Connect with us

Democrats

Elizabeth Warren proposes full-blown open borders, and her competitors will follow suit

Published

on

Elizabeth Warren proposes full-blown open borders and her competitors will follow suit

Joe Biden might be the frontrunner. Kamala Harris and Pete Buttigieg might be the upstarts. Bernie Sanders might be the grandfather of the modern Democratic-Socialist Party. But it’s the other person near the top of the Democratic nomination race who sets all the trends for policy proposals. That’s Elizabeth Warren, and her scariest non-economic proposal to date should send chills down every sovereignty-loving American’s back.

It isn’t just because she proposed it and as a chance of winning. It’s because since she’s proposing it, the other major candidates with the possible exception of Biden are going to embrace Warren’s plan with a tweak here or there so they can call it their own.

Even left-leaning Mother Jones and Trump-opposing writer Kevin Drum are calling it de facto open borders because if one were to propose a set of policies to initiate a declaration of open borders for America, it would look exactly like Warren’s plan.

Here’s what he said, briefly:

Are Democrats Now the Party of Open Borders?

This is a curious plan. As near as I can tell, it recommends no actions to improve border law enforcement in any way. There’s nothing about either a wall or a “virtual wall.” There’s nothing about E-Verify. There’s nothing about “smarter” or “more efficient” enforcement. No one will ever be deported—except, presumably, for serious felons, though Warren doesn’t even say that explicitly. Expedited removal will be ended. The Border Patrol will be reshaped from “top to bottom,” and will focus their efforts on “homeland security efforts like screening cargo, identifying counterfeit goods, and preventing smuggling and trafficking.” The whole thing is very similar to Julian Castro’s plan.

I have previously criticized Republicans who accused liberals of wanting “open borders.” President Trump tweets about this endlessly. But I have to admit that it’s hard to see much daylight between Warren’s plan and de facto open borders. As near as I can tell, CBP will be retasked away from patrolling the border looking for illegal crossings; if border officers happen to apprehend someone, they’ll be released almost immediately; if they bother to show up for their court date, they’ll have a lawyer appointed for them; and employers will have no particular reason to fear giving them a job.

The short and quite obvious answer to Drum’s headline question is, “Yep.”

For the longer answer, we have to go all the way back to the 2016 election when Sanders was trying to lay the foundation for something that seemed conspicuously like open borders. His immigration policies weren’t discussed much because his economic and healthcare plans were so radical for the time, they sucked all the progressive air out of the room. Sanders excited people with his bold discussions of fairness and hosing the rich, so much so that in the wake of his loss, the Justice Democrats were formed and progressive activists started taking over the Democratic Party.

Many of them came from Bernie’s camp. Others were brought in from the Green Party based on a promise of an environmental policy upheaval which we now know turned into the Green New Deal. What this group was able to accomplish in a little over a year was nothing short of embarrassing to all other similar movements. They succeeded where others failed miserably and were able to install Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, and Ayanna Pressley. Ilhan Omar would join them after the midterm elections and “The Squad” was born.

This is where Warren comes into play. She’s a capitalist turned socialist who made the change early enough that her past fiscal conservatism won’t be held against her. Nobody can doubt her progressive bonafides anymore. After a rocky start to her presidential bid, she decided to take a page or two out of the Justice Democrats’ playbook and start throwing radical proposals in the air. Magically, they stuck, and as the far-left base of the New Democratic Party saw them, these proposals were allowed to remain afloat.

Cue the rest of the field. They saw what was working for Warren and were quick to embrace the ideas.

But most of them were economic. Free school. Free healthcare. Reparations. Spend trillions on the environmental plan that’s actually an economic plan. And now, we can add open borders to the list.

What Democrats have learned recently is you don’t sell one of two ways: huge ideas that can be negotiated down to big ideas like the Green New Deal, or small ideas that, when combined, yield a result that shall not be named. Saving the environment is popular, so the Green New Deal was proposed using the first sales tactic. Open borders are not popular in name, so she’s selling it using the second principle.

If you stop securing the border, stop deportations, stop penalties for hiring illegal immigrants, decriminalize illegal border crossings, and offer a pathway to citizenship, you have open borders. Warren is too scared to name it now, but that’s exactly what it is.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Advertisement

0

Democrats

Dianne Feinstein’s comment on Dayton shooter skipped one important point

Published

on

Dianne Feinsteins comment on Dayton shooter skipped one important point

Gun control is the talk of the town as the week comes to a close. Well, that and Greenland. And Jeffrey Epstein. But the mass shootings two weeks ago has DC buzzing, media furiously reporting, and activists on both sides of the debate furiously Tweeting at each other. Senator Dianne Feinstein weighed in on the discussion by pointing out some important facts about the alleged Dayton shooter, Connor Betts.

Her facts are correct. Her analysis is off because it missed one important point. We’ll get to that in a minute, but let’s declare once and for all (though I’m sure I’ll have to repeat myself later) that the 2nd Amendment IS NOT ABOUT HUNTING OR HOME PROTECTION. Our right to keep and bear firearms was put into the Constitution by our founders because they recognized what could happen if the people had no recourse against an oppressive government. Just as Venezuelans didn’t realize they danger they were putting themselves into when they allowed their guns to be taken away, so too do many Americans put way too much trust in government.

The authoritarian left wants guns because they know they’ll never achieve their endgame as long as the people can defend themselves from tyranny.

Feinstein is correct that the Dayton shooter was able to cause an extreme amount of death and injury in a short period of time. Police were quick to respond, otherwise it could have been much worse. But as our EIC pointed out in a Tweet, Feinstein’s narrative is worthless when you look at it from the opposite perspective.

Gun control is not the solution to our mass shooting problem. If anything, gun control has enabled shooters to enact their crimes without fear of many “good guys with a gun” to stop them. We must never give up our 2nd Amendment rights.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

President says AOC ‘fuming’ that Tlaib, Omar are becoming the faces of the party

Published

on

President says AOC fuming that Tlaib Omar are becoming the faces of the party

President Trump took to Twitter to make fun of the opposition party as two of its most outspoken members, Representatives Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, continue making headlines and stirring up controversy. He even threw in an accusation against Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for good measure.

There are no indications that this is accurate, but that’s not the point. This isn’t hard policy or thoughtful analysis. It’s a petty jab, and while many Americans, including some of his fans, are against him taking shots at the opposition in such a manner, this is the society we live in and it includes a President who takes jabs on Twitter. You can stress over it or sit back and enjoy it. I choose the latter.

For AOC’s part, she took the jab with a chuckle.

Beyond the diversion this offers ahead of a weekend, reality is probably more closely reflected by the President’s Tweet than Democrats are comfortable admitting, at least the part about them being the face of the party. “The Squad” makes more headlines among the four of them than the rest of the Democrats combined, and this includes the powerful heads of committees who are actively investigating President Trump ahead of a possible impeachment.

Both Democrats and Republicans have different degrees of infatuation with “The Squad.” Are they a real threat to our republic, as many on both sides claim, or are they merely a diversion from real decisions being made in DC?

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Kirsten Gillibrand wants to confiscate guns

Published

on

Kirsten Gillibrand wants to confiscate guns

Senator and failing Democratic candidate for president Kirsten Gillibrand wants to confiscate your guns. The former “conservative” when it was politically expedient to be one in upstate New York has now gone the way of most her new party. She’s a radical progressive who wants your guns.

For someone who used to have an “A” rating with the NRA, she’s come a long way to hit rock bottom by calling for “assault weapons” bans and mandatory buybacks, AKA confiscations. Oh, but she won’t actually SAY they’re mandatory buybacks. She danced around that question like a pop star.

Gun activist Colion Noir broke down a recent interview she did with CNN. It was clear, as Noir pointed out, that CNN has already weighed Gillibrand in the balance and found her wanting. They went after her to corner her on her old gun rights support and tried to get her to admit what she wants to do as president with gun confiscations.

It’s funny watching Democrats flail around trying to get attention for themselves. There are only a handful of candidates leaving a mark, and Kirsten Gillibrand isn’t one of them. But she’s still trying to do damage to the 2nd Amendment on her way out.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending