Posted on 12/08/2015 1:39:56 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
I completely get the fury over political correctness. I completely understand that the aristocratic political, media, and academic establishment have been lying to us about Islam and the Muslim world for more than fourteen years. As I explain at length on the home page, it's simply not the case that Islam is a peaceful, tolerant faith plagued by a tiny few extremists. Rather, Islam has massive problem with hate and bigotry - with hundreds of millions of Muslims supporting the worst kinds of religious intolerance and tens of millions more outright terrorist sympathizers. In the refugee controversy, I've repeated over and over that it's foolish to admit a class of refugees when we know the world's leading terror army is attempting to infiltrate the displaced masses or recruit from their ranks. We can be compassionate without making ourselves vulnerable.
But the correct response to political correctness isn't to simply take the opposite position, to answer one form of unthinking ideology with another. By tacking to the opposite of Obama's scolding self-righteousness, Trump isn't charting his own course so much as merely reacting. In fact, now that he's "clarified" that he's not just talking about immigration but a moratorium on all Muslim entry to the United States, he's gone well beyond being the anti-Obama and has reacted straight into foolishness.
Off the top of their heads, even the most hawkish national security conservatives can identify multiple categories of Muslims who should have access to the United States, beginning - of course - with our own citizens. There are many others. What about the interpreters who've laid down their lives to serve our warriors downrange and now find themselves under imminent threat from jihadists? What about members of allied militaries who are training to be the Muslim "boots on the ground" that we need to help take the fight to the enemy? Do we treat the Kurds - who are sheltering so many of Iraq's Christians while also providing the most effective fighting force against ISIS - the same as we treat suspected terrorists? It makes no sense.
On the merits of Trump's proposal, I agree with Ben Shapiro:
Kiss Our Intelligence Apparatus Goodnight. We need to work with Muslims both foreign and domestic. It's one thing to label Islamic terrorism and radical Islam a problem. It's another to label all individual Muslims a problem. That's what this policy does. It's factually wrong and ethically incomprehensible. Donald Trump has just transformed into the strawman President Obama abused on Sunday night.
There is nothing wrong with closing our borders to select groups when confronted with actionable intelligence or to place some groups under greater scrutiny because of known threats. But to treat every single Muslim as a threat, regardless of whether they're from Raqqa, Erbil, Cairo, or Des Moines - and regardless of whether they've tweeted jihadist threats or bled on the battlefield alongside our troops - is to act mindlessly. I would also say Trump is acting maliciously, but I don't think Trump despises Muslims as much as he loves leading the news cycle. This is a political stunt and should be treated as such.
I often speak to audiences on college campuses and elsewhere about the proper response to PC nonsense. I call the formula "apathetic, informed conviction." When formulating cultural or political opinions, one must be completely apathetic to PC pressures - don't react against or capitulate to leftist browbeating. Instead, educate yourself and act through informed conviction. Respond to unreason with reason, to intimidation with a bored shrug, and speak truth even when the truth is unpleasant. In this instance, however, Donald Trump is the voice of attention-seeking reaction, not principled leadership.
Another thing that should be discussed is that Muslims live and work in Israel.
The Dems aren't so sure about their chances in 2016.
Just let the Republicans win: Maybe things need to get really bad before America wakes up
wheat, chaff
when chaff kills, wheat should not be permitted to benefit
if wheat is not permitted entry, there will be no incidental chaff
Of course not, you can make up your own mind, but you should have a better argument than the left will be mean to us.
Before you jump to the msm tune, listen and analyze.
Trump is throwing out red meat, he does that every time he starts to sink in the polls and the msm goes batsh!t and the GOPe thinks "now he's done it" and the people who are SICK TO F"ING DEATH of the lying msm and GOPe go "Yea!"
I don't know how this is going to turn out, but I know that Trump is shoving it to the worst people in the country and I'm glad about that. I'm glad that he totally destroyed Jeb and Kasich and the other GOPe minions.
I'm glad that he plays the msm like the whores that they are. They don't know whether than to sh!t or wind their watch.
And finally, I'm glad that someone asked the very reasonable question; why should we take in people that want to kill us?
We can learn a lot from Israel. For one thing, the houses of the family of the California terrorists should have been bulldozed by now.
Right out of the gate you must characterize my analogy as trivial. It isn't. They will come at you with "moral equivalency" in spades.
Again from the article:
I often speak to audiences on college campuses and elsewhere about the proper response to PC nonsense. I call the formula "apathetic, informed conviction." When formulating cultural or political opinions, one must be completely apathetic to PC pressures - don't react against or capitulate to leftist browbeating. Instead, educate yourself and act through informed conviction. Respond to unreason with reason, to intimidation with a bored shrug, and speak truth even when the truth is unpleasant. In this instance, however, Donald Trump is the voice of attention-seeking reaction, not principled leadership.
The MSM constantly makes the mistake of forgetting that their approval ratings are lower than Congress.
BTTT!
I hope this causes a lot of people to look at the polling data. It tells an ugly story.
And I'd like to add, that this is the way, you go after the bad actors - CRUSH them and the rest fall in line real fast (right now they're more afraid of the ISSI crowd and not us). But you take that broad brush and call all Muslims terrorists and you make them defend the bad guys (the old, "We can criticize them but you can't" scenario).
“Off the top of their heads, even the most hawkish national security conservatives can identify multiple categories of Muslims who should have access to the United States, beginning - of course - with our own citizens.”
“own citizens”? It would seem obvious, to anyone with a room temperature IQ, that Trump DID NOT have in mind banning U.S. citizens, nor did he have in mind banning Muslim heads of states, or Muslim military allies in performance of their duties. How can these supposedly intelligent people be so stupid. No, they can’t be.
Cruz supporters are right in there with the Muslims on this one.
“What do you think he’ll do if elected?
The answer is this: You don’t know.”
That is the unknown involved what in every election, every marriage, and everything.
But if a politician refuses to step forward during a campaign, do you think he will step forward if elected?
All Muslims are potential terrorists. All Americans are potential terrorists too, just look at Adam Lanza. It is up to other Americans to take responsibility. Look at Adama Lanza’s father. All he did was cut checks to the batship crazy mother. Not much different from the family of the crazy jihadi terrorist in California. The rest of us need to be somewhat careful making a private weapon sale, watching our neighborhoods and other simple things.
Trump has elevated this “conversation” to a necessary level, that will put them on the defensive. He can modify his statements later if he wants to. But his tone and sense of urgency are long overdue.
Ask this, would it have been correct to let Nazis in during WW2?
.
So ... how many more innocent Americans will be slaughtered like dogs by Islam ?
The cosmic level of denial by our “elected leaders” is approaching criminal malfeasance of office ... and defacto treason ...
Buddists and Baptists don’t murder or behead innocent people — Islam does, and actively encourages it in the Koran ... go read it yourself ...
Donald Trump knows exactly what he’s talking about ...
I suggest that these GOPe “Isalmic Apologists” throw a baby shower for the next “nice” Islamic couple down the street, or who work in their office for five years, and PRAY TO GOD that the “nice” Islamic couple doesn’t MURDER them all in cold-blood ...
Americans are sick-and-tired of the suicidal “politically correct” nonsense spewed daily by our arrogant and corrupt political aristocracy ...
.
That should be required reading for every Congressman, everyone at the State Department, and the entire officer and senior NCO corps of the military. Thanks for posting.
To put it succinctly, the San Bernardino Jihadis were to all outside appearances textbook, “assimilated” “moderate Muslims.”
Until they weren’t.
Reading the article makes all the difference. Spewing knee-jerk platitudes in an echo-chamber is much easier.
Yes.
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.