B is for bigot! R is for racist! X is for xenophobe! (S is for silly!)
We are all xenophobes now—any governors with concerns about a state’s right to control the resettlement of expensive (and potentially dangerous) refugees to their states, you, me, and of course Donald Trump.
You can read the whole thing yourself, that is not why I’m posting it—the No Borders Left, including the NYT editorial board, continues their tired old name calling, ho hum (not worth mentioning).
But there is one little line in the editorial that I found interesting, but apparently the great minds at the NYT have no concern for the FACT that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops is deciding which refugees go where.
Who ELECTED the Bishops?
Obviously the Times doesn’t give a flying c*** about States’ Rights or what governors think, but how can they justify the fact that NO elected official or legislative body is making a decision to foist expenses on state and local taxpayers, change the cultural make-up of American towns and possibly endanger people.
Here is the line I found so troubling, but apparently the NYT does not:
….in fact resettlement decisions are made by mainstream social agencies like the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
The US Conference of Catholic Bishops and its subsidiaries (Catholic Charities) are federal contractors paid millions upon millions every year by YOU to resettle refugees in your communities with no opportunity for you to question those decisions.
The Founding Fathers could not have imagined such a thing when crafting our Constitution.
Have a look at a 2014 Annual Report for the USCCB Migration Fund. Citizen taxpayers are paying the majority of the Bishops’ budget. And note that, in addition to the $79.5 million in federal grants and contracts, that the over $3 million in ‘travel loan collection fees’ is also your money (in a budget of $85.9 million).
They could not exist without their hands in your wallets!
By the way, if the lawsuit against the governor in Indiana (which the NYT crows about) is dead, there is a potentially very successful States’ Rights lawsuit that will soon (we hope) come out of Tennessee. More here.
There is no way that the US Supreme Court could ever find this arrangement ‘Constitutional’ if a case could get there. In fact, I wonder if there is any case challenging the power of federal contractors generally on Constitutional grounds?
If this whole federal contracting business was blown to bits, we would all be a lot better off!