Here’s an easy thought experiment: what would the national
conversation sound like if the Orlando massacre had occurred while a Republican
was in the White House?
You know the answer: liberals and progressives would have
been screaming that the president had failed to protect the people. They would
have been calling for investigations into the president’s dereliction.They
would have been demanding an assault weapon ban. Some of them would have wanted
to take away your guns… all 300,000,000 of them.
Of course, they would not have denounced Islam, any more
than they are today. They might have expressed surprise that a “religion of
peace” could have fostered so much hatred, but they would certainly not have
called the terrorist attack an act of war. They would have blamed Christians for their homophobia. They would not have demanded reprisals—unless against Christian
pastors. They would have declared that America had a homophobia problem, as our
president has said himself.
You recall the 9/11 Commission. Savvy Democrats worked very
hard to ensure that the blame for the terrorist attack fell completely on
George Bush. They worked very hard to ensure that no one came away with the
impression that the Clinton administration had anything to do with the rise of
Islamist terrorism or that the lack of communication between the FBI and the
CIA, a Clinton administration policy, had anything to do with the attack.
Republicans on the committee missed the point completely.
They thought that they were there to discover the facts. Naïve and innocent
they were. Now they are wondering why so many of their constituents think they
are dupes and dopes.
Right now, the liberal media is doing everything in its power
to deflect blame away from Barack Obama. They are crafting a narrative that
completely exculpates Barack Obama for what happened in Orlando. They do not
seem to understand that projecting weakness to the world makes you a target.
The media are happy to ignore the role that fear of being
called racist played in the FBI investigation of Omar Mateen. Yesterday, the FBI director said that they had called off their investigation of the
terrorist because they did not want to appear to be Islamophobic. It reminds
you of the neighbors of the San Bernardino terrorists who saw something
suspicious but did not report it for fear of being called racist.
The Obama administration’s war for social justice has just
claimed dozens of more victims. In the midst of it all the president has held
firm on one point: he refuses to speak ill of Islam. He insists that terrorism
has been caused by a perverted strain of a great religion. And he insists that
we have no evidence suggesting that ISIS directed the attack.
Apparently, some people think that it does not really matter
whether he uses the words “Islamic terrorism.” Obviously, they have got caught
in mindless legalism. If the president declares the terrorist act an act
of war and names an enemy he will be obliged to do something about it, beyond
being the mourner in chief. He will be obliged to retaliate. And, we know,
Obama will do everything in his power to avoid that.
Brit Hume made the salient point in a commentary on Bret
Baier’s Fox Report last night. He remarked that while Obama had exhorted
Americans to examine their own homophobia he NEVER said a word denouncing the
virulent strain of homophobia that infects Islam.
And yet, all is not lost. A glimmer of good sense came down
to us yesterday from a fully fledged member of the progressive left: Barney Frank.
Yes, that Barney Frank.
Asked to comment on the terrorist attack in Orlando Frank began
by saying a few words about gun control. But then he added some remarks that
are guaranteed to make his leftist friends uncomfortable. Islam, he said, has a
problem with homosexuals. We cannot ignore it.
He might have said that Islam has a problem with a lot of different people. In fact, it has a problem with anyone who is not Muslim. He didn't, but, you can't have everything.
Frank told the New York Times:
There
is an Islamic element here. Yes, the overwhelming majority of Muslims don’t do
this, but there is clearly, sadly, an element in the interpretation of Islam
that has some currency, some interpretation in the Middle East that encourages
killing people — and L.G.B.T. people are on that list. And I think it is fair
to ask leaders of the Islamic community, religious and otherwise, to spend some
time combatting this.
The Times report continues, quoting Frank:
The
attack “reinforces the case for significant surveillance by law enforcement of
people who have given some indication of adoption of these angry Islamic hate
views.” The gunman had
been questioned by the F.B.I. “If they had continued to surveil him,
that would have led to some A.C.L.U. criticism – and they would have been
wrong. I wish they had surveilled him more, not less.”
Of course, these remarks did make the New York Times. But,
don’t expect to hear very much about them again. Since they defy the narrative
they will be ignored. Or, they will be written off as a function of Frank's advanced age… or something. If the
same words had been pronounced by a Republican, all hell would have broken
loose. The ACLU would have been protesting outside his office.
Remember when Ted Cruz—the candidate that the Republican
establishment thought was worse than Donald Trump—recommended that law enforcement
authorities increase surveillance in Muslim neighborhoods. Remember the hue and
cry that rose up. Cruz was quickly denounced as a bigot.
CNN reported the story:
"If
you have a neighborhood where there's a high level of gang activity, the way to
prevent it is you increase the law enforcement presence there and you target
the gang members to get them off the streets," the Texas senator told
CNN's Anderson Cooper. "I'm talking about any area where there is a higher
incidence of radical Islamic terrorism."
And also,
Earlier
in the day Cruz said in a statement, "We need to empower law enforcement
to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized,"
adding that the U.S. can no longer afford to [sic] "political correctness."
"For
years, the West has tried to deny this enemy exists out of a combination of
political correctness and fear. We can no longer afford either. Our European
allies are now seeing what comes of a toxic mix of migrants who have been
infiltrated by terrorists and isolated, radical Muslim neighborhoods,"
Cruz said in the statement.
Of course, a representative of the New York Police Department
declared that the comments were "incendiary" and "foolish." That they were merely a
description of Bloomberg administration policy did not prevent anyone from calling Cruz a bigot.
Other political figures piled on:
Cruz's
call drew a swift rebuke from GOP presidential rival Ohio Gov. John Kasich,
Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the
Anti-Defamation League, a leading anti-bigotry organization.
"We
are not at war with Islam, we are at war with radical Islam," Kasich said
during a news conference. "Just because you happen to be a Muslim does not
mean you want to destroy someone in the West.... The last thing we need is more
polarization because for those who want to preserve Islam in the west, we
alienate them."
One remarks that the uber-qualified Kasich was an also-ran
because he was tone deaf and came across as weak.
Naturally, Democrats despised Cruz. They were reading from the John Boehner hymnal:
Wasserman
Schultz was blunter.
"Ted
Cruz is a disgrace," the Florida congresswoman said, adding that the
freshman senator's statement amounted to "fear-mongering."
"His
comments today were worse than opportunistic and inappropriate politicking in
the wake of the terrible tragedy in Brussels -- they were a shameful display of
hate that only serves to foment anger and make the world less secure,"
Wasserman Schultz said in a statement.
Was the Congresswoman from Florida suggesting that Ted Cruz
would ultimately be responsible for acts of domestic terrorism? At the least, she was laying down a predicate.
The heated rhetoric directed against Ted Cruz—and today
against Donald Trump—combined with the outrage directed against the NRA
tells us that the American left, with a few exceptions, is at war against
Republicans and conservatives. For them, politics is about affixing blame. When
something good happens they take the credit. When something bad happens they
blame Republicans. It’s time for Republicans to start understanding the nature
of the game.
Democrats are never responsible for anything because of their good intentions.
ReplyDeleteAnd what is _____phobia? I am tiring of such made-up words.
Anyone else noticed that gun control is the reflexive solution to everything? Said by people who are surrounded by people protecting them with... guns.
Is it all Bush's or Trump's fault? It's difficult to keep track these days.
Stuart: the American left, with a few exceptions, is at war against Republicans and conservatives. For them, politics is about affixing blame. When something good happens they take the credit. When something bad happens they blame Republicans. It’s time for Republicans to start understanding the nature of the game.
ReplyDeleteWow, that's a lot of self-pity there. The Right never plays blame games, but now they're going to have to get tough against their will. The Right wants to play fair, but they have to defend themselves and do what it takes to keep America safe from the Left's rhetorical manipulations.
Here's Hillary's speech about Orlando. Perhaps we can extract the "Blame the Republicans" portions of it and set the record straight.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/text-of-hillary-clintons-remarks-on-the-orlando-shooting-and-terrorism-2016-06-13
Ares, why do you bother?
ReplyDeleteIAC, oh, you are not interested in even skim-reading what the next President of the United States has to say?
ReplyDeleteHere's her speech ending. Is she being deceptive? Is this just fake "reaching across the aisle"? Is it just trying to "sound presidential" while not actually meaning what she says? Or is she one of Stuart's "exceptions" who isn't at war with the Republicans?
Feel free to read between the lines below as you like and tell me what you find.
---------
I was a Senator from New York. There was a Republican president, a Republican governor, and a Republican mayor. We did not attack each other – we worked with each other to protect our country and to rebuild our city.
President Bush went to a Muslim community center just six days after the attacks to send a message of unity and solidarity. To anyone who wanted to take out their anger on our Muslim neighbors and fellow citizens, he said, ‘That should not and that will not stand in America.’
It is time to get back to the spirit of those days. The Spirit of 9/12. Let’s make sure we keep looking to the best of country, to the best within each of us.
Democratic and Republican Presidents have risen to the occasion in the face of tragedy. That is what we are called to do my friends, and I am so confident and optimistic that is exactly what we will do.
---------
Wasn't Obama's speech today reassuring, unifying and powerful? He's just the best, isn't he? /S
ReplyDeleteAdmit it, Stuart, Trump is looking alot better to you.
No, Ares, I do not care to read Presidrnt Obama's speech. I've heard enough from him to know that his words are absolutely meaningless, and his actions -- which contradict a great many of his words -- are at this point hopelessly predictable. He's spoken so much over the years that I'm full.
ReplyDeleteIAC, I mentioned Hillary's speech, America's next president, not current President Obama, but since you mentioned it let's see where the unfair blame lies...
ReplyDeletehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/06/14/president-obamas-remarks-after-national-security-council-meeting-on-islamic-state/
-------
In continuing to push on this front, I want to mention that it is critical for our friends in the Senate to confirm Adam Szubin, my nominee for undersecretary of terrorism and financial intelligence. Adam has served in Democratic and Republican administrations. Everyone agrees he's eminently qualified. He has been working on these kinds of issues for years.
It's now been more than a year since I nominated him. More than 420 days and he still has not been given a full vote. There is no good reason for it. It is inexcusable. So it's time for the Senate to do its job, put our national security first and have a vote on Adam Szubin that can lead our financial fight against ISIL and help keep our country safe.
-------
Have the Republicans given a reason for not confirming Szubin? Is the president unfairly blaming the republicans for not doing their job?
I know, tit-for-tat - surely Obama must have said something mean first, so we can't possibly move forward until the country suffers a little longer.
And continuing:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/06/14/president-obamas-remarks-after-national-security-council-meeting-on-islamic-state/
--------
We now have proposals from the presumptive Republican nominee [Trump] for president of the United States to bar all Muslims from emigrating to America. We hear language that singles out immigrants and suggests entire religious communities are complicit in violence.
Where does this stop? The Orlando killer, one of the San Bernardino killers, the Fort Hood killer -- they were all U.S. citizens. Are we going to start treating all Muslim Americans differently? Are we going to start subjecting them to special surveillance? Are we going to start discriminating against them, because of their faith?
--------
Is Obama unfairly blaming Trump for wanting to push 1+ billion people of the world on the far side of the fence with the terrorists?
At the very least this is a vast difference of opinion, not a blame game from the president.
"Is Obama unfairly blaming Trump for wanting to push 1+ billion people..." Yes. Trump wants those not here to go thru the immigration process and be checked out. Same for those from Mexico and parts south.
ReplyDeleteYes, muzzles should suffer increased surveillance, the restriction of Internet use, a ban on citizenship, and the importation of refugees, and clamps on religious expression until they show they can follow America's path to citizenship, censure their own hate speech, joyfully turn in their beheading malcontents, and prove the are a benefit to our society instead of a pox.
ReplyDeleteEvery time Obama says "That's not who we are," I cringe.
ReplyDelete