Opuscula Silent Dems bow As GOP’s Trump Speaks and acts

ALL GENERALITIES ARE LIES.
However, there is a grain of truth in all generalities; smoke and fire if you will.

THERE ARE MANY WHO condemn President Trump for everything he says and does – and a few who condemn him for things he does NOT say or do.

But unlike some of his Democratic predecessors in the White House, Trump DOES what he says he will do (if the Congress and the Courts don’t overrule him).

AMERICA AS “RODNEY DANGERFIELD”

American lost the world’s respect starting with one-termer Jimmy Carter who gave in to the Iranians and allowed them to capture and humiliate U.S. diplomats when the embassy was seized.

What did Mr. Carter do?

Nothing.

Mr. Clinton was no better.

When the Iranians – same folks that should have caused Mr. Carter a red face – successfully attacked the USS Cole, what did Mr. Clinton do?

Same as Mr. Carter: Nothing.

There are equally silent Republicans.

Ex-president Geo. W. Bush, a/k/a Bush 2, not only was silent after Muslim terrorists brought down the Twin Towers (9-11-2001), along with more than 3,000 innocents (including those who died in the disaster and the aftermath), but was a propagandist for the Muslims.

Geo. W also famously told the world that the invasion of Iraq was “successfully completed.” As the world knows, it wasn’t completed.

On the flip side, former president Lyndon Baines Johnson usually did what he promised; sometimes to the nation’s benefit (e.g., Head Start) and sometimes not (e.g., Vietnam). Granted, Vietnam was not LBJ’s war.

BOWING OBAMA

Two-term leftist president Barack Obama kowtowed to his Muslim friends and declared an “Arab spring,” but then did nothing when he and his secretary of state allowed Muslims to murder Americans during a planned “spontaneous” uprising in Benghazi. It was the secretary’s “do nothing” attitude before the “spontaneous” attack that directly led to the American deaths. (Imagine if she became president!)

Bowing, showing submission to someone or something¹ is Mr. Obama’s trademark.

According to The Atlantic², the ex-president has bowed to

1. 2009: Obama bows to the Saudi King
2. 2009: Obama bows to the Queen of England
3. 2009: Obama bows to the Japanese Emperor
4. 2010: Obama bows to a Republican
5. 2010: Obama bows to the mayor of Tampa
6. 2010: Obama bows to the Chinese
7. 2012: Obama bows to Felipe Calderon
8. 2013: Obama bows to a Communist

TRADITION

It’s a grand Democrat tradition to do nothing – at least until the polls and soothsayers approve an action. This goes back at least to Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) who preferred to violate U.S. citizens basic rights (by putting them into concentration camps) while sending a boatload of Jews back to Germany and death. FDR also forbade American bomber crews from dropping bombs on railroad tracks beneath them on their way to and from bomb runs on "approved" nazi targets.

Once the polls and soothsayers said it was OK – and with a little help from the Imperial Japanese Navy’s attack on Pearl Harbor (allegedly known to the White House BEFORE the attack) – FDR finally allowed Americans to save Europe (once again).

WHERE THE BUCK STOPS

President Harry S (no period) Truman proved that some Democrats are doers.

FDR had plans in motion to create and use an atomic bomb. Would he or wouldn’t he?

He failed to share his thoughts with his vice-president.

Mr. Truman who, having served in WW 1 knew the horrors of war first hand, decided “the bomb” could end the war in the Pacific and save American and allied lives. He ordered the bombing of two Japanese cities. That led to the surrender.

Mr. Truman, protecting the sovereignty of the president’s role as Commander-in-Chief, cashiered a popular general for disobeying orders. The president was roundly criticized for his action, an act that preserved presidential (civilian) control of the military and one that may have cost him election to a full four-year term. (He lost to a general.)

---

Sources

1. http://kencarlson.org/bible/worship/we-bow-down-2/

2. http://tinyurl.com/y9qodvk8

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Comments on Do vs. Don’t do

On immigration Under political “sun” Nothing really is new

THE LIBERALS ARE UP IN ARMS over president-elect Trump’s plans to limit immigration of certain people until it can be proven that they are not a threat to the nation.

Trump is calling for a “vetting” process that seems to anger the Left.

This is a bit strange for several reasons.

FIRST, the idea of special vetting – investigation – of selected individuals in specific groups was promised by lame duck president Obama. Trump’s proposal is basically Obama’s plan.

The fact that the promised additional vetting failed to occur during the Obama administration is another matter.

In truth, the U.S. normally does NOT vet people classified as refugees.

This is initially done by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the Geneva-based International Organization for Migration (IOM)

The UN is controlled by countries that hardly can be considered as having the nation’s best interest at the fore.

Eventually the refugee is interviewed by State Department and other federal agencies. Unfortunately, State is populated by pro-Arab liberals who thwart any attempts to protect the country – regardless of who is in the White House.

That’s today. What about “yesterday?”

The Puritans put the first immigration law into place on July 12, 1637. This law , the Alien Act, forbade newcomers from staying in the Massachusetts colony for more than three weeks sans the (civil/religious) court’s permission. This Act was to prevent the immigration of people who, although Puritans, held beliefs not held by the governors and majority preachers. (For an in-depth presentation of Puritan New England of the early 1600s refer to “American Jezebel “by Eve LaPlante, ISBN006-056233-1, in particular, Page 110 for information about the Act.)

According to the American Immigration History from Colonial Times to the 1965 Immigration Act, American opposition to immigration dates back to early Colonial days.

The colonies often protested against the landing of criminals and some indentured servants. But as long as they had no independent standing, all they could do was complain.

In 1639, the Pilgrims of Massachusetts called for the expulsion of foreign paupers, setting fines for shipmasters who discharged criminals and paupers. Virginia and other colonies followed suit. Pennsylvania passed a law "for imposing a duty upon persons convicted of heinous crimes and imported into the Province," and another "for laying a duty on foreigners and Irish servants, etc.; imported into the Province." These laws were viewed as too weak and were repealed in 1729 and replaced by a more stringent ordinance.

The General Assembly of Maryland tried to reduce the number of criminals dumped on its shores with a 1676 law requiring all shipmasters to declare whether they had any convicts on board, and attempted to prohibit them from landing if they did. A fine of 2,000 pounds of tobacco was imposed on anyone attempting to illegally import criminals, half going to the government and half to informers. (The first "whistle blower" law?).

In 1700, Massachusetts passed an immigration law requiring shipmasters to furnish lists of passengers and prohibiting the landing of lame, impotent or infirm persons, or those incapable of earning their own keep. Shipmasters were required to return those proscribed persons to their home country.

The Infoplease.com web site chronologically lists U.S. Immigration Legislation with the subtitle "A detailed look at immigration legislation from the Colonial Period to the present."

The list starts with 1790 - well after the Puritans created their Act - and continues through 2014 when Obama announced he was taking executive action to delay the deportation of some 5 million illegal immigrants.

In 2005, The Real ID Act passed; it requires states to verify a person’s immigration status or citizenship before issuing licenses, expands restrictions on refugees requesting asylum, and limits the habeas corpus rights of immigrants.

Internment of U.S. citizens

Normally not considered "internment," the forced removal of Native American (Indians) from their homelands to "reservations" where they often were mistreated and then relocated again when the government wanted the land it had given the Indians: this has to be considered "internment" in the same light as the Italian and later German ghettos.

The best known internment during WW2 is of Japanese-Americans.

However, Italian-Americans also were rounded up and interned. Some German-Americans also were interred during WW1 and WW2.

The WW2 internment orders were issued by Democrat FDR who also was responsible for sending hundreds of Jews aboard the St. Louis back to German and to their deaths.

According to Business Insider Few people know that Executive Order 9066, signed by President Roosevelt, which permitted the roundup of Japanese and their American-born children, also paved the way for the arrest of Germans and Italians whom the FBI considered security risks and labeled as "enemy aliens." Indeed, the day before Roosevelt signed the order FBI agents had arrested 264 Italians, 1,296 Germans, and 2,209 on the East and West Coast. The hunt for perceived enemies was on.

Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952

The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, a.k.a. the McCarran-Walter Act (An act to revise the laws relating to immigration, naturalization, and nationality; and for other purposes) was passed by the 82nd Congress in June 27, 1952. The bill was vetoed by Democrat President Truman and then Congress, with a Democrat majority, overrode his veto.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 was meant to exclude certain immigrants from immigrating to America, post World War II and in the early Cold War. The McCarran-Walter Act moved away from excluding immigrants based simply upon country of origin. Instead it focused upon denying immigrants who were unlawful, immoral, diseased in any way, politically radical etc. and accepting those who were willing and able to assimilate into the US economic, social, and political structures, which restructured how immigration law was handled. Furthermore, the most notable exclusions were anyone even remotely associated with communism which in the early days of the Cold War was seen as a serious threat to US democracy. The main objective of this was to block any spread of communism from outside post WWII countries, as well as deny any enemies of the US during WWII such as Japan and favor “good Asian” countries such as China. The McCarran-Walter Act was a strong reinforcement in immigration selection, which was labeled the best way to preserve national security and national interests.

Carter and Iran

On April 7, 1980, then president Carter, a Democrat, announced a series of new sanctions, including the following:

the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly.

ON THE OTHER HAND

Top officials at the Department of Homeland Security considered a specific policy to strengthen security screenings for foreign visa applicants’ social media accounts, but the proposal was ultimately not adopted, according to an internal department memo obtained by MSNBC.

While the U.S. visa screening process does not include formal vetting of social media accounts, the memo proposed the Obama administration “authorize” customs officials to “access social networking sites” to vet applicants. Such vetting could help catch applicants bent on fraud, crime or “national security” risks, the memo stated.

The federal government considered that policy, according to a former senior official in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), but officials passed on it in 2011.

AmeriBluff Iran shreds what China Declared is a Paper Tiger

 

Obama=Chamberlain; Ayatollah=Hitler
Washington's promises just empty words

 

THE UNITED STATES had, until it abrogated it, an agreement with the Marshall Islands government to defend it as if it was US. soil, and that pledge included Marshall Islands flagged vessels on the high seas.

USA Today reports that

Iran seized a Marshall Islands-flagged cargo ship on Tuesday after claiming it ventured into Iranian waters in the Strait of Hormuz, defense officials said, an incident that could complicate talks about Tehran's nuclear program.


There were no Americans among the crew of the Maersk Tigris, though the United States has security responsibilities with regard to the Marshall Islands.

Meanwhile, the BBC relates that the US military 'monitoring' Iran ship seizure

A US naval destroyer has been ordered to the region to "monitor" the situation.

The ship was in an area recognized as an international shipping lane, he went on.

So much for American promises and official commitments.

The BCC also reported that

Iran's foreign minister Javad Zarif, said that the Maersk shipping company, which charters the vessel, had been ordered by an Iranian court to pay damages to a private firm.

No longer will America decisively act "from the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli"; no longer are America's promises - already compromised by previous administrations - be considered of any value by the country's "allies."

A number of years ago the Chinese, before they bought America, called the nation a "paper tiger." I'm not so sure "paper" is not too solid a word for America today.

Without question most Americans are tired of war, of sending their young men and women to fight wars in foreign lands for foreign causes.

But the ayatollahs' chutzpah, especially gross given the current administration's acquiescence to every Iranian demand while, like Israel and the "Palestinians," getting nothing in return, is beyond all civilized comprehension.

Don't the politicians in Washington "get it"?

The ayatollahs seized the embassy during the administration of Democrat Carter - the example of a bungling administration that only current the one may surpass for ineptitude - but the U.S. still held out hope for the regime.

When the USS Cole was attacked and sailors killed, Democrat Clinton was the president and commander in chief who failed to effectively act against the ayatollahs.

China was wrong - the U.S. is not a "paper tiger," it is, at best, a gossamer tiger, smoke and mirrors.

Cartainly no one wants to harm "innocent" Iranians - Persians - in an effort to eliminate the ayatollahs, but collaterial damage must be expected - along with the howls of outrage from the world's liberals.

I am reminded of the story from Germany following its capitulation to the nazis:

When they came for the Jews, I said nothing; I am not a Jew.
When they came for the Communists, I said nothing; I am not a Communist.
When they came for the Roma, I said nothing; I am not Roma.
Now they are coming for me, and there is no one left fo speak up for me.

Eventually the ayatollahs will come for the liberals, their political allies du jour, and who will cry for the liberals then?

King Solomon was right when he opined that there is a time for war and a time for peace.

It's time that the U.S. meets its commitments. It is time that the U.S. must adandon its failed diplomatic efforts vis-à-vis Iran. It's time to remove power from the aayatollahs and their army.

But, unlike the fiasco in Iraq, it's time for the U.S. to realize it will need to guide the Persians toward a peaceful Iran as it guided Japan and Germany after WW2. It cannot re-establish a shah, but it need not establish a U.S.-style democracy, either. The type government for Iran is best determined by the Iranians, bearing in mind that they always - from Cyrus on - have lived under a heavy-handed rule. In other words, the U.S. should avoid making the mistakes it made in Iraq - and Cuba, and …