Re: Trump & Muslims -- Democrats, what SHOULD we be doing?

[Mac1958]

Who knows what Trump's recent comments about Muslims will do to his campaign. He's said so many inflammatory things at this point, and been forgiven for them, that the damage caused is impossible to predict.

So, a question for lefties:

If you were President, what exactly would you do to address the possibility of domestic terrorism by (insert your name for domestic jihadists here)?

I understand what you would NOT do, and the arguments I've seen are reasonable and valid.

But what would you do?
.

i don't know... what should we do about the white christian terrorists who do things like shoot up women's healthcare clinics?

Yes, the standard defection tactic.

No doubt they appreciate that.
.

 

[jillian]

Who knows what Trump's recent comments about Muslims will do to his campaign. He's said so many inflammatory things at this point, and been forgiven for them, that the damage caused is impossible to predict.

So, a question for lefties:

If you were President, what exactly would you do to address the possibility of domestic terrorism by (insert your name for domestic jihadists here)?

I understand what you would NOT do, and the arguments I've seen are reasonable and valid.

But what would you do?
.

i don't know... what should we do about the white christian terrorists who do things like shoot up women's healthcare clinics?

Using Trump's logic, we would bar them from entering the country.

seems so.

except they have white skin so trump won't say that.

 

[jillian]

Who knows what Trump's recent comments about Muslims will do to his campaign. He's said so many inflammatory things at this point, and been forgiven for them, that the damage caused is impossible to predict.

So, a question for lefties:

If you were President, what exactly would you do to address the possibility of domestic terrorism by (insert your name for domestic jihadists here)?

I understand what you would NOT do, and the arguments I've seen are reasonable and valid.

But what would you do?
.

i don't know... what should we do about the white christian terrorists who do things like shoot up women's healthcare clinics?

Yes, the standard defection tactic.

No doubt they appreciate that.
.

no "deflection" about it. just pointing out the idiocy and hypocrisy and the double standard of the way the debate on terrorism has been handled.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yep....thousands of people have died on American soil at the hands of terrorists. As long as the odds of your selfish ass dying never go up too much, you're content.
It's some consolation that you feel you can hide from the problem......because you feel your number will never be picked.

The people that are needlessly slaughtered?

**** them, right?

Oh,.....just fyi, these assholes were planning on taking down a school, but the hothead little shits decided to give in to their anger and shoot up a government building instead because they couldn't wait.

The fact is and I'm sure you know it, the number of deaths at the hands of Islamic terrorist in the US since 911 is incredibly small. The numbers don't justify Trump's proposals. Even if there were a thousand times as many deaths due to Islamic terrorist attacks, it would still not justify punishing the many for the crimes of the few.
2002 17
2003 1
2004 1
2005 0
2006 3
2007 0
2008 3
2009 19
2010 5
2011 4
2012 2
2013 5
2014 7
2014 19

What punishment are you talking about?

Trump's proposed ban on Muslims entering the country.

A ban isn't a punishment.....and he didn't propose a ban. Just a shutdown of the process until serious problems in the process can be addressed.

Obama suggested punishing everyone just because two assholes decided to kill a bunch of people over a Christmas party. He wants to take away our guns. He also made everyone remove Christmas from the Christmas party announcements in the federal government. We have to call them Holiday Parties now.

I figure that inconveniencing a few Muslims is a small price to pay for preventing Jihadists freedom of movement.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

So, if Congress is prohibited from respecting or prohibiting the free exercise of religion, one might infer requiring a religious test to immigrants or visitors to our shores would be unconstitutional if The Congress were to pass such a law/regulation and it were signed by POTUS.

[yet, consider the Chinese Exclusion Act]

But what of executive action? Can a President prohibit a Muslim from coming to America by a simple stroke of his pen?

 

[Flopper]

The fact is and I'm sure you know it, the number of deaths at the hands of Islamic terrorist in the US since 911 is incredibly small. The numbers don't justify Trump's proposals. Even if there were a thousand times as many deaths due to Islamic terrorist attacks, it would still not justify punishing the many for the crimes of the few.
2002 17
2003 1
2004 1
2005 0
2006 3
2007 0
2008 3
2009 19
2010 5
2011 4
2012 2
2013 5
2014 7
2014 19

What punishment are you talking about?

Trump's proposed ban on Muslims entering the country.

A ban isn't a punishment.....and he didn't propose a ban. Just a shutdown of the process until serious problems in the process can be addressed.

Obama suggested punishing everyone just because two assholes decided to kill a bunch of people over a Christmas party. He wants to take away our guns. He also made everyone remove Christmas from the Christmas party announcements in the federal government. We have to call them Holiday Parties now.

I figure that inconveniencing a few Muslims is a small price to pay for preventing Jihadists freedom of movement.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

So, if Congress is prohibited from respecting or prohibiting the free exercise of religion, one might infer requiring a religious test to immigrants or visitors to our shores would be unconstitutional if The Congress were to pass such a law/regulation and it were signed by POTUS.

[yet, consider the Chinese Exclusion Act]

But what of executive action? Can a President prohibit a Muslim from coming to America by a simple stroke of his pen?

If you're speaking of executive orders, federal courts can shoot them down because of violation of federal law or the constitutional. In addition, congress can block executive orders in a number of ways. The most straightforward way is to pass legislation that would override the executive order. The idea that a president can violate federal law or the constitution and congress or the courts can do nothing is not so. This is why so many statements that Trump makes would never appear in executive orders. Apparently his supporters don't realize that. No president, including Trump would want to have their hand slapped by congress or the courts.

Considering the condemnation of his party over a plan to ban all Muslims from entering the US, such an executive order would probably draw a bill of impeachment from congress. If congress didn't act, the courts would.

On immigration he could allow Obama's executive orders on immigration to expired but that would hardly make a dent in the number of undocumented immigrants . He could not issue an executive order to remove all undocumented immigrants because that would violate existing immigration laws as well as the due process clause in constitution.