It is really easy to dunk on Cher. Her tweets are often emoji laden and sometimes indecipherable. And she is an unabashed California liberal who often uses her star status to promote inaccurate party lines. So imagine the shock and dunking when she tweeted this last night:
This is of course in response to President trump’s announcement that he intends to transfer asylum seekers from the border to sanctuary cities. Cher lives in such a city, and the entire state of California is designated as such. Rather than dunking, I want to congratulate her for her honesty.
First of all, if you look at her timeline, she seems pretty consistent in advocating for the homeless and veterans. I think the concern in her tweet is probably genuine. And if the overall response to the President’s suggestion is indicative, she is not alone.
I get that this is frustrating to those of us on the right who have been called racists and bigots for wanting increased border security and changes to the immigration system. Even more maddening are the politicians on the left who refer to the President’s plan as “dumping” immigrants into their cities and towns. The hypocrisy is real. Tucker Carlson sums it up:
Tucker’s message is harsh, but probably at least in part resonates with many of us. And pointing out hypocrisy such as this is cathartic and maybe even necessary. Because ultimately, Americans who live in sanctuary cities have elected the people who pass sanctuary policies.
However, I think those of us who know our immigration policy preferences are not rooted in racism or bigotry need to give people like Cher a hand. She is acknowledging the tension these policies cause through the lens of issues she genuinely seems to care about. Give her an out and suggest she work to move her own party back to a reasonable stance and encourage them to fund securing the border.
Just as I think the pro-life movement needs to embrace people who identify as pro-choice but are appalled by laws such as the one in New York, I think people in the border security and merit-based immigration wing need to extend a hand to those on the left genuinely questioning an open borders stance. In reality, many people in either of these groups are never going to vote Republican. But they may be helpful in giving Democrats a big shove back towards the center where policy issues can be negotiated in good faith.
Until that conversation is forced within the Democrat party, I have absolutely no problem with the President implementing a policy such as the one he has outlined. Voters in California voted for Gavin Newsome who has an open borders policy stance. Voters in my state voted for Brian Kemp, who has a border security stance. I expect Governor Kemp to keep his word and take a stance similar to the one Governor Abbott took in Texas during the Obama administration.
Georgia is full. We need to focus on solving the problems faced by citizens in our state. Voters in sanctuary cities need to decide just how much virtue signaling they are willing to tolerate and demand their elected officials act accordingly. Because elections do have consequences even at the state and local level. It’s time for the open borders crowd to put their money where their mouth is or change their policies.
Connoisseurs of middlebrow literature love Nicholas Sparks. Most of his books have hit the best seller lists, and several of them have become hit movies. His subgenre is a relatively chaste romantic f …