Corolinth wrote:
It was a Muslim ban. Donald Trump promised a Muslim ban if elected President. That was a running theme throughout the entire campaign. Pretending he didn't say that because you've got a bug up your *** about social justice warriors and politically correct speech isn't helping you.
I'm not pretending he didn't say that. I'm saying that what actually occurred was not a muslim ban. That's what "accomplishes that" means. Trump started backing off on the "total ban" some time before he was elected. These are the facts; no amount of pretending I have a "bug up my ***" will change them.
Quote:
The federal government turned red because the left wouldn't acknowledge the role that Islam plays in terrorism. That can happen to you, too. Federal judges are ruling against Trump. Maybe these are liberal activist judges who are legislating from the bench. I realize that's a popular catch phrase when judges say things you disagree with, but there's a clearly identifiable theme here. The only people who didn't smell bullshit were the ones who have become convinced that the Trumpening can do no wrong because it prevented Hillary Clinton from becoming President. That's not doing you any favors. That's how you make sure Congress turns blue in 2018.
Congress isn't going to turn blue in 2018, and no one is pretending Trump can do no wrong. He just hasn't done any yet. Disregarding the realities of the electoral map in 2018 that make a Blue turn almost impossible, people voted for Trump
after he made it very clear he would do something like this. Publicly keeping a campaign promise is not going to hurt his Senate situation in 2018. The House may be a different story just because the President's party almost always loses seat in the off election year, but it is not likely that the huge swathe of red across the middle of the country is going suddenly blue because Trump did what he said he was going to do. It took the Left decades to build up the resentment of the center against it and shove them into the arms of Republicans; that isn't going to reverse itself in 2 years barring something that really is egregarious - which this is not.
The facts are that:
1) This is a stop of immigration with a defined end date.
2) It is a list of specific countries, which excludes both the most populous Muslim nations, and the most important (Saudi Arabia, for reasons that should be obvious)
3) This list was compiled by the previous administration, specifically as a list of countries one could not have bisited and still participate in the Visa waiver program. The Obama administration suspended Iraqi visas for 6 months in 2011, as well. These are by no means unprecedented or novel actions; the only thing novel about them is the amount of crowing about it Trump did on the campaign trail.
4) The reason these countries were selected is the state of general disarray, or the extreme uncooperativeness, they are in. It is difficult or impossible to properly inspect immigrants from these countries (immigration inspection is the proper, legal term, by the way) because their government is wither unable to provide information on who they are, or is unwilling to cooperate. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan are not on the list because their governments are quite willing and able to engage in behind-the-scenes quid pro quo and cooperation and customarily do so.
Now you've have your free class on how things actually work, from someone who actually knows.
If we're going to talk about "bugs up their ***", we can talk about the gigantic bug up your *** at the idea that anyone has the power to make a decision you don't personally approve of, or having authority of any kind. You're an armchair quarterback, and like most armchair quarterbacks and generals, you've never played the game.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
