The disconnect between what congressional Democrats are saying about the recently enacted tax cut and what is happening in the real world is so wide that it is getting difficult to see across the chasm.
A lot of people think hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment, but it is. Unfortunately, so is their ignorant speech.
Actually, I think protecting “hate” speech is the reason the First Amendment exists in the first place. The very idea is to protect unpopular speech from government harassment and censorship, especially since a lot of what qualifies as hate speech these days, isn’t, and needs saying more often. For example:
Jesus is the ONLY way to Heaven.
They keep using the word “hate,” but it doesn’t mean what they think it means.
The illegal immigration problem falls squarely in the lap of Democrats. The laws are clear that illegal immigration is a crime, but Democrats, primarily, have been aiding and abetting these criminals for years. Hundreds of people have died attempting to cross the border. They try to blame it on tightening security along the border, but the bigger problem is the hope on the US side.
- Death in the desert: The dangerous trek between Mexico and Arizona (Al Jazeera America)
- ‘Death map’ of deserts aims to save lives of desperate Mexican migrants (US news – The Guardian)
They can get jobs. There are US citizens who will hire them, despite knowing they are here illegally. They hire them for the work “no one wants to do” and they pay them less than minimum wage. Generally I’m all about keeping down the cost of doing business, but I’m against breaking the law to do it.
There’s a good chance they won’t be sent back to where they came from. Democrat run sanctuary cities won’t arrest them, and at times, have even let them go after committing crimes. Democrats actively try to skirt the law, because of “compassion.” Don’t worry about the law, we’ll fix that. We’ll ignore the parts we don’t like.
It’s the fault of Democrats who allow illegal immigrants to get driver’s licenses, attend public education, vote in some towns, and they even hold office in one town!
It is the fault of Democrats because they refuse to differentiate between legal and illegal immigrants.
Amnesty won’t stop the flow of people dying in the desert between Mexico and the US. If anything, it will only encourage more people to try and make it.
People didn’t just start complaining about the illegal immigration problem in the last couple of years; they’ve been complaining for years and no one has been taking them seriously. The laws are there, but law enforcement has gotten lax. It’s finally come to a head. I would argue that’s one of the reasons Trump was elected over Hillary. It has nothing to do with xenophobia: “a dislike of or prejudice against people from other countries1,” and everything to do with the law and the burden placed on society. People watch the news and see illegal immigrants getting better treatment than many of our actual citizens.
- Cost of Unlawful Immigrants to the U.S. Taxpayers (The Heritage Foundation)
- Welfare Use by Legal and Illegal Immigrant Households (Center for Immigration Studies)
It is time to deter people from illegally coming to, or remaining, in the US. Right off the top of my head, I can think of five places to start:
- Pull federal funding from sanctuary cities
- Pull federal funding from colleges and school districts that allow illegal immigrants to attend
- Fine, heavily, companies that hire illegal immigrants
- Arrest people for aiding and abetting illegal immigrants
- Deport illegal immigrants
I know. I’ve heard the Christian argument about taking care of the foreigner, but let me remind you of what else the Bible has to say:
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. ~Romans 13:1-2 (ESV)
How does one reconcile following the law and taking care of foreigners? Simple. Differentiate between the legal and the illegal. It’s called discernment; another Christian principle.
For more information on Illegal Immigration:
- Illegal Immigration is a Crime (Federation for American Immigration Reform)
- The Myth of the “Otherwise Law-Abiding” Illegal Alien (Center for Immigration Studies)
"I can’t, in good conscience, vote for either candidate." As a Christian, and an American, I have a problem with this idea, because while neither candidate is desirable, one IS better than the other. That’s not to say, you shouldn’t vote for a third party candidate because that’s the party you identify with, and you truly like that candidate, but if you’re voting for what’s in the best interest of the U.S., it’s not the way to go. Personally, I identify closest with the Constitution Party, but lets face it, they probably won’t garner enough votes to even show up in the final results.
Because the candidate I want to win, doesn’t stand a chance, my next question is what’s best for the country. The answer to that is simple, #NoMoreDemocrats. So I vote for the candidate that has the best chance of beating the Democrat, and in just about every case, that’s a Republican. The bottom line is no matter how bad the character of a candidate is, it’s the policies that that candidate will bring.
The winner of the election is going to be a Republican or Democrat. No other candidate stands a chance. It will be one of the two. So, the realistic choices for President, from a Christian standpoint, are the Democrat whose policies suck, or the Republican whose policies suck a lot less. If you look at it that way, the choice should be easy. So, in good conscience, I have to vote for the Republican.
I’ve always believed to be a Democrat, is to be devoted to double standards. It showed itself in two separate articles today.
The first, FBI Obtains Warrant for Newly Discovered Emails in Clinton Probe — as Reid Accuses Comey of Hatch Act Violation – NBC News, discusses Harry Reid’s comments in which he “scolded Comey for potentially breaking the law.” My question here is, where is the concern over whether Hillary broke the law? For the sake of argument, I’ll say that there currently isn’t any proof that she broke the law, but there is a mountain of evidence: evidence stated by Comey himself during the press conference when he said that no prosecutor in his right mind would go after Hillary, Wikileaks Podesta emails, and Project Veritas Action videos as a start. Where is the concern there? There isn’t any.
The second, A Scandal Too Far? Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton, and a Test of Loyalty – NYTimes.com, discusses the relationship between Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Huma Abedin, and Anthony Weiner. What caught my attention was this statment:
The Clintons have never publicly criticized Mr. Weiner.
Yet they’re all over Trump. What this tells me is that the Clintons really don’t care about women or sexual misconduct; they only care about power. They only care about Trump’s supposed indiscretions because he’s in their way of returning to the White House.