WhatFinger

Our national security is at stake and the sooner those “ignominious ingrates” put sane policy proposals ahead of their political party, the safer and better off our country will be

Ignominious Ingrates


By —— Bio and Archives--January 8, 2019

American Politics, News, Opinion | Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

Ignominious Ingrates
Do you think that Democrats who are against building a security border wall on the border with Mexico, could or should be called or classified as “ignominious ingrates”?  The definition of those terms by Merriam-Webster is as follows.  “Ignominious” – marked or characterized by disgrace or shame, despicable, and, “Ingrate” - an ungrateful person.  Do those definitions describe the actions of the anti-wall Democrats and their flunkies in the main stream media?

.

Well, is that a fair description of the attitudes of Nancy Pelosi,  Chuck Schumer and the majority of Democrats?

Just a few short years ago, those same Democrat leaders (including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton) were in favor of building a wall, but now that President Trump is in office, the wall is now considered “immoral” and a complete waste of money. What has changed since then?  You probably guessed it, Donald Trump is now president and they (the Democrats) don’t want to give him a victory on one of his signature proposals, even if it is good for the security of the country.

All of our professionals in the field of immigration enforcement (the Border Patrol, I.C.E., the Office of Homeland Security) are all in favor of erecting a wall to deter illegal immigration, the prevention and distribution of illegal drugs, and the illegal trafficking of young boys and girls for prostitution purposes.  They point out that where a wall is in place, the aforementioned illegal activities are cut down precipitously.  They claim that their job would be made much easier if a wall or barrier was in place.  Shouldn’t we listen to the people on the front lines of trying to enhance our national security, instead of the political hacks who put party interests ahead of our national security?

In addition, most of those very same people who are against the border wall are also in favor of “sanctuary states and cities”. That’s where the term “ignominious ingrates” applies and comes into play.  Any sane person realizes that putting up a barrier (e.g.: a wall) will prevent or reduce illegal border activities by over 90% (those figures supplied by the Border Patrol).

So, by totally rejecting the funding of a border wall, it shows that the nay-sayers deserve to be called “ignominious ingrates”.

How many more innocent citizens and law enforcement personnel must be injured or killed by illegal aliens before common sense kicks in?

During the previous presidential campaign, then Democrat candidate, Hillary Clinton, called her opponents “a basket of deplorables”, but it should’ve been directed at her own supporters who were the advocates of that policy of no border wall but sanctuary cities and states. 

Our national security is at stake and the sooner those “ignominious ingrates” put sane policy proposals ahead of their political party, the safer and better off our country will be.  A country divided against itself is a recipe for disaster now and in the future.


CFPSubcribe

Only YOU can save CFP from Social Media Suppression. Tweet, Post, Forward, Subscribe or Bookmark us

Chuck Lehmann -- Bio and Archives | Comments

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann (Chuck on the Right Side


Commenting Policy

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence and death, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban.
-- Follow these instructions on registering: