The Democrats keep insisting we have to let everyone into the country who wants to come in, but, as I’m sure you’ve noticed, the ones they’re referring to are those most likely to vote for Democrats.
The fact is whenever anyone starts quoting the inscription at the base of the Statue of Liberty, “The Modern Colossus” by Emma Lazarus, with its open invitation to the huddled masses and wretched refuse, I am reminded that we are already filled to the brim with welfare recipients who answer to that description. I would also like to point out that bad poetry is a lousy basis for national policy.
Obama keeps telling us that Gitmo has to be shut down because it’s a recruiting tool for the enemy – an enemy he refuses to name, by the way – but everything about America acts as a recruiting tool for the Islamists. And by everything, I include the fact that our women drive cars, go to school and show their faces in public; that our Constitution guarantees free speech and freedom of religion, and does not kowtow to Shariah law; and that we do not prostrate ourselves to Mecca five times a day. In fact, if Obama didn’t keep yakking about Gitmo, nobody else would.
When Barack Obama mocks Republicans who reject the notion of Muslims flooding into America by saying: “Apparently, they’re afraid of widows and orphans,” you would hope that someone on our side would confront the arrogant jerk and say: “No, Mr. President, what we fear is that as a result of your endless pandering to all things Islamic, we might wind up with thousands of widows and orphans of our own, just the way we did on 9/11.”
The truth is that until fairly recently, no national leader in the West, and certainly not in the U.S., has ever looked around and said: “You know what we don’t have nearly enough of? Muslims!”
The folks who favor bringing in vast numbers of Syrians oppose using religion as a factor, claiming it would be bigotry to favor Christians, but they ignore the fact that the Muslims have been tossing Christians off the boats headed to Greece. But, then, we all know how tolerant Muslims are when it comes to infidels, their pet name for non-Muslims.
Both Obama and Mrs. Clinton claim that if we identify the terrorism problem the world is facing as having any connection to Islam, it will antagonize a billion Muslims around the world. But for over a thousand years, half the Muslims have been trying to kill off the other half. It’s the world’s misfortune that so far both sides have failed.
We keep hearing from the FBI and Homeland Security that although we are aware of 1,250 people in the U.S. with links to ISIS, we only have enough human resources to track 60 or 70 of them at a time. At the same time, we have more agents working for the IRS than for the FBI and Homeland Security put together. Few things better reflect Obama’s priorities as commander in chief.
But it also raises the question why we prefer to track them when we should be jailing them.
Although I knew Bobby Jindal had no shot at the GOP nomination, I took no pleasure in seeing him drop out of the race. I would much rather have seen the thinning of the herd begin with Bush, Kasich, Pataki, Graham and Dr. Ben Carson.
Unlike the other four, I like Dr. Carson. If the race for the nomination were a beauty contest, I have no doubt he would be voted Mr. Congeniality.
Still, I did sit up and take notice the other day when, questioned about his knowledge of foreign affairs, he said, “I know a lot more about it now than I’ll know a year from now, and a year from now, I’ll know a lot more than I know now.”
I realize that on occasion, we all misspeak, but that was a humdinger. But we already have a vice president notorious for his verbal gaffes, although, I grant, Carson’s was funnier than almost anything Joe Biden has ever said. But even I understand that we should expect more from our leaders than that they provide me with a few cheap laughs.
Having said that, I grant that Dr. Carson strikes me as a very decent man and I suspect that most of us would love him as a next door neighbor, unless we happened to be living at 1602 Pennsylvania Avenue.
I understand that when it comes to ISIS, Boko Haram, Iran and Vladimir Putin, Obama would prefer to play a waiting game, so he can leave all of these problems for his successor to deal with, but even I can’t fathom why he is pressing so hard for these so-called Syrian refugees. If just one of them pulls off an act of terrorism over the next 14 months, that, and not his refusal to confront or even name Islamic jihadism, will be his lasting legacy, and will sink any chance for a Democrat to succeed him.
In the meantime, ISIS, despite its vile sadism, remains what I regard as a much smaller problem than a nuclear Iran. If the West had the will to act, I am convinced it could wipe ISIS off the face of the earth because, militarily, they are the equivalent of a flock of wasps, gnats and fleas; in short, a JV team that has been allowed to score at will because the other team refuses to take the field.
By the West, by the way, I mean the United States. For, as they’ve consistently shown over the years, the U.N. and NATO are useless when it comes to dealing with evil. At best, they are merely grand-sounding organizations which exist as a way for diplomats and military brass to live high off the hog in Manhattan and Brussels.
When it comes to confronting Islam, American politicians are all cowards, far more concerned with losing an election than they are with Iran’s wiping Tel Aviv off the map. Our enemy keeps boasting that their god is greater and more powerful than our own, and, by our moral cowardice, we make their case for them.
After the massacre in Paris, even President Hollande has demonstrated a willingness to strike back, something that President Obama has never shown. It’s as if the world suddenly underwent surgical reconstruction, as a result of which France wound up with the balls and America wound up with the a—hole.
Media wishing to interview Burt Prelutsky, please contact [email protected].