Bachmann: 'Donald Trump Is Right' On Muslim Immigration Ban

Former Rep. Michele Bachmann praised Donald Trump’s proposal to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. yesterday, telling WorldNetDaily that “Donald Trump is right” and that his plan "is the only one that ensures the innocence, safety and security of all Americans, Muslims included":

Former GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann said the media is reacting as though citizens of foreign countries have constitutional rights to enter the U.S.

“Donald Trump is right,” said Bachmann, of Minnesota, which has had its share of problems with Islamic terrorists recruiting young Somali refugees.

“Obama’s insane open-door immigration policies are getting innocent Americans killed.

“No one has a right to enter the United States,” Bachmann continued. “Until we can set up a working, fail-safe vetting system, Trump’s idea is the only one that ensures the innocence, safety and security of all Americans, Muslims included.”

 

Alex Jones And Tucker Carlson Trash 'Hippo' Huma Abedin

Fox News pundit and Daily Caller editor-in-chief Tucker Carlson joined radio host Alex Jones yesterday to discuss Donald Trump’s success in the polls, which led the two commentators to hurl insults at Huma Abedin, a Muslim-American who is one of Hillary Clinton’s top aides, for saying that “Trump wants to literally write racism into our law books” by banning Muslim immigration.

Jones compared Abedin to a hippo featured in a Ringling Bros. poster that was displayed behind Carlson: “Let’s take Huma Abedin, who I notice you have a picture behind you of her on your wall of that Ringling Bros. [poster]. That actually does look like her, Hillary Clinton’s special friend.”

He went on to say that if “Trump or a conservative” had a “special friend” like Clinton does, the media would be all over it. “Her whole background, she seems to just get away with everything,” Jones added. “I think that also sticks in people’s craw that these Democrats and establishment Republicans are above the law, they don’t get reviewed, they don’t get looked at, and then Hillary’s little hippo, she can do whatever she wants, stay in the same hotel room or whatever, this should be looked into.”

Calrson, who was apparently amused by Jones’ joke about Abedin looking at a hippo, took issue with Abedin’s “insane” characterization of Trump’s policies as racist: “That is exactly the kind of language of rhetoric that divides people, that makes people hate each other, that whips the population into a greater frenzy. That’s every bit as irresponsible as anything Donald Trump has suggested and, unlike Donald Trump, she’s actually in a position of power.”

Perkins: 'Only 16 Percent Of Islam Is A Religion' So Immigration Ban Not A 'Religious Test On Muslims'

The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins jumped into the debate over Donald Trump’s call to ban all Muslims from entering the U.S. yesterday, citing the same shoddy Center for Security Policy poll as Trump to say that “we shouldn’t be embarrassed to say that we oppose those who want to come to the United States to destroy it.”

In an email to FRC members last night with the subject line “How Do You Solve a Problem like Sharia?,” Perkins did not mention Trump’s proposal directly, but alluded to the “national discussion” about “who should and shouldn’t be in the country.”

Warning that unlike previous generations today’s immigrants don’t want to “come to America and assimilate,” Perkins declared that the U.S. may soon “lose our identity in the shadow of muliticulturalism.”

He then addressed the debate about Muslim immigration, writing, “What most people either don't realize or willfully ignore is that only 16 percent of Islam is a religion — the rest is a combination of military, judicial, economic, and political system. Christianity, by comparison, isn’t a judicial or economic code — but a faith. So to suggest that we would be imposing some sort of religious test on Muslims is inaccurate. Sharia is not a religion in the context of the First Amendment.”

How Do You Solve a Problem like Sharia?

The word "contentious" doesn't begin to describe the American immigration debate over the last two decades. But in recent days, the lines are being redrawn -- and with it, the national conversation. The focus is no longer being dominated by illegal immigration south of Texas but "legal" immigration coming from across the Atlantic, where a bold new enemy is exposing weaknesses in the West's tolerance.

Attacks in Paris, followed by a mass shooting in California have made believers of Americans, who doubted that radicalized Muslims were one of the greatest threats to our nation. Now, with President Obama offering to throw open the door to more Syrian refugees, more voters from both parties are ready to put the brakes on the process until a better, safer vetting protocol is in place.

As the national discussion turns to immigration, people are starting to stake out positions on who should and shouldn't be in the country. But first, we need to consider one of the unfortunate realities -- in America and elsewhere -- which is that the purpose of immigration has changed. It used to exist for people who wanted to come to America and assimilate. Now, in a dramatic shift from even our grandparents' generation, the "sensitivity" and "diversity" doctrine of the modern age is suggesting that we create cultural enclaves, where outsiders come to our country and live as if they never left home.

That doesn't work, as Europe will tell you. Instead, we lose our identity in the shadow of multiculturalism. It's happened in France, and it's happening in Britain. Leaders are learning a painful message that if you tiptoe around the global realities, you'll pay for it. If people want to live in America -- including Muslims -- they need to embrace our Constitution and our culture. Others have said in less artful ways what conservatives have been warning for years: there is no such thing as coexistence between Sharia law and our constitutional republic. That isn't religious prejudice, but an ideological reality.

What most people either don't realize or willfully ignore is that only 16 percent of Islam is a religion -- the rest is a combination of military, judicial, economic, and political system. Christianity, by comparison, isn't a judicial or economic code -- but a faith. So to suggest that we would be imposing some sort of religious test on Muslims is inaccurate. Sharia is not a religion in the context of the First Amendment. Under the framework proposed by Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Rick Santorum, America wouldn't vet refugees based on religion but an ideology that's incompatible with American liberty. "I've proposed actual concrete things [like eliminating the visa lottery system] and immigration law that would have -- not the effect of banning all Muslims, but a lot of them," Santorum explained.

The bottom line is this: the U.S. Constitution is an agreement between people about how they'll be governed. What good is it if people immigrate to America with the sole purpose of undermining that contract? We shouldn't be embarrassed to say that we oppose those who want to come to the United States to destroy it. And while most Muslims are not radicalized, Sharia certainly encourages it. Based on polling from the Center for Security Policy, that's the system most would choose. The majority of Muslims in America believe they "'should have the choice of being governed by Sharia [law].' Sharia authorizes such atrocities as murder against non-believers who won't convert, beheadings, and more unthinkable acts that pose great harm to Americans, especially women."

In America, we have freedom under the construct of ordered liberty. Even the Wall Street Journal struggles with the clash of these ideologies. "Certainly Islam and the America way of life are compatible in as much as America is capable of welcoming Muslims who are not Islamic supremacists. On the other hand, it's always struck us that categorical statements to the effect that Islam [is peaceful] are far more hortatory than empirical -- which is to say that there is a gap between Islam as it actually exists and Islam as...President Obama would like it to be. How wide that gap is, and how dangerous, we do not know." Nor, I would argue, should we risk the future of our nation to find out.

Brigitte Gabriel: 'Trump Is General Patton Reincarnated'

ACT! for America’s Brigitte Gabriel is, unsurprisingly, a big fan of Donald Trump’s proposal to ban all of the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims from the United States, telling Florida talk radio host Joyce Kaufman yesterday that Trump is “General Patton reincarnated.”

“I was talking with a friend of mine this morning,” Gabriel said, “and he said to me, ‘Trump is General Patton reincarnated. Trump is General Patton in a suit. General Patton, if he was alive today, he would be talking exactly like Trump, he would be doing exactly like Trump. This is the type of leaders we used to have which made America great, and what Trump is trying to do is make America great again. He is the General Patton of our lifetime.’ It was so interesting hearing those words, because you sit back and you think, Donald Trump, he has a way of saying words, but boy did he touch a nerve nationwide.”

Sessions Defends Trump On Muslim Ban, Says It's 'Appropriate To Begin To Discuss This'

Sen. Jeff Sessions, the Alabama Republican who helped Donald Trump craft his far-right immigration platform, came cautiously to Trump’s defense today after Trump proposed banning all Muslims from entering the United States. Sessions said that Trump was “treading on dangerous ground” but that it is “appropriate to begin to discuss” the issue.

“Well, he’s treading on dangerous ground,” Sessions told Stephen Bannon on Breitbart News’ SiriusXM program this morning, “because Americans are so deeply committed to freedom of religion, that is a major part of who we are.”

“But,” he added, “at the same time, we’re in an age that’s very dangerous and we’re seeing more and more persons enter and a lot of them have done terrorist acts and a lot of them believe it’s commanded by their religion … So I think it’s appropriate to begin to discuss this, and he has forced that discussion. We may even have a discussion about it in Judiciary Committee today. But, you know, it’s time for us to think this through and the classical, internal American religious principles I don’t think apply providing constitutional protections to persons not citizens who want to come here.”

“As a principle, we want to be not condemnatory of other people’s religion,” he continued. “And there are millions of wonderful, decent, good Muslims, hundreds of millions worldwide, and so we’ve got to be really careful that we don't cross that line and I guess Mr. Trump has caused us all to think about it more concretely.”

Right Wing Round-Up - 12/9/15

  • Sara Jerde @ TPM: Planned Parenthood Gunman Says He's 'Warrior For The Babies' In Court.

Right Wing Bonus Tracks - 12/9/15

  • Franklin Graham prays that God will open the eyes of leaders who dare to disagree with Trump’s Muslim immigration ban. 
  • Meanwhile, Jeb Bush thinks that Trump is “the other version” of Barack Obama. 
  • Mission America’s Linda Harvey claims Planned Parenthood and the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network are “using children as change agents” and acting as “their escort service into hell.”

Déjà Vu, Global Radicalism Edition

Sometimes, covering the Religious Right every day, we feel like we’re hearing the exact same talking points repeated over and over again.

And then, sometimes, we actually are hearing the exact same talking points.

Earlier today, we wrote about a fundraising email that we got from the Family Research Council asking for money to fight the “sexual radicals” that are going to war with families throughout America. These were the first few paragraphs of FRC’s email:

I've never seen a year like 2015.

And 2016 may be worse—unless Christians like us get ready now.

In 2015, radicals in Washington (including the government), New York, Hollywood, big corporations, and every part of America have declared war on your values. Your family. Your religious beliefs and freedom.

Family Research Council (FRC) met every test head-on to counter and overturn many of the attacks. But now our team of experts and activists needs your year-end gift to end the year ready to protect your values in 2016.

So imagine our surprise when, this afternoon, we got this email from Austin Ruse of the Center for Family & Human Rights (C-Fam), making a very similar argument:

I have never seen anything quite like this.

And 2016 may be worse—unless Christians like us get ready now.

In 2015, radicals at the United Nations, Washington, DC (including the government), New York, Hollywood, big corporations, and every part of global radicalism have declared war on your values. Your family. Your religious beliefs and freedom.

C-Fam met every test head-on to counter and overturn many of the attacks. But now our team of experts needs your year-end-gift to end the year ready to protect your values in 2016.

Times are tough, we guess.

Andrew McCarthy Defends Trump, Says Islam Not A Religion

The Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney has been thrown into the spotlight this week after Donald Trump cited a shoddy poll that his group conducted in his call for a ban on all Muslim immigration and tourism to America.

Gaffney has since been defending both Trump and himself from criticism, and enlisted the help of his frequent ally conservative columnist Andrew McCarthy on his “Secure Freedom Radio” broadcast yesterday.

McCarthy told Gaffney that Trump is “bloviating us into important issues, particularly in the immigration area, that we need as a matter of policy to consider carefully” and has either wittingly or accidentally gotten Americans to discuss whether Islam is in fact a religion that deserves religious protections under American law.

“And I don’t know how much he actually knows about Islam, I don’t know how much he actually knows about immigration law, but he has certainly pushed us into what I think is … the central question that everything else flows from, which is, is Islam, strictly speaking, a religion as we understand religion in the West?” McCarthy said.

“The reason that that’s important,” he explained, “is that we have obvious legal restrictions on using religion as a litmus test for a variety of things, not least immigration.”

McCarthy, for his part, concluded that Islam is not a religion but instead “has ambitions to be more than a religion, that is to say that it is an ideological, sweeping system that does not recognize a division between spiritual life on the one hand and political and civic life on the other,” and therefor does not deserve the same legal protections.

“I don’t know whether Trump is up on these nuances or not, but certainly he has provoked a discussion where we have to start to consider it,” he added.

Gaffney, displeased that the press was prompted by Trump’s comments to revisit Gaffney’s long history of anti-Muslim conspiracy theories , then asked McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor, to reassure listeners that while there are “conspiracy theories,” there are also “conspiracies,” such as the Muslim Brotherhood’s infiltration of the U.S. government.

“There is, at the moment, a considerable effort being made to deprecate yours truly and our center and, I think, others who have been pointing out the kinds of information that you have so well, that this is, oh, just sort of conspiracy theorizing and to be dismissed as such,” Gaffney said. “In your experience, Andy, obviously there are conspiracy theories, but is it not also the case that there are conspiracies? And would you characterize what’s going on with the Brotherhood in America at the moment, including inside our government, as a conspiracy?”

“At the U.S. attorney’s office, we used to say that you can’t have a conspiracy without a conspiracy theory,” McCarthy agreed.

Jim Simpson: Immigrants Will 'Destroy The Culture,' Usher In 'Despotic Governments'

Jim Simpson, an activist who works with Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy to oppose U.S. refugee resettlement efforts, claimed earlier this month that liberals support refugee resettlement and other immigration measures because they want to “destroy the culture” and ultimately “create a huge pool of voters” that they can use to institute “despotic governments.”

Speaking with Alaska talk radio host and former GOP Senate nominee Joe Miller in a program that was posted online on Saturday, Simpson said that “the illegal alien, open borders agenda, the refugee resettlement agenda, for that matter, they all serve all of the left’s strategies.”

It all started, he said, with Sen. Ted Kennedy’s immigration and refugee resettlement efforts.

“His goal was to see America swamped with as many people from as many disparate cultures, poor cultures around the world as he possibly could,” Simpson explained. “That guaranteed two things. It guaranteed, one, that we would have a huge and growing population of needy people who would require government benefits, something perfectly tailored for the Democrats to go out and purchase votes by providing those benefits.

“And, two, to dilute the American culture to the point where it’s unrecognizable, to the point where you and me as red-blooded Americans are just two people on the block among eight or 10 others who are from all over the world and who could care less about the Constitution, could care less about the freedoms that we hold dear, could care less about the American dream and all of the things that go with it. They want the benefits but they don’t want the associated responsibilities. And the Democrats, it’s a perfect recipe for them to amass power. Why? Because you have a population of needy people and, two, those needy people will vote for you.”

Later in the program, Simpson added that refugee resettlement is part of a UN plot “to not merely redistribute income but to redistribute populations around the world and take people from poor countries and move them into wealthy countries as a means of redistributing, so that they can share the benefits of the wealthy countries that they have not been able to before.”

But, he said, “the true agenda” of refugee resettlement and immigration “is much more malevolent.” Liberals, he said, are using immigration “to destroy the culture, to suck up welfare resources and to create a huge pool of voters that will allow the radical left to gain an unbeatable majority for the foreseeable future and after that we will see institution of despotic governments.”

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious