"A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take away everything you have."

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Watch Out for Those Right-Wing Christian Terrorists!

So, a bomb almost went off in New York's Times Square last week. Word quickly came out that the person of interest in the attack was a naturalized American citizen originally from Pakistan who had just returned after spending five months there. What was the reaction of the chattering classes?

--New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg on the identity of the bomber: "If I had to guess twenty-five cents..., homegrown maybe a mentally deranged person or someone with a political agenda that doesn't like the health care bill or something." Ah yes, because opponents of the health care bill are in the habit of blowing up cars and buildings.

--New York Congressman Jerrold Nadler gives his expert opinion as well: "Whether the guy who did this, or the people who did this were with some Islamic terrorist group or whether they were some right-wing nut group or whether they were by themselves, in one sense it doesn't matter." Of course not. Islamic terrorists, Republicans, the Christian Right -- they're all the same!

--MSNBC terrorism expert Evan Kohlmann: "The potential culprits -- it's a wide range, I think it's fair to say that the presumption is that it's more likely to be a homegrown group. Whether it's Al-Qaeda group, a right-wing group, whether it's somebody else." Hmmm...like maybe a left-wing group?

--MSNBC's Contessa Brewer on Stephanie Miller's radio show: "There was part of me that was hoping this was not going to be anybody with ties to any kind of Islamic country.... There a lot of people who want to use terrorist intent to justify writing off people who believe in a certain way or come from certain countries or whose skin color is a certain way. I mean they use it as justification for really outdated bigotry." If only the bomber were a right-wing Christian, it would be very politically useful....

--On the O'Reilly Factor last night, O'Reilly asked liberal radio talk show host Alan Colmes about why Obama refuses to call this bombing an act of Islamic terrorism. Colmes countered by saying, "Wait a minute. We have a Christian militia who said I'm going to throw rocks through Democratic office buildings. Should we define that as Christian terrorism." Now I'm finally getting it. Right-wing Christians and Islamic jihadists are all the same. Some wacky militia person talks about throwing rocks through a building, and Muslim jihadists have attempted four mass killings on U.S. soil just since September. Sounds like Christian and Islamic terrorists are both a serious threat!!!

--Mayor Bloomberg had some additional words of wisdom after it was proven that the Times Square bomber was, in fact, an Islamic terrorist: "I want to make clear that we will not tolerate any bias or backlash against Pakistani or Muslim New Yorkers. All of us live in this city. And among any group, there's always a few bad apples." This warning is clearly necessary due to the meteoric rise in violence against Muslims in the U.S. after previous terrorist attacks. Wait....there wasn't any. Maybe Mayor Bloomberg should be warning Muslims to stop killing American civilians?

Now, put these comments together with the Nazi and racism rhetoric of the left about the Arizona law cracking down on illegal immigration and the Tea Party movement, and a disturbing picture is starting to emerge. Health care policy and government spending and illegal immigration and Islamic terrorism are serious policy concerns for our country, and it's important to be able to discuss them openly, honestly, and rationally. Unfortunately, that is becoming increasingly hard to do because the Left will not engage the Right on policy. All they want to do is yell "Racist"! They continue to falsely accuse Republicans of supporting the status quo on health care. They have no solution to the problem of illegal immigration and their only policy position on the issue is to claim Republicans are bigoted and racist against Mexicans. They make up racial incidents at Tea Party rallies out of thin air and then claim the entire movement is some kind of power play by white supremacists. They equate Christian fundamentalists and Muslim fundamentalists, despite the fact that Christian fundamentalists don't commit acts of terrorism, and they immediately play politics with any terrorist attack by using it as an excuse to attack "homegrown right-wing nuts." And I'm not talking about Daily Kos and Moveon.org. I'm talking about columnists from major newspapers, anchors and senior reporters on cable news channels, and top elected politicians such as big city mayors and members of Congress in leadership positions.

And yes, I include the President of the United States in that category too. Because Obama himself uses the same inflammatory rhetoric. Obama himself was quoted in a new book by Jonathan Alter as calling members of the Tea Party "teabaggers," an insulting and obscene sexual reference. He told flagrant lies about the Arizona immigration law, claiming that if you were Hispanic you could be arrested "just for walking down the street to get ice cream." He and his administration refuse to even use terms like "Islamic terrorism" or "jihad" or "radical Islam" for fear of offending Muslims, but his Department of Homeland Security has specifically singled out "right-wing militia groups" and "anti-abortion activists" as threats to our country's security. He has personally attacked everyone from Cambridge, MA cops to Sarah Palin to Fox News, which is far below his dignity as President. (I challenge my readers to point out one time in which President Bush EVER personally attacked private citizens, elected officials, his presidential predecessors, or news organizations during his 8 years in office.)

The political climate today is the most polarized and angry I have ever seen it. And the Left is primarily to blame for that. They are following a scorched earth policy of ramming through an unpopular, hard-left agenda on purely partisan votes, and then, with help from their pals in the media, demonizing ordinary citizens exercising their constitutional right to protest and speak out. If you are against illegal immigration or government-run health care, or if you believe Islamic terrorism is a serious threat, or if you are sympathetic to Tea Party ideals of limited government, then the Democratic Party and the White House consider you a racist, a bigot, and a threat to America. Of course, conservatives are becoming more and more outraged at these unfair charges, which just serves to increase the temperature of the debate.

It is vital that we as conservatives channel our anger into making every effort to vote out the bums and elect principled conservatives to the House and the Senate this year (and then the Presidency in 2012). I don't think we can take another 6 years of Democratic control.

7 comments:

Where are my khakis? said...

I don't know if Bush attacked private citizens, elected officials, his presidential predecessors, or news organizations, but he did attack THE ENTIRE COUNTRY OF IRAQ!

Also, that Hispanic person just "walking down the street to get ice cream" could be arrested if he/she were j-walking.

Now above I was mostly joking, but doesn't the AZ law remind you of legislation about blacks from the 1850's? That wasn't all that great . . .

Natedawg said...

Thanks for commenting, Where Are My Khakis.

There is no resemblance between the AZ law and the slavery/segregationist laws against blacks. None at all. Not only does the AZ law not call for discrimination against Latinos -- it specifically prohibits racial profiling! The law is not against any ethnic group. It is against illegal immigrants. Surely you will concede that illegal immigrants do not have a legal right to be in this country. Most Latinos in Arizona are there legally. It is unlikely they would even elicit reasonable suspicion, but if they do all they have to do is show the cop their driver's license and they have nothing to worry about. There's nothing extreme about this law. It just enforces laws that have existed on the federal books for decades.

I certainly hope that you do not hold to the belief that it is racist to oppose illegal immigration.

Where are my Khakis? said...

I do not think it is racist to oppose illegal immigration, and to be frank, this law doesn't really bother me all that much. My only concern is, well, what I stated before. Something about requiring law enforcement to stop/question/detain/arrest anyone they have a "reasonable suspicion" about is unsettling to me.

"All they have to do is show the cop their driver's license." Well, not everyone has a drivers license. I'm guessing that new (legal) immigrants don't have the best jobs, and may not be able to afford a car . . .

Requiring any group of people to carry their papers around with them at all times is disconcerting. Do you really feel 0% of that?

Dat Dude said...

The law is requiring everyone to carry identification with them. Not just Mexicans. The law has nothing to do with racism. It is cracking down on illegal immigration. This includes terrorists who enter the country through the mexican border or anyone from any country who is entering the US illegally. In this case, a large majority are mexicans. That doesn't make the law racist.

But since this enforcement law was signed by a Republican in a Republican state, the liberals have to label it as "racist" in order to gain politcal points and more votes.

Natedawg said...

Unlike the ridiculously over the top racist and Nazi charges being routinely made by the left, your concerns are legitimate and reasonable. As I said in my original post on this topic, I don't think this law is perfect and I have some concerns about it. Like you said, it is possible this law could lead to abuse or harrassment of legal immigrants (although I think there are safeguards in the bill itself that should prevent that). I also expressed concerns in my original post about how it could affect the relationship between the Latino community and local law enforcement. I understand your uneasiness about requiring people to carry their papers with them at all times, but it's my understanding that this is actually a federal requirement for non-citizens in this country anyway. So it's not like this law creates a brand new requirement that didn't exist before. And honestly, I don't think it's an overly burdensome requirement.

It's easy for talking heads and pundits to offer arm-chair opinions about this law, but they don't have to live with the effects of illegal immigration every day the way Arizonans do. Illegal immigration is creating a serious crisis in this state, and the state is trying to respond and get control of the situation. This law would not have been necessary if the federal government were doing its job and controlling the border. Even now, it's apparent that most of the politicians in Washington would rather attack Arizona for being "racist" instead of doing their job and fixing this problem. It is inexcusable that U.S. citizens from Arizona, many of whom have been there for generations, should have to live in a war zone. I understand the concerns about this bill, but I also sympathize with the people of Arizona and I think the Arizona government is doing what it has to do to protect its people. Maybe the federal government should try that sometime.

Where are my Khakis? said...

Dat Dude: I never mentioned Hispanics or any other specific race (I guess I did once in my original comment b/c I was quoting). I also never mentioned that I thought the law was racist (I don't), but that doesn't mean I am comfortable with the requirements or implications of the legislation.

Regarding your second point, of course liberals are going to complain/campaign. This is no different than Republicans preaching armegeddon because a bill was signed by a Democratic president and passed by a Democratic congress.

For every stupid liberal media or liberal politician's quote you can post here, there are easily as many stupid Fox News or conservative politician's quotes. Are all of these people actually dumb? Are they being 100% sincere when they say silly things? I sure hope not . . .

Bottom line, this bill is relatively popular, and we (I think) are relatively indifferent to the bill. Immigration is probably the area I am most conservative, and you (Natedawg) least conservative. So I will save some of my willpower for juicier debates :)

Dat Dude said...

Khakis- The "requirements" in this law are the same requirements in current federal law. The Arizona law is what you could call a re-enforcement of the federal law that is not being enforced by the feds so now the state had to take matters into their own hands. This is nothing new so I don't see what the problem is.

The illegal immigrants are breaking the law and should be arrested and deported.