I do not live in, nor pay taxes in the state of California or any of the other sanctuary cities or areas so what goes on there does not affect my daily life, but it does affect the future and security of the United States, and it’s at that standpoint my commentary is aimed.
It is so obvious that what the politicians who support sanctuary for illegal aliens are doing, so for one reason and one reason alone, they smell a voting base, that once installed would represent an unbeatable majority, keeping progressives in power ad infinitum.
There is a price to be paid for such recklessness. A price of social upheaval, a community of criminals who will become bolder and bolder in the commission of local crimes, alienation from the federal government and an unwillingness of the general law-abiding public to come to the rescue when it all goes south, and it will.
There is no possible way for any community to sustain itself under these circumstances and with California and other sanctuaries bleeding tax base every day, the draw on public funds and services will quickly drain the coffers, making it necessary to cut social services to people who won’t understand why.
To me, if a state or city refuses to operate by the same set of laws the rest of the country operates by, they should not share in the taxes the rest of us pay and should be cut off from any discretionary federal funds that would otherwise come their way.
One of the worst things the Obama administration did, and there is a long list of them, was to foster a feeling that some people had the right to enforce and obey the law of the land selectively, constitution be damned and a tacit, tongue in cheek, disrespect for those who enforced the law.
Widget not in any sidebars
United means we stand together, obeying laws and statutes that are beneficial to all, which can be an unwieldy house of cards when one of the fifty states decides to go it on their own.
I am a big believer in states’ rights, but there are certain laws that have to be universally obeyed by all if there is to be a truly united country, and states’ rights can go extremely amuck.
Segregation was proliferated under the guise of states’ rights to the point that when a southbound train crossed an imaginary line the passengers had to be reshuffled with the black passenger being confined to certain areas of the train for the remainder of the trip.
The opposite thing happened when a northbound train crossed the same line, the black passengers were able to sit in any part of the train they chose,
The same was true on any kind of mass interstate public transportation and was backed up by a segregation law in the Southern States.
Many businesses had “White Only” signs in the windows and sanitary facilities were marked by only three signs, “White Women,” “White Men” and “Colored.”
All schools, restaurants, theaters and all matter of public places were subjected to segregation and African Americans, who paid the same taxes to the same government as the white population, were denied their constitutional rights.
In other words, the rights they were given under federal law were denied them by state laws.
It took rigid federal enforcement and much pain and suffering for the African-American population to reach any stage of parity.
It’s not been but a little over a half-century ago and remember it well from my early years. It was an attitude that hurt not only the development of the Southern States but the whole of the nation, causing bitter feelings and the exodus of some of the South’s finest young black minds.
So, are we to be the United States or the divided states?
Will we live under a uniform set of laws that govern the major policies of all states or will certain states and cities be able to thumb their noses at the rest of us and go their own way?
And how far does it go?
Well, there’s always secession.
What do you think?
Pray for our troops, our policy and the peace of Jerusalem.
God Bless America
— Charlie Daniels