Abolish
Abolish ICE: NYT Leftist Readers Say Forget It
Default author
July 01, 2018, 08:59 PM
A+
|
a-
Print Friendly and PDF

A tip of the hat to The American Thinker’s Ed Straker, who reads letters to the editor in The New York Times so we don’t have to.

Even the Times’s liberal readers, he reports, think trying to abolish ICE is a special delivery from Kookville [Even Dems Fear That “Abolish ICE: Will Re-elect Trump, American Thinker, June 30].

Read these samples from the Times’s astute readers, one of whom is about the leave the Democratic Party because of its radical ideas on immigration. Another left when California decided illegal aliens should get driver’s licenses, which makes one wonder what the former defines as “radical,” if it’s not giving illegals a licence to drive.

  • Democrats are going to play Trump’s game--watch his support grow—if they are going to push this anti-ICE agenda. More fodder for his “Democrats want open borders” lie. Abolishing ICE is a losing cause outside outside of immigrant (often non-voting) communities.
  • Lifelong Dem, here. “Abolish ICE “ is a recipe for disaster, and electoral defeat.
  • Oh, please. This is not a “progressive rallying cry,” it’s a beginner’s guide to self-immolation.
  • The Left are doing a mighty fine job influencing us moderate liberals to vote Republican in November...for the first time in our adult lives. Bravo.
  • When the state of California started giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants a few years ago, I stopped being a Democrat. When Governor Brown declared California a “sanctuary state” last year, I became a Republican. I don't like most Republican policies but will vote that way from now on unless the Democrats come to their senses.

The MSM, by the way, never trumpets defectors unless they’re Republicans.

The unhinged left is powerful in the Democratic Party, to say the least. Let’s hope it gets worse … or better. In 2009, the party enlisted a terrorist sympathizer to run for Virginia’s House of Delegates. That was nutty enough. But in 2016, it proposed the mentally ill or public office, consistent with adopting platform positions that, a short 50 years ago, any mainstream Democrat rightly would have thought utterly insane.

Abolishing the agency responsible for border enforcement is almost mild by comparison. Then again, maybe not.

It’s a call for Open Borders. That’s a loser for the party, as Nov. 8, 2016 amply showed.

No wonder the Times’s readers worry.