Speaking of lies…

In a recent post, I was decrying this recurring ‘talking point’ of the open-borders crowd: the claim that sending illegals home is “breaking up families” and ”tearing children from their parents” and other such manipulative nonsense.

Now here we have John Kasich of Ohio, in his bid to become president, spouting just this very lie:

[Kasich]  flatly rejected the idea of the mass deportations Donald Trump has called for.

 “You don’t actually think, folks, that we’re going to drive around in Canton Ohio and yank people out of their homes and ship them to Mexico, leaving their kids on the front porch. You really think that’s going to happen.”

The crowd, overwhelmingly, answered “no.”

Is Kasich ignorant, or merely dishonest? He is the governor of his state; can someone attain governorship of one of these United States despite being so out-of-touch with reality? Really, Mr. Kasich, where has this ever happened in this country when someone is deported? When have children been left alone on a porch or in a house (as per other statements by Kasich which I’ve read), unattended? This would just not happen. Ever.

I defy anyone who makes such idiotic claims to back up their claims with facts: name places, dates, names of those deported and the names of irresponsible authorities who would supposedly leave unattended children to fend for themselves.

And why does nobody ever challenge these kinds of statements? Is there not one honest ”journalist” in this country who would ask such pertinent questions? I know the answer: the ”narrative” matters much more than truth to these mind-conditioned leftist journos and the ‘diversity’ hires who of course have their own ethnic agenda.

And why is there seemingly not one ”conservative” politician who will speak up when Kasich or some other open borders shill spouts this propaganda?

And why does it seem that few to no bloggers ever question that particular bit of propaganda?

There are no children being ”torn” from their doting parents’ bosoms when these few token ‘deportations’ (more like free vacations back home, if the truth be told) happen.There is no way that Mexico or other Latin American countries would refuse to admit the whole family back into their home countries. The United States government is not going to hold ”anchor babies” here against their parents’ will just because they are supposedly ‘citizens’ of this country — which is by no means certain anyway.

The parents can take their large families back home (yes, HOME, to their place of origin and rightful place of residence) when they go. Nobody will stop them from keeping their families intact.

As for Kasich’s support for a so-called ‘path to citizenship’ for illegals, which is amnesty, whether he will call it that or not, some express surprise. But why should anyone be surprised? He has recent immigrant ancestry — either parent(s) or grandparents, depending upon which source you accept. Having recent immigrant origins almost always translates into support for mass immigration and lenient attitudes toward illegal immigration.

So now we have two Cubans, one an immigrant the other the son of immigrants, and an Eastern-European immigrant descendant running for president. Clearly the party bosses want immigrants or recent descendants of immigrants, non-WASPs, as our only possible Republican choices. The globalist element of the GOP is definitely in charge.


8 thoughts on “Speaking of lies…

  1. Good points on Kasich, VA, and on the Cubans and Kasich as a narrowing of our choices not an expansion. Kasich gets on my nerves as well with his comments, which are really only a thinly concealed attack on Wasps whom he evidently loathes.

    That recent immigrants even one or two generations removed support immigration of all kinds even of those openly hostile shows they make common cause with invaders against the natives here for generations. Kasich proves immigration is a bad idea and really shows that even a successful immigrant like himself feels free to show open hostility to the native Whites.

    No surprise that Kasich is a lie machine on illegals. In Kasich’s vision those ripping the parents away are Wasps with KKK embroidered on their sleeves if not tattooed on their backs in fiery red letters. The greater problem is that elderly Wasps actually believe and trust this man. They then absorb his anti-Wasp pro-immigrant values.The real con man is Kasich not Trump.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I see Kasich won his home state, Ohio. I haven’t spent much time there but I get the impression from people I’ve met who have lived there that it is like another country (from the perspective of an outsider anyway) having old ethnic enclaves, etc. I suppose Kasich represents that and the whole ‘immigrant heritage’ attachment many people have.


  2. Among the Constitution’s many failings was the lack of limiting citizenship and voting until you are at least 3rd generation natural born – that way any immigrant ancestors are memories and photos and stories only, not personally known and beloved people some feel obliged to defend. Of course, that restriction still only ameliorates some of the worst effects of mass immigration, which should be banned.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Good points, but i suppose the Founding Fathers couldn’t have anticipated our present age of mass movement of peoples, or didn’t conceive of our allowing mass immigration of incompatible peoples, especially those from countries which have grudges or antimosity towards us. That’s been our downfall in great part.


  3. I saw John Kasich at the Miami debate say he would maybe be running for president of Croatia if we didn’t have immigration which to my mind was another strong argument against immigration. I truly wish he wasn’t here to run.

    Cruz is less Cuban than Rubio being only half with Cruz’s mother being mostly of Irish descent with some Italian as well. That makes Cruz the only one left with any Northwest European ancestry besides Trump of course.

    In fairness to the descendants of the past waves of immigrant hordes though we did have four colonial stock candidates run for the Republican nomination, 3 of who were I believe of wholly Southern ancestry, those being Bush, Perry, Huckabee and Graham. They may not have had the hokey immigrant story for a reason but all four of those men are as big a bunch of treasonous dogs as has ever lived.


    • Those four you mention in the last paragraph (with the exception of Bush of course) are as far as I know of more or less ‘Anglo’ or Anglo-Celtic origin. I used to think Perry had more integrity than I now believe he does, but the others, Graham and Huckabee I have never liked or trusted. I think they are just sorry representatives of the South, or of the South’s founding stock if they are in fact of that stock. I like to think they are exceptions — but then there are all the people who re-elect them.


  4. I tried explaining to my brother tonight that the chasm we’re witnessing within the Republican party is due to a very intense difference on the meaning of “Conservative”.

    Many are happy with the twin pillars holding up the meaning up Conservativism, i.e. free market economics and less government in the lives of the public. So-called Conservatives are so convinced by these they literally explain away all problems through these two facets. What is the cause of black crime and dysfunction? An overwhelming presence and dependence on government AND the lack of quality employment to uproot themselves from the ghettos (brought to you in part by the Democratic party, they say). Thus, we must promote capitalism and loosen the grip of government over-reach in order to solve these problems.

    But that’s where the buck stops. Anything else is not Conservative dogma and the mere mention of preserving a national identity, battering the idea of conservative rationalism (rooted in the assumption that the meaning of “American” is grounded on the acceptance of certain propositions and ideas), and that the is no specific history defining America, will result in being marginalized as a loon – or a white supremacists (which is conflated with white nationalist and even a traditionalist).

    That mainstream Conservatives are unwilling to even consider they might be wrong about what defines Conservativism has splintered the party. That they’re unwilling to see that money is not a savior and that fighting big government is a reactionary position (thus, not essentially Conservative for Libertarians are defined by the same quality) has enraged many.

    The problem, which you note, is that many enraged Americans are not yet courageous to say what they really want: the maintenance of a white majority and representatives that care about solidifying this desire. And the Beltway Right refuses to entertain this. So, it must be allowed to pass into the darkness. Reclaim it. If Trump helps us do that, so be it.

    But as it stands, every time I hear another politician spew support for amnesty and open boarders, the idea of a global village and a family of man, I see it as the equivalent of spit in my face. These men know exactly what many of us want and they stand proud in defying that wish, as if to say “You don’t have a choice”. Kasich said today of Cruz and Trump “Those two can’t win in the general election. ” He knows he can’t either. It should therefore be obvious what he’s – and his donors – are doing.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s