Chuck Schumer on immigration: then and now
It should come as no surprise that just nine years ago, when Obama was president, Chuck Schumer expressed rather conventional GOP-type sentiments on illegal immigration and on what should be done about it. But pointing out Schumer’s slippery political hypocrisy, as that article I just linked purports to do, is fun for those on the right but doesn’t have much affect on anyone else, IMHO.
The argument would be that Schumer has “evolved” on the subject, much like Obama did on gay marriage. For Schumer, 2009 was then; this is now. This is not only now, it’s “the age of Trump,” and all thinking feeling moral people need to vigorously oppose every thought that comes out of Trump’s head and every idea or plan Trump has ever expressed. It’s really quite simple as a guiding principle, and applauded by vast numbers of people.
Consistency is a funny thing in politicians, and people generally seem very forgiving of a lack of it, particularly on the left. The left is all about holding power and getting “progressive” things done and saying what is necessary to do so; it’s not for nothing that Orwell portrayed leftists as being willing to say that two plus two equals five (see this post I wrote on that subject) if the party says so. Schumer is just being a good flexible leftist, and what he really believes may indeed have changed or it may not have changed.
Schumer could also quote no less than Ralph Waldo Emerson, who wrote in Self-Reliance:
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day.
Schumer could just say he’s not a little statesman, he’s a big one—or even a “great soul.” Of course, people should be flexible enough to be able to change their minds with changing circumstances, as I’ve said many times here. But what actual circumstances have changed since 2009 that would justify such a change (besides the aforementioned need to oppose Trump)? I haven’t seen Schumer offer any or acknowledge his change of heart. But that’s not Schumer’s concern, because apparently it’s not the concern of those who elect him time and again because he’s a Democrat and because he’s a powerful one.
By the way, here’s Schumer in 2009, in case you wondered what he was saying on illegal immigration back when Obama was president:
Chuck Schumer in 2009:
-Americans don't like illegal immigration
-"Illegal immigration is wrong"
-People illegally in the U.S. are "illegal aliens," not "undocumented"
-Border fence made the southern border "far more secure…created a significant barrier to illegal immigration" pic.twitter.com/zoVyEgdrTC— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) December 28, 2018
Tony Blair showed the Democrats the way. If the voters don’t buy your dog food, hire a new set of voters. Labour did that and Britain will never recover. You will be arrested for defending yourself against burglars.
That is why Open Borders is the Democrats’ new theme.
Nothing new here.
“The evil is in the White House at the present time.”
Tip O’Neill on president Regan.
Q: What’s Chuck Schumer’s position on illegal immigration?
A: What time is it?
The key word in Emerson’s statement is the first word, “Foolish”. That adjective, with its very precise definition, has been shrugged aside, so that Emerson’s has become simply “Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds”.
The elites do of course, by definition, have BIG, not little, minds. And like Schmucky Chuckie, thus have no difficulty with their inconsistencies.
Thank you for pointing out that “foolish” bit. In many fields of work consistency is a major plus. As in consistent adherence to principles. Y’know, don’t lie, cheat, or steal, or tolerate those who do. Keep yourself physically fit, mentally alert, and morally straight. What to do is not hard to figure out, doing it is hard.
As G. K. would say, “The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried.” That Christian ideal requires consistency.
Over @ American Thinker, Thomas Lifson points out that noteworthy evidence has emerged that Schumer and Pelosi are at best in collusion and at worst just puppets; “With identical tweets, Schumer and Pelosi reveal themselves as mouthpieces for the same propaganda puppet master”
Lifson points out that Schumer and Pelosi posted their tweets within 23 minutes of each other… Judge for yourself;
Chuck Schumer
Verified account
@SenSchumer
Follow Follow @SenSchumer
More
“It’s Christmas Eve and President @realDonaldTrump is plunging the country into chaos. The stock market is tanking and the President is waging a personal war on the Federal Reserve—after he just fired the Secretary of Defense.”
10:37 AM – 24 Dec 2018
————————————————
Nancy Pelosi
Verified account
@NancyPelosi
Follow Follow @NancyPelosi
More
“It’s Christmas Eve and @realDonaldTrump is plunging the country into chaos. The stock market is tanking and the president is waging a personal war on the Federal Reserve — after he just fired the Secretary of Defense.” #TrumpShutdown
11:00 AM – 24 Dec 2018
As David Horowitz says, the issue is never the issue, it’s always accumulation of power by whatever means necessary. There’s no inconsistency at all in what Schumer and Pelosi say and do.
I continue to be outraged at the hypocrisy and double standards of the PC Dems.
So glad HR Clinton lost.
The acceptance by GOP of the “secret discrimination” against hiring Rep professors is now, in my mind, the biggest issue on where the GOP is losing the culture war, now and in the near future.
Just one man’s opinion here. I don’t have to look at this situation like a Ralph Waldo Emerson, because I think it is a simple one: Schumer is a typical Democrat. Yes, politicians of all parties lie to varying degrees. The point I will make here is that today the Democrats lie much more, because they are now a left wing party. Lefties lie more. Left wing organizations lie in lockstep; this is one of their defining characteristics. Lying and character assassination performed in unison are a powerful tactics and they believe they can be successful if they all lie together. The goal they hope to achieve on this political pivot is clear to all who are not willfully blind, and that is to increase the number of new entrants into the U.S. who are almost certain to vote for Democrats, and then find a way to give them the vote. The potential payoff is too great for them to be concerned with a trivial thing like accusations of inconsistency. Schumer didn’t “evolve;” he has just joined the new strategy bandwagon. We all know this, don’t we?
Tell the dog bite victim that my dog doesn’t bite. If that doesn’t work, tell him I don’t own a dog. It’s theater of the absurd, but who cares if it works.
MikeK mentions that a British citizen may/will be prosecuted for defending himself against burglars. There was that specific case that Neo posted many months ago where the homeowner was assaulted by a burglar in his home and responded by stabbing the burglar to death with a butcher knife. And was prosecuted.
I discovered much later that the burglars in this case were members of The Travellers Irish ethnic group. This is a group that claims that robbing people is part of their cultural heritage. That while they may beat people, they don’t kill them, except by accident. If you want to see where the multi-cultural horse-pucky leads, just look at the U.K.
painting Trump as racist by conflating illegal and legal immigrants doesn’t make it true it just make the democrats liars. Ann is the kind of useful idiot who still firmly believe Kavanaugh attempted to rape Ford or was waiting in line to gang rape unconscious girls who had a drink spiked by Kavanaugh and friends every weekend.
At CBS News — “Trump lowers demand for border wall funding”:
Pingback:80% of Americans Want Secure Borders | American Elephants
“We sat down with (Chuck) Schumer and gave him a number below five.
They turned that down and may find he will not be willing to accept that number next time. It all depends on who is winning and I think Trump is.
We will see.
Eight Days With Harry Truman
https://www.americanheritage.com/content/eight-days-harry-truman
Truman was particularly irked by the “professional liberal,” whom he distinguished from “real liberals” like himself. Professional liberals lived by slogans and saw American politics as an ideological war, which Truman considered alien to the genius of the Democratic party. In his lifetime the party was a sort of political melting pot in which conservative Southerners and moderate border-state men like Truman found common ground with Eastern liberals. “Professional liberals are too arrogant to compromise,” Truman said. “In my experience they were also very unpleasant people on a personal level. Behind their slogans about saving the world and sharing the wealth with the common man lurked a nasty hunger for power. They’d double-cross their own mothers to get it or keep it.”
Today, ALL liberals are “professional liberals”…