Make the U.S. citizenship test harder
This year the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is expected to update the citizenship test. With about a 96% passing rate, the current version is almost easy enough for the Cheat-in-Chief to pass—almost! It needs to be harder. Only accomplished legal aliens should be endowed with citizenship rights; how can they care to reinvigorate our constitutional republic if they know nothing about it?
Currently, a citizen wannabee only has to get 6 out of ten civics questions during the interview portion correct; that’s about the equivalent of D-. That’s simply not good enough for those who presume to assume the mantle of American. Even 7 out of 10 would be forgiving as that equates to about a C, but America begins with A.
Not only must the passing threshold be increased, but the questions need to measure comprehensive civics knowledge, rather than just reward someone with sound short-term memory. It’s simply too simple, even without the plethora of study guides.
The USCIS is conducting a pilot test that replaces oral questions with multiple-choice questions. That’s an improvement because their design requires a broader base of knowledge. An example can be found here.
A ninety-plus percent passing rate doesn’t even constitute a proper “test” but a perfunctory validation for almost all newcomers. But the path that ascends to citizenship of such a great country must be gaspingly steeper.
Here’s my brief sample of multiple-choice questions to whittle down the ludicrously liberal pass rate:
Circle the correct answer:
America is known as the “Land of the Free, the Home of the__________.” (Redskins, Patriots, Redcoats, Tomahawks, Brave)
The due process clauses of the 5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution can be tied to…? (Magna cum Laude, Cicero, Magnum P.I., Magna Carta, Communist Manifesto)
For the first time in history, our founders acknowledged that the pursuit of ________ is a fundamental human right. (wealth, pleasure, hedonism, mindfulness, happiness)
Contrary to the 1619 Project’s propaganda, America was founded on idealistic principles for all humans; we call this the _______. (American Dream, welfare state, socialist’s dream, “real” communism, caste system)
Part of Thomas Jefferson’s mandate to the Lewis and Clark Expedition was to find the _____ . (Northwest Passage, Shangri-La, Silk Road, El Dorado, Continental Divide)
The _______, articulated in 1823, attempted, in part, to prevent further European interference in the Americas. (Adams Proclamation, Lombardi Game Plan, Washington Resolution, Jackson Edict, Monroe Doctrine)
In Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville wrote: “The __________ colonies have always enjoyed more internal freedom and more political independence than the colonies of other nations.” (Spanish, French, Belgium, English, Portuguese)
In 1773, a mob chucked a boatload of British tea into Boston Harbor. How many pounds did they wantonly waste? (50,000, 60,000 70,000, 80,000, over 90,000)
The battle of ________________ is widely regarded as the start of the American Revolution. (The Bulge, The Alamo, Little Bighorn, Bull Run, Lexington and Concord)
In addition to returning illegal aliens (a much more pressing issue) whence they came, a future President Trump will do well to impose stricter requirements for permanent legal aliens to become U.S. citizens. In fact, he did it once before, making the citizenship test harder to pass. Predictably, Joe Biden the dunce once again demonstrated his penchant to make America average (something he can relate to), by dumbing-down the test. His executive order titled “Restoring Faith in Our Legal Immigration System” emphasizes inclusion, rather than merit.
During the last decade, USCIS opened up America the Beautiful to 7.7 million naturalized citizens. Nevertheless, the United States is reputed to have one of the most stringent citizenship processes. That seems dubious, but if correct, then good! If a citizenship applicant has advanced occupational skills that can help MAGA, then that wannabee should have no trouble scoring at least 80% on a new multiple-choice civics test. Then, presuming they’re of good moral character and financially independent, they are welcome to partake of our bounty, commensurate with their contributions.
Our MAGA efforts require not only kicking out the illegals gaming the system, but ensuring our immigration and naturalization system is based on meritocracy, not DEI imperatives and family sponsorships. We are exceptional, so let’s indeed restore faith in our legal immigration system.
Image: Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons, unaltered.
Democrats Drop 260k in Voter Registration Edge in Pennsylvania
Democrats have dropped nearly 260,000 in their voter registration edge — more than double the 2020 margin — in Pennsylvania, according to the latest statistics.
A brief look at Pennsylvania voter registration statistics shows Democrats leading Republicans with 3,893,342 registered Democrats to 3,475,267 registered Republicans — a difference of 418,075 registered voters.
A broader look, however, shows that this trend has continued for the past several years, as Democrats had a registered voter advantage of 916,273 in 2016. That shrank to 685,818 in 2020. According to the Republican National Committee (RNC), the Republicans reduced the gap even further by 161,549 voters since 2022 alone, bringing it from -605,188 to -443,639 as of December 2023.
In other words, the gap has reduced by well over 260,000 voters since 2020:
This trend is not exclusive to Pennsylvania. Republicans are making what the RNC described to Breitbart News as “historic voter registration gains” in battleground states across the country.
As of December, Republicans had a 192,323 voter advantage over Democrats in Arizona, up from 139,923 in 2021. Republicans continue to close the gap in other key states as well, including Florida, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina, and Wisconsin, as Breitbart News detailed:
In Georgia, Republicans were down 343,190 as of November 2020, but that gap has decreased to -240,676 in December 2023, meaning Republicans have reduced the Democrats’ registration lead by 102,514 voters over the past three years. Like Arizona, Republicans in Georgia also have an advantage in more than half of the Peach State’s counties.
In November 2020, Republicans were down 8,537 in Michigan, for example. “As of December 2023, the gap has flipped to a 215,338 advantage for the Modeled Republicans for a net registration increase of 223,875 voters in the last three years,” the RNC told Breitbart News.
Similarly, in November 2020, Republicans were down 109,031 in Nevada. The gap has since decreased to -67,067. In other words, Republicans have reduced the Democrats’ lead by 41,964 voters over the last few years.
In North Carolina, Republicans reduced the gap to 118,693 voters, bringing it from -316,618 in November 2021 to -197,925 in December 2023. And in Wisconsin, Republican advantage over Democrats has grown from 80,266 in November 2020 to 111,355 in December 2023.
The figures come as polls show former President Donald Trump leading President Joe Biden in these same key swing states.
IS JOJO NO LONGER LYING THAT HE'S FLOODED AMERICA WITH ILLEGALS?
FIFTEEN THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT LA RAZA “THE RACE”
by Michelle Malkin
Only in America could critics of a group called "The Race" be labeled racists. Such is the triumph of left-wing identity chauvinists, whose aggressive activists and supine abettors have succeeded in redefining all opposition as "hate."
Both Barack Obama and John McCain will speak this week in San Diego at the annual conference of the National Council of La Raza, the Latino organization whose name is Spanish for, yes, "The Race." Can you imagine Obama and McCain paying homage to a group of white people who called themselves that? No matter. The presidential candidates and the media have legitimized "The Race" as a mainstream ethnic lobbying group and marginalized its critics as intolerant bigots. The unvarnished truth is that the group is a radical ethnic nationalist outfit that abuses your tax dollars and milks PC politics to undermine our sovereignty.
Here are 15 things you should know about "The Race":
15. "The Race" supports driver's licenses for illegal aliens.
14."The Race" demands in-state tuition discounts for illegal alien students that are not available to law-abiding U.S. citizens and law-abiding legal immigrants.
13. "The Race" vehemently opposes cooperative immigration enforcement efforts between local, state and federal authorities.
12. "The Race" opposes a secure fence on the southern border.
11. "The Race" joined the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee in a failed lawsuit attempt to prevent the feds from entering immigration information into a key national crime database -- and to prevent local police officers from accessing the data.
10. "The Race" opposed the state of Oklahoma's tough immigration-enforcement-first laws, which cut off welfare to illegal aliens, put teeth in employer sanctions and strengthened local-federal cooperation and information sharing.
9. "The Race" joined other open-borders, anti-assimilationists and sued to prevent Proposition 227, California's bilingual education reform ballot initiative, from becoming law.
8. "The Race" bitterly protested common-sense voter ID provisions as an "absolute disgrace."
7. "The Race" has consistently opposed post-9/11 national security measures at every turn.
6. Former "Race" president Raul Yzaguirre, Hillary Clinton's Hispanic outreach adviser, said this: "U.S. English is to Hispanics as the Ku Klux Klan is to blacks." He was referring to U.S. English, the nation's oldest, largest citizens' action group dedicated to preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States. "The Race" also pioneered Orwellian open-borders Newspeak and advised the Mexican government on how to lobby for illegal alien amnesty while avoiding the terms "illegal" and "amnesty."
5. "The Race" gives mainstream cover to a poisonous subset of ideological satellites, led by Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan, or Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan (MEChA). The late GOP Rep. Charlie Norwood rightly characterized the organization as "a radical racist group … one of the most anti-American groups in the country, which has permeated U.S. campuses since the 1960s, and continues its push to carve a racist nation out of the American West."
4. "The Race" is currently leading a smear campaign against staunch immigration enforcement leaders and has called for TV and cable news networks to keep immigration enforcement proponents off the airwaves -- in addition to pushing for Fairness Doctrine policies to shut up their foes. The New York Times reported that current "Race" president Janet Murguia believes "hate speech" should "not be tolerated, even if such censorship were a violation of First Amendment rights."
3. "The Race" sponsors militant ethnic nationalist charter schools subsidized by your public tax dollars (at least $8 million in federal education grants). The schools include Aztlan Academy in Tucson, Ariz., the Mexicayotl Academy in Nogales, Ariz., Academia Cesar Chavez Charter School in St. Paul, Minn., and La Academia Semillas del Pueblo in Los Angeles, whose principal inveighed: "We don't want to drink from a White water fountain, we have our own wells and our natural reservoirs and our way of collecting rain in our aqueducts. We don't need a White water fountain … ultimately the White way, the American way, the neo liberal, capitalist way of life will eventually lead to our own destruction."
2. "The Race" has perfected the art of the PC shakedown at taxpayer expense, pushing relentlessly to lower home loan standards for Hispanic borrowers, reaping millions in federal "mortgage counseling" grants, seeking special multimillion-dollar earmarks and partnering with banks that do business with illegal aliens.
1. "The Race" thrives on ethnic supremacy -- and the elite sheeple's unwillingness to call it what it is. As historian Victor Davis Hanson observes: "[The] organization's very nomenclature 'The National Council of La Raza' is hate speech to the core. Despite all the contortions of the group, Raza (as its Latin cognate suggests) reflects the meaning of 'race' in Spanish, not 'the people' -- and that's precisely why we don't hear of something like 'The National Council of the People,' which would not confer the buzz notion of ethnic, racial and tribal chauvinism."
The fringe is the center. The center is the fringe. Viva La Raza/UNIDOus.
Joe Biden Promises 2024 Campaign for More Migration and Amnesty
An angry President Joe Biden said he would make immigration a central issue in his 2024 campaign if Senate Republicans do not back his more-migration bill on Wednesday.
“If the bill fails, I want to be absolutely clear about something,” Biden told reporters at the White House on Tuesday.
The American people are going to know why it fails. I’ll be taking this issue to the country … Every day between now and November, the American people are going to know that the only reason the border is not secure is Donald Trump and his MAGA Republican friends.
“It is great news if the President wants to make immigration a key issue for the 2024 election,” responded Chris Chmielenski, president of the Immigration Accountability Project. “People know that the chaos started when Biden took over the White House,” he said.
In his Tuesday speech, Biden touted support for his migration-expanding bill from the investor-dominated U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Wall Street Journal, saying:
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports this bill because they know this bill is not just good for the border, it’s also good for American business and for the American economy. And it’s why the [editorial board of the] Wall Street Journal endorsed the bill. The headline this morning reads “A Border Security Bill Worth Passing.”
But Americans do not want business groups to run the nation’s immigration system, Chmielenski noted:
Americans don’t want to see more migrants coming into the country to help boost the economy if it means American workers are going to lose … They understand that our current immigration system is a detriment to our economy because we’re bringing in millions of workers that we don’t need for lower-skilled jobs … [and many] white-collar workers to take jobs that Americans are willing to take for higher wages.
“That’s what the Chamber of Commerce and Wall Street are pushing for … [but] Americans [prefer migrants] that won’t directly compete with them but will complement them,” he said.
Biden also insisted he would push for amnesties in the 2024 campaign, saying “We’re not walking away from true immigration reform including permanent protections and a pathway to citizenship for young DREAMers who came here when they were children.”
McConnell: Open Borders Bill Has “No Real Chance” to Pass
C-SPANBiden’s 2024 challenge to Trump came after the caucus of 49 GOP Senators decided not to support the bill in a Wednesday vote, despite advocacy by GOP Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), and other Senators.
The GOP decision came despite much establishment pressure — but amid a populist pushback that GOP Senators are closely tracking.
“A vote for this border surrender bill is a vote for Biden’s open-border policies,” said William Gheen, the president of ALIPAC, a grassroots group that opposes politicians who back pro-migration policies.
Many polls show that the public wants reduced migration, especially reduced labor migration.
In 2014, the GOP gained five Senate seats after Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) helped pass the very unpopular “Gang of Eight amnesty through the Senate. The bill was blocked in the House by GOP activists.
Yet the Democrats’ 2024 bill only promises more — albeit better-organized — migration into Americans’ communities and workplaces.
Many polls also show that Biden’s easy-migration policy is a political deadweight in 2024, raising the GOP’s hope of winning a majority in the U.S. Senate.
ABC News reported on February 5:
According to a Nov. 3-4 poll from ABC News/Ipsos, American adults said they trusted Republicans to do a better job handling immigration than Democrats, 36 percent to 24 percent. That 12-point gap was tied for Republicans’ second-biggest advantage on any issue (out of 11 tested).
And acrosssevennonpartisanpollsconductedinJanuary,* President Joe Biden’s average approval rating on immigration and/or the southern border was just 29 percent, and his average disapproval rating was 63 percent. That’s significantly worse than his already-poor 39-percent-to-57-percent average approval and disapproval ratings in those same polls.
ABC added, “16 percent of independents also identified immigration as their most important problem, which was up from 6 percent in July.”
Republican candidates should recognize that 70 percent of swing-voting independents “strongly” or “somewhat” favor the deportation of illegal migrants, according to a poll by Cygnal that was released mid-January. The report advised:
Republican candidates at all levels would be wise to tap into this sentiment and contrast themselves with a sheepish bench of Democrats who have largely let the issue fester to a boiling point no locality can afford to further ignore because it’s impacting voters day-to-day lives.
Biden’s migration failure also worsens voters’ worries about the economy. The polling firm of TIPP Insights issued a report on February 4 noting:
Nearly four in ten (38%) Americans picked the economy as the country’s most important issue, followed by immigration/border security at 36 percent and crime at 19 percent as the other top concerns. Interestingly, the importance of immigration increased sharply from 29% in December to 36% in January and remained at that level in February.
…
A recent TIPP Poll and Bankrate survey revealed that the majority of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. Their wages have not grown, while stubborn Bidenflation, at 17 percent, has taken a toll on their finances. Only one-third (34%) say they’re better off than four years ago.
The report is titled “America’s Immigration Anxiety Amidst A Gloomy Outlook On The Direction Of Country.”
Biden’s eagerness to challenge Trump on immigration politics likely reflects his growing dislike of Trump. On February 1, Politico reported:
The president [Biden] has described Trump to longtime friends and close aides as a “sick fuck” who delights in others’ misfortunes, according to three people who have heard the president use the profane description. According to one of the people who has spoken with the president, Biden recently said of Trump: “What a fucking asshole the guy is.”
Extraction Migration
Since at least 1990, the federal government has relied on Extraction Migration to grow the economy after allowing investors to move the high-wage manufacturing sector to lower-wage countries.
The migration policy extracts vast amounts of human resources from needy countries. The additional workers, consumers, and renters push up stock values by shrinking Americans’ wages, subsidizing low-productivity companies, boosting rents, and spiking real estate prices.
The economic policy has pushed many native-born Americans out of careers in a wide variety of business sectors, reduced native-born Americans’ productivity and political clout, reduced high-tech innovation, crippled civic solidarity, and allowed government officials and progressives to ignore the rising death rate of discarded Americans.
The policy also sucks jobs and wealth from heartland states by subsidizing coastal investors and government agencies with a flood of low-wage workers, high-occupancy renters, and government-aided consumers.
The colonialism-like policy has also killed many thousands of migrants, including many on the taxpayer-funded jungle trail through the Darien Gap in Panama.
Mail-in voter fraud and the 2020 election
A country cannot survive, let alone thrive, when the voting process itself has been tainted, thereby driving a significant portion of the citizenry to no longer trust in the electoral system. In the United States, we have generally been immune from this nightmare scenario, at least for the most part. Yes, we have had our share of highly contested elections, most recently in 2000. But these situations have been much more the exception than the norm in the United States over the past two centuries.
Unfortunately, it has become clear that the 2020 presidential election did not reach this historically high bar due to the sheer level of fraud mail-in voters admitted to committing in the 2020 election.
Our story begins in the months leading up to the 2020 election, when several states, including all the critical swing states, changed their voting rules under the pretext that traditional in-person voting was dangerous due to the pandemic. Rather than having most people vote in-person, which is the most safe and secure method to cast a ballot, dozens of state officials usurped the power of state legislatures and implemented unprecedented (and unconstitutional) measures to encourage mass voting by mail.
These dubious changes to state voting procedures resulted in a record-breaking number of ballots cast by mail in the 2020 election. At the same time, the percentage of mail-in ballots that were rejected by state officials was far below the historical average.
It just so happens that Joe Biden received a far greater share of the record-high mail-in votes in the 2020 election. In fact, at the national level, Biden received nearly twice as many mail-in votes compared to Trump.
Fast-forward to late 2023, when the Heartland Institute and Rasmussen Reports conducted a survey that found at least one-in-five mail-in voters admitted to committing at least one type of election fraud. To put it mildly, the poll caused a stir in the media.
The shocking poll results also begged the question: Did widespread mail-in voter fraud impact the outcome of the 2020 election?
In short, the answer is: Yes, it probably did.
Make no mistake, that conclusion was not reached in haste. On the contrary, my colleagues and I came to that conclusion after rigorous analysis of the raw polling data supplied by Rasmussen coupled with state-based mail-in voting figures.
All of this information is available in a newly released Heartland Policy Study titled: "Who Really Won the 2020 Election? Measuring the Effect of Mail-in Ballot Fraud in the Trump-Biden Race for the White House."
According to the report, “the best available evidence suggests that mail-in ballot fraud significantly impacted the 2020 presidential election, in favor of Joe Biden. In other words, had the 2020 election been conducted like every national election has been over the past two centuries, wherein the vast majority of voters cast ballots in-person rather than by mail, Donald Trump would have almost certainly been re-elected.”
Truth be told, the main reason we decided to investigate the 2020 election in such detail is not because we are interested in relitigating the 2020 election. Our primary objective is to prevent anything like what occurred in the 2020 election from ever happening again.
To avert a repeat of the 2020 election, and to minimize the chances of fraud impacting future elections, we’ve included several commonsense policy recommendations that we believe will increase election integrity. For instance, we advise states to clean up their outdated and inaccurate voter registration rolls while encouraging in-person voting as much as possible.
The countdown to the 2024 election is already underway, with the odds of a Trump-Biden rematch appearing more likely by the day. It is of paramount importance that the integrity of the 2024 election is not questioned en masse by either side. We need to return to a time when the American people overwhelmingly trusted the veracity of elections. We need to keep things simple and transparent when it comes to the voting process. We need to know with a high degree of certainty that our elections are free and fair. We need to know that our vote still actually matters.
Are We on The Doorstep of Another Civil War?
Before I get into my analysis, I want to make it clear I believe that anyone who wants a civil war to happen in the U.S. is dangerously naïve, insane, or working for one of America’s enemies. Imagine a Russia-Ukraine-type conflict in the U.S.
Thanks to Hollywood, most Americans believe that rebellions can be started and won by small ragtag groups of patriots, freedom fighters, insurrectionists, or everyday common folk. All you need are pistols, assault weapons, bows and arrows, and maybe a few Molotov cocktails. Blow up the Death Star, and the problem is solved.
But that is not how it usually works. Revolutions require armaments, soldiers, money, something worth fighting for, and popular support. Unless lives are at stake, few people are angry or committed enough to leave jobs or families to risk going to jail or dying needlessly.
The most daunting task is overcoming the opposition. The weaponry and manpower available to peacekeepers in our country is formidable. This includes the local sheriff’s departments, city police, state police, National Guard, and various federal agencies, most notably the FBI. Plus, in a crisis, these organizations will usually work together. An uprising of twenty, fifty, or even a hundred-plus armed citizens would quickly fail.
Ever heard of the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794? In 1791, Congress passed a distilled spirits tax. Residents of western Pennsylvania, who used whiskey as money, protested and refused to pay the tax. Sporadic acts of violence and resistance began, along with threats to secede from the Union. The unrest culminated in 1794, when a group of around 600 armed citizens took a federal marshal prisoner. When the government sent 13,000 troops, commanded by George Washington, to restore order, the rebels went home without firing a shot.
What about John Brown’s Raid? In 1859, abolitionist John Brown and 21 other armed followers attempted to start a slave rebellion by capturing the Federal Arsenal in Harper’s Ferry, Virginia. He and his followers were confronted by U.S. Marines, commanded by Colonel Robert E. Lee. Ten of the rebels were killed during the ensuing firefight. Seven more were tried and hanged later.
Remember the Weather Underground? This was a Marxist antiwar faction that wanted to start a revolution by radicalizing students to oppose the Vietnam War. The Weathermen, a group of around 400 people, were involved in numerous bombings of federal and state facilities between 1969 and 1973. Almost all of them were eventually arrested and imprisoned.
This brings me to the two most significant military conflicts on American soil, pitting family against family and brother against brother. One is the American Revolution, basically an English Civil War, and the other is the American Civil War. One was fought over taxation and individual rights, the other over slavery and states’ rights.
The battles that started the Revolution were between the British army and the Massachusetts militia. Some might equate the word “militia” with a mob. But at that time, the militia was a legitimate military organization, like today’s National Guard.
On April 19, 1775, around 700 members of the British occupation force in Boston were sent to capture or destroy military supplies stored at Lexington and Concord. During the early morning hours, the militia was warned that the British were coming, so individual units began to assemble while the military stores were being moved.
At Lexington, around 77 local militia faced roughly 400 British troops. The militia realized they were heavily outnumbered and were about to disperse when someone fired a shot, prompting the British to open fire and charge. Eight militia members were killed and several wounded. This might have been swept under the rug as an unfortunate incident except for what happened at Concord.
At North Bridge, roughly 400 militiamen faced off against about 100 British soldiers. As both sides maneuvered to control the bridge, supposedly, a panicked British soldier fired his musket. Before their officers could stop it, other British soldiers opened fire. In self-defense, the militia did the same, resulting in several killed and wounded on both sides.
As the British began to retreat, other militia units began to arrive. Word of the casualties at Lexington and Concord had spread, prompting a running firefight between the militia and the British all the way to Boston. In only one day, the situation had gone from an uneasy peace to an armed rebellion. In 1776, the other colonies finally chose sides and declared their independence.
In 1860, the U.S. was divided over the issue of slavery. When Abraham Lincoln, who supported the abolition of slavery, was elected president, seven Southern slave states decided to secede. These states then asked that all federal facilities within their jurisdiction — forts, shipyards, etc. — be turned over to them.
However, Lincoln refused to give up Fort Sumter in South Carolina. So, on April 12, 1861, the South Carolina militia opened fire with artillery and bombarded the fort. Two days later, the small contingent of federal troops defending it surrendered. Lincoln then issued a call for volunteers to fight the rebels. At that point, the eight other slave states decided to either secede from the Union or stick with it. Now that sides had been chosen and shots fired, the war began.
You might notice a pattern here. First, important issues divide our country, like independence versus obedience to the king or slavery versus freedom. Then, either a military skirmish occurs before sides get chosen or sides get chosen before the military gets involved. Both the Revolution and the Civil War were started by state military organizations, not by groups of armed radicals.
We are at a similar junction in history right now. Politics has divided the country, and the pivotal issue is unlimited illegal immigration. Few wanted it. No one expected it when he voted for Biden. And now almost no one is willing to pay the price socially or financially to support it.
The White House may have believed that its open border policy would get someone, anyone, to pick up a gun to stop the madness. It would give Biden an excuse to impose martial law, ban assault weapons or handguns, or both. But the horde of right-wing extremists the far-left fantasizes about does not exist.
It seems the administration may have gone too far too fast. The whole country is aware of this issue, and opposition is rising, leading the states to get directly involved.
The Texas National Guard has been sent to the border to stop the flow of migrants. Roughly half of the states have declared their support for Texas.
If Democrats want to continue unlimited illegal immigration, Biden could nationalize the Texas National Guard, take control, and send it home. But what happens if Texas says no? Would Biden order the armed forces to disarm or attack the Texas Guard? Would the use of the armed forces be legal? Do Democrats care?
History tells us that civil wars happen when our country is divided and the states believe they must get involved. That time may be at hand.
Pray that sanity prevails.
Image: Michael Theis via Flickr, CC BY-ND 2.0.
Joe Biden’s Unvetted Afghans to Score Green Cards as Part of Senate Deal
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
No comments:
Post a Comment