Open borders = terrorist acts

Via Reuters:

BOULDER, Colorado, June 1 (Reuters) - Eight people were injured on Sunday when a 45-year-old man yelled "Free Palestine" and threw incendiary devices into a crowd in Boulder, Colorado where a demonstration to remember the Israeli hostages who remain in Gaza was taking place, authorities said.

Four women and four men between 52 and 88 years old were transported to hospitals, Boulder police said. Authorities had earlier put the count of the injured at six and said at least one of them was in a critical condition.

So who was this terrorist? An illegal immigrant.

 

NYC police quitting in record numbers

In light of the illegal immigrant cost crisis which I alluded to in my previous post, New York City has started cutting police funding. This, in order to help cover costs for illegal immigrants who are shrewdly being transferred there by Texas to share the load (i.e. experience the pain their liberal policies have been inflicting on others). NYC has responded to the cost issue not by demanding border control but by cutting police costs.  The unintended consequence (or perhaps deliberately intended "defund the police") is police quitting.

New York liberals are now getting pretty much what they want - open borders and somewhat defunded police.  And now, it's having an impact they don't like. Poor babies.

A Sanctuary City except it's really NIMBY

Not in my backyard: leftist liberals want open borders and and actually love illegal immigration. As proof of their devotion to the cause, they will declare their cities sanctuary cities.  That is, until the immigrants actually start showing up en masse and they are confronted with reality. Boo freaking hoo.

This is happening at the border

 This is merely a tiny fraction of the problem:

America cannot be a nation if there are no borders. It will collapse, and maybe that's exactly why the left want open borders. 

The logical extension of admit-anyone immigration policy.

Eliminate ICE. Have completely open borders. And by the way, anyone who comes in to the United States can vote.  These are actual progressive Democrat positions.  Let's pair that with the Democrat efforts to open voting to voters on days other than election day.  Let's pair it with the out-of-state voters efforts and the mail-in-ballots. So anyone regardless of documentation can vote, from anywhere, and increasingly, any time.

And then let's pair all of that with society increasingly existing in an information age. The technology exists to allow people to vote electronically from any location, at any time.  Let's assume to be magnanimous that there are no issues to privacy and fraudulent voting - or assume that they can be resolved eventually. If there are no borders, that means there are no nationalities.  And if that's the case, why limit voting in American elections to just constituents?  Why limit it to Americans? Why not open it to the entire world?  Isn't that the logical extension of the liberal immigration policy?  Someone in Jakarta voting for a senator in Texas or for the next president is a frightening prospect.

The world is full of socialists, Islamists and radicals.  Do Americans really want them all voting in America's elections?  Imagine what sort of radical, globalist, anti-liberty government would result.  Maybe that's actually the end goal of these Democrat ideas.