In my piece on Sarah Palin's immigration policy I made the points that she hasn't thought and/or doesn't care that much about the issue; and if she happens to have good instincts, they aren't going to come out as McCain's running mate or vice president. Both of these assertions came to fruition in a recent interview with Univision. When asked how many "undocmented immigrants" were in her state, she replied "I don't know, I don't know. That's a good question." As for amnesty, she says she's against it; but qualifies that she's only against "total amnesty." One thing she is against without qualifications is deportations,

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.

So what's her alternative between "total amnesty" and deportations. If you guessed, "attrition through enforcement," you're wrong. Instead when she is asked "so you support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants?" She responded,

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.

In my article, I got a bit of grief about calling Palin "a pig in a poke—despite the lipstick." Well, the gender sensitive conservatives can be happy to know that there is no pig in the poke. Her amnesty cat is out of the bag.