12 Comments
User's avatar
Dan Dagovitz's avatar

I have an excellent idea!

Let deport (Exile) the Leftist obstructionists. I am guessing there would be a major improvement in the country's law enforcement. Welfare, unemployment, crime and illegal immigration would virtually disappear!

So let create a new penalty instead of prison (a slap on the hand in todays color TV jails). Instead if found guilty of obstruction of the nations' processes (whether they be border protection, civil laws, employment or treason) punishable by revocation of your citizenship and exile.

This is a plus/plus action. You dispose of a useless or even destructive Leftist while opening up opportunities for LEGAL immigrants with the same culture and religious orientation.

What do you say folks!

Deport a Leftist!

Make America Better Already (MABA)

Signed

The man whose NATO ally disowned!

Sword of God Militia!

Expand full comment
Laura's avatar

I believe it's their intention to get people killed. Creating chaos, lawlessness and anarchy is part of the Marxist revolutionary playbook. They need to upend the existing order to usher in communism. Likely she was paid to be a provocateur against ICE agents though she didn't expect it to result in her death. For the hard left, folks like Good are human shields.

..............................................................................................................................................................................................

We have city officials with megaphones telling people to “resist,” “defy,” and “fight back” then throw tantrums when it ends badly.

Expand full comment
Sunny's avatar

I used to think what you just said, was conspiracy theory stuff. I'm beginning to believe in what you are saying.

Have a good weekend Laura.

Sunny

Expand full comment
Catherine Nottle's avatar

100% correct. It comes under the FAFO rule. There are, and should be, consequences to actions.

Expand full comment
Resa WARCHICK Kirkland's avatar

When we didn’t kill the Democrats after the Civil War.

Expand full comment
EllisGee's avatar

Right idea. Wrong method. He started us down the slippery slope to lawlessness. Not much of a leap from “civil” disobedience to riots. The foundation of Western Civilization is that laws are to be obeyed. Without law there’s only anarchy.

Expand full comment
Sunny's avatar

Typical Liberal,

Everything that sounds good has to be good. They only care about what sounds good, not the results.

Expand full comment
EllisGee's avatar

It goes back to Gandhi’s assertion that you don’t have to obey laws you don’t like. It’s been downhill ever since!

Expand full comment
Sunny's avatar

I agree with you...under that theory, why bother having laws at all?

Expand full comment
The Radical Individualist's avatar

But Gandhi was willing to accept the consequences.

Expand full comment
EllisGee's avatar

He started us down a slippery slope. His followers didn’t think there shoul be consequences, because their actions were morally righteous, at least in their own minds.

Expand full comment
The Radical Individualist's avatar

So, for the sake of argument, were they right? Gandhi wanted to end British control of India. Was that wrong?

Expand full comment