En esta campaña electoral, el candidato que más se ha puesto al día en cuanto a mentiras y promesas evidentemente falsas es el Senador Barck Obama. No por que tenga un temple moral de peor calidad, sino porque ha estado en campaña mucho más tiempo…

But one need not even do that. Enforce employment laws and maybe round up 1 million. The rest will take the hint…

As governor, how do you deal with them? Do you think they all should be deported?
There is no way that in the US we would roundup every illegal immigrant -there are about 12 million of the illegal immigrants- not only economically is that just an impossibility but that’s not a humane way anyway to deal with the issue that we face with illegal immigration.

1. You can’t deport them in one fell swoop. Got it. You can’t balance the budget, win the Global War on Terrorism, or fix social security that way either. Each of these things requires a long-term, incremental plan (something that Americans, typically, are (A) unable to understand, (B) too impatient to implement). For illegal immigration: Step 1. Deport any and all criminal illegal aliens (e.g. “criminal” beyond the fact that they are here illegally). Step 2. Change the rules for citizenship so that one must either be a naturalized citizen or born of a citizen in order to be a citizen. No more “anchor babies”. Step 3: Over a 5-year period, increase the fines on companies who employ illegals. Make it unprofitable to employ illegals. Then, after five years, make it illegal to employ illegals, and actually enforce it.
2. She says that it just wouldn’t be “humane” to deport them? Do I really need to get into this one? I think Mrs. Malkin has hit this one pretty well.

Do you then favor an amnesty for the 12 or 13 million undocumented immigrants?
No, I do not. I do not. Not total amnesty. You know, people have got to follow the rules. They’ve got to follow the bar, and we have got to make sure that there is equal opportunity and those who are here legally should be first in line for services being provided and those opportunities that this great country provides.

“Not total amnesty”? So partial then? “Equal opportunity”? I’d like for her to define this in the context of illegal immigration. “First in line for services”? Why should illegals have any place in line for said services? Remove the desire to be here illegally, and you’ll cure 90% of the problem.

To clarify, so you support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants?
I do because I understand why people would want to be in America. To seek the safety and prosperity, the opportunities, the health that is here. It is so important that yes, people follow the rules so that people can be treated equally and fairly in this country.

1. Why would the people of Mexico/Central America/Northern South America feel the need to leave for safety, prosperity and health? This probably has something to do with the fact that all of our neighbors fully know that if they don’t promote the “right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” that Uncle Sam will take their disgruntled citizens off their backs. Why deal with the problems when you can export it to the Americans?
2. If we remove the desire for people seeking these things to come here (making work impossible to get unless you’re here legally), then they’ll stay home and fix their problems there. This will also free our border patrol to go after those with less than admirable intentions.

Palin imposed a windfall profits tax. Is it a surprise she’s a pushover on illegal immigration?

LibTired on October 23, 2008 at 10:41 AM

No she didn’t punk. She increased the royalty the oil companies have to pay for the right to dig and use the oil. That’s not a windfall profit tax. That’s a royalty increase.

Also, her opinion (of John’s if she is stating the campaign’s position) on illegal immigration is a good one. There is NO WAY anybody is going to win the POTUS by uprooting women and children and marching them back to Mexico a la the “Trail of Tears” of the Cherokee. They need to be assimilated and if they don’t by a certain date (English language anyone?), then they should be sent back.

Get real. Her opinion is just right, with the added requirement of securing the border.

Check this poll – the only one to ever offer ALL THREE CHOICES.

fred5678 on October 23, 2008 at 5:00 PM

This poll.

… Do you think they all should be deported?
….

Do you then favor an amnesty for the 12 or 13 million undocumented immigrants?

The correct answer: “Actually, I favor the approach that a vast majority of all Americans (voting) citizens favor – attrition through enforcement.”

Check this poll – the only one to ever offer ALL THREE CHOICES.

Palin imposed a windfall profits tax. Is it a surprise she’s a pushover on illegal immigration?

LibTired on October 23, 2008 at 10:41 AM

The oil companies extracting oil from Alaska pay for the oil they are removing. It is Alaska’s oil after all. It is essentially a royalty being paid on the oil. What Palin did is to change the structure of the payments so that the state could take advantage of the higher price of oil than the previous agreement.

Palin imposed a windfall profits tax. Is it a surprise she’s a pushover on illegal immigration?

LibTired on October 23, 2008 at 10:41 AM

Yes…please do continue to mischaracterize the windfall profits tax on Alaska. Don’t bother to include the fact that Alaska’s laws are set up differently and that the Alaskan people actually own that oil according to their laws.