Posted on 12/09/2015 11:10:57 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network
While many in the GOP are fiercely condemning Donald Trump for his proposal to temporarily ban all Muslims from entering the U.S., a whole lot of other Republicans are saying, hey, he has a point.
From established party figures such as Ted Cruz and Rick Santorum to more hard-core right-wing personalities such as Ann Coulter, numerous Republicans are either stopping short of condemning Trump’s audacious proposal or are outright applauding the billionaire businessman as finally offering a common-sense solution to terrorism threats.
They are offering a glimpse into why Trump has continued to zoom ahead in the polls, despite a series of jaw-dropping comments that many in the media, and now the White House, have called not only offensive but also disqualifying for the position of leader of the free world.
http://valdostatoday.com/2015/12/some-big-gop-players-say-trump-has-a-point/
(Excerpt) Read more at valdostatoday.com ...
He is brave, and he is right. Not at all afraid to be politically incorrect. Ever. About anything.
That combination, is very powerful.
The fact that Trump has PC and the media on the run is the best show in town. I can’t wait to wake up in the morning to watch the dour face of Charlie Rose, the constant disgust on the face of Gayle King, and the pale sickened complexion of NorDUH O’Donnell each morning as they shift into overdrive to convince Americans that they hate trump and we should too.
Speaking the truth now disqualifies a person from the Presidency.
No longer reporters of the news, now they are opinion makers and DNC operatives.
Nothing that Trump has offered is wrong. I admire him for saying what he believes and is willing to take the trash from the communists in America. This group of communists has even become part of the GOP. Without Trump America will never survive.
Indonesia also has a larger Muslim population than any other country in the world, with approximately 202.9 million identifying themselves as Muslim (87.2% of Indonesia's total population in 2011).
And some of us generally agree with the point but wonder how to resolve specific legal & rights issues.
I think the Trump law is to exclude people from immigrating from particular countries.
Don’t know that Indonesia, or a lot of other countries need to be excluded.
It started last evening. Now more and more are seeing the wisdom of this great man and are agreeing that we must pause the Trojan horse.
We've been attacked several times now inside the US by Radical Islamic Terrorists who should not have been in the US. Why isn't it treason that Obama and the US Senate aren't declaring war on them, in the homeland?
Instead the Republican leadership is declaring war on Mr. Trump. Disgusting.
Trump clearly has a point, but banning entrants by country casts the net wider and more thoroughly. I’m not sure how they can be ascertained as muslim or non-muslim at the point of entry.
(And you avoid the BS charges of “bigotry” at the same time)
going to see more of this as the elites realize the effect their knee-jerk reaction is having on their popularity
That’s the precedent I see: target a given country.
Problem is Trump specified (and many here support) restrictions based on _religion_ on grounds that conquest is a core principle of the religion in question, that even “moderate” adherents internalize proselytizing-thru-conquest as axiomatic, so there’s a legit question about whether that poses a threat to this country via immigrants. I’ve not resolved this one personally yet, holding “freedom of religion” and “rule of Constitution” as core principles.
Problem: most of them were natural-born citizens.
Lou Dobbs doesn’t appear to be a Trump supporter at all, but it was Dobbs who said that this position Trump has taken is a courageous one. He reminded everyone that Trump has huge financial interests in Arab countries, and that he puts that at risk with his comments.
This is not just campaigning on Trump’s part. It could come at great cost.
What the naysayers fail to understand is that it is not unconstitutional ANS there is already a precedent with democrat Jimmy Carter doing the same thing in 1979!
I think stopping immigration on a per country basis is more practical. On the other hand, Saudi Arabia is (excluding foreign workers) 100% Muslim and Pakistan is 95-98% Muslim, so whether you want to call it excluding Muslims or excluding Pakistanis and Saudis, I am not sure there is much actual difference. It gets trickier with more mixed countries, but that would be a start. But to your point on the Constitution, as far as I am aware the US Constitution does not protect non-citizens who are residents of other countries. It really has nothing to do with them and the US has an absolute right to exclude any non-citizen (and possibly non-permanent resident, IDK) that it wants for any reason or no reason at all without violating the Constitution. I have not seen any serious argument to the contrary despite all of the handwringing. That is, no foreigner has the right to immigrate to the United States and we could, without offending the Constitution, exclude all redheads or all fat people or whomever we wanted, without any constitutional limitation.
Trump has pierced the PC veil.
PCBS, ABPC and NBPC are naked.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.