Sanctuary Blockers

One of the errors conservatives make is thinking pointing out the left’s hypocrisy will make them change their ways. They think if only we can really highlight how unprincipled they are, they’ll not be able to use the same arguments any more. Well, how’s that working out after thirty-plus years of trying?

Where Trump brings a breath of fresh air is in using his opponents’ hypocrisy as a weapon against them. This was a master stroke:

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Sunday the potential plan to transfer undocumented immigrants from border cities to “sanctuary cities” is “an option on the table,” though it’s not the administration’s first choice.

Sanctuary cities are Democrat-controlled cities whose administrations have decided they will refuse to cooperate with federal immigration officials trying to deport illegal aliens from the United States. This is fully-consistent with the increasingly mainstream Democratic position of open borders, and is enacted and supported by liberals who believe undocumented migrants represent a net positive for the United States regardless of who they are and how many. So in order to solve the crisis on the border – which is in large part a result of Democrats’ refusal to secure it and instead encourage more people to cross over illegally – Trump announced he’d send all these migrants to the places where they’ll be most welcome: the lefty-run sanctuary cities.

“The Radical Left always seems to have an Open Borders, Open Arms policy – so this should make them very happy!” he tweeted, later in the day singling out California at an event discussing 5G technology. “They’re always saying they have open arms, let’s see if they have open arms.”

Let’s see indeed:

House Democrats are formally launching an investigation into the Trump administration’s consideration of a controversial proposal to send undocumented immigrants to sanctuary cities.

The chairmen of the House Judiciary, Oversight and Homeland Security Committees have asked the White House and Department of Homeland Security for any communications concerning the potential transfer and release of immigrants detained at the southern border to various cities across the country.

Turns out they’re not keen.

“These reports are alarming. Not only does the Administration lack the legal authority to transfer detainees in this manner, it is shocking that the President and senior Administration officials are even considering manipulating release decisions for purely political reasons,” Reps. Jerry Nadler, Elijah Cummings, and Thompson wrote in a letter.

Of course, Trump has no intention of doing this, he’s just forcing the holier-than-though Democrats to publicly declare they don’t actually want the problem of illegal immigrants brought to their cities. I expect this will appeal more to his base than swing voters but the stunt appears to have turned at least one celebrity into a staunch Republican:

How indeed?


15 thoughts on “Sanctuary Blockers

  1. The army should have dealt with the corbyn poster shooting video by (secretly) having a second video made with big bird from sesame street as the target. An investigation can then conclude that it is not believed that either Corbyn or Big Bird are at risk. Every time he tries to complain you get another chance to repeat in public the line that neither Corbyn nor Big Bird are at risk.

    As we are going to ask those soldiers to put themselves in situations where they will be shot at for real, it seems only fair that we protect them when someone whines who is at zero risk of being shot at.

  2. Exactly the same could be done here. Let some pikeys park on hampstead heath. Let some of the champagne socialists little berchtesgartens be “enriched”.

    Expose their utter hypocrisy directly. It wouldn’t be difficult at all.

    On a slight tangent, I wonder what these “climate” protests in Londonistan are doing for their enthusiasm for windmills and “fair trade” tofu.

    As one who wouldn’t enter that debased third world shitehole except in chains, I’m finding it all rather amusing.

  3. When I lived in Cambridge a couple of years ago, there were a several big houses facing Jesus Green with big posters in the window saying “Refugees Welcome Here”. They were expensive Victorian properties, displaying through their original sash windows shelves of books, tasteful furniture, and old paintings.

    I would have expected long queues of African and Middle-Eastern men, but no, not one. The houses looked tastefully under-occupied, if anything. But early days. When word gets out, I guess things will pick up.

  4. It is one of Saul Alinsky’s tactics from his book “Rules for Radicals” – make the enemy live up to their own values. I can’t see how the left could object to that when it is their own methodology being used against them.

    Oh, wait …

  5. “Exactly the same could be done here. Let some pikeys park on hampstead heath”
    Long ago, mid-80s, I bought a flat in central London (Kings Cross). A late Georgian property with a long garden; and at the bottom of that garden a small childrens’ playground. Then the pikeys broke in and set up camp in that playground. Camden council was rather deaf to protests and some councillors (resident in more northerly parts of the borough) even suggested making it an official traveller site. Not long after another group of travellers set up camp on Hampstead Heath, which is owned by the City of London who had a rather more robust attitude to trespass. Shortly after that ‘our’ travellers moved on.

  6. Salvini should bus all the “refugees” to the Vatican and see how long it takes for the Holy Father to change his tune.

    It was amusing to see that Bernie suggested locking up migrants in camps at the border before deporting them. Yet no screaming outrage from the left…

  7. Not only should Trump do it, every government should do it: survey the country, and only place immigrants in the most inclusive neighbourhoods. Anything less would be unfair, even dangerous, to the immigrants themselves. Can Britons really trust Tommy Robinson types not to harm refugees? Would migrants ever feel safe living where the BNP polled above 10%? (Taking that angle might even sell it, at least to the true believers.)

    Much as I’d enjoy the schaadenfreude, I do actually mean this quite sincerely.

    The big problem with mass immigration is that its supporters are ignorant of the downsides. People can vote how they like, but they ought to at least understand what it is they’re voting for.

    (Phase Two:

    Inclusive types will contrive an excuse to move, so we must contrive an excuse to keep them in place. Perhaps this: young people can’t afford to buy a house, so we offer them a generous grant, funded by a 500% hike in stamp duty for the over 50’s. You can get an exemption, but only if you agree to help diversify somewhere that’s not multicultural enough. Bradford springs to mind.)

  8. This is good trolling from Trump, but I suspect and fear that is all it is. It will never happen, but it should be happening now.

  9. We mustn’t forget that these immigrants add considerably to GDP, as well as being otherwise enriching.

    The good people of Hampstead and similar may feel that they’re already lucky enough and don’t deserve even more.

  10. “It is one of Saul Alinsky’s tactics from his book “Rules for Radicals” – make the enemy live up to their own values. I can’t see how the left could object to that when it is their own methodology being used against them.”

    Its just goes to show that our ‘Conservative’ governments are nothing of the sort, because a true Conservative government would soon find a plethora of ways that it could legislate to ensure that the Left is hoist on its own petard, yet they do absolutely nothing.

    I keep saying that a parallel voluntary tax system should be instigated with swinging tax rates across the board at the level often demanded by the Left. Then its a simple case of saying ‘If you want higher taxes, you can have them, sign here!’

  11. Scott Adams had an interesting take on Trump’s possible strategy. I think Cher did a bit of a reverse ferret once she realised who she was agreeing with!

  12. What A Joyous Political Policy – Trump Sends Illegal Immigrants To Sanctuary Cities

    Trump calls Democrats’ bluff on illegal immigrants

    ‘The Five’ reacts to Trump’s sanctuary city proposal

    The Left are beyond stupid or insane, they are evil as shown by Stalin, Castro, Mugabe, Maduro to name a few. “Vote for me & I will pay you taxpayers money and you’re above the law; steal, rape & murder at will”

    Popcorn time watching the Left & SJWs tie themselves in knots about why their policies should not be implemented where they live.

    It adds to their LGB vs T vs RoP; Obese vs Starving poor and Green vs “Heat or Eat” conundrums.

  13. I’m surprised more hasn’t been made of virtue-signalling Canada’s partial U-turn on refugees. They were all full of the ‘welcome here’ stuff until the overland route from the US started getting appreciable numbers of illegals coming through, as some migrants cottoned-on to a better deal in Canada, or had family there.

    Suddenly it was all about controlling the border, and rapidly deporting anyone who had been in a safe country (the US – or the UK, Oz or NZ to make it seem less targeted).


  14. I’m not sure the sanctuary-city lefties are stinging so much from the exposed hypocrisy so much as from the thought that other regions might not have to host the gatecrashers. That left politics has running other people’s lives for them as a primary goal is a powerful explanation for a lot of things they do.

Comments are closed.