Editorial: Chicago can be a ‘sanctuary city,’ sure. Just not in my backyard.

submitted by MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee from archive.ph

all 4 comments
sorted by:
new (suggested)
topinsightfulfun

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Heating up: a Hispanic alderman just resigned from key roles after physically blocking a black alderwoman from voting.

A recent address given to the city council by local black activist Zoey Lee is typical of the resentment building between Hispanic and black people of the Windy City.

In her exasperated address, Lee spoke about how Hispanics — both residents and illegals — are getting preferential treatment, all at the expense of black residents.

“What’s the point of being an alderperson if y’all aren’t going to be for the community,” Lee asked the black leaders gathered before her.

She warned that Chicago was devolving into a “race war” between the black and Hispanic communities.

Video at the link.

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

More on this incident from the Washington Examiner:

"You want to take the little scraps of resources we have and put us at the bottom of the barrel? That’s not fair!" one Chicago woman said at a meeting about city plans to turn a neighborhood field house into an immigrant shelter. "A lot of these young boys, they don’t have fathers, so a lot of these coaches, they are their fathers. They spend part of their weekend here along with during the week, that keeps them in a safe place, it gives them mentorship, it shows them discipline."

Chicago’s black residents are not the only ones unhappy with Biden’s open-border policies. As John B. Judis and Ruy Teixeira note, Hispanics along the border in Texas are tired of Biden’s policies, too. “According to a survey by Equis Research, 61% of Hispanics in South Texas wanted spending on border security boosted and 58% wanted the number of asylum seekers limited — higher than the national average on both issues. In other words, significant numbers of Hispanics favored policies that they thought would reduce illegal immigration. The Democrats were out of step with the people they assumed were their loyal base.”

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Related: better get those aldermen back in line, Johnson. You wouldn't want the FBI looking into your finances, would you?

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Mayor Johnson (much touted, celebrated, and excused by the Due Dissidence guys) seems to be facing a growing rebellion among aldermen besieged by furious constituents.

And, uncomfortable as it may be for this city to admit, this plays right into the political instincts of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and others who figured “sanctuary cities” might be less than enthusiastic when forced to confront the kinds of numbers familiar to communities nearer the border. We dislike what Abbott chose to do with human beings in need, but he calculated what would happen and it is pretty much coming true.

Mayor Johnson... is going to have to abandon his typical platitudes about Chicago’s welcoming spirit and face up to the reality that migrant shelters do impact the quality of life of those around them.

...

Johnson still needs to use whatever influence he has to get the state, the feds and, yes, the county more involved. After all, temporary medical facilities were stood up fast in Chicago during the COVID crisis.

Arguing about the sanctuary city issue doesn’t change the short-term problem.

And solving the short-term problem (which won't happen) doesn't change the long-term problem: that liberals have no limiting principles. Billions of "human beings in need" exist all over the planet. How many should American taxpayers allow in, and treat, feed, clothe, educate, and house? For how long? What's the number?

In case the Chicago Tribune didn't notice, "the COVID crisis" did one hell of a number on actual Americans - you know, the people whose interests the government is supposed to be serving, as distinguished from "human beings" generally - and the key word in "temporary medical facilities" is temporary. "Human beings in need" will be in need longer than that. And since liberals will never countenance enforcing immigration laws, more "human beings in need" will arrive tomorrow. And more the day after that.

What's the number? 500 million? One billion? Two? More?