Baby we ain’t the first
I’m sure a lot of other lovers been burned
Right now it seems real to you, but it’s
One of those things you gotta feel to be true
Tom Petty “Live like a refugee”
“When candidates say we shouldn’t admit three-year-old orphans, that’s political posturing,” President Obama on the GOP’s opposition to his Syrian Refugee plan
“The whole point of terrorism is to do what hasn’t been done before, before 9/11 planes were never used to go into buildings——So if you would have said what’s wrong with giving Islamic radicals flight lessons—–because that’s the new idea that occurred to them (Islamic radicals). I’m simply saying now, that why should we put it past them to use refugees to smuggle bad guys into the country. It’s just common sense.” Dinesh D’Souza on Huffington Post 11/24/15
A few Issues:
Sorry Mr President, they are not mostly “women and children”, according to the UN’s own numbers 72% are men, and 54% are men between the ages of 18-34.
Contrary to the Presidents assertions about “religious tests” the United States code on asylum seekers demands one. And one of the highest scoring grounds for refugee status is religious persecution. It actually makes sense in a country founded by people fleeing religious persecution.
A few points about the Refugee debate: Neither side can claim moral or biblical superiority, to do so is exactly the arrogance that many in political debates engage in when they complain about imposing morality. While there is plenty of that on both sides, the reality is both sides also have plenty of serious moral standing. It’s not any more moral to want to welcome the innocent from abroad then it is to want to protect the innocent within. I don’t want Syrian children to suffer in bombed out hulks, but I don’t want our children to be victims of suicide bombers. Both are moral and biblical positions.
And please there are two memes we can do without. One is the comparison to Jewish refugees fleeing gennoacide pre WW II. In all sincerity that was a totally different situation, to compare the two is a gross admission of ignorance. Those Jews had no sanctuary, Hitler was invading their homes and hunting them down, they had no homeland to retreat too, no Jewish enclave to take them in. Todays Syrian-Muslims on the other hand live in a world with 52 other Muslim nations and twenty plus Arab-Muslim nations, many of which are wealthy and in far better position to take them in than any nation in the West. The fact is the wealthy gulf States have so far taken in zero of the Syrian refugees, perhaps we should ask why?
Another meme we can do with out is a comparison between todays Syrian Refugees and the early European settlers that came to North America. As Samuel Huntington rightfully points out in “Who are We”. The Europeans that came here were not “immigrants”, they were entering a largely undeveloped uninhabited land (you could take the entire population of Natives in North America-estimated at roughly 15-25 million and stick it in the NYC corridor fairly comfortably). The Settlers that came to North America, came to an empty land with the purpose to build something.
Many of todays immigrants are coming to a Nation with the desire to take something, or be beneficiaries of that Nations largess. And considering we’re running an 18 Trillion dollar deficit, that largess is getting pretty unaffordable. Among the hundreds of radical Imams living off Welfare in the UK included Abdul Salem (the man who led rioting against the Danish cartoons) and Abu Qtada, and Anjem Chaudary all hate preachers who specialize in inciting violence against the very system that pays their checks. I’m not interested in financing Jihad with our tax dollars.
My take is this, to me this is pretty simple. Caution in protecting the country should abound. The reality is teenagers attending a concert or Black Friday shoppers are just vulnerable as many of the refugees fleeing war torn Syria. We should start by taking in children, women and families. This is just basic human decency, and the reality is unlike the 54% of the refugees who are fighting age men, the need to protect the truly vulnerable is undeniable. The next group we must look at is Christians. Christianity (a faith community that pre-dates Islam by several hundred years in the Levant) in the Middle East is truly facing massive ethnic cleansing and gennoacide, and we should apply every method to protect them and rescue them when necessary.
As far as the majority of young single men that are refugees, ecspecially those without families in the US, we should first try to protect them in Syria in safe-no fly zones. And then to repatriate them with our so-called allies in the Middle East like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Qatar. The reality is we simply can’t vet them, we don’t have access to Syria’s criminal or military records, so the “vetting” process is basically a crap shoot, and admitting them in the country with out good records is risky at best. I lock my doors at night for a reason, it’s not because I hate outsiders or I’m a racist, it’s because I want to protect the individuals and contents inside. A Nations first duty is to protect it’s citizens.
President Obama said this yesterday on Good Morning America “ISIS is not getting stronger, we have contained them”. Last night after the attacks he described the attack as “an attack on all of humanity and the universal values we share”. In both cases he was sadly mistaken.
And frankly I’m sick of these goat scewing bastards believing that walking in to a concert hall with hand greenades and AK’s is a form of political expression. I’m sick that when thousands of them show up in Europe to protest cartoons, there aren’t hundreds of thousands marching in counter protest. The reality is ISIS is capable of paralyzing any major city in the West, Sydney? London? DC? Chicago? LA? Berlin? whose next?
These were not attacks on “Universal Values”, Freedom of Speech, Religion, Assembly, Expression, the Press, Freedom from undue search and seizure, and the Right to Bear Arms only exist in a small slice of the planet, and they are under attack there. Just this week, we had a protest at the University of Missouri which included an assault on freedom of the Press. At Yale, Freedom of Speech is clearly under assault. And sadly judging from my face book feed today many Americans are far more worried about micro aggressions, Safe spaces, and Islamaphobia than they are about an attack on Universal Values. Perhaps the President should define these “Universal Values” and explain to us, and the world, why they are superior?
To paraphrase Mark Steyn, the farmer in Yemen who thinks his daughter should be stoned because she was raped doesn’t share these values. The Goat Herder in Pashtun who believes in beheading those who blaspheme the prophet doesn’t share those values. The magistrate in Iraq who issued the order to throw homosexuals off the roofs of tall buildings doesn’t believe in those values, and the ISIS terrorist who opened fire in the concert hall in Paris certainly doesn’t share those values. They are not universal, the sad fact is, a vast majority of humanity doesn’t share those values Mr President. Even in France “hate speech” laws have rendered the Charlie Hebdo attackers successful.
Je Suis Charlie, neat hashtag, but don’t print copies of the cartoons here. They might offend. Evidently even “I am Charlie” isn’t all it’s cracked up to be? But “Bring back our girls” worked great didn’t it? The girls were sold into sex slavery, but we showed our solidarity with them, we “did something”. We aren’t serious, they are. They believe in their values, we apologize for ours. They build bombs, we create hash tags. They open fire with AK-47’s, slaughtering innocents, we change our Facebook profile pics. They blow up a civillian airlinner we have candlelight vigils. They send millions of immigrants into Europe, we send fifty “boots on the ground” to Syria. Seriously is this an episode of South Park that I’m trapped in?
Hillary Clinton who now believes “Climate Change” is the greatest threat to the Planet, made the charge during the Primaries in 08 that Barak Obama would not be prepared to answer the call at Three AM for a world crisis. On Sept 11, 2012 that call came, at Seven PM, we STILL don’t know were the leader of the free world was that night, only that he rushed to a fundraiser in Vegas, and Ms Clinton whose asking us to become the new leader of the free world spent seven hours before any response. And then the response of the administration was to throw a harmless you-tube video-maker in jail. So much for “Universal Values”. It’s hard to defend them if even your own administration doesn’t share them.
It’s bad enough that the Leader of the Free World and the leading candidate from one American political party don’t promote those values, but it’s even worse when they are deluded. ” Isis is not getting stronger, we have contained them”. Lets forget for one minute the events of Paris last night. The President made these comments in a week when ISIS had brought down a commercial airliner and pulled off two suicide bombings in Beruit. Even before the attacks that is a delusional statement, with no basis in reality But in light of the events in Paris that same night one has to ask is he fit to lead?
The Free World needs an adult leader, more Churchill, less Valarie Jarrett. We don’t’ need a pacifier, a child who wants to get along, because ISIS understands weakness as one thing, an invitation to attack, something to exploit. And we’ve answered violence with weakness for far too long. An administration that calls spending Four-hundred million to train four or five fighters in Syria an ISIS policy, is not adult. An administration that yields leadership in the power vacuum of the Middle East to hegemonies of Putin and the Mullahs is not adult. An administration that percieves the Manbearpig of Climate change as greater threat than radical Islam is not adult, even in an episode of South Park.
For the good of the country and those Universal Values you claim to hold I ask you Mr President, please resign for the healing of the country and what’s left of Western Civilization? I am not sure we can survive another year and a half of your childish leadership. And another hash tag campaign with a candlelight vigil is not enough. You weren’t ready, and that’s not OK.
FIRST PLACE: The American people, there are real differences on issues between these candidates, and the moderators were determined to steer the discussions in that direction. It actually got a bit boring, candidates discussing substantive issues, and having to defend sound bites. This is what happens when you have quality moderators.
THE SURPRISE DEBATE WINNER: Rand Paul, I went into this process with him as my first choice. And I must admit that as the emphasis of the electorate has changed with the rise of ISIS, his stock has fallen. But last night he made the best conservative case for the Presidency, and had the strongest grasp of the issues. Even when he challenged someone (Rubio on Conservatism and Military spending) he did it based on philosophical differences not on trite personal attack. Is it enough to resurrect his candidacy? I doubt it
THE TIE FOR SECOND PLACE: Rubio and Cruz. Cruz had the one Rick Perry style slip up where he named five departments he would close and named Commerce twice. But he also delivered the best line in the debate about economic effects of immigration. “If those were men with Journalism degrees crossing the Rio Grand and driving down the wages of Journalists, the coverage of this issue would be far different”. He’s also lightened up a bit, and only mentioned the Constitution once.
Rubio, continues to have the best grasp of the issues and the easiest time defending his positions off the cuff. When Rubio is talking about the economy and referring to Uber and Candy Crush, he speaking from personal knowledge of America today, not some younger advisors tip on how to be cool for the hip voters.
THE BIGGEST LOSER: John Kasich, I’ve always liked the guy, he was my original pick for VP, but he’s so busy giving talking points to Hillary attacking Republicans and making his claims about the Ohio “miracle” all the while being rude. He belongs in the corner getting a time out at the next one. The kids table is too good for him. Kasich made Trump seem humble on the stage that is quite an accomplishment.
A SOLID THIRD: Ben Carson, I realize he has a lower bar in some ways, but his answers were solid, especially on the minimum wage. His statement about Hillary and the contrast in coverage was right on the money. My biggest complaint with him was actually the moderators fault. He wasn’t asked enough questions, or given enough time. He is not an interrupter or a boorish lout like Kasich, it’s not in his nature, to me this is one of the most appealing things about him. But because of this the moderators need to take the debate to him, he is polling way higher than Kasich who got about double the air time.
BLAH: Donald Trump and Carly Fiorino, Donald for sounding vapid, the more details he’s asked, the more he goes back too “it’s gonna be great, it’ll be huge”. Basically his detailed position on the issues is, trust me, I’m the Donald. Between this and his attacks on Carson, and his lack of substantive attacks on Hillary, I have to wonder if he’s running for the Republican nomination. The more he talks trying to appeal to conservatives, the more tone death he sounds. If you want a “substance free” Presidency vote for Trump, come to think of it he may be the perfect candidate for the America of the Kardashians and the Voice.
Fiorinio, to me has the opposite problem, she is as well versed on the issues as anyone, but she comes across as to clinical, the Al Gore of the Republican party, a policy wonk who would want to discuss Quantitative Easing over a beer when you want to discuss the College Football playoff system. She just doesn’t seem in touch with the lives of ordinary Americans, something Rubio and Cruz get.
TAKE A HIKE: Jeb (along with Kasich) displayed a fundamental mis-understanding of the banking system. While he had a few good points in the beginning, he is not on the game. And if his last name was Gilmore or Pataki he wouldn’t be on the stage. The fact of the matter is both Jindal and Christie are more credible candidates.