1 May 2005

Schwarzenegger actually has questionable history in terms of complying with America's immigration laws

The Hollywood celebrity California governor has been flexing some anti-immigrant muscles in stark contrast to his own history.
As the San Jose Mercury News reported on 9/21/03, immigration attorneys agreed that when Schwarzenegger first immigrated to the United States, he "most likely violated the terms of his work visa." In interviews over the years, Schwarzenegger has said he joined forces with an Italian bodybuilder to rebuild damaged homes after the deadly Sylmar earthquake jolted Southern California. But immigration attorneys across the country said Schwarzenegger would have been barred by visa restrictions from starting his own business. That revelation followed an earlier discovery that Schwarzenegger might have violated his visa in 1968 as well.

When asked about this hypocrisy, Schwarzenegger aides "declined to make the candidate available for an interview" and then refused to release Schwarzenegger's immigration records. Maybe he should take a cue from his campaign, start once again keeping his mouth shut, and stop trying to appeal to his radical right-wing base by attacking immigrants.


So he "most likely violated the terms of his work visa." BY "rebuild(ing) damaged homes after the deadly Sylmar earthquake jolted Southern California" WHAT AN AWFUL EVIL MAN. HOW DARE HE REBUILD DAMAGED HOMES!

First of all if the rebuilding of homes was a charity it probably didn't violate his WORK visa as a charity is not actually a business. Second this all comes back to the whole RIGHT or WRONG versus LEGAL or ILLEGAL issue, if something is legal it doesn't mean it is RIGHT or GOOD, and just because something is illegal it doesn't mean it is truly WRONG or BAD, and speaking of legal and illegal:

Let's see Arnold had a WORK VISA, which means he was a LEGAL IMMIGRANT, yet his "ANTI-IMMIGRANT" stance is against ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, So would it not be more correct to say he had an ANTI-ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT stand rather than a blanket statement against all forms of immigration? There is after all a BIG difference between those who come to this country through legal means and those who do so by illegal means. It is hardly "hypocrisy" for a legal immigrant to be against illegal immigration. That would be the same as a law official who owns a car being a hypocrite for arresting a car thief.

"If they don't have the guts to come up here in front of you and say, 'I don't want to represent you, I want to represent those special interests, the unions, the trial lawyers ... if they don't have the guts, I call them girlie men,"