Saturday, August 20, 2016
‘Extreme Vetting’ Is Extremely Overdue
In his trademark manner, Trump departed from the prepared text to Archie Bunker-ize the speech by calling this “extreme vetting,” which is not the phraseology you should use once you’ve won the nomination and are trying to persuade the middle-of-the-road voter in Ohio and Florida. But rather than calling for body-cavity searches, as this label might suggest, he was instead calling for ideological/values screening, with the commonsense goal that “we should only admit into this country those who share our values and respect our people.” He explained:
In addition to screening out all members or sympathizers of terrorist groups, we must also screen out any who have hostile attitudes towards our country or its principles — or who believe that Sharia law should supplant American law. Those who do not believe in our Constitution, or who support bigotry and hatred, will not be admitted for immigration into the country.
It takes an Ivy League education to object to using our borders to keep out Jew-haters, gay-killers, and apostate-stoners. And, sure enough, in the Washington Post, Politico, and elsewhere, a passel of experts tells us that this is crazy, illegal, unconstitutional, and various other adjectives.
Questions about the practical implementation of such a proposal are legitimate, if overblown. Trump obviously didn’t go into detail about the specific bureaucratic means of trying to screen out enemies of our constitutional order, but there are a number of ways to go about it. The first thing to keep in mind is that Trump’s speech referred to immigrants, not visitors, who are much more numerous. As I wrote in December, if a tourist from Saudi Arabia or business traveler from Pakistan think it’s good to behead blasphemers, that doesn’t really matter to us because they’re just passing through and not joining our society. But people being granted permanent residence — or even long-term “temporary” status, such as foreign students or H-1B workers — are joining our society, and we have a responsibility to keep them out if they reject our ...
Trump Leading Clinton Nationally 44.2% to 43.6% According to New Poll
Good for Trump, but not great overall.
He’s just barely coming out on top with a few months to go over a woman who has been a disaster at every political position she’s held.
Hillary failed as a senator and as secretary of state, but for some reason she could still potentially wind up being the 45th president of the United States.
(44th really, since Grover Cleveland was 22nd and 24th.)
From Breitbart:
Donald Trump leads Hillary Clinton in the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times “Daybreak” poll for the first time since Aug. 3 — the last day he had an edge on the former secretary of state.
Although the race remains too close to call, Trump is roughly half a point in front of Clinton, 44.2 percent to 43.6 percent.
Crooked Hillary Redefines "Charitable Donation"
ABC and NBC's evening newscasts on Thursday barely mentioned the Clinton Foundation's announcement that it would stop accepting foreign and corporate donations if Hillary Clinton is elected president. ABC's World News Tonight set aside 25 seconds of air time to the news at the end of a full report on the Donald Trump campaign preparing for the billionaire's first presidential debate with Hillary Clinton. NBC Nightly News devoted 26 seconds to the story immediately before a minute and half-long segment on the Clinton campaign blasting "conspiracy theories" about the Democrat's health.
CBS Evening News didn't cover the story until Friday. However, unlike its competitors at ABC and NBC, the program aired a full report on the Clinton Foundation's move that lasted one minute and 42 seconds. [video below]
Friday, August 19, 2016
Staying Home For The Elections?
Turn in Your Guns.
If we lose this one, the rules will change so much, we will never need to vote again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)