I was among the crowd of 150 who had the privilege of listening to Michelle Malkin at the Sabattus Town Hall recently. The Sabattus venue was the fourth and (finally) last of the meeting locations to have scheduled her appearance, the other three having canceled for reasons not clearly defined.

Where was the problem? Malkin is obviously controversial because of her strong stands on illegal immigration, which she talked about at length in her remarks. Her ire was directed at, among other things, “sanctuary cities,” that she rightly referred to as “outlaw cities.” Local communities are required, under provisions of the 1996 Illegal Immigrant Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, to cooperate with immigration officials. There are hundreds that do not. Are they then not “outlaw cities?”

Her message resonated with the assemblage of concerned and loyal Americans and legal immigrants in the audience.

She made the point — which we acknowledged — that we are not “xenophobic, anti-immigrant and racist.” We are concerned for the security of our nation, and we support legal immigration, secure borders and enforcement of our laws.

How can that be controversial?

It is unfortunate that those other venues canceled her appearance. Our crowd was peaceful, law-abiding and respectful of others.

Bob Casimiro, Bridgton

Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.