Because the US Stood Up to the Border Rushers and Refused to Let This Tactic Win, No Matter How Much Bad Press the Administration Got For It, Migrants Start Saying They Regret Joining the Caravan and Start Heading Home

Hey NeverTrumpers -- tell me that your precious Maaaario or Jeb! or John Kasich would have faced the fire and simply said, "NO."

TIJUANA, Mexico--After fleeing tear gas shot at the U.S. border, Carlos Gonzalez confessed confusion and second thoughts about the caravan that carried him to doorstep of his dream: life in the United States.

The 40-year-old corn farmer from Honduras, wearing a pink breast cancer awareness hat and an orange work vest, had hopped on the caravan of Central American migrants figuring it would facilitate his entry into the country. It set out from San Pedro Sula, Honduras, on Oct. 12 and for five weeks he could hope and dream--especially as the caravan pushed past police barricades and crossed through closed borders in Guatemala and Mexico.

But the U.S. border has proved impossible so far for the more than 7,000 migrants anxiously arriving in Tijuana, where they're waiting in the squalor of a small baseball stadium-turned-tent city. It's just a stone's throw from the border they hope to cross, which many could not imagine would be so difficult.

"I thought it would be easy," said Gonzalez, who traveled north with his wife and two children, ages 4 and 3. He said his family was planning to sign up with Mexican officials for voluntary repatriation.

Hey Erick Erickson -- he's going back home and all we needed was to defend the fence. We didn't have to fund authoritarian regimes dropping dissenters out of helicopters. We just had to say "NO." We just had to stop pissing our pants and bowing to leftist media pressure as our cucked party always does (due to the cuck pants-shitters who lead it and fancy themselves as real stalwarts).

The migrants freely admit their tactic is to front their columns with human shields go garner sympathy:

Women and children were walking at the front of the march, he said, "to see if they would let them enter."

But saying "NO" to predictable and tired tactics, and the hand-in-glove cooperation of leftwing NGOs, "protesters," and media operations all working to achieve leftwing agenda points, has changed some minds:

Corrales, wearing a yellow soccer jersey, expressed few complaints with the camp, where he sold single cigarettes to fellow migrants. He thought the caravan's experience crossing into Guatemala and Mexico would prove the template for the U.S. border.

But now, "I'm done with the United States. I'll stay [in Mexico, which offered him asylum]."

Just wishing the masses of migrants wouldn't swamp over the border isn't enough, as some RINOs seem to hope. Neither is engaging in General Jack T. Ripper-esque Action Fantasies about a new cadre of Pinochets in Central and South America.

It takes saying "NO," no matter how many staged video opportunities the "protesters," their NGO sponsors and organizers, and the leftwing, Democrat operative American media arrange.

And saying "NO" will be unpopular, as leftwingers shriek, and then begin spooking the Panicky Horses of the RINO wing of the GOP, who immediately begin stampeding in any direction their leftist Twitter palz tell them to stampede in.

But it begins with saying "NO."

Not with wishing, not with fantasizing.

But giving the unpopular answer "NO," and standing up to media and leftist NGO bullying.

And if you don't have the intestinal fortitude to do that or support that, maybe you should just be honest with yourselves and everyone else and admit you support Open Borders, so long as we don't call it that.

Think about the people who started shrieking about "baby jails" and "infant prisons" when children were put in separate facilities when their parents were arrested for crimes, same as any other kids of parents arrested for crimes.

Think about the people who started freaking out about the picture of the woman risking her own kids to rush the border, as if that's something we can be blamed for.

Now: Think about the people who first started saying Trump should withdraw the Kavanaugh nomination as soon as the left began the Information Op against him.

The lists are mostly of the same "conservatives," aren't they? That special breed of TruCon who shows what a Principled Conservative he is by calling for surrender at the first sighting of a media operation.

Maybe it's time to eject these people from any position of influence or authority.

They are the Defeat Mechanism of the conservative movement, as a friend says. This type always has been, from the first days of Reagan until now.

They're far more interested in pleasing and appeasing media liberal opinion than their fellow conservatives. Because, on a fundamental level, where it counts, they have an emotional, cultural kinship with the left and the media class that they simply do not have for actual conservatives.

And blood is thicker than ideology -- they will always side with the people they feel a cultural connectedness with. Doesn't matter what ideology they profess to believe; politics is downstream of culture, and culturally, they're kinsmen of the left.

They will never change, and therefore they simply need to be purged from positions of influence in conservative messaging and leadership.

We have plenty of pressure from progressive coming from the outside; we don't need our own cadre of internal progressive-aligned saboteurs delivering leftist media pressure from the inside as well.

Related: Guy who swears he's not naive about antisemitism on the left also admits he's perpetually surprised at how forgiving his "friends on the left" are of... antisemitism.

The problem, of course, is that he really, really, really likes his friends on the left, and so is willing to always give them the benefit of the doubt. Even having learned this lesson today-- he'll forget it again by next week, because he wants to forget it.

He wants to think the best of his "friends on the left."

Seth Mandel, however, is not quite so forgiving of antisemitism on the right.

Not saying antisemitism on the right is more forgiveable on the right than on the left -- just wondering why Seth Mandel is always ready to forgive and forget his "friends on the left" being very tolerant of antisemtism, while being more exacting about antisemitism on the right.

And of course I'm not wondering why. That was rhetorical. I know why.

I already offered the answer: Because Seth Mandel is of the left in his heart. He might be a contrarian liberal, with a couple of odd ideas here and there, but his kin are urban liberals. He will always seek their praise and their good favor.

And he will, meanwhile, be rather less solicitious of the good favor of the group he does not feel a kinship with, the actual right.

As I've said before, it's not like this type shouldn't have any representation in the GOP.

But should they be dominant in alleged "conservative" media and in Establishment DC, its think tanks and fundraising operations and magazines?

Why is that actual conservatives -- people who are not just conservative by ideology, but feel a cultural kinship with other conservatives -- should be the fringe minority in all of the leadership and media positions of the conservative movement?

posted by Ace of Spades at 07:31 PM

| Access Comments