Posted on 08/15/2016 4:58:29 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
The madman has actually done it. God-Emperor Daddy — known to the rest of you as Republican presidential candidate Donald J Trump — has just outflanked Hillary Clinton on the Left and announced what can only be described as an ultra-progressive immigration policy.
I don’t mean progressive as it has come to be used, of course — nannying, language-policing, Muslim-pandering. I mean it’s a policy that could actually make things better for minorities.
Trump’s plan is to introduce a screening process for prospective immigrants to the U.S., testing their ideological commitment to western values like women’s rights, gay rights, and religious pluralism. It’s a brilliant plan. I’m especially inclined to say it’s brilliant because it may have been partly inspired by me.
The test will apply to all immigrants, yet its obvious target is Muslims, who, as we know, get a bit bomby in the presence of gays, a bit rapey in the presence of women who wear skirts shorter than their ankles and generally a bit hostile and violent around anyone who doesn’t have their bum in the air five times a day.
The media won’t portray this policy as progressive, of course — they’ll portray it as stupid, bigoted, and reactionary. The Washington Post, little more than a Hillary mouthpiece this election cycle, has already started, branding the proposal “crazy” and “outlandish.” But it isn’t. Actually, it’s about the most pro-gay policy I’ve ever heard from a presidential hopeful.
Trump has also promised to deport hate-preachers in the U.S. His specific wording (“send them home”) again suggests that he’s targeting Islam. Go Daddy!
"Those who are guests in our country that are preaching hate will be asked to return home immediately." – Trump pic.twitter.com/UGAAZIuBj0— Fox News (@FoxNews) August 15, 2016
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
When was he behind them?
Ping
One problem: taqiyya.
I think Donald rightly doesn’t want people who are going to be jihading gays in America. Anything beyond this, needs to be discussed. Requiring people to politically support gay marriage, for example, is going to be beyond the pale with much of America.
If he wasn't a part of that world, the voters in that world wouldn't listen to him.
Surprised you are still here, Nick.
Like your namesake, obsequious to the core.
I was too slow on the trigger.
Hatred of America on the other hand is most likely a permanent problem.
I like what was said in this article.
Let us proceed with caution.
Watched Zuddi Jasser tonight on Greta. He said that it is easy to pick the radicals out in interviews. The Israelis have a very good system for it.
;-P
Hang in there.;-)
If Milo is anything, he’s acerbic and self-referential.
Probably means recognizing that they're human beings and should be not thrown off buildings, like they do in muslim countries.
It’s sometimes hard for even supposedly wise freepers to see a distinction between disapprove and jihad.
But the degree of divine love that is necessary to support such a distinction is going to have to be affirmed, or else it won’t be possible.
As John Adams said: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
He meant Christians and Jews.
It’s just that a whole boatload of things can go along with the phrase “gay rights.”
This is definitely a thing where the devil is in the details. Conservatives have been pointing out for years that just like it does everybody else, yes the Constitution grants certain “rights” even to homosexual people, while disagreeing fervently about whether that extends to the “right” to have a perverted mockery of marriage.
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.