employer sanctions. Fine a couple of small employers with HEAVY fines, enough to put them out of business. Make a couple of CEOs of large employers go to prison. Introduce an easy to use SSN verification system. The problem will resolve itself in no time at all.

The federal government can’t secure the border but you want to put the burden on private business? What is the government doing with $3 trillion we already give it?

You’ll always have millions who will find living via the cash-only economy preferable to moving back to their original country.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 7:55 PM

Deporting someone other than the soldier’s widow would be a good place to start.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 7:43 PM

How about deporting, after a long prison sentence, those who have killed the mother, sister, wife, girl friend or child of some Soldier or Marine serving in Iraq or Afghanistan?

That would be a small start anyway.

A law suit against the plantation “employer” who aided and abetted them by drawing them up here would be nice too.

If the plantation “employers” were not allowed to employe their illegal serfs, most of them would probably go back home as if not for them most of the illegals would not likely even have come here.

Let’s find out anyway.

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 7:56 PM

Come on now. You get my point. We are talking about hypocracy. And for provable homocide I don’t believe there is a statute of limitations. But I’m not a lawyer. I just play one on Hotair.

You play a lawyer very well, and you are right that there is no statute of limitations for murder, paying back taxes, or other things the government deems very serious.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 7:58 PM

The federal government can’t secure the border but you want to put the burden on private business? What is the government doing with $3 trillion we already give it?

You’ll always have millions who will find living via the cash-only economy preferable to moving back to their original country.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 7:55 PM

Private business will do it a lot more efficiently than the federal government. Hiring an illegal is an economic decision. They only way to stop it is if the consequences of choosing to do it are not worse than not doing it.

This is not any different than relying on people to do their own taxes (or at least arranging for them to be done) and selective audits of a very small minority. Yes, there is cheating, but mostly taxes get collected.

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 8:00 PM

you are right that there is no statute of limitations for murder, paying back taxes, or other things the government deems very serious.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 7:58 PM

Heh. Well said.

Zetterson on January 24, 2008 at 8:01 PM

How about deporting, after a long prison sentence, those who have killed the mother, sister, wife, girl friend or child of some Soldier or Marine serving in Iraq or Afghanistan?

Sure thing. I’d think that publicly traded companies currently abide by the immigration status check that is required. I’m in favor of real-time databases and biometric id cards that make it more accurate and less burdensome to screen employees.

You are still going to have the cash-only operators, and there are a lot of those that are “mom & pop” businesses or families that hire nannies or baby sitters.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 8:04 PM

Sure thing. I’d think that publicly traded companies currently abide by the immigration status check that is required. I’m in favor of real-time databases and biometric id cards that make it more accurate and less burdensome to screen employees.

You are still going to have the cash-only operators, and there are a lot of those that are “mom & pop” businesses or families that hire nannies or baby sitters.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 8:04 PM

Publically traded companies can hire subcontractors who are not as careful. Where do you think McCain and Huckabee get the financial support that they do (especially Maverick)? From the guy who gets a couple of illegals to help him dig a ditch in his back yard?

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 8:12 PM

John McCain has a brain disease. He sucks and he’s retarded. He’s also a liberal.

Griz on January 24, 2008 at 8:19 PM

Publically traded companies can hire subcontractors who are not as careful. Where do you think McCain and Huckabee get the financial support that they do (especially Maverick)? From the guy who gets a couple of illegals to help him dig a ditch in his back yard?

They get most of their funding, I guess, from individuals who are trying to gain influence for things like tax policy or industry regulation. Same thing for Mitt and for the Dems. The Dems are out-raising the GOP, not because Wall St. has some principled affinity for Dems, but because they are favored to win and campaign contributions to Obama or Hillary are more likely to yield results for a lot of government actions that the general public is little aware of.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 8:20 PM

You are still going to have the cash-only operators, and there are a lot of those that are “mom & pop” businesses or families that hire nannies or baby sitters.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 8:04 PM

As an “animal lover” I don’t especially like this saying but, “You kill the Chicken to scare the Monkey”.

If some of the big boy serf masters are held to account and some of the “mom & pop” small fry serf masters and some of the “nannie” small fry serf masters are held to account that will scare most of the rest.

Any left will be manageable/fineable/arrestable/sueable in their much reduced numbers.

Let’s find out.

We certainly won’t if Juan Plantation McVano becomes el Presidente, of course.

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 8:20 PM

John McCain has a brain disease. He sucks and he’s retarded. He’s also a liberal.

Griz on January 24, 2008 at 8:19 PM

And you only mentioned his best qualities!

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 8:22 PM

John McCain has a brain disease. He sucks and he’s retarded. He’s also a liberal.

Griz on January 24, 2008 at 8:19 PM

Yup, that’s our Juan!

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 8:23 PM

The only hypocrisy to be found in making our government enforce our immigration laws would be found in those who swear to enforce those and laws and then ignore them. We are fixing our politicians years of hypocrisy not adding to it.

And hell yes businesses who employ criminal aliens should face fines and the owners / CEO should look at jail time. It’s a freaking crime and a huge part of our economic problems in the US.

Reagan got talked into granting amnesty to 3 million illegals in 1986 with the promise that illegal immigration would be stopped. It wasn’t, it never is as long as you keep granting amnesty and sweat shop owners keep hiring illegals. Reagan later regretted signing the amnesty bill when he saw it for the lie it was but 21 years later we have a Republican President who wants to give 12 million illegals amnesty using the same damned lie.

What is worse is that Republicans are actually voting for amnesty shills such as Giuliani, McCain, and Huckabee while the most “conservative” of the bunch is Mitt Romney. What is much worse is that supposedly stalwart conservatives such as Tancredo and Hunter (Fred, don’t you dare) are endorsing these guys.

I think I’m going to visit Ronald Reagan’s grave and just listen to him spinning at 10,000 rpm over all of this. He made a mistake on amnesty once before but it was a mistake. It’s much much more than a mistake when our leaders decide to do the same damned thing again and expect it to turn out differently. Does anyone know what that is called?

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
Benjamin Franklin

Buzzy on January 24, 2008 at 8:23 PM

They get most of their funding, I guess, from individuals who are trying to gain influence for things like tax policy or industry regulation. Same thing for Mitt and for the Dems. The Dems are out-raising the GOP, not because Wall St. has some principled affinity for Dems, but because they are favored to win and campaign contributions to Obama or Hillary are more likely to yield results for a lot of government actions that the general public is little aware of.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 8:20 PM

Yes, but if you want to support a Republican, now you have a choice: are you more interested in free trade or importing illegals? I’m not saying that “free trade” is ALL good, but the choice of who to support if you care about the outcome based on your economic interest is clear.

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 8:26 PM

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 7:23 PM

Thanks again – please post on all amnesty threads. It’s a great analysis, of a different kind.

Just heard on the radio, on the way home, that in LA, on New Year’s eve, a 49 year old non-Latino was hit by an illegal Latino and killed. The perpetrator vanished. A plea went out to the Latino radio stations and no action yet. Calls are out to Villaraigosa, the LA mayor to help find this guy. PC is enabling the newspapers, radio stations and all other to not help. No justice, no nothing, just PC. KFI 640 AM, John and Ken are all over it now, and are soliciting help. I’ll go find names and post a bit later, in more detail.

Entelechy on January 24, 2008 at 8:26 PM

froghat asked if Michelle was fired from the Factor…

froghat on January 24, 2008 at 4:56 PM
No, it’s not.

Bryan on January 24, 2008 at 5:00 PM

That pig, Geraldo, is not only a pig but a punk. And that’s his strong suit. And Bill O’Reilly is spineless for not sticking up for a co-worker, Michelle, who was personally attacked by another co-worker, machismo Geraldo, world famous woman insulter. I, for one, have rarely watched the Factor since. No, Michelle wasn’t fired, she stood by her principles. Michelle is due a proper and public apology from both gentlemen (and I use the term loosely).

But today’s appearance was as great as always. Michelle “owns’ the immigration story. Read her books.

Bryan said:

If McCain had any shame, he wouldn’t use that story to argue that, essentially, US immigration law doesn’t mean anything because one soldier was married to an illegal alien. But he uses it nevertheless.

McCain is a RINO (republican in name only). His stance on ILLEGAL immigration is that amnesty should be granted. I am 100% with Michelle on this issue (and most issues) and am 100% against McCain on the issue of immigration and most other issues as well.

Zorro on January 24, 2008 at 8:28 PM

As an “animal lover” I don’t especially like this saying but, “You kill the Chicken to scare the Monkey”.

See your point. I like monkeys more than chickens so I’m OK with the analogy.

dedalus on January 24, 2008 at 8:29 PM

It’s much much more than a mistake when our leaders decide to do the same damned thing again and expect it to turn out differently.

They don’t expect it to turn out differently and that’s the point. Juan is a liar, he isn’t THAT stupid.

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 8:29 PM

Tancredo actually endorsed Romney, as did Sheriff Joe and Pat Buchanan’s sis, all rightious dudes and dudettes.

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 8:29 PM

Tancredo actually endorsed Romney, as did Sheriff Joe and Pat Buchanan’s sis, all rightious dudes and dudettes.

MB4 on January 24, 2008 at 8:29 PM

Don’t forget DeMint, who together with Sessions led the fight against Amnesty in the Senate last year. You can’t trust Mitt’s own words, but if so many outstanding people endorse him that HAS to stand for something more than “it’s not Amnesty my friend”.

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 8:33 PM

Tancredo and Sheriff Joe have indeed endorsed Romney but I actually see that as a symptom of our RINO problem rather than something to be proud of. He doesn’t have a big illegal immigration problem in his past (like McCain, Giuliani and Huckabee) and has been able to spin his pro abortion, gay marriage past very well with a whole lot of money.

Look at it this way. If I had to jump from a really tall building because it was on fire, I wouldn’t brag that my choice to jump to my death was a good one. I just decided to splat instead of burn.

Buzzy on January 24, 2008 at 9:08 PM

There is not reason to brag, but if someone hands you a backpack when you’re jumping and tells you it’s a parachute, doesn’t hurt to grab it.

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 9:14 PM

Huckabee said the bill, seeking to forbid public assistance and voting rights to undocumented immigrants, “inflames those who are racist and bigots and makes them think there’s a real problem. But there’s not.”

Igor R. on January 24, 2008 at 9:15 PM

McAmnesty isn’t fooling anyone. I don’t care if the good old boys think it’s McVains “turn”. We have to unite behind the closest thing we have to a conservative Mitt Romney. Becoming more liberal will not win us the White House.

Go Mitt Go!

HotAirExpert on January 25, 2008 at 2:39 AM

McCain and Kennedy as his running mate may be able to reach out to the major sectors of the voting public; while the same ticket would loose the entire public support.

MSGTAS on January 25, 2008 at 8:12 AM

Comment pages: 1 2