Sarah Palin, Game Change, and Immigration

by Atty. Emmanuel Samonte Tipon
   
“You don’t get to go back in time and do do-overs in life.” – Steve Schmidt, Sen. John McCain’s campaign adviser, on whether he would have recommended Sarah Palin as McCain’s vice presidential running mate if he had to do it over again.

“You have watched that movie three times, what’s so fascinating about it?” asked my beloved as she urged me to get dressed and go to church. She was referring to the new HBO film “Game Change” which portrays Sarah Palin (Julianne Moore) from the time she was being considered by Steve Schmidt (Woody Harrelson) as Sen. McCain’s (Ed Harris) running mate because they needed an exciting game changer to lift them from the political doldrums until they lost the election.

“There are lessons to be learned from the story that are relevant to immigration,” I replied.

Depending on your political orientation, the movie is either accurate, partly accurate and partly derogatory, totally derogatory, etc. Why would HBO, four years after Palin’s defeat, make a film about her? Is it because she is a super star and there is a continuing interest in her and they want to make money out of her story without even giving her a share? Or is it because they are part of the liberal, elitist, pro-Democrat media who probably enjoy kicking a woman when she is down simply because she is a Republican?

SHOULD WE KICK A WOMAN WHO IS DOWN?

How would this argument play in immigration court? “Is it the American way to kick out of the country a woman who is down and is trying to get up in order to care for and support her young children by working in a health care facility to help the sick?  Is it in the best interest of the United States to break up a family and leave U.S. citizen children motherless simply because their mother many years ago deposited some bad checks at the behest of her former husband, even though she has been punished and met the 5 R’s of rehabilitation – took responsibility although she did not know the checks were bad, expressed regret and apologized, showed remorse, made restitution, and has not been a recidivist?

Sarah Palin has sex appeal, exhibits poise, and is a great communicator with a sense of humor in her speeches and in her debate with the humorless Senator Biden (whom she mistakenly called O’Biden probably because she was thinking of Obama). During these occasions she could talk eloquently about policy and spoke in generalities. Her handlers’ mistake was arranging for her to be interviewed by reporters who are part of the liberal pro-Democrat media. Didn’t they realize that these people are out there to pose “gotcha” questions? And worse, they did not thoroughly prepare her. Even if they did, how could they have anticipated the question to name one bad Supreme Court decision – a totally irrelevant one since Palin was not applying for a judgeship. Even lawyers applying for a judgeship are not likely to be asked such question. If they cited one case, there would be endless follow up questions. How about the question to Palin to name the newspapers she read? Obama and Biden were never asked. This was a trick question. If she named one/some, the follow up question would be “why does she read this newspaper/newspapers and why not others? Another follow up question would be “how often?” If she did not say “everyday,” the follow up question would be “why not every day?” On and on.

How come Obama was regarded by the media as “experienced” to become President, even though his experience basically consisted in being a “community organizer,” while Sarah Palin was regarded as “inexperienced,” even though she was a former mayor and an incumbent governor? Because Obama was supported by the media and knew how to charm many Americans like Casanova charmed the women he seduced. McCain lost not because of Palin but because many people vented their anger at him for Bush II’s (his fellow Republican) reckless imprudence in invading Iraq on the pretext it had weapons of mass destruction, just like Marcos and Enrile faking Enrile’s ambush as a pretext for imposing martial law.

PREPARE FOR INTERVIEW

Immigrants should endeavor to avoid an interview by submitting a neat and complete application package. But in many cases, an interview is required for which immigrants should thoroughly prepare with their lawyer. Some lawyers do not prepare an immigrant but tell the immigrant that they will just meet at the immigration office. Replace your lawyer who tells you that.

Many immigrants regret ever having immigrated to the United States. They had a good life in their homeland, had a job, owned their own home, had a car, had a maid, and were respected members of the community. Here they have none of the above or only some. It is probably too late to go back. They have no more job there, they might have sold their home, and as the comedian Rodney Dangerfield complained “don’t get no respect” because they would be considered failures. Should they be lamenting their misfortune like David remembering the days of old? Psalms 143:5. Or hearken to Steve Schmidt’s words: “You don’t get to go back in time and do do-overs in life?”

(Atty. Tipon has a Master of Laws degree from Yale Law School and a Bachelor of Laws degree from the University of the Philippines. He specializes in immigration law and criminal defense. Office: 800 Bethel St., Suite 402, Honolulu, HI 96813. Tel. (808) 225-2645. E-Mail: filamlaw@yahoo.com. Website: www.ImmigrationServicesUSA.com. He is from Laoag City and Magsingal, Ilocos Sur. He served as an Immigration Officer. He is co-author of “Immigration Law Service, 1st ed.,” an 8-volume practice guide for immigration officers and lawyers. Listen to the most funny, interesting, and useful radio program in Hawaii on KNDI at 1270, AM dial every Thursday at 7:30 a.m., rebroadcast at www.iluko.com. This article is a general overview of the subject matter discussed and is not intended as legal advice. No warranty is made by the writer or publisher as to its completeness or correctness at the time of publication.)