"Banning Muslims"
What is funny right now is that the left does not even realize that its over-the-top response to Trump's initiatives is driving the 10% or so of the population who could not quite bring themselves to vote for Trump rapidly into the Trump camp. So, for instance, David French, who was so anti-Trump that he considered running as the face of the #neverTrump wing of the GOP, has now authored an editorial arguing how reasonable Trump's executive order on travel was. And I have seen this with a number of other #neverTrumpers: they are now saying to themselves, "We didn't like Trump, but his opposition is over-the-top nuts."
Consider, for instance, the travel ban that French discusses above. The hysterical left keeps insisting that it is a "Muslim ban." So if that's what it really is, how did Trump do in his targeting? For instance, in trying to "ban Muslims," how many of the ten nations with the highest Muslim population did he hit?
Only one out of ten! And that one is only number seven. An effective "Muslim ban" would start with Pakistan, Indonesia, and Bangladesh, not a single one of which Trump named. And why is that? Well, those countries do not happen to have collapsed civil governments engaged in civil wars with jihadis, who would be anxious to slip into any refugee stream and attack the US.
Meanwhile, CNN demonstrates how bad things are in the seven countries named in the ban. Hmm, and how did things get so bad? Hmm... hmm...
Perhaps it was... the hyper-aggresive foreign policy of the Bush and Obama administrations that created most of these catastrophes? A foreign policy Trump has repudiated: "We will stop trying to impose our way of life on other countries." So the mainstream media's outrage over Trump's policy amounts to this: "Sure, the guys we liked wrecked Muslim countries, killed countless innocent civilians in those countries, created tremendous refugee crises... OK, OK. But at least they always said nice things about Muslims while they were killing them!"
One of the leading critics of Trump's order on the GOP side has been John McCain, who said that Trump's order was a "self-inflicted wound" in the war on terrorism, since it would turn Muslim countries against us. Um... John McCain. Um... John McCain. Yes, that John McCain who gleefully bounced around on a stage singing "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran!": advocating a bombing campaign that between its direct impact and its aftermath could easily have resulted in a million or so dead Iranians.
So, we are supposed to believe that carpet bombing a country is something its residents will respond to by saying, "Well, the US means well," while telling that country "Your residents can't travel here for 90 days until we get tighter security in place" will turn them against us?
It's almost as if politicians like McCain and Lindsey Graham were the bought and paid toadies of a military-industrial complex that wants to engage us in as many wars as possible in the Middle East, creating as many angry survivors as possible, and then allow the angry survivors of their murderous foreign policy to freely enter the US, and stage attacks here, which they would then use to justify further warfare overseas, which... would result in higher and higher profits for the defense contractors that fund their careers in "public service."
Almost as if.
Consider, for instance, the travel ban that French discusses above. The hysterical left keeps insisting that it is a "Muslim ban." So if that's what it really is, how did Trump do in his targeting? For instance, in trying to "ban Muslims," how many of the ten nations with the highest Muslim population did he hit?
Only one out of ten! And that one is only number seven. An effective "Muslim ban" would start with Pakistan, Indonesia, and Bangladesh, not a single one of which Trump named. And why is that? Well, those countries do not happen to have collapsed civil governments engaged in civil wars with jihadis, who would be anxious to slip into any refugee stream and attack the US.
Meanwhile, CNN demonstrates how bad things are in the seven countries named in the ban. Hmm, and how did things get so bad? Hmm... hmm...
Perhaps it was... the hyper-aggresive foreign policy of the Bush and Obama administrations that created most of these catastrophes? A foreign policy Trump has repudiated: "We will stop trying to impose our way of life on other countries." So the mainstream media's outrage over Trump's policy amounts to this: "Sure, the guys we liked wrecked Muslim countries, killed countless innocent civilians in those countries, created tremendous refugee crises... OK, OK. But at least they always said nice things about Muslims while they were killing them!"
One of the leading critics of Trump's order on the GOP side has been John McCain, who said that Trump's order was a "self-inflicted wound" in the war on terrorism, since it would turn Muslim countries against us. Um... John McCain. Um... John McCain. Yes, that John McCain who gleefully bounced around on a stage singing "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran!": advocating a bombing campaign that between its direct impact and its aftermath could easily have resulted in a million or so dead Iranians.
So, we are supposed to believe that carpet bombing a country is something its residents will respond to by saying, "Well, the US means well," while telling that country "Your residents can't travel here for 90 days until we get tighter security in place" will turn them against us?
It's almost as if politicians like McCain and Lindsey Graham were the bought and paid toadies of a military-industrial complex that wants to engage us in as many wars as possible in the Middle East, creating as many angry survivors as possible, and then allow the angry survivors of their murderous foreign policy to freely enter the US, and stage attacks here, which they would then use to justify further warfare overseas, which... would result in higher and higher profits for the defense contractors that fund their careers in "public service."
Almost as if.
Oh yeah, any attempt to even question McCain's intentions is shot down by an appeal to his time as a soldier.
ReplyDeleteAs if it is mutually exclusive to think that the young McCain was a patriotic soldier and the older McCain a mischievous opportunist...
"the 10% or so of the population who could not quite bring themselves to vote for Trump"
ReplyDeleteAbout 80% of the population did not vote for Trump.
I will just assume your number is correct. What does that have to do with what percentage of the (eligible) population that COULD NOT QUITE BRING THEMSELVES to vote for Trump.
DeleteAre you assuming that 80% of the population was ALMOST persuaded to vote for him. You're thinking if he does well, he'll get 100% of the vote in 2020?
THAT would really be a landslide!