I talked about the falsity of the media narrative yesterday that a bipartisan chorus roundly condemned Trump's Muslim ban.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/12/the-most-cloying-and-dishonest.html
But really it's worse than that even. It''s not just that Trump's policy is very popular among Republicans.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-muslim-ban-polls_566ac9fde4b080eddf57d05e?vlhaor
We saw 57 House Democrats support a ban on Syrian refugees a few weeks ago. Ok, the good news there is more than half of those have since had second thoughts-though you wonder how it plays now post San Bernandino.
Meanwhile Loretta Sanchez is a Senate Dem candidate who while she''s criticized Trump is saying some rather Trump like things herself.
"Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) claimed Wednesday that “between 5 and 20 percent” of Muslims were willing to “use terrorism” to create an Islamic “caliphate."
"Sanchez made the comment in an interview on “PoliticKING with Larry King,” which was flagged by Buzzfeed News."
“There is a small group, and we don’t know how big that is—it can be anywhere between 5 and 20 percent, from the people that I speak to—that Islam is their religion and who have a desire for a caliphate and to institute that in anyway possible, and in particular go after what they consider Western norms—our way of life," she said.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/loretta-sanchez-muslim-caliphate
All of this is, of course, exactly what ISIS wants. This is the point of 'terrorism.' The Presdient's response to ISIS has been so lied about and distorted.
There are all these semantic games-Morning Joe continues to lie and claim Obama said ISIS couldn't strike in the US. He never said anything like that. Because Obama is an adult he doesn't' make such categorical statments on something like this.
But the GOPers play their semantics game all day He said ISIS was contained. It's not contained. He won't say Islamic Terrorism.
It actually reminds you of Benghazi. This is the GOP way-every time there is a foreign policy tragedy they play word games. With Benghazi it's Why did Hillary Clinton mention a video?
What the President said regarding ISIS being a JV team and that 'They are killers with good social media' has been totally misconstrued. He was refusing to be terrorized by ISIS.
But Morning Joe had a cow. They want to be terrorized. There is this hysterical need to be afraid, very, very afraid.
NY Congressman Steve Israel has a piece in the Huffington Post today.
"The new national mood is, "we have everything to fear, including fear itself." In part, it's an unintended consequence of a political strategy sparked by the far right in 2010 -- or perhaps, after all, it was intentional. "
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-steve-israel/nothing-to-fear-but-gover_b_8777118.html
Meanwhile. Congressman Israel has chosen to be part of this fear. He was not just a supporter of the refugee ban, he warned other Democrats to support it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/house-democrats-syria-refugees_564f5607e4b0879a5b0ac4f7
To say We have everything to fear, including fear itself misses FDR''s point. Fear is the only thing to fear is what he meant. To say fear is just one thing to fear obscures his meaning.
Right now, it seems too many Americans, including some Democrats are not heeding FDR.
Even on that Trump ban it's much less clearcut than many have made this. True a poll showed that 49 percent oppose it and only percent support it.
But isn''t 37 percent way too high for comfort? That's hardly 'only 37%' in the way that you could say 'only 6 percent.'
It may be a minority position but hardly a fringe one. Almost 4 in 10 Americans support a full ban on Muslim immigration.
As for GOPers, it's 65 percent.
And you got to remember the power of framing arguments. To frame it as 'banning Muslims' sounds wrong to most Americans-thankfully-because we don't believe in religious tests. Still, it is possible to frame a policy that is de facto banning of Muslims that sounds a lot more reasonable.
What Rand Paul said, for instance, was he wants to ban immigration from a bunch of countries that all happen to have lots of Muslims.
Rubio says don't ban all Muslims just a lot of them.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/12/the-most-cloying-and-dishonest.html
But really it's worse than that even. It''s not just that Trump's policy is very popular among Republicans.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-muslim-ban-polls_566ac9fde4b080eddf57d05e?vlhaor
We saw 57 House Democrats support a ban on Syrian refugees a few weeks ago. Ok, the good news there is more than half of those have since had second thoughts-though you wonder how it plays now post San Bernandino.
Meanwhile Loretta Sanchez is a Senate Dem candidate who while she''s criticized Trump is saying some rather Trump like things herself.
"Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) claimed Wednesday that “between 5 and 20 percent” of Muslims were willing to “use terrorism” to create an Islamic “caliphate."
"Sanchez made the comment in an interview on “PoliticKING with Larry King,” which was flagged by Buzzfeed News."
“There is a small group, and we don’t know how big that is—it can be anywhere between 5 and 20 percent, from the people that I speak to—that Islam is their religion and who have a desire for a caliphate and to institute that in anyway possible, and in particular go after what they consider Western norms—our way of life," she said.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/loretta-sanchez-muslim-caliphate
All of this is, of course, exactly what ISIS wants. This is the point of 'terrorism.' The Presdient's response to ISIS has been so lied about and distorted.
There are all these semantic games-Morning Joe continues to lie and claim Obama said ISIS couldn't strike in the US. He never said anything like that. Because Obama is an adult he doesn't' make such categorical statments on something like this.
But the GOPers play their semantics game all day He said ISIS was contained. It's not contained. He won't say Islamic Terrorism.
It actually reminds you of Benghazi. This is the GOP way-every time there is a foreign policy tragedy they play word games. With Benghazi it's Why did Hillary Clinton mention a video?
What the President said regarding ISIS being a JV team and that 'They are killers with good social media' has been totally misconstrued. He was refusing to be terrorized by ISIS.
But Morning Joe had a cow. They want to be terrorized. There is this hysterical need to be afraid, very, very afraid.
NY Congressman Steve Israel has a piece in the Huffington Post today.
"The new national mood is, "we have everything to fear, including fear itself." In part, it's an unintended consequence of a political strategy sparked by the far right in 2010 -- or perhaps, after all, it was intentional. "
Meanwhile. Congressman Israel has chosen to be part of this fear. He was not just a supporter of the refugee ban, he warned other Democrats to support it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/house-democrats-syria-refugees_564f5607e4b0879a5b0ac4f7
To say We have everything to fear, including fear itself misses FDR''s point. Fear is the only thing to fear is what he meant. To say fear is just one thing to fear obscures his meaning.
Right now, it seems too many Americans, including some Democrats are not heeding FDR.
Even on that Trump ban it's much less clearcut than many have made this. True a poll showed that 49 percent oppose it and only percent support it.
But isn''t 37 percent way too high for comfort? That's hardly 'only 37%' in the way that you could say 'only 6 percent.'
It may be a minority position but hardly a fringe one. Almost 4 in 10 Americans support a full ban on Muslim immigration.
As for GOPers, it's 65 percent.
And you got to remember the power of framing arguments. To frame it as 'banning Muslims' sounds wrong to most Americans-thankfully-because we don't believe in religious tests. Still, it is possible to frame a policy that is de facto banning of Muslims that sounds a lot more reasonable.
What Rand Paul said, for instance, was he wants to ban immigration from a bunch of countries that all happen to have lots of Muslims.
Rubio says don't ban all Muslims just a lot of them.
Another way ISIS gets what it wants: the case of Obama's nominee Szubin and the Senate failing to confirm anybody or for congress to authorize action against ISIS. Pathetic. I never hear Jennifer Rubin complaining about any of that.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/obama-nominees-judges-appointments-216615