Update: Normal to codify: Laws don’t matter

The resident radical attempting to throw Karen Schmidt off the Bloomington Council will be leading the charge in Normal:


By:  Diane Benjamin

According to WGLT, Normal will consider a “Welcoming Ordinance” Monday night:    http://wglt.org/post/normal-consider-welcoming-ordinance-monday

Considering RC McBride is WGLT’s General Manager and he’s on the Normal Town Council, they would know.  It must be nice to have your own personal radio station.

Documentation for the meeting hasn’t been posted yet.  Chris Koos claims the ordinance is in line with the Town’s  Comprehensive Plan and Visioning Report.

They planned for people who can’t legally work and therefore can’t take care of themselves?  Or maybe good progressives love creating a permanent underclass and calling it compassion?

Koos thinks they have come up with a plan the police approve of and the open border radicals.  The only plan I can think is telling the Police Chief to shut up and comply.  This ordinance puts your safety at risk because all laws will become immaterial.

When the packet is posted the proposed ordinance may not be included, they might still be tweaking it.  They also might be trying to hide it.


Mad yet?









10 thoughts on “Update: Normal to codify: Laws don’t matter

  1. Peterson did accuse everyone of being racist when the Police Review Board was being discussed. Normal has had behind-the-scenes meetings with the activists over the past 6 months according to the WGLT article.
    The article also gives the impression that the BPD is plotting with ICE to track immigrants based on FOIA acquired documents but Normal have very few correspondences. I’m wondering the difference in crime type and rate between Bloomington and Normal. What is the difference in demographics? As I recall, Bloomington had 6 interactions with ICE which resulted in ZERO destruction of families.
    We’ll just have to wait to see what the proposed document says.

  2. Isn’t it ironic that pressure groups get 6 months of direct face time with the Town and its elected officials yet lunchbucket taxpayers that insist the Town live and spend within its means are treated as social pariahs and are privately and publicly insulted? Let that synch in.

  3. The Left loves to keep “pets”. Illegals are the current rage it seems. That, as cold as it sounds, is the bottom line. A few of the formerly loyal pets may be running away, and they need some new ones to take their place. For the left, it IS all about keeping a permanent underclass as well so they will have a large number of people who they can constantly say they are “fighting for”. It’s so transparent.

  4. Welcoming city ordinance puts us at risk. I had a conversation with a gentleman the other day I would categorize this person as someone who would be very left leaning with his thoughts and actions. I asked him about his take on a welcoming city ordinance boy was I shocked to hear him say that he did not support it. He said that his wife a teacher was threatened to be killed by a student not just an idle threat but a serious threat. The student here from another country was deported with ICE involvement. With the welcoming city ordinance ICE would not have been allowed to be involved and the student would have remained a definite threat to the teacher. This along with the fact that illegal aliens that commit crimes will be released back among us instead of being deported because immigration officials will not be allowed in our community is reason enough to not allow a welcoming city ordinance.

  5. A little review of history is always helpful…

    “(DACA) is an American immigration policy that allows some individuals who were brought to the United States illegally as children to receive a renewable two-year period of deferred action from deportation and become eligible for a work permit in the U.S. Unlike the proposed DREAM Act, DACA does not provide a path to citizenship for recipients.[1][2] The policy was announced by President Barack Obama on June 15, 2012, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) began accepting applications for the program on August 15, 2012.” (Not voted on by Congress who has the sole right/responsibility, according to the Constitution, to enact immigration law.)

    “In November 2014, Obama announced his intention to expand DACA to cover additional illegal immigrants. Although multiple states immediately sued to prevent the expansion, their attempt was ultimately blocked by the courts. The United States Department of Homeland Security rescinded the expansion on June 16, 2017, while continuing to review the existence of the DACA program as a whole. Plans to phase out DACA were initiated by the Trump Administration on September 5, 2017, allowing Congress six months to pass the Dream Act, which would provide the path to citizenship for Dreamers under DACA that Congress had originally intended.[3][4][5][6]”


    The supporters of the “Welcoming Ordinance” claim local immigrants are living in fear because of Trump’s rhetoric. Trump is actually doing his job as President by upholding the Constitution to “force” Congress to pass the DREAM Act which is languishing in Committee. Local activists should be directing their representatives to vote on the passage of the proposed DREAM Act. It is NOT local government’s job to get involved in Federal issues. Didn’t Renner say Mayors don’t succeed when they do?

    1. They love the visual of the poor fearful immigrant huddled in the shadows, it’s a bonus if that huddled fearful person is a “person of color” – yes I said it and there is not a racist or xenophobic thought in my head. IMO the most insidious racism belongs entirely to the “compassionate” (cough) Left.

      1. Oh and it makes them feel all special and noble if they can be the savior of that poor huddled creature – bottom line.

      2. Yes, the activists and Mayor Renner reference the quote on the Statue of Liberty as reason to create the Welcoming Ordinance. Check the history of that…the phrase is section of a Sonnet written as part of a fundraising campaign to pay for the base for the Statue. At the time, the U.S. was in a dire financial state and couldn’t afford a foundation for the gift from France. Most of the money raised was by pennies from the “poor huddled masses” not from the wealthy.

Leave a Reply