After the Paris attacks and the revelation that at least one of the suicide bombers was a recent Syrian refugee, a bright line has been drawn between President Obama's insistence that the United States accept as immigrants many thousand un-vet-able Syrians ... and the push-back from many Republicans (and some Democrats) who believe that this is an invitation for future terrorist attacks here at home. So far the governors of 22 states have indicated that they do not wish Syrian immigrants to be relocated in their states ... defying President Obama who says that this is inhumane and unAmerican.
Hillary Clinton's former State Department attack dog, Ben Rhodes, has indicated that the United States can thoroughly vet such immigrants "from the available data" while many intelligence officials and many (Republican and Democrat) on the intelligence committees in Congress saying that this is impossible ... no such data exists. Thus the bright line has been drawn that should define the political landscape for the next year.
This bright line is also now separating the candidates for president ... with most Republicans opposing Syrian immigration while most Democrat candidates are ducking for cover. I do believe that this will be the defining issue ... at least for the foreseeable future ... in the race for the White House. Watch for the Obama administration to throw up all sorts of political gorilla dust to confuse this issue ...while most common-sense Americans push back against this political insanity.
Will Obama win this argument? He certainly has the bully pulpit of the presidency on his side ... as well as the Christian golden rule working in his favor. But then again, self-preserving common sense and the suspicion that Obama's motivations are not Christan but more Muslim-inspired work against his stance ... and the stance he expects his acolytes to follow ... including Hillary Clinton. Watch and see if she toes the line on this one. If she does, it may be her downfall.
3 comments:
Another bright light: When Cons make excuses for Gun Rights, they say that the majority of gun owners should not be punished because a few bad actors shoot rooms of innocents with semi-automatic weapons. But when a few bad Muslims do the shooting, all of them are considered dangerous. How twisted is that logic?
By the way, I happen to agree that we should not take refugees from anywhere that have not been screened. Especially young Syrian men and women. Send them back to Syria to fight against ISIS.
Aren't these two comments contradictory?
Post a Comment