“WE’RE AT WAR: GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD”
Say what you will about Donald Trump, but the fluff and bluster of the GOP frontrunner – on display this week via his controversial call for a “total and complete shutdown” of Muslim immigration into the United States – is buttressed by an iron determination to never back down.
In keeping with that philosophy, Trump is doubling down on his Muslim immigration ban – telling CNN during a contentious interview that he stands by his proposal and doesn’t care what the “Republican” establishment thinks of it.
“You’re going to have many more World Trade Centers if you don’t solve it – many, many more and probably beyond the World Trade Center,” Trump told CNN host Chris Cuomo. “They want our buildings to come down; they want our cities to be crushed.”
“They are living within our country,” Trump said of radical Islamic terrorists. “And many of them want to come from outside our country.”
Pressed repeatedly by Cuomo regarding the feasibility and constitutionality of his plan, Trump had a characteristically blunt response.
“We’re at war – get it through your head,” he said.
Trump’s proposal has been assailed by the GOP establishment – which months ago blasted him for making controversial comments about certain Mexican immigrants. The immigration furor resulted in Trump skyrocketing in the polls.
We wonder if this dust-up will lead to a similar surge?
Two points of clarification: Trump said his proposed ban on Muslim immigration would be “temporary” – lasting “until the country’s representatives can figure out what’s going on.”
In a separate interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos, Trump also cleared up some confusion by saying the ban would not apply to U.S. citizens who are currently overseas – as one of his campaign aides incorrectly stated.
“If a person is a Muslim, goes overseas and comes back, they can come back,” he said. “They’re a citizen. That’s different.”
Obviously we’ll have much more on Trump’s latest anti-PC broadside soon …
I’m glad this guy is around to bring the racists into the light and expose they’re hate. He like a dumber, less charasmatic wannabe Hitler. Why would a site claiming to be libertarian support this fascist doiche?
You can’t expose hate much more than Obama does for Whites and Jews! not
He is half white and over half his adminstrstion is Jewish. Try again, moron.
I hereby invoke Godwin’s law.
You are declared the loser.
Where were you when GrandTango was here?
I didn’t know Islam was a race.
Oh yeah, they’re bigots too. Thanks for bringing that up.
You failed the first time irrelevantly bringing up “racists” and “hate”, you didn’t need to bring up “bigots”, too, in order to prove how clueless you are and how easily you soak up what the media feeds you.
Trump’s supporters cheer from racist, bigoted and unconstitutional postions everytime Trump offers one up. The videos from the rallies don’t lie. In any case, in our popular culture Trump supporters are seem as dumb, white and hateful. That will be the preception in the future too. ‘Trump supporter’ will even be shirthand for dumb, white and hateful.
Here’s an example…
“What’s up with Terry? He’s a little strange?”
“Oh yeah. Terry? He was a Trump Supporter.”
I’m so glad GrandTango endorsed me last election, I wouldn’t have won the presidency without him!
I’m so disappointed he wasn’t elected to ward off those that terryfy me.
Will, this incessant pandering to the wingnuts has greatly diminished “Fits” value. Hit reset.
Pandering to the wingnuts is the only way to get paid for Republican operatives these days. Duck Dynasty is old news. Gotta spend those government checks on something!
Careful, from a previous article here hitting reset appears to mean nuke the brown people.
Trump also cleared up some confusion by saying the ban would not apply to U.S. citizens who are currently overseas – as one of his campaign aides incorrectly stated.
And if he winds, what mistakes will his aides make then?
Good. It would be a shame if all those Muslims, who currently serve in our Armed Forces, could return from deployment fighting the terrorists. Trump really thinks things through.
What’s he going to do about the Muslim royalty that lease NYC residential suites from him? Evict them? Or those wealthy Muslims in Dubai and Qatar that he is doing business with and allowing to slap the Trump name on their ventures? Will they be barred from access into the states too? What the Heck will happen to the NYC UN building – will it be temporarily closed?
Or the ones from Dubai that finance his crap.
Probably nothing any worse than Harff saying that giving terrorists jobs will cause them to change their evil ways.
Generally when we are “at war” with someone we are mainly against their government and army, not anyone who hails from that country. Even so, you can’t even declare war against an entire religion for the actions of a few extremists. When did Congress or a sitting President declare war against Islam as a whole?
Donald Trump should be thrown in a cell next to GWB and Dick Cheney.
You’re thinking too much. Do what Trump supporters do and cut that shit out.
I heard they are going to repeal and replace ObamaCare. They are going to take away everything, however they will allow free lobotomies at the taxpayer’s expense for anyone suffering from Intelligent Reasoning Skills Syndrome.
I didn’t know restricting immigration (practiced by all countries throughout world history) was the same as declaring war.
Then tell Trump that.
Do any other governments in the world restrict entry into their countries based on religion? I don’t know if any do. And Donald’s solution to enforcing this ban is dumb – just ask the person if they are Muslim? Of course, an Islamist terrorist will sure answer that question honestly.
Maybe they should. Germany, France, Belgium, and the UK, to name a few, are countries that are being invaded by muslims like a plague of locusts, also by invitation of their respective governments. They are responsible for numerous rapes of the local (infidel) females. They form “Shariah patrols” which go out and intimidate women who do not dress to their standards, people who drink alcohol, or people who gamble. Is this really what you wish to see in your city or your neighborhood? Will you be happy if/when your wife, sister, mother, daughter, is gang raped by a group of these peace-loving men? Maybe yourself? Right now, Trump is the only one in the running who is talking sense.
We still have antiquated blue laws in this county. And judging by some of the letters to the editor in my hometown paper, the conservative Christians would sure like to dictate how everyone here lives.
That is true. I have criticized the Xtian churches and religious nutters more than a few times for their intolerence of anyone who doesn’t think what they think, say what they say, and do what they do. I often find the churches and their political activity to be irritating on a level comparable to a boil on a delicate part of the body where it may be frequently pinched by underwear or similar.
THAT SAID, the Christians have had about 600 years of evolutionary progress in being kinder and gentler with their bullshit, over the muslims. For the most part, they have ceased with physical torture and murder of Witches during the last 200 years. Not to say that there aren’t those among their numbers who wouldn’t gladly resume such barbaric practices if sufficiently motivated by a charismatic enough preacher, but such is not presently part of large scale accepted church doctrine.
Unlike current day Christians, muslims do embrace torture and murder of people who do not adequately enough follow their dogmas. This is not only church culture, but regularly enforced in many majority muslim countries, such as Saudi Arabia. Such evils are rarely ever vocally condemned by even so-called “moderate” muslims.
Given a choice between living in a predominately Christian country and a predominately muslim country, I will choose the former, any day of the week.
Yes, Israeli citizens are banned from entering Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Something has to be done, getting into this country and staying here seems to be accomplishment that requires very little effort.
While Trump’s statements may be extreme to some, it at least, brings the immigration problems into focus. If left up to the current administration, nothing in the immigration debate would change, while most blame would continue to be placed on certain US groups and citizens.
In certain debates, sometimes taking an extreme view leaves plenty of room for compromise and working back to the center. Trump has a long way to go to get back to the center, and so does the Obama administration.
Both side need to compromise.
People just can’t stop sticking their noses down at grassroots voters. They see these Trump rallies and they can’t help but see it as nothing more than a Klan or white power rally, because that’s the only way they are conditioned to see things. They will never see the problems for what they are, only as means to bait those with solutions into showing numerous mythical -isms.
The KKK and America’s largest Neo-Nazi group both endorsed Trump. It isn’t because he embraces inclusiveness. You are the company you keep. And Trump supporters have some mighty shitty and hateful company. It is what it is.
Actually the KKK endorsed Ben Carson. Nice try.
Oh, the ex-leader and still racist David Duke endorsed Trump. My bad. Looks like the KKK has options this cycle. Yeah, they support the GOP. What does that tell you?
Tells me nothing. They typically endorse based on policy. In this election circle, they are doing so based on immigration. Their reasons for it are different than most Republicans. They are also rape. If you are against rape, does that mean we can make a link between you and the KKK?
Watching how a Trump supporter’s brain works interesting. The powers of denial are very strong and logic left town along time ago.
“Watching how an Obama supporter’s brain works is interesting. The powers of denial are very strong and logic left town along time ago.”
There, fixed it for ya.
At least you can read. Are you one of the very few Trump supporters who attended college?
Too bad he can’t make up an original comeback and has to resort to using someone else’s.
No, it’s called illustrating absurdity by using your opposition’s own absurd logic. Anybody can come up with nonsensical one-liners and pot-shots.
No, no, I’m pretty sure it’s just being an unoriginal hack who can’t think of a better retort, but you’re welcome to call it whatever you want.
There is no “better retort” to what was already an absurd retort. Arguing sensibly with some of you idiots does not work because there is nothing sensible about any of your responses.
We are saying nothing sensible, yet you respond. How droll. At least that was more original than your other comebacks. You should give up while you’re behind though.
I think I’ve already demonstrated I’m way ahead of you. I’m not really responding directly to anything, that’s the point. I’m illustrating the absurdity by being absurd. Hopefully, you understand that this time and I don’t have to keep explaining it.
You are the gift that keeps on giving. You’re about as delusional as GrandTango with your self image. Unfortunately your originality tanked once again, so I’m done drawing from the lulz well.
So, that’s three times you’ve used the same argument, but strike three on me, huh? GT used to constantly complain about my unoriginality, no matter what I said and despite his redundant rants. You two have lots in common.
Dude, only idiots keep responding after they’ve been owned.
That pitcher worked your ass.
Pot, meet kettle.
Mike Tyson also endorsed Trump, and Tyson is a muslim.
This isn’t even a solution. They are able to radicalize people already over here, born and raised here. Unless you round them all up you haven’t solved anything.
So you’re saying rounding them all up would be the only solution?
If you are declaring Islam as the enemy, and every Muslim a suspect, then yes, that is the only solution that people with that mindset ever come up with. It will come slowly but surely from people like Trump and his supporters.
Policies that would horrify most sane people qualify as Facebook memes for the right, you don’t even have to stroll through that many to find them either.
You said “they are able to radicalize people already over here, born and raised”, therefore you recognize them as the threat. You are basically saying then that we either shouldn’t do anything or we should “round them all up”. Those are your only two options if you believe what you say.
Not every Muslim is susceptible to radicalized ideology, but the rare ones that are tend to be pretty hard to single out. For that reason if you are going to talk about potential threats, you are going to have to look at all of them as potential threats.
We already perform domestic spying, which has already spread beyond suspected Muslim extremists. Now we are talking about banning Muslim immigrants. When that fails to stop home grown Muslim extremists from committing acts of terror, I’m sure another hair brained policy will prop up to treat Muslims even worse. It will continue to degrade until we are rounding them up.
So yes, it is going to be an all or nothing thing. Nothing we do will effectively stop radical Islamic terrorism except rounding up every last one. If you peruse enough right wing news sites’ comments section you will find no shortage of “grassroots” calling for just that.
(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate
8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens
Compromise what, the values that this country was founded on? Blacklist an entire religion from coming here because occasionally a whacko that’s already over here shoots up a holiday party? How long will this de facto ban last? Indefinitely? Infinitely? What other religions or “risky demographics” should be banned?
Good question. If you have any “other religions” or “risky demographics” that you know of, I’ll be happy to get on board that if it also helps increase our security.
Radicalized Christians from SC. Like the one who shot up the PP in Colorado.
Basically, white men. They carryout most mass shootings in my area.
When are you people gonna quit making this stupid argument? It doesn’t even remotely fit into our discussion. Yeah, if you wonna find all five loners who live in a trailer in the mountains and have a small semblance of affinity for some supposed faith, then go find them and kill them. I’ll be fine with that.
You asked for other “risky demographics”? I live in Colorado. We’ve had some bad luck with white men and guns killing many people at a time. There have been two in the last couple months in my town alone. If you’re all about safety, Why is it wrong to point out that undebatable fact?
Muslims are “the enemy” to Christians so it is OK to discriminate against them and rob them of their rights. Same with gays. It’s easy to dehumanize someone in the name of God because religion is hard wired into most people to override compassion for others.
Christians are “the enemy” to liberals, so it is OK to discriminate against them and rob them of their rights. Same with all white people. It’s easy to dehumanize them in the name of liberalism because liberalism is hard wired into most people to override compassion for others.
There, fixed it for ya.
When they want to legislate a woman’s right to choose away? Yeah, that makes them adversaries.
When they want to pass constitutional amendments barring gays and lesbians from having the same rights everyone else has? Yeah, that makes them enemies.
Donating to charities and helping the needy, wishing well on those you disagree with, being respectful of people who have different beliefs, those are Christian qualities. I don’t see any reason to call people like that an enemy. If anything I’d love to have ten times this many Christians around, they are awesome.
Unfortunately those Christians are drowned out by the extremists in their religion. Extremism isn’t good in any religion I guess.
Christians are not the enemy of liberals or conservatives. Only those who purport to speak for Christ are the enemy of anyone. There is nothing of Christ about the hate that has arisen among the so called Christians of this country. Christians hate no one. Christians fear no one in this world. Christ did not turn away those of other religions or those who might do him harm. He did not put his personal safety ahead of the needs of the helpless. He forgave those who tortured and killed him. Please stop trying to usurp the name Christian unless you are going to act like a Christian. A Christian would be that guy going among the Syrian Refugees with food, water and supplies.
I didn’t usurp anything, Mary. You have tried this line of thinking before. You are usurping the conversation. I’m not making any points about what Christians should or should not be. I’m pointing out the hypocrisy. You come from the Emergent movement of Christian thinking that says it’s all about the deeds/good works and not about truth/dogma. I agree with the former but I disagree that it does not also involve the latter.
And exactly what dogma have I overlooked? I am what I believe to be a traditional Christian, who tries to ask what would Christ have me do. Christians do not do good works to be saved, Christians do good works because they are saved. It is what fulfills them. It brings joy to their soul and spreads the news of Christ love. Unlike fear and hate.
I don’t disagree with any of that, except your definition of fear and hate. You think that someone taking a hard stand on any type of policy position is doing it out of “fear and hate”. You can’t do that. Either it’s right or it’s wrong.
When refugees come to us seeking help and we turn them away knowing it may mean their death because we fear some of them may seek to do us harm, we cannot argue we have not acted out fear; we cannot argue we have done good; we cannot argue we have acted as Christians; and we certainly cannot say we have spread the news of Christ’s love. So what have we done right?
The article is not even remotely Christian. Glenn Beck is a hate monger. He sells hate to those who want to buy it. He is no different than the prosperity profits who preach god makes good people rich and bad people poor. His teachings are false, and in all Christian love I warn you to avoid them, because there is no more of Christ in Glenn Beck than there is in GT. They are products of each other.
You are laughably far off on this. First, this article isn’t even by Glenn Beck. Yes, it is his site but he is not involved in it, not does this article reflect his opinion. Regardless, what evidence do you have that he “sells hate” or advocates the prosperity gospel? I don’t agree with Glenn Beck (he’s a Mormom, not a Christian) but you are just buying the non-Christian liberals’ caricatures of him. Please read the article and all of it. It answers all the questions you previously raised and your distorted view of how Christians should approach policy (like the Syrian refugees).
Well I guess some of us will have to be happy that Christ did not choose this route when he prayed in Gethsemane prior to the crucifixion. I can hear the pray you would have prayed.
Dear father, I think its time for me to come home now. While most of these people can be saved, I think there may be few bad apples down here and I think they may intend to do me harm. I think we need to spend a few millennia reviewing this before we decide if any of these people should be let into your Kingdom.
Lets just say a lot of American Christians don’t have a pay it forward mentality. Does that make you a bad Christian? I am thinking, yes.
If that’s your response, then you didn’t even read the article. It completely rebuts your frivolous claim about what or how I would pray. You also did not provide any evidence to support your claim about Glenn Beck. You are only getting it from liberals, just as your getting your “Christian” philosophy straight from the pages of liberalism, not the scriptures.
Also, there is no such thing as a bad Christian. You are either a Christian or you are not. Those led by the spirit are certainly not immune from sin, but they do not have a distorted worldview that leads them to either ignore direct commands of scripture or to do something that they don’t spell out. Yes, Jesus calls us to help the less fortunate, but He doesn’t dictate government policy (that’s what this is about), and He doesn’t prescribe exactly how we ought to care for these particular less fortunate, in this particular situation, at this particular moment in history. Christians can have differing views on this. I understand Christians who say “let them come,” but I cannot tolerate Christians who tell other Christians they’re bad or evil or less Christian for cautiously considering the situation based on national gov’t security policy. Have you even seen the videos of the havoc and destructions that the “refugees” have wreaked in places like Hungary, Germany, and Finland? This has nothing to do with “helping the less fortunate” and everything to do with protecting our families. If we are going to in fact bring in refugees, I believe we ought to prioritize young orphans first, then widows, then families. The problem is that what has happened so far in Europe tell us that most of these refugees are not in these categories are well off males seeking to infiltrate another land. Your naivete in believing we will be “helping widows, orphans, and children” will lead to the same disastrous consequences that Europe is facing. Regardless, you are not arguing for being more Christian in this, you are arguing for the gov’t to act a moral agent in this. That’s all this is about. You turning this into a statement of missionary philosophy is off the mark. This has nothing to do with that or about who should be presented the gospel or not. A “pay it forward mentality” is irrelevant.
I’m sorry, did you not just send me to an article telling people they are not “bad Christians” because they want to turn away thousands of innocent refugees because a few may be evil and intend them harm. If they are not bad does that not imply they are “good Christians.” So I am not the one who started the characterization. You are.
I don’t give a flip about government policy. I care about Christian policy. And if you think Christ was not specific as to how you were to help people in need; I suggest you re-read Matthew 25 verses 31-46. Because it sounds very specific to me. Especially when dealing with refugees.
As for protecting our families. I know you are afraid. But that is the emotion Christians must fight most. Fear leads to hate. Fear leads us to shun those we should be helping. Christ had an answer for that as well. ” A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. It is enough for the disciple to be like his teacher, and the servant like his master. . . . And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.” Read that in connection with Matthew.
As for there are other things we can be doing. What are those? What have you advocated we do for these unfortunate people? They are starving. Their children are dying at sea. Winter is upon them and they have no clothes, food or adequate shelter. They have asked for help from us. Yet, I have heard nothing but fear and anger from the Christian right. I have heard noting but protect our own.
The article is responding to the concept being projected of a “bad Christian”. It’s not making a case for one side the debate being good or the other being bad, just responding to the concept that opponents (like you) have come up with that Christians who think a certain way about policy are “bad Christians”. Like I said, if you had read the article we wouldn’t have to keep re-hashing this. The article is basically responding to people like you who characterize that way. Maybe you just misunderstood and that’s why you said it, but you needed to read the article before misrepresenting what I meant.
As for fear, you don’t have a pulse if you don’t fear evil. That’s all we’re talking about. That’s not the fear that Christians must fight. It’s not the fear Jesus is talking about. He is not saying you need to suppress the natural fear that will inevitably come over you if (hypothetically speaking) armed robbers invade your house and put a gun to your head, only that there is no ultimate fear in death because of the hope that lays before us eternally. You don’t deliberately put yourself in fearful situations if there is an alternative that will accomplish the same goal that you are seeking of reaching people for the gospel. That’s a false martyr’s mentality. Fear can be healthy if it leads you to take precautions that will spare your life and cause you to be more productive for the gospel’s sake here on earth. Or if you are a Father who wants to raise your kids to fear the Lord. Fear does not lead to hate. ISIS doesn’t fear anything, yet they are the biggest hate group on planet earth right now.
I advocate that we meet the needs of these people and give them the gospel, everything else is meaningless. The only way that can be accomplished is removing earthly obstacles. It’s not as simple as you want to make it out to be that we go over there or just bring them all here. That’s just naïve fantasy. I wish that could be done, but there’s nothing sensible about that. Not to mention, we have plenty of people here in the US with those same needs who we need to focus on and it’s not even certain that the refugees want to come here. Your claims that their “children are dying at sea” “they have no clothes” “winter is upon them” are nothing more than ISIS propaganda that is being spoon fed to this country by our media. They are not true. They don’t even have harsh winters in the middle east and, while they “have asked for help from us”, they have not necessarily asked to come here. There may be a few that do, but for the most part they just want a secure life in their homeland. I absolutely advocate we assist them with that once the region is stabilized (Lord willing it will be at some point). It simply can’t be done until that’s the case, otherwise it’s nothing more than a suicide mission on the part of our people. There is no “fear and anger” coming from anybody. We’re just tired of facing the same evil and being duped/propagandized into believing that we can’t do anything about it because we don’t want to marginalize, offend, or single out any group of people. This is called wisdom. There is nothing Christian or non-Christian about what you believe in regards to what the policy of the United States to be. You can say that you don’t give a flip about it, but that’s what this conversation was about from the get go. This is a Caesar discussion and Christians should “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” in this case and not pretend that this has implications for our Christian mission.
This is a Caesar discussion and Christians should “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” in this case and not pretend that this has implications for our Christian mission.
Really, Christians have no business supporting our government helping these unfortunate people but it is ok for Christians to oppose our government helping these people?
What we advocate for our government to do or not do has nothing to do with our obligations as Christians? We should stay out of it as Christians. Let the government do what it wants. Its not part of our Christian mission.
Do you support the concept that freedom of religion is a government free of influence by the religious? Do you believe you can divorce your political views from your views as a Christian? Do you believe it is ok for you to advocate for your government to act in an un-Christian manner but claim you would not do it personally? That you can support all kind of evil through government while saying you opposed it personally.
Do you feel the same way about abortion? I.E. if its the government’s position that is Caesar acting and we should not take a position one way or the other? I think I am beginning to detect a lot of hypocrisy here.
No, you are really just falling further down the rabbit hole of misunderstanding. You and I just disagree that, in this instance, that what the government is doing is actually “helping these unfortunate people”. I don’t believe that our gov’t is able to and I don’t believe they have the ability to ensure there are no unintended consequences from doing so. If you think so, fine. But I’m not abdicating my responsibility as a follower of Christ by not believing that. I believe my reasons are well informed. They certainly aren’t based on “fear and anger” as you want to misrepresent it to be. I only advocate Christians do the obligations of Christians, not the gov’t. That’s not to say that you can divorce your political views from your views as a Christian. For instance, I don’t believe that the government should permit the killing of the unborn. However, I don’t base my public advocating that it should be outlawed on the basis that I’m a Christian, but on the basis that it’s wrong. The fact that I’m a Christian and that it informs my belief that abortion is wrong is irrelevant. I believe it’s wrong because it is the taking of a life and that is the ONLY reason for addressing it as far as public policy. That is still rendering unto Caesar because I’m not arguing that I should be listened to because I’m a Christian, but because I believe in right versus wrong (and I would argue on principle that killing the unborn is wrong). I don’t get to advocate theocratic rule and impose my views on the electorate, instead I use reason and logic. The same reason and logic that informs us that rape and murder are wrong (and therefore outlawed). People can disagree with me on abortion, but they can’t dismiss what my opinion on the basis that I’m a Christian. I’m either right (and it should be outlawed) or I’m wrong (and it should be permitted). On the same token, just because I believe in the gospel doesn’t mean I can advocate a law that the gov’t call on everyone to Christ and be baptized into the faith. That would be great if everyone did, but it’s certainly not the government’s job to make everyone Christian. It’s Christians job to give the gospel, not the gov’t. Does that mean Christian are divorcing their political views from their views as a Christian? Of course not. It means they understand when a distinction should be made.
I am sorry, I think you are just making excuses for your fear and distaste for Muslims. Of course what the government is doing is helping these unfortunate people, they are dieing. They need food, shelter and clothing. By turning them away some will die; and you and those who advocated for turning them away must accept some responsibility for their death. You might want to ask forgiveness for that as you sit down for your Christmas dinner filled with enough food to feed 100 refugees and as you pass out your presents to those who want for nothing. But then again, maybe you feel if they are going to die, best they be about it and decrease the surplus population.
And no one is advocating for theocratic rule. Helping the poor and helpless is not just the Christian thing to do, its the right thing to do. You have used no reason or logic at all. You say you don’t believe the government should permit the killing of the unborn, because it is wrong, not because you are a Christian. Well allowing people to die when the government could prevent it is also wrong. So why does this wrong not bother you? Surely the man who allows 100 children to starve when he could prevent it is, at least as evil as the man who kills one unborn.
Whether you consider us a Christian nation or not, these refugees do, and this is what they will remember about our Christian nation, This
When they should be remembering this.
You’re just making stuff up now. My “fear and distaste for Muslims” exists only by way of your warped presuppositions. If I have any fear or distaste for Muslims, it’s because they are walking in darkness. That is it. Regardless, it’s irrelevant. You can paint this as being between welcoming refugees and turning them away, but I’ve already explained why it’s not that simple. If it were, I would be going to Syria myself and forsaking the comfort of my earthly life here in the US. It’s not that simple, but if all you’re going to see in my position is an “excuse for fear and distaste for Muslims” then we have nothing to discuss further.
It’s your job as a Christian to help the poor, so if you’re not doing so then you’re a hypocrite. It isn’t the gov’t’s job to do it for you while you sit in the comfort of your own home. The gov’t does not have the capacity to help all the world’s poor and even if it did, it would be at the expense of taxpayer dollars. Those taxpayer dollars could be better spent in the hands of missionaries or charitable organizations who would be far more efficient and effective at aiding the Syrians.
Lest we forget, though the Romans crucified Christ, the one who turned him over was none other than one of his own disciples, Judas.
Christians need to look among their own ranks as there are many evils lurking in them. It is the same with any group of people. Thinking those who think like you are above such things is folly.
The way I see it, I’m far more likely to be shot by a crazy white guy with an assault rifle than I am a Muslim gone crazy.
There’s some churches in Charleston who probably feel the same way.
You liberals love anecdotes. Those outlier anecdotes are threats, but pointing out epidemic patters more likely to put you at risk is “profiling”, “racist”, etc.
Hey, saying I’m afraid of white people is just the reverse of what people like you do. You’re just too PC to admit that white people perform mass shootings. Clearly you don’t have a problem saying other races or religions can be violent.
That would be 45 percent, which exceeds non-whites’ 37 percent share of the population.
Of the last 30 mass killings, 11 were committed by non-whites — right at the 37 percent mark.
And what if we go all the way back to 1982? We then have 66 mass killings in which the races of the perpetrators were known, and 22 of them, or one-third, were at the hands of non-whites. Note here that America’s demographics have been changing, with non-whites comprising only about 20 percent of the population in 1982; thus, if we consider an approximate average non-white population of 28.5 percent during the 31-year period in question, it appears that, again, mass murderers are slightly disproportionately non-white.
In other words, there is no evidence whatsoever that mass killings are a characteristically white phenomenon.
And there never was
Going back to 1982 what percentage of the mass killers have been Muslim?
Quit changing the subject.
Hey, you’re the one dividing mass murderers by racial factors, why not religious ones?
Remember kids, be afraid of Farooqs, not McVeighs!
“You’re just too PC to admit that white people perform mass shootings”. That’s I responded to and that was met with the come back of “what percentage of the mass killers have been Muslim?” Who’s “the one dividing mass murderers by racial factors”?
Worldwide, they are the undisputed leader.
And it is headed this way.
“When are you people gonna quit making this stupid argument?”
They can’t because their statements are self accusatory.
I remember some famous guy saying something about sacrificing liberty for security…
He’s dead and a loser! Only losers die.
Don’t want to fade away into obscurity when you die like some loser? Download a virtual copy of yourself into one of my Trump Server Towers! I have the finest Indian tech support guys monitoring the server 24/7 for pennies a day to make sure your virtual existence stays, well, maybe not alive, but well!
As long as I’m a non-loser vegetable! Sounds great!
What part of this do you not understand?
“Trump has a long way to go to get back to the center,”
“Both side need to compromise.”
Try reading with a little comprehension, works every time.
Such a position is really not the least bit controversial. Of course, if you are not willing to accept the concept of Islamic Jihad – and/or if you are unwilling to accept that Islamic Terrorists have been targeting us for the past decade – then Trump’s position might seem controversial. However, for the rest of us, it simply makes common sense.
The really exceptional part of Trump’s proposal is that it is the only consideration that might actually force non-Jihadist U.S. Muslims to confront the problem within their religion/association, which in turn leads to less generalizing, not more. That’s the part that makes Trump’s plan unique.
It is not the extremist elements within the Amish community trying to hide terrorist cells within local communities. If it were the Amish, we’d be having a similar proposal about a prudent pause – and probably without even one tenth the controversy. Get that? There wouldn’t even be one tenth of the controversy, which makes the incessant bantering of “racist”, “bigot”, “Islamophobe” so pathetic and so insufferable.
You lifted that straight from Sundance’s ass aka blog didn’t you? .
It is not the extremist elements within the Amish community trying to hide terrorist cells within local communities. Nor is it Mr. and Mrs Jorgenson being willfully blind to Isaac the bomb-maker’s presence inside their church. If it were the Amish, we’d be having a similar proposal about a prudent pause – and probably without even one tenth the controversy.
Actually, that line of thought is not original to Sundance, either. Nor does he claim it to be. Nor do I claim it to be mine. It’s not about whether it’s original, but whether the point drawn from the original fits or not. Had I quoted directly, I would have just cited.
I read the comments over there from time to time – if they aren’t going after the blacks (the main boogeymen), they’re on the Muslims and democrats. Bunch of bigoted conspiracy buffoons.
For claiming not to be a racist, Daniel sure does figuratively hangout with A LOT racists.
I had to threaten him with law enforcement.He is a crazed stalker.
Hitting the road for ALL those keeping track.Columbia.Myrtle Beach and Florida next three weeks.
If anybody misses me please email me at firstname.lastname@example.org
It was awesome how you got outted and now you hardly comment.
Man, was it Rocky? Whoever? They slapped the living hell out of you and you’ve never been the same. You got epically shamed.
Really, this place had been getting boring lately until that gem was unearthed. God bless whoever dug that one out.
pogo is definitely butthurt over the departure of his fellow masturbatory partner Tango. It’s funny as hell.
Great point. I guess I stand corrected. I will make sure to check my white privilege next time.
Yeah, I know, you’re the same one that’s shared these thoughts before. You get it off of the one looney left wing blog that claims to have outed Sundance. BTW, “going after blacks” is a nice misrepresentation. If you consider the fact that the media incessantly makes everything about race, you would know why that’s a topic of conversation over there.
No, one of Sundance’s old rightwing posting pals outed him. The majority of his crime articles are about black crime. And usually have nothing to do with the “BGI” a favored Treehouse topic. He rarely posts about the atrocities committed by white people. Sundance knows his audience.
Chuck Johnson is a kook, everyone knows that. He is not one of his “old rightwing posting pals”.
His stories regarding black crime have everything to do with the BGI narrative that runs rampant throughout the media. THAT is the reason you see them on there, because they are covered up in the mainstream media to protect the BGI narrative, while atrocities committed by white people are trumpeted (not to mention rare). That’s your problem. You can’t do anything but see it as giving fodder to a supposed racist audience, despite the fact that it’s merely shining a light on what the media wants to keep out of view and destroying the myths inherent within racial politics.
Wasn’t Chuck Johnson. Someone from his Hillbuzz and Tea Party Patriot days. Whatever you say about BGI – I see it as another excuse to complain about black people.
Of course you do, that was my point. You are incapable of seeing things as being between truth and lies. You only see things as either overtly racist or subconsciously racist. Those are the only two options in your mind.
No true racist needs excuses to complain about black people, they would just do it. You trying to find some racist element under every rock is the problem we have today.
has plagiarism reared its ugly head?
Why didn’t you read my response below before commenting?
His brain cells have already taken quite a beating reading your other comments?
I know. They’re tough to follow when I constantly have to correct obfuscations and misrepresentations.
Must not be hard to keep your balance on that high horse of yours.
I think this is like the sixth or seventh instance on just this forum of someone trying to change the subject with a diversionary statement when they’ve got nothing left.
I never engaged you with the plagiarism claim and Sundance, fuckface, but someone else is actively discussing it with you if you care to respond to them.
Number one, I didn’t say you did. Someone else also tried to bring Muslims into the conversation after I debunked claims regarding whites and mass shootings. Number two, I have responded regarding the plagiarism. Number three, fuckface is the juvenile stuff reserved for Grand Tango/TARevolution. Why don’t you join him in getting the hell out of here?
God damn, it’s funny watching people who think they are smart try and make sense of Trump’s ridulous postions. You can almost smell the smoke coming out of their ears!
Keep it up!
Thank you for that point by point rebuttal.
They have nothing but name-calling and personal attacks.
Trump has opened up the debate, which has been needed.
Trump’s stance on immigration will not be accepted, neither will Obama’s current stance.
Trump has placed this issue up front and pointed out some weaknesses in the system. Obama is basically defending the current system. The answer is in the middle,
Trump is saying things that will never happen in America. The fact you think that these things are open to debate is hilarious. Maybe you guys can debate amoungst yourselves, but most Americans are even taking anything Trump says seriously and never have. He’s a fucking spoiled, rich kid reality star. Just like Paris Hilton and the Kardashians. That is what you are supporting.
Again, what part of the following statement do you not understand?
“Trump’s stance on immigration will not be accepted..”
I’m just wondering why you think a grown up version of Paris Hilton would be a suitable POTUS. That’s insane!
‘grown up’… may not be quite accurate.
Maybe, you could go with a 69 year old version of Paris Hilton.
Good point. Even Paris has more sense than that orange putz.
May day is complete, i have managed to piss off at least three of you leftards.
Could you please inform me as to where you read anything about me proclaiming my support for Donald Trump.
At this point, I don’t know who I will vote for in the Republican primary.
You guys still don’t get it. It is about the issue of Immigration, and I have said numerous times, I do not support Trump’s stance on this issue. It is an issue (immigration) that needed to be placed on the table for debate. There needs to be movement on Obama’s position on immigration to the middle. Trump has delivered the issue, now is the time to have a debate.
You people, today, are just using this issue and this article to vent about everything non-liberal.
It is old and tiresome and gives me a chuckle, you guys always make my day. Come up with some new retorts, the same old, stale bullshit is getting ridiculous. None of you are unique, you are all the same.But come up with some new line, you are many, but all the same.
I enjoy your rants.
His stance won’t be accepted and yet it fires up his base. The fact that such a stance fires up anyone is sorely disappointing for our nation.
It fires everyone up because most of America knows that the issue needs to be on the table for debate. And if the truth be known, I think most Trump supporters know it will not be accepted as Trump states it. Just getting it in the mainstream political consciousness is a major accomplishment.
He and many others are actively proposing this. This isn’t to just open up debate, this is actually asserting that such policies should be put into place. Franklin Graham was proposing this long before Trump ever farted them out from his noise hole.
If we are starting off debates with extremely unreasonable demands, I say we ban all vegetables and only permit dessert at the dinner table.
What has been disappointing for most people in the US about this issue is the absolute ineptness of the Obama administration.
The one thing I’ll give Obama is that by doing nothing he’s beating the hell out of what the last president would have done, taken us into another expensive unfunded war to chase ghosts in the desert. At least Russia learned their lesson about land wars in Asia, which is why they’re putting bombs on the ground rather than boots.
What most people underestimate about Trump is that Trump knows what he is, he’s just riding it out, milking it for all he can. If he does win the nomination he’s probably going to bow out on behalf of Hillary just for the lulz.
Trump gains momentum because these things have ALREADY happened in the US. And, all signs point to them being repeated.
Good points and post, Daniel!
He got a perfect score on mental gymnastics, I couldn’t be more impressed with how far he bent over backwards to defend Trump.
It’s something to behold. It would just be easier to say “I hate minorties and immigrants” because that’s all anybody else is hearing.
You have to have a pretty small mind to hear that. Small minds all think alike.
Small minds fill Trump rallies.
Did we ban German or Japanese immigration during WWII? Of course we are all aware of where Japanese-Americans were placed during WWII but did we temporarily stop immigration as well?
Yes we did:
“The day after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt suspended naturalization proceedings for Italian, German, and Japanese immigrants, required them to register, restricted their mobility, and prohibited them from owning items that might be used for sabotage, such as cameras and shortwave radios. The curfews on Italian immigrants were lifted in October 1942, on Columbus Day.”
This was after an act of war and during a time where we had actually declared war against a tangible set of enemy countries. This, versus leveling a ban against over a billion people belonging to a group we have not declared war against, over an extreme minority of radicals.
The GOP should be ashamed of Trump but how can they be, their followers eat this shit up.
The question was “…did we ban immigration…” the answer is yes we did. FDR treated the Constitution like so much Kleenex during the war.
Suspended Habeas corpus
Ordered the internment of Japanese
Denying the Japanese due process and property rights
Censored the media
Used the IRS to attack opponents
Installed the income tax
and on and on and on…
Imagine the outrage if Obama did that today.
Imagine it?1? We’re living it…
Obamacare delays – violating the public law
Used the IRS to target specific groups – check
Sued Arizona forcing a violation of the 10th Ammendment
Recess appoints of the heads of National Labor Relations Board and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Texas v. United States (Immigration)
The DOL guidance letter July 30, 2012 violating the WARN Act
Waiving the TANF Work Requirements
Ignoring the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C In re: Aiken County)
Head in sand much? https://www.committeeforjustice.org/content/25-violations-law-president-obama-and-his-administration
If you see Trump’s postions as “common sense”‘ then………oh fuck it.
At least we had somewhat better sense in 2008 and 2012.
The “position” as you perceive it certainly is not, because you cannot accurately frame to save your life.
Pretzel logic,autofellatio and auto-analinguis.Good job!
Trump continues to cover himself and the Republican Party with glory. He and Cruz are doing their best to ensure we don’t see a Republican in the Oval Office for the next couple decades.
I can’t wait until he does the reveal on his little scheme.
Let’s all hope they won’t be remembered for being absolutely on target correct.
I fear their assessments are closer to the truth than the looby left.
Looks like ME firms are starting to drop him. Will he sue them too?
One of the Middle East’s largest retailers, Landmark Group, has stopped selling Trump-branded products, following the Republican presidential candidate’s controversial call to ban Muslims from the United States.
The Dubai-based firm signed a deal in February this year to sell items from the Trump Home collection to customers in the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia through its Lifestyle outlets.
However, the group said on Tuesday it would now remove all products from its shelves.
Well, Let’s see. Too people, a man and his wife appeared to be living the American dream in California. They had a child, were married in this country they had a home and they supported his mother who helped to take care of the child. He worked with people who liked him, had lunch with them discussed things with them and even went to a party with them. Seems like a pretty normal couple until they went home got their guns went back to the party and shot their friends and co workers and had a shoot out with the police. So Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims until we can vet them and find out who they really are. Hmmmmm….sounds reasonable to me. Who’s next to get shot?
Huh? The wife came from a family of wealthy landowners in Pakistan. She later moved to Saudi Arabia with her immediate family. She returned to Pakistan to study pharmacy in the city of Multan between 2007 and 2012. She traveled to the United States in July 2014 after marrying Farook in Saudi Arabia.
We’ve been through this before. The anarchist bombings of 100 years ago and the association with revolution in the Old World and immigrants from eastern and southern Europe led to similar xenophobic hysteria and outlandish proposals by political buffoons. We survived it.
Beaners and Kebab leave!
You can earn now $8796/week….It’s time to take some action and you can join it too.It is simple,dedicated and easy way to get rich.Three weeks from now you will wish you have started today….Make your christmas happy with a lot of Dollars.. ?????F?O?L?L?O?W??M?E?????
»»»»»»»»» Go to my Account For WEB ADDRESS where you earn DOLLARS