Chicago Democrat Alderman Flips Stance on ‘Sanctuary City’ to Fox News

It can be difficult to be a Democrat. You have to be moral, caring, and compassionate on the one hand. Your positions can often come back to bite you. On Thursday, Chicago Alderman Brian Hopkins told Fox News he did not believe that Chicago would have been a sanctuary city had it known what the consequences would be.

Smith asked the right question when Hopkins complained to Fox News’ Samantha Smith about the sanctuary city status of his city, which dates back to 1985.

With all due respect, did not your city’s leadership say that “We are a Sanctuary City”? All are welcome. Wasn’t this the message?

Um, Brian? She’s got a big point. Hopkins’s response was hilarious, in part because he was so blatantly honest.

Yes. I’m not saying that. You know, if I had to vote again to determine whether Chicago would be a sanctuary, I am not sure I would have voted yes.

Translation: “We just wanted to convince voters that our party is compassionate.” We never imagined that we would have to put our words into action — at least not on such a large scale.

The comment by Hopkins is just as funny:

We have asked the federal government for help in resolving this crisis and securing the border between Texas and Arizona.

Hold the bus. (No pun intended.)

Hopkins, you and your fellow Democrat Aldermen along with Harold Washington, then a Democrat mayor, supported the sanctuary status — not taxpayers in America. Why should taxpayers in the United States bail you out now?

Oh, and Mr. Hopkins. Why are you only now urging the Biden administration, and not nearly three years ago, to secure the border? The question is rhetorical, as we already know the answer.

Hopkins has admitted the Chicago Democrats’ stupidity from day one.

In the 1980s, our status as a Sanctuary City was first established. This is nothing new. This flag was planted in the ground many years ago. At the time, no one could have imagined that this would be where we are today. It was completely unexpected and unprecedented. Nobody thought that a sanctuary city could mean the things it does.

Bingo. Imagine a Democrat admitting to his mistakes and those of his colleagues.

Here is the link to watch this segment:

Conclusion:

Symbolism has always been more important to the Democrat Party than substance. This is an excellent example.

Democrats thought “sanctuary city” was a Shangri-La of illegal aliens. They would prove to America that they are the “party for compassion.” They would show Americans just how cold-hearted Republicans can be. They would demonstrate to the world how cold-hearted Republicans are.

Then they put their money on the line. They then showed their true colors.