How is a city, a county, a country supposed to accomplish anything positive and get the nation back on track when our elected officials can’t even agree among themselves? This is especially true in Democrat-run areas where politicians seem to disregard the concerns of other elected officials. Take, for example, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot (D), whose response to warnings that districts were going to be engulfed in violent riots was: “I think you’re 100% full of s—, is what I think.”
. “We can’t expect our police, and I don’t fault them at all, to be able to control this,” he said. “Half our neighborhoods are already obliterated. It’s too late.”
“We know that people are here to antagonize and incite, and you’ve got them all pumped tonight, today. They’re not going to go to bed at 8 o’clock. They’re going to turn their focus on the neighborhoods. I’ve got gang-bangers with AK-47s walking around right now, just waiting to settle some scores. What are we going to do, and what do we tell residents, other than good faith people stand up? It’s not going to be enough.”
The mayor refused to answer, so Lopez argued: “It’s not something you ignore. This is a question that I have.”
Insert the mayor’s brilliant response: “I think you’re 100% full of s—, is what I think,” Lightfoot said. That lit a keg of dynamite, and the rest of the conversation, if it could be called that, was anything but productive. Lopez, not one to check his language, dropped a few f-bombs, and nothing was resolved.
Congratulations, Chicago. Even your Democrats can’t get along. The same day that the mayor was telling the alderman she thought he was full of excrement after he’d described the destruction in his district, there were 65,000 calls to 911 and 18 people were murdered. In just three days, between May 29 and 31, 25 people were killed and 85 were wounded by gunfire. So now, who’s really “full of it”?
Showing her stance to be a mass of contradictions, Lightfoot, at the same meeting, described the events taking place in Chicago as a “massive, massive problem,” and that “people are just f—–g lawless right now.” Yet even after being told of rioters shooting at the police, she refused to countenance any involvement of the National Guard.
What we have here, folks, is a failure to communicate. Or, rather, a malfunction in engaging to seek appropriate measures to protect citizens and property from the nation-wide looting and mayhem sparked by Floyd’s killing. What is the Democrats’ answer to safeguard real estate and lives? Why, reduce law enforcement presence. Because that makes sense — to no one.
Remember when President Trump threatened to send out the National Guard to help keep the peace? That went over quite well, didn’t it? There was no contingency plan, however, to replace the help so desperately needed. In some states, local citizen militias formed to patrol and guard small businesses because police already had their hands full. Is it possible that Mayor Lightfoot refused to send in the Guard for fear of appearing to follow Trump’s lead? Just two days prior to the meeting with the aldermen, Lightfoot had choice words to impart to the president: “I will encode what I really want to say to Donald Trump. It’s two words: It begins with ‘F’ and it ends with ‘U.’”
The Democrats again ignore the obvious and, when their cities are being destroyed and their citizens injured and killed, demand law enforcement be reduced. Their plan to bring order and control the violence is to send away federal support and defund police departments in the name of political optics. Is this the kind of change America needs? This only puts everyone in more danger.
Read more from Kelli Ballard.