Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Cher Goes MAGA

Cher Goes MAGA

“If My State Can’t Take Care of Its Own(Many Are VETS)How Can it Take Care Of More”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMYUPFfK0QE

President Donald Trump tweeted on Friday that he is “giving strong considerations” to the idea of sending illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities, which includes many in California.

Cher balked at the idea, but not for reasons you may think. She complained, rightfully, that her city of Los Angeles should first do something with the tens of thousands of homeless people.

Trump tweeted his idea because Democrats have not cooperated on changing our immigration laws. People have crowded our border, which has caused an overflow at detention and housing centers. Officials simply do not have the room.

Most people on the left cried over this idea because they find it cruel and harmful, even those most of them hail from sanctuary cities. These cities will not enforce federal immigration laws and provide protection for illegals.

Cher is the voice of reason, believe it or not.

https://twitter.com/cher/status/1117491420934365185?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

She tried to clarify:

https://twitter.com/cher/status/1117491420934365185?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

But Cher’s initial tweet is correct. Our own Leslie Eastman has documented the homeless problems not only in Los Angeles, but around California. She wrote in February 2018 that homelessness in LA went up by 75% in the past six years.

Then in November 2018, Leslie blogged about how over 100 people in LA contracted typhus, which came from the numerous homeless camps.

Guess what? The typhus epidemic has continued to grow as the state reported over 160 cases in California since 2018.

But it’s not just LA and typhus. San Diego saw an outbreak of Hepatitis A. The homeless made up the majority of those infected.

You can find many of Leslie’s posts on these problems here.

Here are a few responses to Cher, most welcoming her to MAGA and the Republican Party:

[Featured image via YouTube]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

legacyrepublican | April 15, 2019 at 9:07 am

Guess Cher finally got around to channeling Sonny in her own mystical way.

    Like Sonny skiing into a tree, Cher finally ran into a cogent thought.

      JusticeDelivered in reply to Paul. | April 15, 2019 at 12:59 pm

      I had numerous meetings with Sonny, then they came to an abrupt end. I finally threw out all my books about members of varying Congresses. Over two decades worth went in a pen with 10 rottweiler puppies. The puppies seemed to have the same impression of them as many people 🙂

        The Friendly Grizzly in reply to JusticeDelivered. | April 15, 2019 at 1:47 pm

        WAY off-topic; readers and moderators please forgive me. Rottie puppies?!? -melt!- I like Rotties at all ages. Wonderful creatures. If I had the room for them to run and play, I’d have two or three.

But Cher, my Belle, you have so much room, so much land! Giveth quoth I. You sound so….unseemly.

The coffee must be perking at Cher’s house.

Cher will have to retract this rare moment of honesty and clarity if she wants to keep her Hollywood friends.

But the Democrats need more voters to win future elections.

    cloudbuster1 in reply to maxmillion. | April 16, 2019 at 12:23 pm

    They don’t need more voters in the “left coast”. They
    want these “helpless” immigrants to be placed in red
    states so they can vote democrat and tip the state.If
    they start more “sanctuary cities”, they want to do it
    in red states.And yes ,Alice, they do vote.

This plan to send those seeking sanctuary to self-proclaimed ‘Sanctuary Cities’ is absolutely Machiavellian.
.
I love it.

Almost everyone (including liberals/progressives) are very conservative on things for which they have actual knowledge.

I’m guessing Cher wishes she could turn back time right about now.

Cher has successfully connected the dots. Now she has to take a little time to step back, take a deep breath, and think about what she just said. You can do it Cher! Think! You are finally at the brink of wisdom and common sense!

Or you could redistribute your wealth to help these poor people. Tough choice eh? Think about how hard it is for the vast majority whose wealth is dwarfed by yours but are still having it redistributed away! Think! One more step and you are there!

    harleycowboy in reply to Pasadena Phil. | April 15, 2019 at 11:26 am

    I’m sure she lives in a house big enough to put 10 families in. They should be used to a family living in one room. Should be plenty of room for another 20 families to camp out on the lawn.

Cher is just trying to kick-start the revival of her career with what will be called “The Apology Tour.” Because you know that’s coming.

How fitting that today’s featured “video of the day” is the Walker Brothers “The Sun Ain’t Gonna Shine Anymore”. Cher recorded a cover version that is the best. “When you’re without love”… Lose the hate Cher. The sun is still there.

Odd that I don’t seem to remember Cher being outraged on behalf of Arizonans when we were trying to enforce laws against illegal aliens setting up residence here.

AZ taxpayers have long been sick of paying for the crime that illegal aliens bring to our state. Our state prisons are full of illegal alien criminals, and we spend tens of thousands of state tax dollars (at least) on every single one of them, every year. Then there are all the new schools we’ve had to build, the Spanish-language interpreters, ESL teachers, and remedial teachers (because the illegal alien kids are almost always behind their same-age peers and have to be provided lots of special help) that we’ve had to pay for to accommodate all the illegal aliens who have set up residence here. And of course we also have to pay for all the “free” medical care that illegals receive in our local hospital ER’s, where they go for everything from flu shots to pregnancies to organ transplants.

But Cher and her lefty buddies were more than willing to impose all those costs — and more — on the citizens of Arizona so that they could continue with their virtue-signalling bullshit about “tolerance” and “inclusion.” They called us Nazis and Brownshirts and raaaaaacists when we tried to limit illegal immigration here, and cheered when the Obama administration repeatedly sued us.

But now that Trump is threatening to move illegal aliens to leftists’ states, it’s suddenly an outrage to have all those costs imposed on people who don’t want them. Well guess what, Cher? We here in AZ have plenty of other things we’d rather spend our tax money on than providing millions of dollars worth of “free” public services for law-breaking foreign squatters, or spending millions of dollars prosecuting and incarcerating foreign criminals. We too would rather be able to use our money to provide services for our own low-income citizens and our veterans, but we were not allowed to do that, because of asshole hypocrites like you.

I hope Trump actually does find a way to dump every one of those illegal alien grifters onto the backs of virtue-signalling ninnies like Cher and her lefty buddies. The rest of us are sick and tired of having to pay for the stupidity and hypocrisy of idiots like them.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to Observer. | April 15, 2019 at 12:18 pm

    I agree with everything you wrote, but would like to add that dilution of our gene pool is even more devastating than all the costs and aggravation. Everyplace where illegals or Muslims settle will pay dearly as the average IQ falls.

    I suggest that there should be genetics classes for high school and college students which goes into great detail about consequence of having children with those who have drastically lower IQs.

    I would also add that it appears that genes governing intelligence appear to be recessive. Most certainly, American blacks who average about 50%, + or – 15% caucasian linage, IQ’s have not increased proportionally to what would be expected.

    This area of study would make an excellent PhD dissertation.

Also, in a national address, instruct ICE to not selectively enforce immigration laws in blue states but active in other states. Concentrate the pressure on them as in Alinsky and Cloward/Piven. 2020 would have Dem candidate to release illegals to other states setting stage for massive attempt at voter fraud in blue states.

This is what happens when opioids are made illegal! Cher is going cold turkey and it is shocking!

Another case of leftist’s ideas at our expense. She’s no different than leftists who were in favor of O’commie care until they discovered THEY had to pay for it.

Don’t misunderstand this for Cher making sense, this is her saying “Illegal Immigrants, drug smugglers, criminals, human traffic and gang members for thee, but not for me.”

Weird, Trump threatens to send illegal aliens to sanctuary cities and suddenly the local (SF Bay Area) news stations are talking about the border “crisis”. NIMBY’s object. But notice Cher wants to send the “thousands” to cities that object to sanctuary policies.

This whole pile of crap regarding T-rump and the sanctuary cities is so sad.

Let’s start with first principles;

1. asylum-seekers are NOT “illegal aliens”…they are following the rule of law as it stands in the US. Read that carefully before you pop off.

2. NO “wall” will stop them. ANY wall will have ports of entry, and any port of entry will avail asylum-seekers entry into the US under current law.

3. NOBODY…including T-rump…is doing anything or proposing anything that would address US law regarding asylum-seekers.

4. INSTEAD of addressing the problemsssssssssss in our immigration system, both sides in American politics demagogue the issues.

5. Asylum-seekers sent to sanctuary cities or states will NOT be nailed to those locales; they’ll move to wherever they feel like (given the assumption that they will seek their own self-interest).

6. There are solutions to EVERY problem that immigration poses to America. We are not seeing them from anyone in the “leadership” of the US. Playing “gotcha” games is NOT leadership.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Ragspierre. | April 15, 2019 at 12:27 pm

    “1. asylum-seekers are NOT “illegal aliens”…they are following the rule of law as it stands in the US. Read that carefully before you pop off.”

    Technically, you are correct. However, a large number of those seekers do not show up for their court hearings and become illegal aliens.

    The process is broken.

    https://cis.org/Report/Courting-Disaster

    “2. NO “wall” will stop them. ANY wall will have ports of entry, and any port of entry will avail asylum-seekers entry into the US under current law.”

    A wall will deter and curb the flow of illegal immigration and reduce drug trafficking (because with a sound defensive smart wall we can focus on other areas with more manpower and put less manpower on the border chasing coyotes and their packs).

    We are talking about multiple problems here. Asylum gets abused by some. People also cross illegally without seeking asylum. The wall is not designed to stop asylum seekers. It’s foolish to try and equate the two.

    “3. NOBODY…including T-rump…is doing anything or proposing anything that would address US law regarding asylum-seekers.”

    I’m pretty sure Republicans in general have pushed for asylum reforms, including Trump. It gets shot down by Dems and the press runs cover. That one is currently still in the PR war phase, unfortunately.

    “4. INSTEAD of addressing the problemsssssssssss in our immigration system, both sides in American politics demagogue the issues.”

    You are hissing like a snake now. Of course they do…you can say this about any issue in the modern political era.

    “5. Asylum-seekers sent to sanctuary cities or states will NOT be nailed to those locales; they’ll move to wherever they feel like (given the assumption that they will seek their own self-interest).”

    Given the assumption that they will seek their own self-interest, they will probably stay in large numbers. Some might spread out for work or other reasons. Their self-interest might dictate to them that staying in a city with “immigrant friendly” optics is a good idea.

    “6. There are solutions to EVERY problem that immigration poses to America. We are not seeing them from anyone in the “leadership” of the US. Playing “gotcha” games is NOT leadership.”

    What else is new? George Washington ain’t coming back. Even if he were, the left would scream about his white, slave-owning, heteronormative, toxic masculinity. This is the world we live in now, for better or worse. Sometimes, fire has to be fought with fire since the country is no longer unified in goals (in early US history, factions differed more in means but were fairly unified in goals).

      tom_swift in reply to healthguyfsu. | April 15, 2019 at 12:43 pm

      Technically, you are correct. However, a large number of those seekers do not show up for their court hearings and become illegal aliens.

      No, not correct. The glib term “asylum-seekers” includes illegals who sneak in, and then claim asylum status after being apprehended on US territory.

        The correct process of for asylum seekers to make their way to the US embassy in the country they are seeking apply for asylum from. “Catch and release” does not remove the original crime of coming into the country illegally. They are illegal immigrants the moment they cross the border without proper process.

        Observer in reply to tom_swift. | April 15, 2019 at 1:38 pm

        Yes, and the large number who do not show up for the hearings do so because they know they have no legal basis for being granted asylum and they were never asserting a legitimate asylum claim in the first place. They simply lied and scammed the system so that they could get released into the U.S. and be protected from deportation for the years until the hearing date.

        Likewise with the foreigners who bring kids to the border. They know that if they come with kids that they can’t be held for long, and so they borrow or buy or kidnap kids to use them as pawns. This has been going on for years, since the Flores consent decree, and congress is well aware that kids are being kidnapped, abused, raped, sex trafficked, etc., but they simply don’t give a damn.

        Congress could easily legislate the Flores consent decree (with its incentives to use and abuse kids) out of existence, just like they could easily fix the loopholes in the asylum law, but they won’t, because they like the current situation. And hey, if U.S. taxpayers get screwed out of hundreds of billions of dollars a year so that Dims can get more voters and businesses can get “cheap” labor, and if thousands of vulnerable 3rd-world kids get raped and abused, that’s the price congress is willing to have them pay to maintain the status quo!

    Mac45 in reply to Ragspierre. | April 15, 2019 at 12:51 pm

    Let’s take a look at your points, shall we?

    1) Asylum seekers ARE illegal aliens, IF they enter the country at other than a specified port of entry. That in itself is a violation of law and makes their entry illegal. Existing law ONLY allows people claiming asylum, who have ILLEGALLY entered the country, to remain here until their claim for asylum can be verified. The original intent, of that law, was for these people to be contained in a controlled setting, either in detention or with family members who had been vetted and who would assume responsibility for the asylum seeker. And, it was intended to apply to residents from contiguous countries who were seeking asylum from those countries.

    2) A wall will stop some illegal entry. Presenting oneself at a port of entry and claiming asylum only grants the claimant the right to enter and be held on US soil, if that person is claiming asylum from the contiguous country, in this case that would be Mexico. Otherwise, the claimant can be denied entry while his claim is processed. That is why non-Mexican citizens are so desperate to set foot on US soil, BEFORE they make their claim for asylum. The policy has long been that such people were allowed to remain until their claim was vetted.

    3) Actually, by building a wall to restrict entry to ports of entry, Trump IS doing something to address the problem with asylum. There is nothing wrong, with the asylum law, as originally written. The problem is with court decisions, which limit the period of detention of asylum seekers, and a lack of funding for the detention and vetting of asylum seekers.

    4) This is correct. Both Parties, in Congress, want unrestricted entry into this country. They have differing reasons for that, but their goal is the same. The President can not enact legislation. He can arbitrarily earmark funds for immigration purposes. He has to follow the law. So, the CONGRESS, as a whole, has to be willing to address the immigration problem. Something that they have refused to do since 1984.

    5) While this is also true, many, possibly most, would choose to stay in those locals, mingling with enclaves of their countrymen already there. But, even if they choose to relocate, the city, county and state, where they are released, will have to assume the initial financial burden for their care until they establish themselves of relocate. At the moment, the jurisdictions where the detention facilities are located assume all of this burden, when court mandated release has to be affected. Releasing detained immigrants in other locations is only fair.

    6) What the President is proposing is not a “gotcha-game”. It is what is known as leverage. A plurality, if not a majority, of the voters in this country have been demanding that the “leadership” in both parties control immigration, especially illegal entry. Both parties have REFUSED. They REFUSE to do anything to change the status quo, even though their constituents demand it. Trump was elected on this issue. He has spent 2 whole years leading the Congressional jackass to water and cajoling it to drink. The jackass refuses. So, Trump has decided to get the jackass’ attention by hitting over the head with a 2×4. If the jackass does not drink it will die. So, we are left with extreme measures to gain its cooperation.

    If you have any better idea as to how to force Congress to follow the will of the people and fix the immigration system in accordance with THEIR desires, let us all know. There is a Presidential election in a year and a half. There is still time to throw your hat in the ring.

      cloudbuster1 in reply to Mac45. | April 16, 2019 at 9:34 am

      Best synopsis of the problem I have read yet. The
      obvious is often overlooked by our “represenatives”.
      Everyone on planet earth CAN”T come here! Who, but
      the people, has the right to decide who comes??

      Policy is much too important to leave to a “politition”

    thalesofmiletus in reply to Ragspierre. | April 15, 2019 at 1:14 pm

    3. NOBODY…including T-rump…is doing anything or proposing anything that would address US law regarding asylum-seekers.

    Lindsey Graham prepping legislative package to change asylum laws

    CorkyAgain in reply to Ragspierre. | April 15, 2019 at 1:38 pm

    5. Asylum-seekers sent to sanctuary cities or states will NOT be nailed to those locales; they’ll move to wherever they feel like (given the assumption that they will seek their own self-interest).

    If they move anywhere but to another sanctuary city, they’ll be arrested and deported if they violate the terms of their release into the country. But they know this and will stay in the “safe” zones. It’s in “their own self-interest”.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to Ragspierre. | April 15, 2019 at 7:23 pm

    Rags-Rump, what do you know about leadership? Trump leads, you whine and complain. Trump is actually getting things done, and doing so in the face of dealing with lots of small minded adversaries just like you.

    DaveGinOly in reply to Ragspierre. | April 15, 2019 at 9:23 pm

    5. Asylum-seekers sent to sanctuary cities or states will NOT be nailed to those locales; they’ll move to wherever they feel like (given the assumption that they will seek their own self-interest).

    Although true, it ignores the Dems’ purpose for promoting illegal immigration – they want to direct the immigrants to districts where they (if allowed the vote, as the Dems support) can tip the balance from Red to Blue. By dumping them in places that are already Blue, the Dem plan is thwarted. And if they wander out of the enclaves where they are “dumped,” they 1.) will likely go to places where they feel welcome and not subject to “harassment” by LE, i.e. districts that are already Blue; or 2.) they at least will not be directed to places where they could possibly turn a Red district Blue, as it would be highly unlikely that their personal reasons for leaving places where they are already cozy will have any congruence with the Dems’ agenda and purpose.

    VaGentleman in reply to Ragspierre. | April 16, 2019 at 10:32 am

    rags rote:
    Playing “gotcha” games is NOT leadership.

    Words to remember as the 2020 campaign season heats up.

Cher is embracing reality? PPLLLEEAASSSEE. She cares nothing about the homeless in LA. If she did, she would be spending HER money and Her time to assist them. And, that is not happening. Her complaint is that the GOVERNMENT of LA can not support the army of homeless leeches which has taken up residence there. And, she fears that a large number of new arrivals, most unskilled and unable to speak the language, will invade the elitist enclaves still existing in that city.

The reallity that she is embracing is that HER neighborhood could end up looking like the rest of the city.

    Cher may not be embracing reality but she IS reacting to it. She just doesn’t grasp the hypocrisy of citing the same exact arguments being argued by 70% of Americans who want illegal immigration stopped and illegals deported. She grasps the problem when it is right in front of her where SHE has to deal with it. She wants someone else to deal with it. “Illegal immigrants for thee but not for me.”

No blast of enlightenment here. Cher’s just spouting stock liberal mantras. Libs are always very generous, but only with your resources, not their own.

The Friendly Grizzly | April 15, 2019 at 12:49 pm

More likely it’s Cher saying “keep those filthy people out of my neighborhood !”

Like children, Hollywood idiots should be seen, and not heard.

She’s a self serving pile of garbage and her tweet wasn’t impressive or intelligent.
She hasn’t changed anything about her thoughts. If she was so good where the hell has she been previously on “her” homeless people. I don’t recall seeing her buying group homes to shelter anyone and she’s rich enough to have bought more than a few homes for the homeless.
Screw her for voting for democrats who have brought another beautiful state to its knees so the fascists can lord over the peons.

Latus Dextro | April 16, 2019 at 6:27 pm

“…. don’t throw people to dogs.”
You’re doing just that to the law abiding innocents.
The wanton destruction of fabric, people and society beggars belief.
Be silent when your walls and doors are breached, and your economy is broken.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend