Posted by Tina
Democrats do! They say it every time they accuse people on the right of doing so. But is it true that Republicans and conservative media are accusing “all” Muslims of being terrorists? Or is this a suggestion, an insinuation, an inference made constantly by the current activist administration whose purpose seems to be to make the Republican Party the bigger enemy?
People on the right don’t say, “all” Muslims are terrorists. We don’t think it, we don’t believe it, and we don’t imply it.
We are willing to be honest. We are willing to honestly describe the people that have organized as terrorists and the religious, social, and political Islamic ideology they believe guides them. And for that honesty and forthrightness we are labeled bigots and racists. We are labeled as “evil other” so our president and his party and their minions in journalism can justify waging a political and social war against their political opponents. Democrats have purposely made Americans on “the right” a straw man enemy to pummel and abuse. Sadly, they take this effort much more seriously than they do defeating terrorists and keeping the American people safe.
The proof that our president is a disingenuous and contriving activist is in his own speech and behavior. Throughout his terms as president he has created straw man enemies…police officers, white men, gun owners, and Christians are framed as enemies in this divisive administration.
When Obama ran for election in 08 his own rhetoric betrayed the myth that he has deep concerns about bigoted speech, remember: “Obama was caught in an uncharacteristic moment of loose language. Referring to working-class voters in old industrial towns decimated by job losses, the presidential hopeful said: “They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
Obama took the occasion of the National Prayer breakfast to lecture Christians. Does that make him a bigot? Does he believe “all” Christians deserve his public derision? His remarks were uncalled for and specifically targeted Christians, “painting with a broad brush.” Are Christians the greater enemy in today’s world and should Christians be the focus of his concerns?
America and the world are in terrible shape. We are economically compromised. The ME is in chaos. Our military has been decimated and socialized. Under the (lack of) leadership of Barack Obama ISIS, a group Obama smugly called a JV Team, has grown in strength and spread across the globe.
We are not better off than we were eight years ago and this man and Obama and his party are responsible! Obama did not run for president to lead our nation; he ran as an activist with an agenda. Part of that agenda was making republicans a bigger enemy that the terrorists. Describing his agenda is difficult. His legacy is one of weakening the US and the West and strengthening a mortal enemy. Of mocking the Bible while denying the passages that inspire terrorism today? How do we explain such an agenda? What defines it? What “groups” has this president sought to advance? Which has he diminished and weakened? The President spoke to a group of his supporters and told them, “We are the one’s we’ve been waiting for.” To do what? What had he come to do?
Americans had better find a way to answer that question because the woman who would follow him has nothing better to offer. She too is willing to demean her opponents and advance the agenda to disarm the American people and pit Americans against each other above any plans to defeat the enemy or improve our shared economic conditions.
This group of phony activist must be thrown out and it can’t come too soon. Instead of making America great for all Americans the Democrat party is advancing the decline of America, the dependency of America, the weakness of America.
Vote Trump. Vote Republican! Save this nation!
And progressive (aka hypocritical bigots) wonder why conservatives find them so exasperatingly dim.
“People on the right don’t say, “all” Muslims are terrorists. We don’t think it, we don’t believe it, and we don’t imply it.”
But you still want to act against them all, for the sake of apprehending, deterring, whatever, a handful. What else is a ban on ALL Muslim immigration? It’s not acceptable, even “temporarily.”
And, oh, geez … will you please pay attention. If you address a group of Christians and, oh, maybe suggest that they could be a little more so, that could be interpreted as preachy, impertinent, arrogant … but not bigoted. On the other hand, if you suggested that Christianity was charitably inferior to Judiasm, that would be bigoted.
Simply naming a group is … naming a group. You have to be making, directly or by innuendo, an unfavorable comparison, as in “Christianity is superior to Islam,” which fairly oozes from nearly everything you post on the subject.
Libby: “But you still want to act against them all, for the sake of apprehending, deterring, whatever, a handful. What else is a ban on ALL Muslim immigration? It’s not acceptable, even “temporarily.”
THIS. Tina, Jack, at this point it isn’t even about what you *say* about Islam and Muslims. Say whatever you want.
You are now advocating *action* against an entire ethnicity based on the actions of a few. And you can’t even admit that’s bigotry, because your fear and hatred have so blinded your critical thinking processes that the very definitions of words elude you when they don’t suit your narrative.
And this action has been explained to you–by experts from the left and right–as stupid, dangerous, and counter-productive. But you don’t even care enough to acknowledge their points! You just want to *feel* like you’re doing something to make you safer, even if it doesn’t keep you any safer in reality. In that way, how are you any better than those who react to every mass shooting by saying we should ban guns? You think shooters aren’t deterred by gun laws, but you think terrorists will be deterred by immigration laws? It doesn’t make any sense.
Chris keep spinning, eventually maybe you’ll wind down and wise up.
NO I am not advocating “action.”
I am criticizing horses asses that insist on making this remark, although revised and a proposal, a much bigger deal than the reasons a successful terror attack on American citizens was successfully executed by a radicalized Muslim! This man SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE TERROR WATCH LIST BUT WAS REMOVED BY OUR INCOMPETENT ADMINISTRATION, AND SO, WAS ABLE TO PURCHASE THE GUNS AND AMMO HE NEEDED TO MURDER 49 PEOPLE, AND SERIOUSLY INJURE MORE LEGALLY.
I’m saying the political agenda of the President and the Democrat Party takes precedence over the safety of ALL Americans and I’m saying there is no bigotry on the right but there is a consistent strategy to smear the right and make us an enemy greater that the real lethal enemy that the President will not name. Today he was finally shamed into it and his adolescent response was to smugly change the subject. Naming the enemy is a step that establishes the intention to create a strategy. He has had no effective strategy and YOU, and the media that always fawns over and protects democrats, do nothing to criticize or question his ineffective eight years or his failure to keep us safe on the home front. This is disgusting! You are disgusting.
Tina, you have no idea what you are talking about. People on the terrorist watch list are NOT banned from buying guns. If he had remained on the list, he still would have been able to legally buy the guns.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/why-can-people-on-the-terrorist-watch-list-buy-guns-and-other-faqs/
If you would like to change this, you are proposing a new gun law.
Are you proposing we create a new gun law to make it illegal for people on the terrorist watch list to buy guns?
The ban comment was off the cuff, you know that. It has since been revised, you know that. More and more a temporary pause on all people traveling from nations where Islamist and recruits are coming from until a sound vetting process is established is a suggestion worth pursuing. The last two attacks in this nation feature a broken vetting system.
I am offended by the President using this atrocious act to preach to Americans and promote gun control. I’m offended by his attitude, his smarmy disdain, and his smug accusations. He’s been called out about his reluctance to name the enemy because he has had no effective strategy, he refuses to change course, and he constantly condemns his political opponents with vigor but cannot bring himself to be as vigorously critical of the enemy that targets our citizens and citizens across the free world.
If you are going to insist that I am bigoted because I can be honest about the source of this enemies war on the West (it isn’t the Bible, the Declaration of Independence, or the Magna Carta; it is the Koran and the Hadith), then I can insist the Presidents remarks about Midwestern citizens are bigoted. The president said:
“They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations”
…without any evidence that what he said was true. He literally made it up. He made it up out of prejudices he holds, just as he made up that crap about his white grandmother being an example of “typical white people.”
And listen to you…you hold the same type of prejudices.
Tina: “The ban comment was off the cuff, you know that. It has since been revised, you know that. More and more a temporary pause on all people traveling from nations where Islamist and recruits are coming from until a sound vetting process is established is a suggestion worth pursuing.”
Tina, a temporary pause is a ban.
And has Trump gone back on his proposal to temporarily ban all Islamic immigration? I understand he said recently the ban should apply to all countries with issues with terrorism (which, um, would be all of them), but that doesn’t rule out a Muslim-specific ban as well. And the fact remains that you supported the policy of temporarily banning Muslim immigration, and that policy is inherently bigoted.
“The last two attacks in this nation feature a broken vetting system.”
What? The Orlando attacker was born in the US.
“I am offended by the President using this atrocious act to preach to Americans and promote gun control”
But…you just did that. You said that a person on the terrorist watch list should not be legally allowed to buy guns. That is “using this atrocious act to promote gun control.”
And you have no problem with Donald Trump using this atrocious act to promote *people* control.
“…without any evidence that what he said was true. He literally made it up.”
Eh. Read “What’s the Matter with Kansas?” Obama was describing a very real phenomenon. And you always leave out the part of his speech where he said that it was his job to try and reach out to those people despite his disagreements with them; contrast that with Romney writing off the “47%” that he would “never convince to take responsibility for their lives.”
His statement about his grandma crossing the street when she saw a black man walking towards her was, in my experience as a typical white person, accurate. He was speaking of the everyday prejudice that many of us engage in unconsciously. I don’t think pointing that out is prejudiced against whites; I think it’s accurate.
Did you hear that, Peggy.
“Of mocking the Bible while denying the passages that inspire terrorism today?”
That was me, Tina, not the O-man, only I did hot do either one of those things. Pointing out similarity between Christian and Islamic texts is not “mocking.” And I have never hid my dismay over some, and approval of other, aspects of Islam.
But I will say that you are still careening off the rails, that America’s weakness, dependency, and whatever exists largely in your head. You carry on like the world is gonna end tomorrow. It’s not.
No Libby, I was not referring to what you have said.
I am also not careening off the rails. Your liberal media has propped up what passes for a strong economy repeating the talking point, “it’s getting better” and defends a war about which the president keeps saying “we’re making progress,” while things get more and more dire with little progress to brag about. he’s killing the heads but as one falls another rises up.
What a joke after the way you all took Bush to task. We have more debt, more poverty, more joblessness, more retirees working past retirement, more college grads strapped with debt and living at Moms, more deadly chaos in more countries in the ME, Europe being overrun with refugees and economically imploding, more terrorists attacks, and you defiantly still hold your head up and accuse me of, “careening of the rails.” These are not things that “exists largely” in my “head.” These are real world realities that you have to be an idiot to deny.
You are a dishonest person, Libby. You play the activist game. The game is more important that people having jobs, people being safe, and people finally seeing an end to this Islamic terrorist threat!
Yes, I know The Donald told you the world was going to end tomorrow. But look around, it’s still here. I thought Christians were into counting blessings.
“Moe joblessness?” That’s just not true. Both employment and number of jobs are up under Obama.
The rest I’ll give you, though we disagree about the causes.
“WHO SAYS “ALL MUSLIMS ARE TERRORISTS?” Democrats do! They say it every time they accuse people on the right of doing so.”
Well, that doesn’t make sense. Not off to a very good start here.
“But is it true that Republicans and conservative media are accusing “all” Muslims of being terrorists?”
No. Who claims otherwise?
“People on the right don’t say, “all” Muslims are terrorists. We don’t think it, we don’t believe it, and we don’t imply it.”
Of course you don’t. Generalizations are wrong, which is why you would never make a generalization about what Muslims think or what people on the right think.
I get your meaning–you’re saying most of you don’t say this, and that your elected officials and Important People don’t say it. But certainly some “people on the right” have. They say it often, in the comments sections of places like Pamela Gellar’s website:
http://pamelageller.com/2016/01/muslim-refugee-arrested-in-houston-in-isis-jihad-terror-plot.html/
Obviously this one comment does not speak for all conservatives. But as someone who used to visit Atlas Shrugged to see what kind of crazy they’d bring, such comments are common. And they were only very rarely challenged by the other commenters there. So while it may not be a majority view in conservatism, it is tolerated in some of the more anti-Muslim corners.
“We are willing to be honest. We are willing to honestly describe the people that have organized as terrorists and the religious, social, and political Islamic ideology they believe guides them. And for that honesty and forthrightness we are labeled bigots and racists.”
No, you are labeled bigots and racists for supporting banning an entire religious group from immigrating to the country, and for making up statistics like 75% of Muslim men beat their wives.
“We are labeled as “evil other””
Doesn’t feel great, does it?
“The proof that our president is a disingenuous and contriving activist is in his own speech and behavior. Throughout his terms as president he has created straw man enemies…”
You know I really regret teaching you that term. I knew you’d use it wrong.
“police officers, white men, gun owners, and Christians are framed as enemies in this divisive administration.”
No. They’re not. Obama is, himself, a Christian. Obama has condemned individual police officers, in ways that were inappropriate for the office, and has discussed systemic issues in policing and in our gun laws. That is not the same as “making police officers and gun owners the enemy.”
“Obama was caught in an uncharacteristic moment of loose language. Referring to working-class voters in old industrial towns decimated by job losses, the presidential hopeful said: “They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant
“Obama took the occasion of the National Prayer breakfast to lecture Christians. Does that make him a bigot?”
Oh good lord. You are so selective. Go ahead, ignore the parts where he praised Christianity in that very same speech. You are lying by omission.
“Does he believe “all” Christians deserve his public derision? His remarks were uncalled for and specifically targeted Christians, “painting with a broad brush.” Are Christians the greater enemy in today’s world and should Christians be the focus of his concerns?”
He also condemned ISIS in that very same speech, in much harsher language than anything he said about Christians. Your ability to warp reality to suit your narrative is amazing.
” She too is willing to demean her opponents”
You are voting for Donald Trump! You are not against politicians demeaning their opponents. You are only against liberals demeaning their opponents.
I don’t have a lot of time right now but what I hear Chris saying is, ‘We’re nice people and you’re not because a few of you say things I don’t like and none of us on the left have ever said or done bad things like that and since I’m such a fabulous intellectual and you’re not, you need to listen to me…so sorry I taught you that word?…..
Are you kidding me? What an arrogant boob. spinning and spinning and spinning….
“none of us on the left have said or done bad things like that”
Sure we have. But we usually admit it.
The rest is a fairly accurate paraphrase.
OMG
Cut the flipping crap
Ethics? Morals? facts?
They story is unfolding, Update the FBI is questioning the wife now. She may have known.
BTW when trump went to the rally where the preacher said we should kill all gays stone them to death where were you?
This was an attack on LGBQ community, what do you have to say on that?
Don’t preach that hateful nonsense to me Dewey. That preacher did not say that during the event, which was organized by several religious leaders for the purpose of hearing the candidates speak. None of the candidates were aware of that pastors hateful opinion nor would they agree with it. And since you asked, I was right here in CA totally unaware of it until Chris did his usual guilt by association song and dance.
Where is the left on this attack? This club was a popular LGBT club. Muslims slaughter gays, throw them off buildings. They believe their religion demands this of them. It isn’t my rule, it is their rule! And yet the thing that animated the left following this monstrous attack was domestic politics: Blame Trump! Blame access to guns. Our gun laws did not fail. Our government’s vetting and security mechanisms failed! They failed because this president finds it easier to insult and demean his fellow Americans than he does the monstrous Islamic terrorist that targeted an LGBT club!
The usual expressions of sadness or compassion for those traumatized and slaughtered took a back seat to anti-Trump and anti-gun messaging. The promotion of Hillary Clinton and the gun agenda was more important than the suffering in that community. You don’t care about people; you use them for personal political benefit. Disgusting!
You on the left are a bunch of phonies. Your sympathies and loyalties are symbolic just as the presidents approach to destroying this enemy is symbolic and phony. The rise of ISIS, their ability to grow in strength and power, has been due to this presidents failures and it’s their greatest recruitment feature. The weak clumsy leadership in the Obama administration is directly responsible for the deaths in Orlando.
Ret. Lt. Gen McInerney this morning on Fox pointed to the failure of the Obama administration to fight this enemy with strength and resolve. He said the Middle East hasn’t been this unstable since before the Crusades. He said the Obama policy to scrub training manuals of references to Islam or Muslims has created weakness in the agencies that are charged with vetting and intelligence. Chaos and fighting in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Libya is causing the surge of refugees that make western nation more vulnerable to these so-called lone wolf attacks.
The people in Orlando died and were traumatized and injured because of the failures of President Obama…and because nobody in that club had a means to stop the terrorist. Not a single person had a weapon in that club to defend the LGBT’s and take that monster out!
“This was an attack on LGBQ community, what do you have to say on that?”
What I have to say about that is it was an attack on my fellow Americans and it matters not if they were a group of LGBT’s or a bunch of Kindergartners, a group at a homeless shelter or a group in a corporate boardroom.
And you should know. If Islam is practiced as a religion of peace and tolerance I have no objections. I reserve the right, indeed the obligation, to defend the people and nations of the world against the political militant Islamic warriors that are terrorizing the world in order to impose their religion and gain dominion over the world. The divider-in-chief refuses to acknowledge the threat and fight it with vigor for ALL people around the world.
Tina: “That preacher did not say that during the event”
I wish you wouldn’t misstate facts so confidently. Yes, the preacher DID say that at the event, minutes before endorsing Ted Cruz.
http://www.teenvogue.com/story/ted-cruz-lgbt-execution
“None of the candidates were aware of that pastors hateful opinion nor would they agree with it.”
They were aware of it; they were there when he said it. I know they don’t agree, but I think they had a duty to condemn it.
You say all the time that we condemn conservatives more strongly than we do terrorists. By your logic, shouldn’t Cruz have take a break from condemning Obama for a moment to condemn the man who just minutes before said gays should be put to death? Or is this one of those “opinions” you see no reason to object to?
“Our gun laws did not fail”
Just yesterday you falsely claimed that if the man had been on the terror watch list, he would have been unable to buy a gun. You were so confident of this you put it in all caps with exclamation points. When I showed you this was not true, and that people on the terror watch list can buy guns, you said nothing.
Do you believe people on the terror watch list should be legally prohibited from buying guns? If so, you are endorsing a new gun law.
You condemn liberals for politicizing the tragedy. Why are you not criticizing Trump for doing the same? He immediately congratulated himself for being “right” (even though the attacker was not an immigrant) and even implied Obama is sympathetic to the terrorists. People on the right and left condemned him. You hold a double standard which says it’s fine for Trump to politicize the tragedy and blame Obama and our immigration laws, but not OK for liberals to politicize it in ways they think make sense. You’re even politicizing the event by suggesting if the patrons were armed they could have defended themselves.
By your logic you are just as guilty as those you are attacking. You too have spent more time critiquing your political opponents than the attacker himself. And that’s a perfectly rational choice! No one important agrees with this attacker. Condemning the attacker is so obvious as to be almost redundant. So you save your outrage for those you believe to be politicizing the tragedy. Fine. That makes sense. What doesn’t make sense is the double standard of you attacking people for doing exactly the same thing you are.
I hope everyone will pay close attention to what our presidential candidates are saying and don’t listen to what the media claims they said. I have found misquotes on Hillary and Donald. Media today is more bias than ever, watch out. Get the facts before reaching a judgement for anyone on either side of the fence.
Good advise Jack, maybe , just maybe it will penetrate through to the misinformed voters that knee jerk vote to the sound bite bias. The last two weeks of this Champaign are really going to get nasty , especially from the Left!.
The most resent political commercial I saw was spot on though, comparing Hillary lies to that of Bills. It really needs to be admitted those two will do or say anything, if only to serve their interests, not that of America.
Argue all you want about Trumps style, his creditably and honesty (weather you like how he says it or not) still is superior to Hillary’s, especially in working to resolve the failures of Big Zero and other liberals.
Is Hillary Presidential material?………..to be honest , not so much!
Harold: “Argue all you want about Trumps style, his creditably and honesty (weather you like how he says it or not) still is superior to Hillary’s”
Nope. They’re both liars, but Donald lies more. And it’s not even close.
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/
Top Republicans are condemning Trump for politicizing the tragedy:
House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (Wis.) denounced Trump for trying to rally support for his anti-Muslim policies, while others castigated Trump for the accusations he has lobbed at Obama.
“I do not think a Muslim ban is in our country’s interest,” Ryan told reporters. “I do not think it is reflective of our principles, not just as a party but as a country.” He called for “a security test, not a religious test” for immigrants…
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who has praised Trump at times for his willingness to shake up politics and recently met with the mogul, expressed serious unease Tuesday with how Trump responded to a national tragedy.
“Traditionally, it is a time when people rally around our country, and it’s obviously not what’s occurred, and it’s very disappointing,” Corker said.
Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), a leading national security hawk, said he had “run out of adjectives” for Trump. “I don’t think he has the judgment or the temperament, the experience to deal with what we are facing,” said Graham, who does not currently support the mogul.
Graham, like other Republicans, took issue with Trump’s apparent suggestions in Monday interviews that Obama may identify with the radical Muslim terrorists. Obama “either is not tough, not smart, or he’s got something else in mind,” Trump told Fox News.
Trump expanded on that Tuesday, saying in an emailed response to questions from the Associated Press: “President Obama claims to know our enemy, and yet he continues to prioritize our enemy over our allies and, for that matter, the American people.”
Graham said that Trump “seems to be suggesting that the president is one of ‘them.’ I find that highly offensive. I find that whole line of reasoning way off base. My problems with President Obama are his policy choices.”
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who faces a challenging reelection bid, also called Trump’s insinuations about Obama “offensive.”
…Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), an Air National Guard major and leading House GOP voice on national security issues, broke sharply with Trump.
“I guess I appreciate Mr. Trump’s fieriness in talking about it, but you don’t do it by alienating the very people that we need, and those are moderate Muslims,” he said. “We have to use the folks that frankly are not radicalized, which is the vast majority of Muslims, to win this war.”
…But by this week — after a series of fiery rallies in which he called out enemies by name and then his response to Orlando — many Republicans were left scratching their heads.
Lanhee Chen, a GOP foreign policy expert who served as policy director on Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign, called Trump’s Monday speech a “huge wasted opportunity.”
“What he has said overall about foreign policy is very troubling,” said Chen, who said he has many issues with the mogul but does not consider himself part of the “Never Trump” wing of the GOP.
Chen said Trump needs to “start defining what his presidency would look like” in “more than just a few sound bites.” But he added: “I’m not holding my breath.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/top-republicans-join-obama-in-condemning-trumps-words/2016/06/14/fb1619c0-325e-11e6-95c0-2a6873031302_story.html
I ask again, and will continue to ask until it is answered:
Can you cite any national security, foreign policy or immigration experts who support Trump’s proposal to temporarily halt all Muslim immigration?
Chris, I don’t know if I can, I’m not really a very nice person, and it’s so much fun.
But I’m starting to think we shouldn’t push so hard. It is all kinda blowing up in their faces.
The “RINOs” are, in fact, Republicans. They … are something else.