Writes Seth J. Frantzman.
ADDED: If you are horrified by what you see Trump doing, is it because when Obama did things like that you just didn't see? Or did everything look different because it was Obama doing them?
AND: I am fascinated by the NYT's presentation of "1984" as the book to read to understand Trump: "George Orwell’s ‘1984’ Is Suddenly a Best-Seller," "Why ‘1984’ Is a 2017 Must-Read"
It seems to me that Obama was more of a Big Brother figure. You saw his smiling face. You loved him. You trusted him. Not all of you. But that was the overwhelming spirit of the time, reinforced by the press that served him. That face!
... the face of Big Brother, black-haired, black-moustachio’d, full of power and mysterious calm, and so vast that it almost filled up the screen. Nobody heard what Big Brother was saying. It was merely a few words of encouragement, the sort of words that are uttered in the din of battle, not distinguishable individually but restoring confidence by the fact of being spoken... But the face of Big Brother seemed to persist for several seconds on the screen, as though the impact that it had made on everyone’s eyeballs was too vivid to wear off immediately. The little sandy-haired woman had flung herself forward over the back of the chair in front of her. With a tremulous murmur that sounded like ‘My Saviour!’ she extended her arms towards the screen. Then she buried her face in her hands. It was apparent that she was uttering a prayer. At this moment the entire group of people broke into a deep, slow, rhythmical chant.... It was a refrain that was often heard in moments of overwhelming emotion. Partly it was a sort of hymn to the wisdom and majesty of Big Brother, but still more it was an act of self-hypnosis, a deliberate drowning of consciousness by means of rhythmic noise.Here's screenshot from my Kindle, sorted by author:
Posts
330 comments:
1 – 200 of 330 Newer› Newest»Arguing facts with a faith-based opponent doesn't work
Wife and I are discovering that there is not talking facts with hard core lefties. They don't want facts. They want thei feelz. They get honest to God hysterical.
And they thought they were fit to lead us and tell us what to do?
"What the progressives want to do now is to turn the immigration debate into a morality play with Trump cast not as FDR (who on this point he closely and even eerily resembles) but as Satan. Obama’s role (and the role of non-interventionist Democrats) in making the Syrian mess so intractable can be airbrushed out of the picture. The national conversation shall be only and always about courageous, compassionate, and deeply humane progressives resisting the forces of Republican and especially Trumpian darkness."
http://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/01/28/the-refugee-ban-and-the-holocaust/
Ann, since you voted at least once for Obama, I would be interested to know your answer to the question you pose.
FDR was cut total slack for offending enemy nationalities because he was the only hope left for the USSR's Communist Aristocracy that was fighting for its survival in 1941 and needed FDR's help.
Today the Russians are forever done with Communism. So what good is Trump for just being fair with Russia.
The American Caliphate, which has been seeded and normalized by Mullah Obama overr 8 years, will not go quietly. They think Trump must submit to them.
It's a good thing I don't engage in political Twitter much, or I would have spent all afternoon pointing out the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act to all the outraged hysterics, and asking them if they were similarly outraged when Obama turned away all refugees from Iraq for a few months in 2011.
No one is actually outraged over the executive order. I know this because literally none of the protesters carried signs for the Iraqis in 2011 or for Cubans last month. It's just because Trump did a thing, and it does not matter one bit what the thing was, or what the next thing will be.
Now, detaining people who hold green cards is messed up. Stick to decrying that, and I'm with you.
This stuff could lead to widespread regret. Green-card holders turned away, real refugees turned away. Trump inspires triumphalism, and it's getting way too trumpist.
Calm down, trumpies and anti-trumpies.
Agree somewhat about Big Brother.
ADDED: If you are horrified by what you see Trump doing, is it because when Obama did things like that you just didn't see? Or did everything look different because it was Obama doing them?
Perhaps you would be so kind as to explain the way the two policies are the same?
Because it seems that even your commenters know that they're not.
Now, detaining people who hold green cards is messed up. Stick to decrying that, and I'm with you.
Radaio Japan news is horrified by the cruelty of Trump to refugees, a lack of self-awareness that must be uniquely Japanese, perhaps only shared with the left's audiences here.
Women are going to eat up the stories of denied refugees, like the flies on African kids long ago now.
Run the US as a charity and screw the culture. It's who we are.
Those who follow #NotMyPresident will probably not recognize themselves as the Outer Party members convened for the Five-Minute Hate...
Perhaps because by November 2020 it will be the Five-Year Hate.
How soon we forget the images of school children singing songs of praise to Obama at the direction of their progressive teachers. Mmmmm.
They always see in you what they hate in themselves.
How soon we forget the images of school children singing songs of praise to Obama at the direction of their progressive teachers. Mmmmm.
$100 says NYT editors have never read 1984. Most of their readers haven't either. Those who read it likely didn't understand its warning.
As far as the green card thing goes, Trump always overshoots what he wants. It's part of being a good negotiator. Everyone gets all upset about folks with green cards not being admitted. Trump backs down on that, the non-green card holders get put on a plane and sent back to where they came from, and the left pats itself on the back for "beating Trump". He laughs because he never intended to deny them re-entry in the first place.
HT, the policies are the same.
Obama wanted power, and probably money. He claimed that he only wanted what was best for the country. What a crock!
Trump obviously wants power and money. He doesn't even claim otherwise. But now he says he has all the power and money he wants and only wants what's best for the country. What a crock!
People are born stupid, but they don't have to stay that way. Leftism makes them stay that way.
According to this Fox New and AP report, no "green-card holders were prevented
from entering the country.
"Under Trump's order, it had appeared that an untold number of foreign-born U.S. residents now traveling outside the U.S. could be stuck overseas for at least 90 days even though they held permanent residency "green cards" or other visas. However, an official with the DHS said Saturday night that no green-card holders from the seven countries cited in Trump's order had been prevented from entering the U.S."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/29/dhs-will-continue-to-enforce-trumps-travel-ban.html
"Ann, since you voted at least once for Obama, I would be interested to know your answer to the question you pose."
Here's what I wrote about voting for Obama:
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2008/11/im-going-to-write-post-called-how.html
November 8, 2008
I'm going to write a post called "How McCain lost me."
That's my writing project this morning, and it's going to take me a little while. This will correspond to the post I wrote in 2004 called "How Kerry lost me." It's different in that I'm writing it after the election. But it's the same in that I'm mining my blog archive to try to understand how my resistance to the candidate formed and hardened and caused me to vote for the other man.
I know that I voted against McCain. Up through August, I genuinely didn't know which candidate I'd vote for, but I knew I was taking more shots at Obama and therefore giving the impression that I favored McCain. I didn't trust Obama, and I feared (and still fear) what Obama would do with a Democratic Congress. McCain was a more familiar character, less fun to write about, and he was also the underdog. But by mid-October, I knew that unless something big happened, I would vote for Obama. It was nothing new that Obama did. I didn't start liking him more, and I never got caught up in the Obama lovefest.
It was something about McCain. Now, I have 368 posts labeled "McCain," and I'm not going to read them all. I'm going to restrict myself to the time period beginning with the conventions, which is when, I think, McCain lost me.
AND: Here's "How McCain Lost Me"
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2008/11/how-mccain-lost-me.html
All your answers are there.
Sara D said...
1/29/17, 7:34 AM
So More Fake News.
The "How McCain Lost Me" post is long, but it ends summing everything up in 4 points:
1. He did not understand economics, the most important issue.
2. He lost the ability to make the experience argument.
3. He never defined himself as a principled conservative.
4. Erratic and incoherent, he lacked sufficient mental capacity.
Didn't the 9/11 hijackers all have green cards or student visas or somesuch?
Wasn't the Tsarnev brother's family here as refugees?
Even back in 1990 people knew Green Cards were a farce:
1990 movie “Green Card” : “A man wanting to stay in the US enters into a marriage of convenience, but it turns into more than that.”
To make it worse, the man in question was fucking Gérard Depardieu!
Fat drunk French Depardieu! Making a mockery of our laws in a Romantic Comedy!
Where is rhhardin?
I am Laslo.
Explaining voting for Obama. Not a mea culpa, but a well, I had reasons.
Worst POTUS of my lifetime.
2017 movie remake “Green Card” : “A man wanting to bomb in the US enters into a marriage of convenience, but it turns into more than that.”
They will still make it a Frenchman, though, to soothe sensibilities.
I am Laslo.
I voted against McCain, by not voting that year. 1st and only time that I didn't vote. Obama was never an option, because he represented someone who had less appeal than McCain. Far less.
How soon we forget the images of school children singing songs of praise to Obama at the direction of their progressive teachers. Mmmmm.
Not me. That piece of low-brow propaganda made it impossible for me to support Obama, even though John McCain's Senate career had provoked more anger than approval. The sight of those psychologically abused children instantly convinced me that there was sinister intent behind that infectious smile and dulcet voice.
fivewheels said:
Now, detaining people who hold green cards is messed up. Stick to decrying that, and I'm with you.
Not if there is a reason, such as affiliation with a known terrorist organization or a lack of proper vetting before the green card was issued.
I should have said, that I didn't vote for POTUS that year. I did vote for others.
It's the kind of sloppy, legally indefensible action we should all expect from Trump. Not exempting people in transit or people with green cards just invites lawsuits. I understand that he campaigned on the basic policy, so he has to do something of this sort, but maybe he could try to do it competently next time. Another four years of amateur hour.
Why were people with dual nationality being detained? Did Obama do this? Did Obama detain Iraqi contractors that worked for our military and would be in danger staying there? The US is on its way to being a pariah to the rest of the world.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/316692-trumps-visa-ban-also-applies-to-dual-citizens-report
Those who hold dual nationality in the seven countries banned from entering the U.S. by President Trump will also be barred from entering the country, the Wall Street Journal reported Saturday.
The Journal said it got an advance look at a statement by the State Department that the refugee ban extends beyond just citizens of Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Libya and Yemen, but also to people who may originally come from those countries but have a passport from another nation or dual nationality.
“Those nationals or dual nationals holding valid immigrant or nonimmigrant visas will not be permitted to enter the United States during this period. Visa interviews will generally not be scheduled for nationals of these countries during this period.”
I thought many times during the Obama years that the book '1984' was the only way to understand it. It was primarily due to the twisting of language. Illegal aliens were called "undocumented immigrants." War was "kinetic activity." The words "radical Islam" were never mentioned. ISIS was ISIL.
The Left has also perfected the "two minutes of hate" with social media.
Victor Davis Hanson has written about the connection numerous times.
"It's the kind of sloppy, legally indefensible action we should all expect from Trump. Not exempting people in transit or people with green cards just invites lawsuits. I understand that he campaigned on the basic policy, so he has to do something of this sort, but maybe he could try to do it competently next time. Another four years of amateur hour."
Steven Miller and Bannon are writing these executive orders without consulting the State Department or other agencies to check if the EO goes against current law. Why was Bannon put on the National Security Council while the DIL and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are outed.
If you are horrified by what you see Trump doing, is it because when Obama did things like that you just didn't see? Or did everything look different because it was Obama doing them?
“We should have had this for many years.” Donald Trump
I make sure to keep a discreet emotional and psychological distance from every political officeholder. I never bond emotionally or psychologically with any of them.
Not even the ones I voted for: Reagan, Bush 41, etc.
ESPECIALLY not the ones I voted for. It's way too easy to get tied up in the emotion of "Be part of the team" and start covering for your heroes that have screwed up.
I detested a number of things that Obama did.
And I'm coming to detest a number of things that Trump did.
It comes down to this:
If you apply the same standards to judging your friends that you use to judge your enemies, you won't have very many friends.
But the few friends you will have, will be friends truly worth having.
"the overwhelming spirit of the time" O average Gallup approval rating: between Ford and Nixon. But of course history gets written by the MSM and people like AA, who prefer alternative facts and advance-missed that very nice man.
From "How McCain lost me".
"3. He never defined himself as a principled conservative.
4. Erratic and incoherent, he lacked sufficient mental capacity."
And Trump does? This is incoherent, as you seem to defend Trump daily.
WilliamHR wrote: And Trump does? This is incoherent, as you seem to defend Trump daily.
Merde! Pardon my French.
WilliamHR wrote: And Trump does? This is incoherent, as you seem to defend Trump daily.
You think you are arguing against Trump, but in fact, your beef is with the English language.
"Didn't the 9/11 hijackers all have green cards or student visas or somesuch"
Weren't most of them from Saudi Arabia?
"Merde! Pardon my French."
I bring up Fat drunk French Depardieu and now Quaestor is using French.
Man the barricades.
I am Laslo.
According to most here, Obama was weak. How the does a comparison to a strong Stalinesque figure work?
"Weren't most of them from Saudi Arabia?"
So stopping immigration from Saudi Arabia is OK?
Good.
Now change the statement to:
"Weren't most of them Muslim?"
Lather and repeat.
I am Laslo.
You are in a cold civil war and nothing at all matters other than hurting the other side, or preventing harm to your side from the other.
There is no point to argument or reason anymore.
Its a dishonest sort of fight at this point; properly, to make sense of the emotion behind it, it should be conducted in the open with knives and clubs.
As HR pointed out, Trump claims he is doing something that should've been done long before. Did Obama do the same thing or not. Get your story straight Althouse.
On ne passe pas!
CBS News even managed to bring up Anne Frank in connection with Trump's order.
Well, this overdone hysteria will work in Trump's favor.
I also think the TSA and whatever opther agencies will seek to sabotage the order.
Like when Congress tries to stengthen welfare rules, they find a quadruple paraplegic veteran with a sick wife and 7 kids to throw out in the cold, and then call the TV stations to come record the cruel event.
Why was Saudi Arabia exempted Laslo? Don't get shampoo in your eyes.
Hysterical types run to 1984, but Brave New World is much more accurate about the dangers we face.
Obama was a figurehead, much as Orwell's big brother was implied to simply be an image. And one that could be changed as required besides.
The totalitarian system in partial construction behind the puppet-Obama was and is still the danger.
Yes the list was already in existence and extreme vetting has been going on, according reports from folks who have been through it, so why not step it up rather than the show that is going on?
(Side note, I taught l984, in l984 when many also thought Reagan was big brother; it seems any leader who claims to be a savior, as some Trump folks believe, is open to this trope)
Did Obama do the same thing or not.
Yes, he did in 2011. For six months refugees from Iraq were banned from entering the United States. The usual suspects complained not a whit. Trump has imposed a four-month ban, and the assholes go berserk. Typical.
"Why was Saudi Arabia exempted Laslo? Don't get shampoo in your eyes."
Because they used Obama's existing list.
You can't just ban ALL Muslims.
That would be wrong.
Of course, I believe the Japanese should all still be interned.
I am vigilant that way.
I am Laslo.
Steven Miller and Bannon are writing these executive orders without consulting the State Department or other agencies to check if the EO goes against current law
Sounds like more leftist wishcasting to me.
Also, the future is turning out to be way closer to Brave New World than 1984.
Bannon said he was a Leninist. Does that sit well with you folks?
"‘MY GOAL’
Steve Bannon, Trump's Top Guy, Told Me He Was 'A Leninist' Who Wants To ‘Destroy the State’"
Worst POTUS in my lifetime? IF there were two horses asses named Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama in a horses ass race, the race would be a photo finish. I'm not sure which nose would be in front. And then there's the after Presidency--Jimmuh is getting near the end of his life, and in the words of the old shape note hymn, he'll soon go to meet the deeds he's done. Obama on the other hand will be around for a long time to extend his particular brand of the American nightmare. I'm not looking forward to it.
I watched The Green Card again a month ago.
It's the form I like, namely antagonistic opposites find they fit; the actual plot ending was one of those arbitrary director decisions that they focus group, bad only because it comes across as arbitrary.
ARM wrote: According to most here, Obama was weak. How the does a comparison to a strong Stalinesque figure work?
Plue de merdes! False premise, ergo false comparison.
I haven't read 1984.
But I did read Catch 22, in a single reading that stuck when it first came out.
If anybody asks, it's not about the military. It's about organizations in general.
The movie fucked that up.
AA said: "4. Erratic and incoherent, he lacked sufficient mental capacity."
WilliamHR responded: "And Trump does? This is incoherent, as you seem to defend Trump daily."
Trump knows exactly what he's doing. The lefties continue to "misunderestimate" him. I am beginning to love the guy.
I taught l984, in l984 when many also thought Reagan was big brother; it seems any leader who claims to be a savior, as some Trump folks believe, is open to this trope
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2pZSvq9bto
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=obama+halo+pictures&qpvt=obama+halo+pictures&qpvt=obama+halo+pictures&qpvt=obama+halo+pictures&FORM=IGRE
"The movie fucked that up."
"Catch 22" was one of the worst Romantic Comedies ever.
Unless you give points for the homosexual undertones.
Same with "Spartacus".
Obviously.
I am Laslo.
WilliamHR wrote: Bannon said he was a Leninist. Does that sit well with you folks?
Hearsay!
If it were only true. Jefferson told us revolution would be necessary from time to time. Or would you uproot the Founding Fathers, WilliamHR? (Silly me, of course you would. Dead white males being almost as bad as the live ones.)
Blogger AReasonableMan said...
"According to most here, Obama was weak. How the does a comparison to a strong Stalinesque figure work? "
We'll never know. Hillary didn't get elected.
Oh! You mean Trump as Stalin!
I see.
You need to read more history. Trump is nowhere near Stalinesque.
"Trump knows exactly what he's doing. The lefties continue to "misunderestimate" him. I am beginning to love the guy."
'I love Big Brother.'
The "How McCain Lost Me" post is long, but it ends summing everything up in 4 points:
1. He did not understand economics, the most important issue.
And Obama did??? Bahahahahahaha!!!
WilliamHR: "Bannon said he was a Leninist."
LOL
Yeah, run with that one. It's a real winner!
AA: It seems to me that Obama was more of a Big Brother figure.
Lol. Ya think?
When 1984 was published, I'm pretty sure that the left of the day understood what it was about. Unlike now:
"The Guardian Runs Obviously Fake 1984 Quote Like It’s Totally Real To Knock Trump".
The current left has moved beyond the Orwellian into the meta-Orwellian.
WilliamHR: "The US is on its way to being a pariah to the rest of the world."
LOL
The US has always been a pariah to the western lefties.
Or haven't you been paying attention?
#WhenLeftistMemesCollide
I don't like the way the order was instituted. Seems too hasty and therefore more hurtful than it needed to be.
But I can't with all the hysteria. The left and the media are in full hysteria. I feel a great unraveling.
Restarting a critical and analytical public dialogue is crucial, but I doubt it can possibly proceed smoothly or, to some degree, rationally. We're better off dealing with the chaotic nature of the necessary bumpy start than swapping one Big Brother figure for another.
This is a sight reading. It appears that Trump screwed this up. At any rate, it is being heavily reported as a screw up. Obama also screwed a fair number of things up, but the coverage was nowhere near as widespread and intense. Are there any other Syrian refugeees besides cute toddlers? Those are the only ones I see on the news.......People voted for Republicans out of self interest. With Dems it's more of a religious thing. People join religions not for truth but for certainty. Maybe religion is the wrong word. With Obama it crossed the line into cult.
"Big Mike said...
Wife and I are discovering that there is not talking facts with hard core lefties."
Did you too just wake up from a 40 year coma?
Rusty wrote: You need to read more history
Do say that! He might start to regret pretending to be an Aristotelian, and them he'd be forced to appropriate ths for his avatar.
Remember, with the left, history always, always, begins anew each day. Thus making it easier to rewrite history and airbrush it as much as is required for todays talking points and Two-Minutes of Hate.
By definition, the 2015 changes did not target nationals of the seven countries because those countries were not VWP countries. To me, its willful blindness to conflate a reasonable action to more closely screen people who matched identified patterns of travel activity linked to terrorist training - ie they would need a visa - with what this Trump administration has done.
@Anglelyne
Its obvious that the person who wrote that story has never read 1984.
Blogger AReasonableMan said...
"According to most here, Obama was weak. How the does a comparison to a strong Stalinesque figure work? "
Not gonna lie, personally cannot wait until Trump begins executing all opposition, or sending them to prison camps. No doubt Bannon and his alt. right, KKK Nazi gang compiling lists as we speak.
True about the US always being a pariah.
The intellectual consensus outside the US after 1945 was always intensely anti-US.
The US was the great enemy, to Sartre, to Gunter Grass, to Hobsbawm.
To get a fair picture of the situation, Whit Stillmans "Barcelona" will do very well.
<<>>
From Steve Sailer http://www.unz.com/isteve/refugees-demand-to-be-ruled-by-literally-hitler/
Visas are a privilege, not a right. They can be withdrawn at whim. And if someone has secured "refugee" status in the US because they fear for their life, why the hell are they visiting their home country? Doesn't that prove they lied?
In fact, I think that "quote" was most likely crafted and put on the Internet as bait for people who have never read 1984.
"Tiny trains."
I can't believe I'm agreeing with Peggy Noonan, but when someone is correct, they are correct. It's really annoying to recieve condescension from people with less education and accomplishment than you.
MayBee - it might be a fault of implementation/guidance/lack of guidance rather than the order itself. How something like this can be legally construed to apply to green card holders (legal residents) is beyond me.
A legal resident has due process rights, and is in an entirely different position than a person applying for a visa or a would-be refugee claiming asylum (the vast majority of those claims are false).
Sure, those green cards may be revoked, but for cause and on an individual basis.
To some extent, the problem here is that the US has been following a very strange policy. Totally different standards were in place for a Guatemalan claiming asylum than a Pakistani/Syrian/Iranian etc. If a person from a South American country shows up at the southern border claiming asylum, we take their names and let them into the country, unsupervised. The vast majority have never been following through on their "asylum" claims. We have significant measures in place to prevent persons from many majority-Muslim countries even from getting to the southern border, and if they show up, they are detained. But we generally seem to be making other countries stop them before they ever get to the border.
So the treatment (one may see why this has been done) has been very different, and now to argue that this difference is unwarranted bias is rather bizarre. If it was ever justified, it is justified now, and if it isn't justified now, then it never has been.
I don't think that the screaming left actually WANTS a bunch of very shady characters to come walking in across the southern border, though! Then the obvious implication would be that we should intern everyone coming across.
That logic has not been internalized yet.
And this, to some extent, is why I think Trump's course is probably best for the country over the long run. Our "open border" policy has created a huge security hole and a very odd situation. We should deal with our problems in a different and more organized way, and I have no doubt that some from these countries of concern are being denied asylum when they really deserve it.
I didn't realize that "Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream" was the subtitle to "The Audacity of Hope." Hey, anyone else think it reminds them of "Make America Great Again"?
I mean, even if your total exposure to 1984 was the Cliff Notes, you should be able to detect that the quote is a fake. Even without that, anyone with exposure to actual literature would recognize that they writing was just bad and could not have come from a novel which is recognized as a modern classic.
Never forget, journalists are the dumb kids of rich, connected people and they are journalists because they couldn't hack it in law school.
The Germans were reporting a couple of years ago, that the average "Syrian" refugee was carrying four passports under four different names--issued by different countries, often. And they all came back valid on checks. The fifteen minute Obama vetting process deserves to be challenged.
Bobby Kennedy was not murdered by a Palestinian nationalist, but rather by America's gun culture. The Japanese were not interned by FDR's government but by American racists. No mention is ever made of the fact that Sen. Robert Taft opposed this round up. No mention is made of the fact that white people were also put into internment camps. Those white people were sorted out in a discriminatory way. Rumanians were interned, but not the Italians. The due process involved was that FDR liked Italians better than Romanians.Those Jewish refugees on that ship were not turned away by FDR but by American bigots.
It might be worth asking What Would Hillary Do ? Something involving money changing hands, no doubt.
Maybe Trump is a big poopie-head, but compared to what ?
@William
The rule is that any thing bad done by the government while the Democrat party is in power is a failure of America, anything bad done while the Republican party is in power is the fault of the Republicans.
The corollary is that if a Republican did anything good in the past, then he was really a Democrat.
Wait a minute, Obama understood economics? He started out on the national stage as a community organizer getting federal money to spend. He ended his presidency by adding to the federal national debt 10 trillion dollars.
The US is now rejecting 100% of refugees that wish to come here. What percentage of refugees that wished to come here were we rejecting before? I'm guessing it was on the order of 99%. And people are losing their shit over that 1% change?
Bobby Kennedy was not murdered by a Palestinian nationalist, but rather by America's gun culture
It's arguable that Bobby Kennedy's killing was a textbook Mob hit, and Sirhan Sirhan the patsy who takes the fall, a la Lee Harvey Oswald.
It's arguable that Bobby Kennedy's killing was a textbook Mob hit, and Sirhan Sirhan the patsy who takes the fall, a la Lee Harvey Oswald.
Yeah. If you're an idiot.
Looking at the EO in question, it does not seem to have to apply to Legal Permanent Residents, i.e. Green Card holders. So someone in the relevant agency has made a judgment call to do so. Is that because they are (1) hyper vigilant, (2) an unthinking drone or (3) trying to embarrass and undermine Trump by making implementation as noxious a PR disaster as possible?
I tend to think (3), but having dealt with US Immigration authorities for years, it's really hard to say it's not (2).
I know that for the left/MSM there is no history, but US immigration authorities have been a-holes for years. It's like they compensate for all the illegals they can't or won't catch by being extra nasty to people who are following all the rules.
1984 was (and is) a satire of sorts about Communism. Other generalizations are specious.
@WilliamHR
Non-citizens outside of the US have zero constitutional rights. If, in fact, the ACLU is making that argument they are going to lose.
"But under the 1990 law known as the Lautenberg Amendment, the federal government initially granted a presumption of refugee eligibility for Jews and Christians fleeing the former Soviet Union and Southeast Asia. Nowadays, the amendment, extended last year by Obama, prioritizes the resettlement of Jews, Christians, Baha’is, and other religious minorities who flee Iran."
I agree with Althouse.
Of the three people running in 2008, Hillary! was the best choice and McCain the worst - and that should by no means be taken as any support for Hillary!
The squawking in the media about Trump acting rash and creating chaos is BS; it just means they were not prepared for him winning. They did not think it possible.
But Trump and his team have had quite some time to think and plan ahead, and I do not think there is anything at all impromptu about what they are doing.
Nev never forget that 1984 was about IngSoc or English socialism
Socialism is impossible witout force
John Henry
Blogger FullMoon said...
Not gonna lie, personally cannot wait until Trump begins executing all opposition, or sending them to prison camps. No doubt Bannon and his alt. right, KKK Nazi gang compiling lists as we speak.
Do you guys actually read Althouse's posts or is this just a forum to vent emotionally?
The media is an arm to the democrat party. They lie.
The ACLU who got the federal judge to issue a stay, is arguing that Trump's ban is a violation Due Process and Equal Protection because it focuses on Muslims. When Trump made a carve out for Christians in his EO, he made it all about religious persecution of Muslims. That was a big mistake on his part.
roesch/voltaire: (Side note, I taught l984, in l984 when many also thought Reagan was big brother; it seems any leader who claims to be a savior, as some Trump folks believe, is open to this trope).
Works for "Hitler", too. Any leader the left doesn't like is "open to this trope" (or any negative trope) in the minds of not very bright teachers and their not very bright students. (The brighter students will notice what the book is about despite the clumsy, inapt analogizing, but, hey, you tried.)
Wow, James Hoffa is on Maria Bartiromo's show praising Trump.
That is what Elizabeth Warren should be worried about.
Whoa there, careful with those alternative facts that dis-spell the narrative.
The corrupt democrat media industrial complex is Big Brother.
Why of course these propagandists would tell us that it's really Trump.
To read 1984 and not realize that it describes the Obama years is an indicator of complete brain-washing.
Also: Obama being, as a person, not a gigantic moral failure like the other recent liberal heroes (Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy) is the only reason his hagiography isn't seen for the silliness it is. He was a mediocre president, and maybe worse once we see the final effects of his decisions. But, since he didn't have a gigantic, publicized moral scandal, he's going to forever be lionized.
who seems to enjoy creating chaos and controversy when it could be easily avoided.
By pushing the Left's agenda. That's the only way to avoid conflict with the Left.
holdfast: I know that for the left/MSM there is no history, but US immigration authorities have been a-holes for years. It's like they compensate for all the illegals they can't or won't catch by being extra nasty to people who are following all the rules.
This seems to be the common experience among legal immigrants I've known, over many decades.
"It's just because Trump did a thing, and it does not matter one bit what the thing was, or what the next thing will be."
-- And we'd be seeing the same thing if it was Cruz, Rubio, McCain, Romney, Palin or any other Republican president. Yeah, yeah, yeah. The Democrats say that Trump is different, but I've seen the reactions to Republican moderates over the last decade. When the woman who beat up her own party for corruption in Alaska is made out to be a partisan idiot, when Romney--the guy who sat with a dying kid to help him write his will--is made out to be a inhuman monster, and when the media and Democrats turn a blind eye to Obama insulting McCain's physical handicap as "inability to use a computer" because he couldn't use a keyboard--it is 100% clear that the problem isn't Trump.
Yeah, I disagree with Trump on things and he isn't on my top 10 list of choices. But, I haven't spent more than a decade completely demonizing and attempting to delegitimize every political opponent I've ever had, so you know, my issues/concerns mean something other than, "He's on the wrong team."
"The Journal said it got an advance look at a statement by the State Department that the refugee ban extends beyond just citizens of Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Libya and Yemen, but also to people who may originally come from those countries but have a passport from another nation or dual nationality."
-- Yeah. I'd take leaks from the State Department with... let's say many fine grains of salt.
It's been pretty clear that our vetting process is broken. Taking 90 days to work out alternatives with a moratorium on the countries identified as being the biggest danger seems like something reasonable that is being taken as a pretext by the professional protesters whose aim is the destruction of liberal democracy. It's hard to take these crazies seriously, but we should.
PB -- you can't be serious if you think 1984 resembles the Obama years. If that were the case you would not be here today to write about it.
Yeah. If you're an idiot.
Brilliant rebuttal.
Blogger PB said...
To read 1984 and not realize that it describes the Obama years is an indicator of complete brain-washing.
wtf?
"According to most here, Obama was weak."
-- No. In fact, the problem with Obama is that where he chose to be strong (expanding executive power, infringing on Congress' power, unilateral foreign policy decisions without much thought), were areas where he made terrible, terrible choices. The problem was never that Obama was weak; the problem was that he grabbed the bull by the horns and then proceeded to smash all the china in the china shop with.
"To read 1984 and not realize that it describes the Obama years is an indicator of complete brain-washing.
wtf?"
-- Eh, it's just as rational as people claiming it is about Reagan or Bush or Clinton or Trump.
It is Brave New World, not 1984.
Matthew Sablan said...
it's just as rational as people claiming it is about Reagan or Bush or Clinton or Trump.
Where does anyone do this here? You are creating straw men.
Hollywood knows how to do Orwellian. Hilariously, and sadly, they have no idea.
If there were Green Cards issued based on fraud or perjury, then those should be investigated and the Green Cards withdrawn, etc. But absent that, Green Card holders (Legal Permanent Residents) are entitled to the presumption that they are allowed to enter the country.
For those who have not gone through the process, application for a Green Card requires much more "vetting" than that for a temporary visa like an H1-B. Also a lot more than for citizenship. Essentially the Green Card application process is (or at least is supposed to be) the most thorough in the immigration process - once one has a Green Card citizenship just requires waiting 5 years and a bit more paperwork.
"Where does anyone do this here? You are creating straw men."
-- Literally in the same thread above: "(Side note, I taught l984, in l984 when many also thought Reagan was big brother; it seems any leader who claims to be a savior, as some Trump folks believe, is open to this trope)"
Reading! It's helpful.
steve uhr: He is just a jerk who seems to enjoy creating chaos and controversy when it could be easily avoided.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, we know. "Chaotic", "controversial", "divisive", etc., blah blah blah.
The above terms still have meaning, even if they've been simplified and stripped of any semantic shading: they're all synonyms for "not rolling over for the lefty agenda".
Also, this entire thread is predicated on the story that 1984 is selling so people can try and understand Trump.
"1984" is about "labor left" and communism; "Brave New World" is about the gentry left.
PURPLE ELEPHANTS, a primer:
Trump: these seven countries
Press: racist!
Trump: this is Obama's list of countries
Press: what about the countries where you have personal interests?
Trump: like?
Press: how will this keep us safe?
Trump: it's a start
Press: the hijackers were largely Saudis
Trump: the press gets what it wants. I am expanding Obama's list
PURPLE ELEPHANTS cannot be un-thought...
Matthew Sablan said...
Literally in the same thread above:
Do you understand what the word here means? What it doesn't mean is an anecdote from thirty years ago.
Frantzman says: "But the media should also be truthful with the public..."
George Orwell said: "We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men."
The Obama years, and to a great degree before then also, was a time of the restriction of speech and liberty, at least among those against which the left has leverage.
Academics have almost universally shut up, and these were joined by every sort of corporate executive and nearly everyone in the management and professional ranks. Silence, if they know whats good for them.
At one time people like T.J.Rodgers of Cypress Semiconductor or Andy Grove of Intel (who had a lot of Trump-like ideas) could say what they thought.
Now it does not suffice to be silent, but even silent acts will condemn you. Brendan Eich was brought down by a campaign contribution, regardless of his professional standing and stellar record. Only politics count.
In this environment the liberty to speak is extremely limited, it is a semi-totalitarian country still. The only truly free men are billionaires like Trump and Peter Thiel, or people who have nothing to lose.
Maybe I'm being confused. I said that thinking 1984 can be interepreted about Obama is as rational as interpreting it about a number of other people. You said that was a straw man that no one does it; I pointed out that, actually, literally, in this very thread, people show you that it happens.
"Liberty to speak is extremely limited ". Really? Has your liberty to speak been limited by the government. What about anyone you know personnally. You don't know how good you have it when it comes to free speech.
The Democrat Party has always been at war with Middle America.
Matthew Sablan said...
Maybe I'm being confused.
Very confused. No one here was making that argument. If you think the school students in Anglelyne's thirty year old anecdote were making that argument take it up with them.
This is the pathetic part of much of the argumentation that goes on here. Oh! he said that, and she said that. Why not stick the actual arguments made by real people here. I could just as easily draw in all the batshit crazy stuff the right believes. Why don't we shoot up a pizza place? I hear that is all the rage on the right.
Steven Miller and Bannon are writing these executive orders without consulting the State Department or other agencies to check if the EO goes against current law. Why was Bannon put on the National Security Council while the DIL and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are outed.
I see the DNC seminar has finished and the attendees are busy posting comments.
Under Obama -- as pointed out here in these pages months and years ago -- thoughtcrime became a reality. Under Obama, Winston Smith's entry, "Freedom is the freedom to say that 2 plus 2 makes 4" suddenly made sense. Under Obama, truth became a malleable thing, even truth about the most fundamental aspects of life, such as that a man is a man and not a woman, and again under Obama, anyone who demurred to this fictionalized truth was an enemy of the state.
When Trump made a carve out for Christians in his EO, he made it all about religious persecution of Muslims. That was a big mistake on his part.
The Syrian Christians who have really been persecuted unlike the Muslims fleeing economic chaos, have been excluded by Obama policies since the Syrian thing began. They are murdered in refugee camps in the ME and so have mostly fled the UN camps. There were a number of instances of Christians being thrown from boats of refugees to drown.
What Trump is doing is changing the Obama rules to allow the Christians who are NOT in the UN run refugee camps to be admitted.
There have been so far 56 Christian Syrian refugees admitted the past two years. Thousands of Muslims.
At one time people like T.J.Rodgers of Cypress Semiconductor or Andy Grove of Intel (who had a lot of Trump-like ideas) could say what they thought.
The Dartmouth administration changed the rules for election to the Board of Trustees after Rodgers was elected by dissidents (like me).
Rodgers is a very distinguished alum of Dartmouth but he was excluded from the Board. He could not run for re-election.
Seeing as you don't even know who I quoted, I don't think you're actually putting in too much effort into thinking about this. This entire thread has turned in to a discussion on the NYT's piece on Trump-as-1984. The entire discussion is entirely about how people interpret that piece of work, and Roesch mentioned that even in 1984 when he was teaching it, it was common for people to interpret it about Reagan. The point was that reading 1984 about a political leader you dislike is not uncommon or fanciful. If you want to say "No! We shall only talk about the things people here are saying," then you've missed the entire point of the piece.
Also, even without thinking about it, as a regular, you should know who the quote came from. Angeldyne is not a teacher, and as far as I've seen, never mentions convenient anecdotes. Roesch, on the otherhand, is a teacher. Who teaches a lot of things by the way, with an anecdote each week for the point he wants to make. Why, last week he was teaching evolution -- at the college level -- for a convenient anecdote. He's also taught college level physics when an example was needed from his hat.
If you aren't going to take the care to realize what we're talking about and who we're referencing, it just isn't worth the time to engage with you.
But your ability to engage in free speech has been limited in fact, regardless of your legal rights.
Legal rights are a fig leaf over reality.
I grew up in a dictatorship that had very few "legal" restrictions on free speech. And almost never enforced them, legally. All of this was done informally and extra-legally, much like the modern US system, if less sophisticated and "modern".
"But your ability to engage in free speech has been limited in fact, regardless of your legal rights."
-- I can say whatever I want just as freely under Obama as under Bush as under Trump; the social consequences may be different though.
He is just a jerk who seems to enjoy creating chaos and controversy when it could be easily avoided. It isn't enough if we are only talking about him 23/7.
That was a fair statement, Steve, until the last sentence.
The political left does not seem to understand OODA loops.
I'm still -- after all these years -- not getting the lefty female fascination for Barack Obama. Is it just alleged ( based on stereotype) penis size? Could this also explain their derision for Don Trump's hands? Sometimes motive is easy to figure out.
Didn't sales of 1984 jump after Obama's election and especially during the Obamacare legislation process? I guess that a lot of people who were buying 1984 back then also were buying Atlas Shrugged, so it was okay to mock them back then. The people buying 1984 today are totally different and MUST BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY! Because. Or Something. Uh. I dunno.
"Didn't sales of 1984 jump after Obama's election and especially during the Obamacare legislation process?"
-- Don't know. It would be interesting for someone to actually do a graph/chart of the history of sales of 1984 to see if this is out of the ordinary, and if so, by how much. Maybe someone has and I missed it.
Matthew Sablan said...
Seeing as you don't even know who I quoted,
Having lost the specific argument you try to distract. What is more Orwellian than a propaganda campaign that convinces people that they should shoot up pizza parlors based on the information provided by that propaganda campaign.
Matthew Sablan: Also, even without thinking about it, as a regular, you should know who the quote came from. Angeldyne is not a teacher...
ARM made me a teacher? God, I feel sorry for even imaginary students being stuck with me as a teacher.
Love what your autocorrect (I assume, it looks autocorrecty) did with "Angeldyne". That's a great name for a robot, at least as good as "Angle-een". Mind if I adopt it?
The distinction in the modern US is that the people restricted are those over whom the powers that be have a hold.
People with professional careers, with fiduciary responsibilities, with employees, in industries subject to high level boycott (some industries are exempt from this, being entirely in the zone of the other side, like civilian small arms & oil&gas).
The inauguration blackball campaign against entertainers is instructive. Consider this - the same, exactly, but more quietly would happen to the executives and mid-level employees of the bulk of the Fortune 1000.
It will be difficult for the USA's media to now "Speak truth to power" as they are very out of practice in doing so after eight years of intensive, self-imposed, slavery to Obama and the DNC.
ARM: Having lost the specific argument you try to distract. What is more Orwellian than a propaganda campaign that convinces people that they should shoot up pizza parlors based on the information provided by that propaganda campaign.
Having lost the specific argument, you try to distract.
But you're all right. You're a high-quality troll, and I got nothin' against high-quality trolling. (One of the things I like about Trump, as a matter of fact.)
My apologies to Anglelyne on the misquote, but your obsessive concern with other people's jobs and identities is more than a little creepy.
And, given this concern, you still failed to spell her nom de plume correctly: 'Angeldyne'.
"The people buying 1984 today are totally different and MUST BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!"
I assume the NYT et al. are in full fling-anything-and-everything-at-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks mode. Obviously, 1984 was written with the mass movements of the 1930's and 1940's – especially communism and Stalin's regime – in mind, and it's quite a stretch to argue that Orwell's collectivist dystopia is relevant to Trump's administration, but not that of your run-of-the-mill modern Democratic president.
In short, Trump is Hitler, except when he's Stalin. Repeat as needed.
Anglelyne said...
Having lost the specific argument, you try to distract.
I don't think it is fair to call inverting the argument a distraction. I feel you could more reasonably complain about me highlighting the argument in the first place, given its stupidity.
There is nothing Orwellian about being prompted to shoot up pizza parlors by a dissident media campaign. The dissident campaign itself is as anti-Orwellian as can be, as it is disruptive of the official line, whether it is right or wrong.
The system Orwell invented (or described) is much deeper and more insidious than mere lies. Many elements in that insidious program are in effect in the modern US, including the modification of language to preclude thought along lines inconvenient to the system.
buwaya said...
The dissident campaign itself is as anti-Orwellian as can be,
Nonsense. Orwell was first and foremost a journalist. Orwell is very unlikely to have been on the side of the pizza shooter or those who provoked him.
I tried to show you lot how PURPLE ELEPHANTS are anti-Orwellian. buwaya makes the same point @ 10:48am.
Ignore as you will but know you, Leftist Collectivists, are playing the game as directed by Trump. You cannot help yourselves.
Oh, God, can we stop with the OODA thing? That's a re-work of human-resources shit. Kill it with fire.
"AReasonableMan" cannot understand. Literally it is beyond his measure. He cannot understand Orwell. He cannot understand Trump. He cannot understand why the normal Leftist process of destroying people has failed to work.
ARM,
I dont think you get what Orwell was saying.
Its deeper than that. His appendix to 1984 is useful.
Bob Ellison:
I believe it was a fighter pilot thing.
NYT emails cofusing top story headline
After protests, the Trump administration seemed to scale back the president's immigration ban, but confusion continued
Also, if you want a thorough look into Orwell the man, you need to crack his other books. As to law&order, consider "Burmese Days".
At one time Orwell was himself a policeman.
A fighter pilot thing.
Looks like a Deal to me. Look, Trump is cruel and vicious! We need someone to help him be mature and kind. Maybe we should vote on Tillerson on Monday so we can get an adult in charge....
On another note, Soros is in full display this weekend and we can see exactly why European nations are trying to remove this cancer from their countries. Anyone believe all these people protesting at the airports showed up so quickly, on their own?
ARM changes the topic and finds his squirrel. No no - Leftists are not Orwellian - because Pizza shooter.
Shall we run down the list of crazed leftwing shooters? Start with Gabby Giffords shooter, go from there...?
Non-response, Bob Ellison.
Wait a minute, Obama understood economics? He started out on the national stage as a community organizer getting federal money to spend. He ended his presidency by adding to the federal national debt 10 trillion dollars.
And, he got sucked into a Keynesian economic justification for a massive redistribution of wealth to families and cronies of top Dem politicians. Better than 30 years after Keynesian economic stimulation had been empirically debunked. Which, of course, is a big part of why this has been the weakest economic recovery since the last major attempt at Keynesian stimulation (FDR and his lengthening of the Great Depression). While Nancy Pelosi was running around talking about 3x, 4x, 5x fiscal multipliers, a lot of us were getting ready for just what we got - a long, long, recession and weak recovery. It never has worked, even when theoretically it should have been most useful (the equity trap we faced in the early 1930s). Rather, it was just a thin justification for looting the American people, for the benefit of their friends and families, because they "won". Though, I suspect that economic illiterates like Pelosi (in particular) and Obama may have actually bought on to the scheme.
But, in Ann's defense, this was all in the future. The information that she had going into the 2008 election was that McCain sounded stupid in regards to the economy, and Obama, by essentially saying nothing, and just nodding his head sagely, didn't. The reality, of course, was just the opposite, McCain, while not an expert, likely knew much more than the failed community organizer he was running against. But McCain opened his mouth (and temporarily suspended his campaign), and Obama didn't. The rest is history, including Ann's vote.
Another day, another glorious day where corrupt Hillary and her corrupt Orwellian hollywood media hacks are not president.
woohooo!
The executive order seems reasonable. It is not a 'muslim ban' as everyone is hyperventilating about. All it does is suspend things from those 'countries of concerns' until we get the vetting process fine-tuned. Why can't we do that?
I didn't even see anything in there about denying entry to those holding Green Cards. So when I listened to the local news last night, and heard some judge had stopped that part of the order, without explaining which part of the order it was, I was left scratching my head. Did the judge, if there was a judge, even read the EO, or did he too, get suckered into fake news shirt rending?
I can see ARM as The Salad Shooter.
Bruce Hayden... excellent.
I'd suggest, though, that Obama was going to win no matter what slip McCain made. Forget about economics - it was all optics.
buwaya said...
At one time Orwell was himself a policeman.
Attempts by the right to co-opt Orwell are always interesting but I very much doubt that he would have been a fan of Steve Bannon.
Hagar said...
CBS News even managed to bring up Anne Frank in connection with Trump's order.
Well, this overdone hysteria will work in Trump's favor.
I also think the TSA and whatever opther agencies will seek to sabotage the order.
Count on it. And when they do, it would be a great time to finally rid ourselves of the Bureau of Molesters.
Birkel, I'm just trying to add to the conversation. You seem to be trying to have an argument. That's OK. I can do debate. What's the topic?
AprilApple said...
Start with Gabby Giffords shooter, go from there...?
"The director of research on hate groups for the Southern Poverty Law Center noted that Loughner's political positions were a "hallmark of the far right and the militia movement."[44] In the aftermath of the shooting, the Anti-Defamation League reviewed messages by Loughner, and concluded that there was a "disjointed theme that runs through Loughner's writings", which was a "distrust for and dislike of the government.""
"Loughner had expressed a longstanding dislike for Gabrielle Giffords. Tierney recalled that Loughner had often said that women should not hold positions of power. He repeatedly derided Giffords as a "fake". This belief intensified after he attended her August 25, 2007 event when she did not, in his view, sufficiently answer his question: "What is government if words have no meaning?" Loughner kept Giffords' form letter, which thanked him for attending the 2007 event, in the same box as an envelope which was scrawled with phrases like "die bitch" and "assassination plans have been made"."
Orwell was, by and by, neither left nor right.
He was simply right, in different ways at different times.
He is well worth reading, entirely. He wrote up his whole life in one form or another, and it is fascinating.
Who knows, actually, whom he would have admired.
His tastes were eclectic and would surprise modern Miss Grundy's.
chickelit: I'm still -- after all these years -- not getting the lefty female fascination for Barack Obama.
I suspect you've been trying to analyze it rationally. Rationality, like goodness, has nothing to do with it, dearie.
You can probably pick up as good an insight into this stuff on cheesy PUA sites, as anywhere else.
See also:
Don't ask what they're protesting against, they haven't got a clue in hell, either.
I wish I could deport these people from my sex.
Obama screwed the Hatians in September.
When will that stir outrage?
What about the deal with Castro?
Will that stir outrage?
It seems like at least some immigration officers are enforcing the EO against Green Card holders. It's not clear if it was meant to apply to them, but if it is being so applied, then it's logical that they've lawyered up to fight it. After spending significant time and money to obtain Green Cards, any revocation should be subject to due process.
"I didn't even see anything in there about denying entry to those holding Green Cards."
The meat of the Exec.Order appears to be this:
I hereby proclaim that the ... entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to ... would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, ... of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas...
(Elisions done for clarity and hopefully did not materially affect meaning.) It seems pretty across-the-board – if you're from an affected country and you're not a diplomat, no dice. The effect on existing green card holders seems capricious, presumably there will be some clarification forthcoming.
Political correctness is proof that the left doesn't want freedom of speech. The Left demands that everyone speak--and think--according to their dictates. The right does not demand that. The Left is far more 'Orwellian', if you will, than is the Right.
I was reading this morning that Canada is considering a law against 'Islamophobia'. Really? A law against a phobia? Maybe my fear of spiders would be punishable in Canada.
So, I see ARM is attempting to use the far left SPLC to tie Loughner (a known lunatic and member of no "far right" or "militia" organization, basically a "lone wolf") to the entire right wing.
Gee, that was unexpected!
Oh, while simultaneously arguing that actual Islamic jihadis should not be viewed as emblematic of Islamic supremacists!
#ThisIsHowYouGetTrump
When we get a strong Stalinesque figure in office, we will let you know, ARM.
Did you live under Stalin so you can be helpful and point things out?
Southern Poverty Law Center-(self)beclowned, not credible. Loughner's friends said he was a self-proclaimed Leftist. But one who would not read the Lefty classics they wanted him to read. Loughner's distrust of the Government has to do with them issuing money featuring the words "In God We Trust."
Bob wants to put the brakes on OODA by mistaking its origins.
ARM: "The director of research on hate groups for the Southern Poverty Law Center..."
As Orwellian a title, position, and organization as were ever instantiated into reality.
Nicely done, ARM.
So now the left is anti-government and anti-women? You guys will believe anything. It is genuinely amazing. Everything in your world is conditional. That's Orwellian.
Bwaaaaaa
Michelle said Obama's going to make you get outside your comfort zone, but DJT?
Bwaaaaaa
These nut jobs will be marching every weekend.
He's going to exhaust them!
The rest of us will just live our lives.
Just to add to what Paco Wove' said:
"Senior administration officials told CBS News Saturday that for permanent American residents — those holding green cards — from the listed countries, their readmittance to the U.S. will be done on a “case by case exemption process.”"
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-travel-ban-could-affect-green-card-holders-officials-say/
Even when the order is crafted in defensible language that is not a religious-based testing of "Muslim" immigrants, I get the impression that the Trump administration likes to present the thing as a ban on "Muslim-majority countries" in a nod to Trump's campaign pledge, where he read the press release with himself in the third person; "Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on."
In short, even though Trump is being criticized for a "Muslim ban" that isn't technically a "Muslim ban" at all, the Trump administration is sort of enjoying it.
Trolling the media, and world opinion.
SPLC!!!
Drink!
SPLC.
Follow the Benjamins.
Yes, the Left is anti-woman.
It doesn't consider females who don't follow group-pussy think women.
Like KAC, SP, or a lot of women here.
Once again, ARM spreads the lie that Loughner, a schizophrenic, was somehow conservative. The Southern Poverty Law Center(as reliable a source as Stormfront) somehow neglected to mention Loughner also murdered a very conservative judge in the same attack.
As I said when I called you out on your dishonesty before, repeating a lie over and over again does not make it true. It only highlights your own lack of integrity.
The Southern Poverty Law Center ????
Hilarious. That was a successful scam by an entrepreneurial lawyer who has built a nice left empire on lies.
Loughner's mother worked for the leftist Pima County sheriff who was the one who began the campaign against Sarah Paln and lost his next election. She had concealed the complaints against her son by other students in Pima JC who were terrorized by his psychotic behavior.
You are unusually pitiful today ARM.
From what I'm seeing, the problem is that Trump isn't a lifelong pol and actually acts !
Try and keep up, ARM.
That you STILL can't understand what's been documented and commented here for years....
Its not that you don't agree, it's that you don't understand. You don't have to agree, but not to even have a clue about our POV.
Anthony Romero of the ACLU who got the stay on the ban, disagrees with you Chuck. As I understand it, when Trump carved out an exception for Christian immigrants, he made it about religion. It's unconstitutional.
Post a Comment