home

Hillary Slams Thompson For Attack On Cuban Immigrants

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 06:09:22 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Hillary defends people like me:

Taking a swipe at a potential GOP presidential rival, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton on Saturday criticized Fred Thompson for suggesting illegal Cuban immigrants pose a terrorist threat. "I was appalled when one of the people running for or about to run for the Republican nomination talked about Cuban refugees as potential terrorists," Clinton told Hispanic elected officials. "Apparently he doesn't have a lot of experience in Florida or anywhere else, and doesn't know a lot of Cuban-Americans." . . . The actor and former Tennessee senator not[ed] that the United States had apprehended 1,000 people from Cuba in 2005, Thompson said, "I don't imagine they're coming here to bring greetings from Castro. We're living in the era of the suitcase bomb." . . .

On a serious note, it was an absurd thing for Thompson to say. And it was smart politics by Hillary to slam him for it.

< The Clamor For a Third Party | Spain to Use Waiters to Tag Cocaine Users >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Hillary Slams Thompson For Attack On Cuban Immigrants | 55 comments (55 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    By strange coincidence ... (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Ellie on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 08:04:35 PM EST
    Thompson said, "I don't imagine [Cuban refugees are] coming here to bring greetings from Castro. We're living in the era of the suitcase bomb."

    This is the excuse Ricky gave to keep me away from the Copacabana when I asked him to put me in the act, so he or Fred is full of it.

    Fred has got... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by desertswine on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 11:27:27 PM EST
    some 'splainin' to do.

    Parent
    LOL! (none / 0) (#6)
    by Sailor on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 08:34:15 PM EST
    and on a more serious note, can you believe how much Ethel costs these days!

    Parent
    Really stupid of Fred (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 08:54:10 PM EST
    Since so many Cuban-Americans in Florida are conservative Republicans -- he may have cost himself votes big time.

    The Republicans (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by andgarden on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 09:05:05 PM EST
    are doing everything they can to make themselves the successors to the Dixiecrats.

    Parent
    Terrror Must Be In The Blood (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 11:27:59 AM EST
    Cause she's been here since she was one.
    US seeks to deport ex-councilwoman. "Cuban-born Zoila Meyer surrendered to the San Bernardino County office of the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Tuesday and was arrested on charges of violating immigration laws. The arrest stems from Meyer's voting in the presidential election and pleading guilty to an unlawful voter charge last year. Meyer, a 40-year-old mother of four who has lived in the United States since she was 1, is a legal alien resident but not a U.S. citizen, according to the San Bernardino County district attorney's office.

    W & P

    Squeaky (1.00 / 1) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:20:10 PM EST
    Any paerticular reason why she hasn't become a citizen in those  39 years?

    Parent
    HAHHAHA (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:37:33 PM EST
    Obviously you have not read the link....

    What a surprise.

    Parent

    Squeaky (1.00 / 1) (#34)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:48:26 PM EST
    Nope. And why should I?

    The subject in and of itself did not sieze my interest.

    I was just curious as to why....

    Now if you had been interested in a discourse you could have said something as simple as:

    "Pretty detailed. I suggest you read the article."

    That you did not only shows that you aren't interested in a discourse, but just another attack.

    But what's new??

    Parent

    Congratulations (1.00 / 1) (#35)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:53:41 PM EST
    BTW - Becoming curious as to why you were defensive, I read the article. Now I understand. You wanted to sneak an attack on immigration polices without revealing one of the worst excuses I have read.

    Parent
    Discourse With YOu ??? (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 02:07:21 PM EST
    That is a laugh. There are years of examples that it is a proven waste of time. Maybe if I had a garden we could make small talk, but you have never shown any ability or desire to engage in discourse here. You are a GOP shill and warmonger who thrills at the spilling of blood.

    Parent
    squeaky (1.00 / 1) (#38)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:01:59 PM EST
    So you are angry because I showed your motive for leaving out an important part of the article.. Okay. No problem. Go ahead and stamp your feet...

    Maybe if I had a garden we could make small talk,

    If you had a garden?? Please. That's funny.

    BTW - Were you trying to insult me or Peaches??

    Either way, you might notice that Peaches and I can disagree without us attempting to smear each other. In fact, from time to time we agree on things.

    Isn't that absolutely amazing? People talking rationally and discovering they have some common ground. Wow!!!!! (sarcasm alert)

    BTW - Why don't you plant a garden to fight man made global warming... No space?? Buy a tree and go to the country, sneak into the woods and plant it.

    Think of it as being a gurellia for Algore..

    Parent

    Angry? (none / 0) (#39)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:16:14 PM EST
    Hardly
    So you are angry because I showed your motive for leaving out an important part of the article.
    Hahahahhaha

    You give yourself too much credit.

    As far as planting a garden, I have no land because I am a city dweller. I did dig up the sidewalk and plant a lovely weeping birch outside of my building though. The birds love it as do all the passersby as it is quite stunning and unusual for NYC.

    Parent

    squeaky (none / 0) (#43)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:48:30 PM EST
    I am proud of your efforts on the behalf of fighting man made GW.

    But only one??

    Slacker!!! You can do better!!!

    Parent

    BTW (none / 0) (#44)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:51:43 PM EST
    You could also start a movement to have vacant land be made available for individual gardens. People could draw for the right, kinda like bow hunters often draw for a permit to hunt deer.

    Of course that would take away some of your blogging time.

    Parent

    It is Already done (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 04:09:09 PM EST
    Many gardens have lost their tomatoes to towers.  Still many communtiy gardens survive, not where I live though, all spare ground is turned realestate.

    Parent
    squeaky (none / 0) (#48)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 07:14:46 PM EST
    So your claim is that there is no way you can apply for a garden space???

    How convenient.

    Have you thought about organizing a protest about this? Obviously New Work's mayor, who wants to be Pres, doesn't care about man made global warming.

    Parent

    WTF (none / 0) (#50)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 11:05:05 PM EST
    Are you babbling about. If I wanted to garden I could but it is way too inconvienient. If I had a backyard I would.  Sometimes if I am in the mood I go to one of the many farmers markets for meats fish and veggies and meats.  I go to the local gourmet store for stuff.

    Mostly I eat out.

    Parent

    squeaky (none / 0) (#51)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 11:38:15 PM EST
    Look, if you didn't want to talk about gardens, why did you bring the subject up??

    Sounds like a case of suppressed desire to me.

    Ever thought relocating to say, Birmingham??

    Parent

    No (none / 0) (#52)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 11:41:38 PM EST
    I like it fine here. I have done tons of gardening in my youth. Now is not the time for that. Maybe when I am old I will return to digging into the earth.

    Parent
    squeaky (1.00 / 0) (#54)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 09:13:43 AM EST
    So, you don't want to make a sacrifice to combat man made Global Warming?

    Don't like Birmingham? Try Denver. It has a huge shortage of trees,

    Parent

    Excellent (none / 0) (#1)
    by nolo on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 06:30:53 PM EST
    It was absolutely insane (factually and politically) for Thompson to say something like that.  And good politics for Hillary to smack him hard on it.

    Surprised she was the first to touch this (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 06:31:12 PM EST
    GoldnI saw it on Thursday. In any case, yes, good politics from Hillary.

    Thompson is an mediocre actor (none / 0) (#3)
    by clio on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 06:51:52 PM EST
    with an inflated sense of his grasp on politics.  Only Republican desperation and media self-delusion have gotten him this far.  He'll go nova any day now.

    HRC's campaign skills (none / 0) (#4)
    by Molly Bloom on Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 07:42:52 PM EST
    have come along way. I am impressed. She's not my top choice, but I don't believe for a minute she would be a bad candidate who would lose in a landslide as so many perfectionist Democrats insist.



    Good for Sen. Clinton (none / 0) (#10)
    by joejoejoe on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:27:34 AM EST
    Fred Thompson made a gaffe on par with Gerald Ford saying "There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe" and Hillary Clinton called him out on it. Good show by Sen. Clinton and bad show by our media who would have said nothing if not for Clinton's response.

    Unfortunately for you (none / 0) (#11)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 09:16:07 AM EST
    A Senator from New York should be especially concerned with car bombs and airport attacks. That she isn't demonstrates a real inability to cope with the truth. Especially after three more attacks this weekend.

    Average Americans understand that illegal immigrants from any place bring with them the possibility of terrorists using the same routes they do, and of terrorists mixing in with them. Most Senators just got that message this week. I guess Hillary was out of town on a speaking tour.

    Citzens who come from Cuba, and citziens who come from other places understand the danger and will not be offended by a politican stating the truth.

    Hillary and "youse guys" have again proven to have  scant grasp of the real world and a willingness to put politics above national security because of that  lack of knowledge.

    Hopefully you will all be blessed with a revelation of your short comings that doesn't include a dirty bomb brought across the border.

    But then I am an optimist.

    As a citizen who came from Cuba (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 09:34:20 AM EST
    I think I know a little more about how citizens who came from Cuba will react to the statement.

    Parent
    BTD - I note the qualifier "I think. (1.00 / 1) (#13)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:21:28 AM EST
    I note the qualifier "I think."

    Parent
    You forgot to type it (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:33:59 AM EST
    Your statement:

    "Citzens who come from Cuba, and citziens who come from other places understand the danger and will not be offended by a politican stating the truth."

    "I think" was nowhere to be seen.

    Parent

    My mistake (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:35:26 AM EST
    you were not backing away from your statement.

    I suggest that you do not know what you are talking about.

    Parent

    And I believe that you are wrong. (1.00 / 1) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:50:30 AM EST
    Now what?

    Spit balls?? ;-)

    Parent

    Not at all (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:55:45 AM EST
    I think we can stand by our respective positions and knowledge that we each have abotu Cuban-Americans.

    I suggest that I know a lot more of them than you do. I suggest I know better their reaction to this than you.

    I let that be my last word.

    Parent

    BTD (1.00 / 1) (#21)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 11:00:37 AM EST
    And I suggest you probably know less than you think.

    Why? Because you see what you want because of your political position. All politics, all the time.

    The voters, of all ethinic backgrounds, understand that illegal aliens are a natural hiding place for terrorists. Saying that won't insult them.

    Believe what you like. But your belief won't change the fact.

    Parent

    Change what fact? (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 11:21:16 AM EST
    Seriously Jim. I accept that we are exchanging OPINIONS.

    You believe you are imparting facts.

    I sugges that you do not know the definition of the word fact.

    Your command of the English language is wanting.

    Parent

    DA (1.00 / 1) (#27)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 12:57:24 PM EST
    Reaching a bit, eh??

    The fact that I have trouble believeing TM's comments have what to do with anything?? I don't believe. You are welcome to have faith and do so.

    So what's up???

    Having trouble ankle biting today??

    Parent

    Do you enjoy making (none / 0) (#28)
    by Edger on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:06:00 PM EST
    a complete babbling fool out of yourself?

    Read all of your comments today, and reply to them as if they were written by someone else, ppj.

    You need help bud...

    Parent

    Edger (1.00 / 1) (#30)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:19:05 PM EST
    Thanks for the attack.

    Do you anything to add to the conversation, or are you doing your usual.

    Do we offer them respect? Absolutely not. We do our best to marginalize and get rid of them.


    Parent
    If you saw ::that:: as an attack (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Edger on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:55:58 PM EST
    you really need help.

    Parent
    DA (1.00 / 1) (#42)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:46:30 PM EST
    Then you suggest that I be dishonest?

    As for reasons, I noted that it was her various comments and acceptance of comments. See edger's comment re gangs, etc..

    And feel free to question what ever you desire. I was unaware you were previously inhibited...

    I would think that my opinion of Tracy is worthless.
    In fact. It will most likely endear her to edger and squeaky....

    Parent

    DA (1.00 / 0) (#55)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 09:18:27 AM EST
    yadda yadda

    Parent
    Is "suggest" a qualifier? ;-) (none / 0) (#16)
    by Edger on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:36:43 AM EST


    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#17)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:44:41 AM EST


    Parent
    Nope - Don't think so (1.00 / 1) (#20)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 10:56:48 AM EST
    Suggest:

    obsolete : to seek to influence : SEDUCE b : to call forth : EVOKE c : to mention or imply as a possibility <suggested that he might bring his family> d : to propose as desirable or fitting <suggest a stroll> e : to offer for consideration or as a hypothesis <suggest a solution to a problem>
    2 a : to call to mind by thought or association <the explosion... suggested sabotage --F. L. Paxson> b : to serve as a motive or inspiration for (a play suggested by a historic incident)
    - sug·gest·er noun

    Qualifier:

    one that qualifies: as a : one that satisfies requirements or meets a specified standard b : a word (as an adjective) or word group that limits or modifies the meaning of another word (as a noun) or word group


    Parent
    An unqualified statement (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 11:23:50 AM EST
    You have no command of the English language.

    A qualifier means "a word (as an adjective) or word group that limits or modifies the meaning of another word (as a noun) or word group"

    The word "suggest" in my usage limits my statement regarding your knowledge about Cuban Americans.

    It is similar to my previous qualifier, as you properly recognized at the time, "think."

    Stop making a fool of yourself Jim.

    Parent

    Nope (1.00 / 1) (#26)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 12:54:14 PM EST
    A qualifier means "a word (as an adjective) or word group that limits or modifies the meaning of another word (as a noun) or word group"

    I suggest that I know a lot more of them than you do.

    I suggest I know better their reaction to this than you

    Suggest is a verb. It changes nothing. It is telling me that I should believe you. There is no qualifier involved. You wrote a simple declartive sentence.

    BTW - Keep using the word "fool." I suggest it demonstrates a lack of communucation ability.

    Parent

    Of course it does (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:12:10 PM EST
    Suggest is a verb of course. But so is "think."

    Both words qualified my statements.

    Honestly, stop making a fool of yourself.


    Parent

    nope (1.00 / 1) (#33)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 01:43:44 PM EST
    Suggest does not qualify anything.

    It is a verb that you used in a simple declarative sentence.

    "I think you are wrong," is also a simple declarative sentence.

    "I sort of think you are wrong," is a qualifier.


    Parent

    Unfortunately for you that's nonsense (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by Alien Abductee on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 03:27:42 PM EST
    Average Americans understand that illegal immigrants from any place bring with them the possibility of terrorists using the same routes they do, and of terrorists mixing in with them.

    Speaking of inability to cope with the truth, the odious Newt Gingrich tried this set of lies last week - conflating "terrorists" with "illegal immigrants" - and it didn't work too well for him either:

    In a new immigration ad, Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich... mistakenly suggests 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta did not have legal status in the U.S.

    It begins with Gingrich saying, "Mohamed Atta, and several other 9/11 hijackers were in the United States illegally."

    Photos of Atta and other 9/11 hijackers appear and the word "Illegally" -- printed in bold, red letters -- flashes over the screen.

    "Today, more than five years since that tragic day, our borders remain open to gangs, drug dealers and terrorists," says Gingrich in the ad.

    However, a check of the 9/11 Commission Report reveals that Atta entered the United States on a tourist visa and the U.S. subsequently approved him for a student visa.

    "Atta was in the country legally on 9/11," confirmed Janice Kephart, a former counsel to the 9/11 Commission and co-author of the commission's report on 9/11 and Terrorist Travel to ABC News.

    "Atta was now legally in the United States until the day of the planned attack," reads the commission's report on 9/11 and terrorist travel, about a business tourist visa Atta was issued by the U.S. government on July 19, 2001 good through Nov. 12, 2001.

    All of the 19 men who hijacked planes on September 11th, including Atta, entered the United States on a tourist, or student visa, issued by the former U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service.

    Atta's visa status was widely reported in the media in 2002 when the INS famously sent a letter to Atta's Florida flight school, which was received on the sixth month anniversary of 9/11. The letter said the INS had approved a request to change Atta's status from a tourist visa to a student visa weeks before the attacks.

    At which point Gingrich sputtered that while his ad wasn't literally accurate it should have been, because the facts should have been otherwise.

    That's your cue, Jim.

    Parent

    Alien (none / 0) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 07:08:16 PM EST
    And you may exit stage Left.

    I made no claim regarding the 9/11 terrorists. It was my understanding that some had expired visas, but I have never paid much attention either way.

    This CNN link shows that two entered on tourist visas and then requested a change to student visa's through:

    The M-1 student visa request forms for Atta and al-Shehhi were filed by Huffman Aviation on August 29, 2000.

    The student visa requests were actually granted months later -- on July 17, 2001, for Atta, and August 9, 2001, for al-Shehhi..

    What the above does not tell us is the status of the tourist visa between 8/29/00 and 8/9-7/17/01.

    Is it usual for a tourist visa to be granted for more than a year, or to be automatically exended when a change is requested?

    I don't know, but I think not. I think they were here illegally at some point. Perhaps Lonewacko can answer the questions as he maintains great interest in immigration.

    My point is simple. With illegal aliens entering the US in the hundreds of thouands, and with no effective way of controlling the influx it is very logical to assume that terrorists would consider this a viable way of entering and remaining in the US prior to an attack.

    To say otherwise demonstrates a lack of understanding that is staggering.

    Parent

    Stage left? (none / 0) (#49)
    by Alien Abductee on Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 09:14:15 PM EST
    Hardly. I'm a centrist.

    I made no claim regarding the 9/11 terrorists.

    So now you're trying to wriggle out of what you were implying here?

    A Senator from New York should be especially concerned with car bombs and airport attacks

    The point is they ALL entered legally. I'm fully in favor of controlling the border, but trying to conflate two hot-button issues like terrorism and immigration the way you (and the Newt) did is dishonest and meant to confuse the issue. It's not the way to get to a policy that will serve the actual needs of the country. It just serves demagoguery for political ends.

    Parent

    Alien (1.00 / 0) (#53)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 09:09:11 AM EST
    I see your point but you're reaching and wrong.

    Terrorism and immigration has to be considered together.  This link will take you a report from the 9/11 commission staff. It is interesting to read, especially the discussions of watch lists, no fly lists, etc. It details a massive series of failures by the INS. Hopefully these have been corrected. If so, they are great to keep out/pick up terrorists.

    Illegal aliens are uncontrolled. Totally. I say again that the terrorists aren't stupid and have to see slipping across our border as one of hundreds of thousands as a great way of getting in undetectd.

    Laying aside the political issue of Hillary and Newt sniping at each other.....

    Do you believe we should close the borders completely to illegals??

    Parent

    BTW (1.00 / 0) (#56)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 09:20:16 AM EST
    Don't know where the quote slipped in... please disregard.

    Parent
    Most trolls will be deleted.. (none / 0) (#58)
    by jondee on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 01:30:03 PM EST
    We'll see how strong the Rethug-lightweight-of-the-months covictions are the next time he gives a speech in Florida (more likely a veiled apology).

    Parent
    The point is (none / 0) (#59)
    by Alien Abductee on Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 01:57:15 PM EST
    that the 9-11 hijackers came as legal immigrants. Terrorism has nothing to do with illegal immigration per se. It just adds another way to fire up and feed off of the nativism of the mouth-breathing Republican base.

    I'm all for preventing illegal immigration, but not at the cost of a total surveillance society, and I think that practically speaking that's what it would take.

    The point is that just like Newt Gingrich you were being disingenuous in conflating 9-11 with illegal immigration, and now that you've been called on it, you're trying to wriggle out of your error/lie/GOP talking points du jour.

    Parent

    Hillary Slams Thompson For Attack On Cuban Immigrants | 55 comments (55 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment