Sarah Palin talks immigration in contentious O'Reilly interview

The former governor of Alaska was involved in yet another testy exchange with the Fox News host on July 9, 2010.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• sarah palin
• o'reilly
• immigration
• fox

[sasosaso3000]

Does anyone else think that she was just making up answers as she went along? It's like she is completely made up of rhetoric and doesn't think anything through.

[automusk]

I don't see how anyone (even though it's just a small percentage) could support Palin for POTUS. Half of her answers were "what needs to be done". Is she seriously incapable of coming up with a real answer besides pretty much the most generalized/incompetent answer possible? It would probably take like an hour of research to come up with a more detailed answer, assuming you are a person of average intelligence.

[Letsgetreal2011]

How did Sarah Palin earn her citizenship, it's called amnesty! That's why she looked so clueless in the interview.

[golftrailsucks]

WOW! BILL OREILLY IS SO NICE TO HER..... HMMM A LITTLE INTERRUPTION TO COVER UP THE FIX.

[CommonSenseJoe]

@ninuxy No law can provide a person who is illegal with any legal protections.

[CommonSenseJoe]

@ninuxy Sure I could afford a house! I would pay more, but my costs would be lower in other areas. Trust me, there would be people take the jobs if we simply stopped paying people to do NOTHING. Our economy does not need illegal to make it work.

[CommonSenseJoe]

@ninuxy Sorry, there is no comparison. Wal-Mart is NO BREAKING THE LAW. Illegal aliens ARE BREAKING THE LAW. Illegals cost this country BILLIONS of dollars every year. You cannot make a case for the exploitation of illegals as being a good thing for our economy. I do not dispute that removing them from the economy would some impact. However, the MARKET would compensate for the effect. Some wages would go up. Some business would innovate to eliminate the need for the cheap labor.

[CommonSenseJoe]

@ninuxy You are still blaming the wrong people. Wal-Mart sells products. Suppliers supply those products. Wal-Mart cares only about making a profit. Where those products are made is off no concern them IF they are of the same quality and cost. Your issue is with the Chinese government and their labor practices, not ours. Still, one needs to wonder why a product can be made their better and cheaper, then SHIPPED here, and sell for a lower cost than an American made one.

[ninuxy]

And that's exactly what my point was. The same way Wal-Mart's action is resulting in jobs being lost here, the gain would be the rest of the country be able to afford certain products with lowered prices. Same with the illegal workers; there a "demand" for prices to be lowered, hence the employment of undocumented workers. I guess that obvious escaped you.

[ninuxy]

@CommonSenseJoe Wal-Mart coerces its suppliers to move their operations to overseas in order to maintain lower cost--it's a well documented phenomenon. They have an economical clout to do it or else the supplier would be dropped. This in effect has resulted in millions of jobs being shifted overseas.

The domestic supplier would have no chance of competing against a Chinese manufacturer which pays 30 times less to its overworked employees with no benefits.