Obama Weighs In

Obama's eloquence is a big part of his popularity.

So, Obama says he didn't "ban" visas from Iraq he merely "delayed" them. So let's look at that. Obama "delayed" visas for 180 days. Nobody got a Visa if they were coming from Iraq.

And that is proof positive "his" policy was different than Trump's as Trump's policy "bans" visas for 90 days. Nobody will get a visa if they are coming from a Country on the terror list for 90 days.

Eloquence is good, but I wonder if all of Obama's followers are that stupid as to not see it. Whatever you may wish to use for the word that describes people not getting visas, both accomplished this task.

Chris B.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
An oversight. Donald Trump's 'Muslim ban' could be extended to Pakistan
Click to expand...

That leave Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon and Nigeria from your original list of places that should be on the list but aren't, despite the lack of Trump business interests.

Honestly, the fact that the seven countries on the list were also singled out for (much, much less restrictrive) special treatment by the Obama administration leads me to conclude that this isn't a smoking gun regarding conflict of interest. It is suggestive, of course, and the problem with such conflicts are that smoking guns are hard to come by, but the list isn't arbitrary.

That said, of course, I do not support the executive order. I just think that it should be attacked on its overt flaws.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Obama's eloquence is a big part of his popularity.

So, Obama says he didn't "ban" visas from Iraq he merely "delayed" them. So let's look at that. Obama "delayed" visas for 180 days. Nobody got a Visa if they were coming from Iraq.

And that is proof positive "his" policy was different than Trump's as Trump's policy "bans" visas for 90 days. Nobody will get a visa if they are coming from a Country on the terror list for 90 days.
Click to expand...

Obama's order delayed (but didn't ban) the processing of refugee visas from Iraq - for the entire year of the order, 2011, there were still Iraqi refugees permitted into the country. They were fewer in number compared to other years due to the order, but there was never a month in 2011 where the number of Iraqi refugees permitted into the country dropped anywhere near zero, and 6,339 Iraqi refugees entered the country in total that year. Obama's order also was specifically about Iraq, and only applied to refugee visas, not to everyone from Iraq.

Trump's ban, on the other hand, refuses entry to everyone, regardless of the type of visa, from seven different countries.

So yeah, they're pretty different.
 
Trump's blunder of "not giving warning to bad dudes" is perfectly stupid, and he would know it if he was capable of reflective thinking: everyone entering the US was pre-vetted. Having the EO examined by the DOJ, giving Immigration an advanced warning etc. would not have made any difference since even the fastest vetting process takes 9months.
This was just drafted and executed clumsily and in a self-defeating manor.
 
acbytesla said:
How can you be so disingenuous? You pretend as if we shouldn't accept the architects of this policy at what they have said. It is a Muslim ban. That doesn't come from some Left wing bleeding heart Lib. No, it comes from Trump and it comes from Giuliani.
Click to expand...

First of all, that's ridiculous. It doesn't matter what Trump and Giuliani think. It matters what the executive order says and how it will be carried out in the trenches (so to speak). It certainly doesn't matter what you think Trump and Giuliani think. Second, well over 90% of Muslims in the world are completely unaffected by the order, and for the small percentage who are, they're not even banned. It's a temporary suspension while visa and refugee applications are reviewed. If you want to speculate that it will eventually morph into some sort of quasi, de facto Muslim ban, be my guest, but it will be pure speculation on your part.
 
I am glad that Obama is finally getting around to criticizing Trump.

I would have preferred if Obama (and all of the other ex-presidents) would have criticized Trump earlier when Trump endorsed torture, but least Obama is critical now about the immigration issue.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Trump's blunder of "not giving warning to bad dudes" is perfectly stupid, and he would know it if he was capable of reflective thinking: everyone entering the US was pre-vetted. Having the EO examined by the DOJ, giving Immigration an advanced warning etc. would not have made any difference since even the fastest vetting process takes 9months.
This was just drafted and executed clumsily and in a self-defeating manor.
Click to expand...

Is the White House a self-defeating manor?
 
sunmaster14 said:
First of all, that's ridiculous. It doesn't matter what Trump and Giuliani think. It matters what the executive order says and how it will be carried out in the trenches (so to speak). It certainly doesn't matter what you think Trump and Giuliani think. Second, well over 90% of Muslims in the world are completely unaffected by the order, and for the small percentage who are, they're not even banned. It's a temporary suspension while visa and refugee applications are reviewed. If you want to speculate that it will eventually morph into some sort of quasi, de facto Muslim ban, be my guest, but it will be pure speculation on your part.
Click to expand...

Why is it so important to you that this ban isn't a bad thing? Would it really hurt you so much to just say Trump made a bad call here rather than twisting yourself in knots trying to defend the indefensible?
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
The bit directly after the bit you highlighted says the exact opposite of that! Deary me.
Click to expand...

Applications based on religious persecution for members of a religious majority in those countries will not be given higher priority than other claims of persecution, whereas claims from members of a religious minority will be given higher priority. That's not the same thing as saying they won't be considered at all. This stuff is not rocket surgery. Is anybody else having a problem with this rather straightforward English? The relevant section doesn't even include any special legalese.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Why is it so important to you that this ban isn't a bad thing? Would it really hurt you so much to just say Trump made a bad call here rather than twisting yourself in knots trying to defend the indefensible?
Click to expand...

It's a skeptic's site, and I want to try to penetrate the comfortable liberal bubble that most people here want to stay in. Also, I am rather fascinated by Trump's political strategy here. Personally, I wouldn't have recommended this particular EO, although I would have directed the INS to shift our immigration priorities away from taking in people from Muslim majority regions and towards East Asian regions. I'd rather have more Chinese, for example. It would also be helpful to drain the best brains from China given that China is clearly going to be our future strategic adversary.

But Trump seems to be poking the hornet's nest intentionally. I think it's a bold strategy and one that will work for him in the long run. He is generating outrage fatigue and making his opposition look fanatical and extreme. I am doing my part by showing how extreme the response is to a rather mild executive order. In theory, my analysis can help both sides, but I am confident that it will have no effect on enraged liberals, so it won't actually end up helping them.
 
Last edited:
sunmaster14 said:
It's a skeptic's site, and I want to try to penetrate the comfortable liberal bubble that most people here want to stay in.
Click to expand...

Nothing you have posted has done anything of the sort. Apologetics is not skepticism. And you aren't penetrating anything. Merely reinforcing what people already think about Trump supporters

Also, I am rather fascinated by Trump's political strategy here. Personally, I wouldn't have recommended this particular EO, although I would have directed the INS to shift our immigration priorities away from taking in people from Muslim majority regions and towards East Asian regions. I'd rather have more Chinese, for example. It would also be helpful to drain the best brains from China given that China is clearly going to be our future strategic adversary.
Click to expand...

This is just more babble. 'Immigration priorities' has nothing whatsoever to do with refugees. China doesn't have refugees in any great number currently.

But Trump seems to be poking the hornet's nest intentionally. I think it's a bold strategy and one that will work for him in the long run. He is generating outrage fatigue and making his opposition look fanatical and extreme. I am doing my part by showing how extreme the response is to a rather mild executive order. In theory, my analysis can help both sides, but I am confident that it will have no effect on enraged liberals, so it won't actually end up helping them.
Click to expand...

More crap. It's not bold to scapegoat people. Your analysis is apologetics. Simple as that. All you are doing is making yourself look like a ****. Sum total.
 
sunmaster14 said:
First of all, that's ridiculous. It doesn't matter what Trump and Giuliani think. It matters what the executive order says and how it will be carried out in the trenches (so to speak). It certainly doesn't matter what you think Trump and Giuliani think. Second, well over 90% of Muslims in the world are completely unaffected by the order, and for the small percentage who are, they're not even banned. It's a temporary suspension while visa and refugee applications are reviewed. If you want to speculate that it will eventually morph into some sort of quasi, de facto Muslim ban, be my guest, but it will be pure speculation on your part.
Click to expand...

What TOTAL ABSURDITY. That you think that the intentions of the architects is irrelevant is pure sophistry. There are principles that should be the bedrock of how we operate. You can call cow manure chocolate but that doesn't make it tasty. Me, I don't eat feces and say yum.
 
sunmaster14 said:
It's a skeptic's site, and I want to try to penetrate the comfortable liberal bubble that most people here want to stay in. Also, I am rather fascinated by Trump's political strategy here. Personally, I wouldn't have recommended this particular EO, although I would have directed the INS to shift our immigration priorities away from taking in people from Muslim majority regions and towards East Asian regions. I'd rather have more Chinese, for example. It would also be helpful to drain the best brains from China given that China is clearly going to be our future strategic adversary.

But Trump seems to be poking the hornet's nest intentionally. I think it's a bold strategy and one that will work for him in the long run. He is generating outrage fatigue and making his opposition look fanatical and extreme. I am doing my part by showing how extreme the response is to a rather mild executive order. In theory, my analysis can help both sides, but I am confident that it will have no effect on enraged liberals, so it won't actually end up helping them.
Click to expand...

You think its a bold strategy to basically declare war on an entire religion?

And if you think it's just "Liberals" who are enraged, I suggest removing your head from the sand and opening your eyes.
 
Keep up the protests. You're doing a fine job. Every day every policy. Show Trump and the World he is wrong and this is not what you stand for. I'm proud of every protester. God Bless you.
Chris B.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Keep up the protests. You're doing a fine job. Every day every policy. Show Trump and the World he is wrong and this is not what you stand for. I'm proud of every protester. God Bless you.
Chris B.
Click to expand...

I'm an atheist, but I will say this. Amen.
 
Darth Rotor said:
That ban should have been enacted by W: the one for Pakistan. I say this with some rancor, due to some operational issues over a decade ago when Musharraf, was still in charge. I'd calmed down on that until they found Osama living there. That place should have been the first ban.

The one with Iraq makes no sense to me: we have current operations in that country, ostensibly to help the Iraqi government with whom we have relations, to defeat and otherwise deal with ISIS.

Posturing, or just doesn't give a crap? :confused:
Click to expand...
Or just doesn't know WTF he is doing.

Unless one can provide evidence this is meaningful legislation, it's all moot anyway.
What a croc. "Extreme vetting"? OK, show us how this is supposed to differ from current vetting which, as far as we can see, let one person in (San Bernardino shooter) in more than a decade.

Has Trump made any effort to explain how his extreme vetting differs from current vetting? Of course not, because this is nothing more than campaigning and voting by dog whistle. Fear mongering? All you have to do is look at what Trump has said about said extreme vetting.

Trump: "... a complete and total shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on." That is ludicrous on its face, let alone even close to what the order actually did.

All this Exe. Ord. is, is tossing bones to the base. It's absolutely meaningless beyond that. Listen to the pundits.

Con: There's not one shred of evidence this will accomplish anything, not to mention not one sleeper terrorist has come from any of the countries on the ban list.

Pro: You are risking American lives. It's a minor inconvenience to a few people.

That's no more than non sequitur fear mongering.

Pro: The list was Obama's list.

How does that support the assertion "extreme vetting" means anything?


John Kelly HSS is on the news now giving a very vague explanation of what extreme vetting means, "it's under development...we have ideas... blah blah," not one word about what vetting is currently being used. Did they have no time in the last year or even the last few months to come up with a plan? It was a key campaign whistle.

There was no reason to haphazardly stop people arriving with visas, green cards, returning to their homes, their jobs, coming to stay with family... It's not like Trump shut down the Mariel boatlift dumping thousands of unvetted refugees on our shores.
 
Last edited:
qayak said:
... He assured Christian fundamentalists during his campaign that he was going to make sure that Christians from war areas got priority when coming to the US. That is Unconstitutional. ...
Click to expand...
Trump's trying to blow the Christian dog whistle while pretending he's not anti-Muslim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom