Walls for Me, But Not for Thee

Share on facebook
Facebook 0
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn 0
Share on reddit
Reddit 0
Share on delicious
Delicious
Share on digg
Digg
Share on stumbleupon
StumbleUpon 0
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on email
Email
Share on print
Print

 

For rich Leftists, the only personal contact with illegal aliens they actually wish to have is via the servants they underpay.

More to explorer

Irony

Ryszard Legutko has written a book, The Demon in Democracy:  Totalitarian Temptations in Free Societies, which I highly recommend.  The editor of

PopeWatch: Priorities

      Lifesite News reminds us that the Pope has his priorities:   Pope Francis refuses to meet with Italy’s Minister of

10 Comments

  1. In early 2017, the virtue-signalers of the Malibu City Council
    voted to declare Malibu, CA a “Sanctuary City” and to direct their
    law enforcement to withhold cooperation from federal immigration
    authorities.

    Of course, as anyone familiar with glitzy Malibu could tell you,
    the city’s housing costs are so breathtakingly high that no
    illegal alien could afford to actually live there. However,
    illegals do travel into the city to work as (cheap) domestics
    and unskilled laborers. The City Council’s resolution not only
    serves to spotlight Malibu’s virtue-signaling, but also defends
    the city elite’s access to cheap servants.

    Soon after the city’s unfortunate declaration, someone went to
    the trouble and expense to produce and install a very official-
    looking addition to the official Malibu City Limits sign. It read:

    ” OFFICIAL SANCTUARY CITY
    “Cheap nannies and gardeners
    . Make Malibu great!”
    .
    (Boyle Heights not so much)” ****

    __________________
    **** For those unfamiliar with that part of California, Boyle
    Heights is a heavily Hispanic neighborhood in LA, a much
    more likely residence for the Latino servants bussing into
    Malibu.
    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/this-malibu-official-sanctuary-city-sign-is-not-quite-what-it-seems_us_58e7a9dee4b058f0a02e9823

  2. Yes, it is so true – the Virtue Signalling are ok with diversity as long as it doesn’t “enrich” them up close and personal. I like to call it DFAD – Diversity from a Distance.

  3. I do get very tired of being called names simply for wanting a secure border with Mexico. Presidents have the authority to do what they deem necessary to secure the nation. What I find so frustrating are the Bishops and priests that rail against the President calling his demand to secure the border, having an orderly and lawful method of entry into our nation as racist, xenophobic, hateful and so on. Why are church leaders allowed to say such things when our own Catechism allows nations to secure their borders? Are not immigrants also called upon by the Catechism to enter lawfully, respect the host country’s laws and abide by them, assimilate and make every effort to not become a burden on the host nation by carrying their own weight? Am I wrong?? If so please tell me, but if I am right then what is it that our own clergy does not understand about what the Catechism teaches on immigration? I am so frustrated by all of this!

  4. OC, the problem isn’t you. Too many of our clerics are completely off their rockers when it comes to illegal aliens. They have also developed a nasty habit of claiming to be doing good and leaving to other people the duty to pick up the tab.

  5. Anyone who supports illegal invaders needs to give them his citizenship, his house and his benefits, starting with the clergy and the politicians, The virtue of charity is individually decided in the conscience of the individual person. While clerics can exhort Christians to share, guilt cannot be appropriated as a stick to insure compliance.
    The state, on the other hand, with legal immigration in place and the principle of separation of church and state, has no authentic authority to extort money for illegal invaders. to fund the virtue of charity.

Comments are closed.