Shapiro learns lesson about political exaggeration

I have a moderately positive view of Josh Shapiro, as a moderate Democrat.

He’s pretty much a straight shooter, a guy (like former Gov. Ed Rendell) who’s usually willing to concede the other guy (meaning Republicans) might have a valid opinion or policy.

During the campaign, however, he apparently caught the swamp fever and joined many other Democrats in calling Donald J. Trump a threat to democracy, an existential threat, as you can see in this Inquirer story.

Well, maybe you can’t see it, but the headline tells you all you need to know — he condemned Trump and now he is going to have to sit down and talk to him.

Shapiro will work with Trump as long as it doesn’t compromise residents’ “fundamental freedoms.”

The Inquirer quoted “fundamental freedoms,” but not the rest of the sentence and my spidey sense in tingling. Why?

The Inquirer used the term “residents,” not “citizens,” and I think that is deliberate from the Open Borders Inquirer.

Let me explain. The Inquirer, along with almost all liberal newspapers, approves of Sanctuary Cities. In a Sanctuary City, a migrant arriving here illegally will not be removed by the city, nor will the city cooperate with ICE in removing them, even after they have been convicted of a crime. This is an extreme form of woke virtue signaling.

The reality is this: If a jurisdiction will not remove an illegal under any circumstances, that is Open Borders, meaning anyone who gets here, gets to stay here. That contradicts U.S. law.

Sadly, most Democrats ignorantly favor Sanctuary status, but that is beginning to change, such as in deep blue Chicago, where a 46% plurality wants to end it.

Trump’s No. 2 issue was illegal immigration (the economy and inflation were No. 1) and other polling indicates that immigration is very much in the national consciousness and most Americans are sick of the tide of illegals that became a tsunami under President Joe Biden.

So I worry about the key word “resident,” because that could mean anyone living here, and that would include illegals.

I don’t know how much of a fight Shapiro would put up to “protect” people here illegally, especially if Trump puts at the top of his deportation list convicted criminals, and the thousands of illegals who have been adjudicated and ordered to leave — but haven’t.

As a former attorney general, the state’s chief law enforcer, how could Shapiro refuse to cooperate with expelling criminals and those violating court orders?

For that matter, what would Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker do when the feds come knocking? That is a question I politely asked in a December 4 email to her press office:

“Given that NYC Mayor Eric Adams is asking City Council to reform the city’s Sanctuary City status, and given the turmoil and cost to other Sanctuary Cities, does Mayor Parker have any plans to change Philadelphia’s sanctuary status? I would request an explanation for either ‘yes’ or ‘no.’”

Parker is a Mommy, but also a Mummy. I got no reply. 

Parker is essentially a centrist, she is not a “defund the police” Democrat, but she may have fallen under the legality-free myopia expressed by former Mayor Jim Kenney and former Council President Darrell Clarke that Philadelphia is a “welcoming city,” and therefore even welcomes illegals.

I hope she has not.

Back to Shap.

Because I am a middleist, among my readers I have people from far Left to far Right.

Among the far Left there are the TDS — Trump Derangement Syndrome — sufferers who can never accept he has ever done anything right. Among the far Right (hel-lo MAGA), there are those who can never accept he has ever done anything wrong.

Among the former were the people like Shapiro who called him an existential threat to democracy. And a racist, anti-Semite, homophobe, sexist, xenophobic, a fascist, and even a pedophile.

When I hear that from the extremists, I observe, well, you are just a hater.

They always deny it.

My response? Why wouldn’t you hate someone so vile? Of course you would hate him.

How could you not?

I ask Shapiro, how can you agree to work on anything with a man who is a threat to democracy, a fascist, a Nazi? Where are your values?

And then I would ask Shapiro, “So don’t you think you got a little carried away? Don’t you think your remarks were intemperate? And bullshit?”

Look — anyone who reads me knows I do not avoid name-calling.

Sometimes it is completely appropriate, and deserved.

But the name should comport with reality.

In the case of Trump — and I am no fan — the name-calling became so bizarre, so much Chicken Little, that a majority of American voters decided to just ignore it.

Will this teach Shapiro and others to cool their verbal jets?