Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Possibly the Only Thing Bill Maher Ever Said That I Agree With

Col. Allen West wrote recently:
The only aspect of Obama’s presidency we can consider “strong” and “effective” is in paving a path for Donald Trump’s meteoric rise.  Trump’s popularity is seen by many as a direct rebuke to the past seven years and a reflection of widespread anger.

One of the few issues Bill Maher has been right on, going against his fellow liberals, is his criticism of radical Islam.  The regressive left refuses to criticize Islam under any circumstances, and that’s why Bill Maher believes Donald Trump is going to take the presidency this November.
Col. West then went on to quote Bill Maher, who said,
Forty countries in the world have some version of Sharia law.  I just don’t understand how liberals who fought the battle for civil rights in the ’60s, fought against apartheid in the ’80s, can then just simply ignore Sharia law in 40 countries.  Apartheid was only in one.  I am not anti-Muslim and never have been: I am anti-bad ideas.  Killing cartoonists and apostates, these are terrible ideas and practices, and it would be lovely to think that they were confined only to terrorists.  They unfortunately are not.

Not to be an “I told ya so,” but when the Syrian refugee crisis happened, I said, “Certainly our hearts go out to these refugees, but the answer can’t be to empty Syria and every other country in the Middle East where people live under repressive conditions and bring them all to Europe.”  Now Sweden is sending 80,000 refugees back and German Chancellor Angela Merkel is saying, “Hey, when we said you could come here, we didn’t mean permanently.”

Rather than letting them settle in Germany, these millions of young Muslim men, how about let’s train them to go back and fight for their own country?  That’s another one of my issues — the soft bigotry of low expectations.  How come Saudi Arabia didn’t take in any Syrian refugees?  I would think they’d fit in there a little more than in Cologne.  Why don’t they fight their own battles?  Why are Muslim armies so useless against ISIS?  ISIS isn’t 10 feet tall.  There are 20,000 or 30,000 of them.  The countries surrounding ISIS have armies totaling 5 million people.  So why do we have to be the ones leading the fight?  Or be in the fight at all?

So no, Donald Trump is not right — but he will win the election if the American people have to choose between his demagoguery and a party that won’t even say the words “Islamic terrorism.”  I think the Democrats could lose on that issue alone, especially if there’s another attack.
Of course, we all hope and pray there is not another terrorist attack.  But Maher is right about the anger of the American people: anger at Democrats who have responded to the threat of terrorism with an astounding inability to speak clearly and frankly about its source.  

But there is a second anger that is propelling Trump's candidacy: anger of the American people at the Republicans who have failed to present an effective challenge in Congress to the Democrats' lemming-like support for Obama's radical agenda.

No comments: