Posted on 03/14/2018 6:58:02 AM PDT by Cheerio
Earlier this week we looked at the growing chorus on the left seeking to make the idea of abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) a platform plank for the Democrats in 2018 and 2020. This relatively fringe idea has been rapidly picking up steam in the commentariat, even though they haven’t been able to convince potential POTUS candidates like Kamala Harris to endorse it. The clarion calls to excise ICE from the executive corpus have rung especially clear of late. First, an essay by Sean McElwee in the Nation last week probed whether “an unaccountable strike force executing a campaign of ethnic cleansing” is compatible with democracy. (His answer: No.) Then, MSNBC’s Chris Hayes asked potential 2020 presidential contender Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) if the agency, which Harris says has abused its power, should exist. (Her answer: Yes.) The movement gained another high profile supporter yesterday when op-ed columnist Molly Roberts at the Washington Post joined the parade. Apparently noting the reluctance of experienced politicians and generally sane people to endorse the concept, Roberts gamely goes to bat, asking what’s so crazy about the idea of eliminating a federal agency.
The clarion calls to excise ICE from the executive corpus have rung especially clear of late. First, an essay by Sean McElwee in the Nation last week probed whether “an unaccountable strike force executing a campaign of ethnic cleansing” is compatible with democracy. (His answer: No.) Then, MSNBC’s Chris Hayes asked potential 2020 presidential contender Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) if the agency, which Harris says has abused its power, should exist. (Her answer: Yes.)
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Since when has the Constitution mattered to the DNC?
Citizens might shoot MS-13 Democrat voters in self defense.
The Constitution doesn’t seem to matter to many Republicans either.
Cruz, Jindal, Haley and George P. Bush were all born to foreign national parents and are likewise ineligible.
Cruz and Jindal both sought to rubberstamp Obama’s lawlessness, a tradition at least as old as Mr.No-Repeal Eisenhower who could have prevented much of our woes with minimal disruption and incurred debt but chose to rubberstamp FDR’s lawlessness instead.
Or at the minimum he should have got Amendment processes going to make them lawful.
I wasn’t aware that George P was running for POTUS.
As for Haley Barbour, you’re dealing with the Nations (Choctaw) where his mom was concerned and she was therefore definitely a Citizen of the United States. The Indian Nations (blood, not soil) aren’t exactly countries but exist in a grey area.
Nikki Haley, born to two Indian nationals.
Whites from South Africa and Zimbabwe/Rhodesia. And you know what black democrats would have to say about that.
There's also Christians from the Middle East.
Ah, she’s been more or less completely off my radar. But you’re correct that she would be not eligible. Where you were born doesn’t matter for NBC but who your parents were, their citizenship, does.
Ironically, though she never held the office, Clinton still managed to play a pivitol role in popularizing the current misconstruction that confuses 14th Amendment citizenship with NBC by focusing on where Obama was born instead of who his father was. Woman is really toxic,
This indicates that it’s working.
How about we abolish all federal “law enforcement” agencies? Agencies could sue to enforce federal law, but not carry firearms or other weapons. Arrest, etc., would be handled by the local sheriff or police department.
Real “liberals” would agree with this. Totalitarian socialists (cough, cough... ‘Rats...cough, cough) will not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.