Don't Want to be Chased by Border Patrol? Don't Invade the Country!
On Monday, leftists on social media set another false narrative, hyperventilating that border patrol agents were chasing Haitians and whipping them from atop their horses. This caused two main reactions:
- Fellow braindead leftists insisted this was somehow akin to slavery
- Conservatives pointed out border patrol had no whips, just horse reins, as if this was some kind of "lol, gotcha" moment
Once again the forest burned. Those who'd set it alight and those who came to fight it just used squirt guns as they debated the species of trees.
Border patrol is mounted on horseback rounding up Haitian refugees with whips. This is unfathomable cruelty toward… https://t.co/l44LDpDb7c— Sawyer Hackett (@Sawyer Hackett) 1632152009.0
Firstly, who cares if border patrol had whips or used their reins.
"Courtney how could you say it doesn't matter if whips were used! WHIPS ARE SO MEAN AND INHUMANE!" won't do a lick of good, I don't care. No one would give a tiny rat's behind if border patrol used whips, bean bag rounds, or flashed Donald Trump's mean tweets had the border been swamped with a bunch of Irishmen, their white skin blistering in the southern sun. That means it's not about the tool used. So why obsess over the tool? I know the answer, I'll address it later.
But since we're here talking about whips vs. reins because the world is stupid, allow me to play my equestrian card: some western-style reins double as whips. This is so ranchers can have fewer things in their hands, as they need the use of both hands to do things like rope cattle. That makes the argument of whips vs. reins even dumber. I can explain a saddle horn at another time, but no it's not for amateurs to grab onto then yell yee-haw.
Of course rather than set their own narrative, the right once again reacted to what the left incorrectly said. This was a wasted opportunity to ask more relevant questions, such as:
- What kind of treatment should invaders expect as they're invading a foreign nation?
- How does a nation defend its borders if not through physical barriers and/or physical force?
- Should both questions above be modified if the invaders have a certain degree of melanin in their skin, and if so, what degree of melanin and to what degree of response?
Note that I'm calling the people who ran across the border "invaders." Not immigrants. Not "undocumented people." Not refugees.
The left is forever leveraging language to garner a certain emotional response. Fine. Two can play this game, and I'm nothing if not competitive. A person who is not welcome into a country and runs across the border without us knowing who they is invading. That makes him or her an invader. Not an immigrant. Not a refugee. An invader.
Spare me the refugee plea in order to turn me into some kind of villain. As with everything else, there's a process to admit refugees. And yes, vetting comes first. How can we know if someone is fleeing if we don't know who they are? We can assume, we can guess, but we can't know until we know who someone is before they enter the country. They can't just run across the border. Click that link to learn more if you actually give a hoot about refugees and not about running with a narrative.
How should a nation respond to an invasion? What we saw yesterday was a mild display of force. But usually before force, a barrier is first. For the noodle-minded leftists in the back, that means a wall. A motherf*cking wall.
Not all barriers are walls, mind you. Some barriers are fences. Some fences are more aggressive than others. Electric, barbed, and razor. For centuries human beings have signaled "do not enter without permission" via things like walls, fences, gates and closed doors. "You may enter" is then transmitted with something like a door or gate opening to those who come calling. Basics. If you're not allowed in, the gate or door remains closed. Let the record state many Americans wanted a wall.
But since we were told walls and fences were somehow mean, now we're only left with physical force. Walls are the most humane way to tell people "go away" or at least "wait here." All people. Regardless of skin tone or language.
How to respond to an invasion if not through physical force?
Am I advocating physical force against an invasion? You're damn right I am. If someone breached my fence or my home, I'm going to respond with force. Regardless of their race or gender. That's equality, baby.
The left wants to make this about race. Don't let them. This argument is about an invasion. How should we respond to an invasion if not through force? That's the question we need to ask over and over and over again.
There is no other way to respond. That's why the left is adamant about making it about race. It's a distraction. So when idiots are out there saying horses are weaponized to attack Haitians coming across the border, we shouldn't apologize or "balk" at the phrasing, or try to correct it. We should instead say "...and?"
DHS Sec. Mayorkas on troubling viral videos of Border Patrol being aggressive with Haitian migrants: "One cannot w… https://t.co/q0W1LOZAyd— The Recount (@The Recount) 1632225851.0
This isn't about horses, whips, or what's been weaponized. It's all a smokescreen and I'm tired of our side falling for it with apologies and bitching about media being biased and unfair.
There is nothing anyone of us on the right can say to anyone on the left to make them like us. So why do we try to argue the point? Why do we try to convince them we're reasonable, humane people? We're the ones who wanted walls, y'all. They made that mean, too. We're the ones who are pro legal-immigration so people who come to America are better set up to succeed. Doesn't matter to the left.
Reject the premise of their argument. We'll never be liked by them. We need to defeat them.
Yes, the border patrol should chase away invaders. Their job is to protect the border. Yes, they should use force if necessary. Yes, that means I think they should chase people down with their horses, reins, whips, bean bag rounds, actual rounds, Donald Trump's mean tweets, or if it gets really serious, the blaring of Christian music. Whatever it takes, we must stop an invasion. Regardless of the race of people invading.
If the left doesn't like it, let's compromise: prevent people becoming invaders. You want to help refugees? Fine. Then help them. Stop them from running across the border. Go to them before they get to the border. Help them through the process. Why is it border patrol's job to be the refugees' concierge?
Don't apologize for, excuse, or try to explain away the methods used to combat an invasion. Don't accept the premise here. Don't play their game, it's rigged. Toss the board, reset the pieces.