The
hang-wringing and blowback from the suggestion by Donald J. Trump to
implement a pause in the immigration of Muslims to the United States of
America, has been everything that the consummate showman now doubt hoped
for...and more.
White House Spokesperson Josh Earnest was positively apoplectic at yesterday's Daily Press Conference, as Breitbart.com reports...
President
Barack Obama’s spokesman angrily lashed out at Donald Trump for
proposing a ban on Muslim immigration to the United States, and accused
him of “offensive bluster” and “grotesque and offensive” language.
“The
fact is, that what Donald Trump said yesterday disqualifies him from
serving as president,” spokesman Josh Earnest said, suggesting
to reporters that his words were fundamentally anti-American.
Earnest
denounced Trump’s “carnival barker routine” which included “outright
lies” and mocked the Republican frontrunner for having “fake hair.” He
said:
The
Trump campaign, for months now, has had a dustbin of history-like
quality to it, from the vacuous sloganeering to the outright lies to
even the fake hair, the whole carnival barker routine that we’ve seen
for some time now.
Earnest also denounced other Republicans for continuing to say
that they would support the nominee of the Republican party even it was
Donald Trump.
Earnest
suggested the Republican Party is racist for failing to denounce
Trump’s presidential campaign, and he reminded reporters that House
Majority Whip Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA)
once called himself “David Duke without the baggage.” He said:
"Earlier
this year, House Republicans elected to their leadership somebody who
famously bragged to a reporter that he’s David Duke without the
baggage."
“They
should say right now that they will not support him for president,”
Earnest said, as he called Trump’s proposal “morally reprehensible.”
Earnest said Republicans leaders should:
"Say
right now that they would not support Donald Trump for president. What
he said is disqualifying and any Republican who’s too fearful of the
Republican base to admit it has no business serving as president either.
OK?"
When
asked why the White House had decided to weigh in on Trump’s hair,
Earnest defended the topic as an important part of the campaign.
“Well
I guess I was describing why it would be easy for people to dismiss the
Trump campaign as not particularly serious,” he said.
“Because of his hair?” one reporter asked in disbelief.
“Well
because he’s got a rather outrageous appearance, that’s the hallmark of
his campaign and his identity, though, that’s the point I’m trying to
cite there,” he said.
“How do you know that it’s fake?” asked a second reporter.
“Well I guess I’m happy to be fact checked,” Earnest replied.
Suspending immigration is not a new concept.
It's been done before...for over 40 years.
During
the Harding administration, a stop-gap immigration measure was passed
by Congress in 1921 for the purpose of slowing the flood of immigrants
entering the United States.
A more thorough law was signed by President Coolidge in May 1924. It provided for the following:
The
quota for immigrants entering the U.S. was set at two percent of the
total of any given nation`s residents in the U.S. as reported in the
1890 census;
after July 1, 1927, the two percent rule was to be replaced by
an overall cap of 150,000 immigrants annually and quotas determined by
"national origins" as revealed in the 1920 census.
College
students, professors and ministers were exempted from the quotas.
Initially immigration from the other Americas was allowed, but measures
were quickly developed to deny legal entry to Mexican laborers.
The
clear aim of this law was to restrict the entry of immigrants from
Southern and Eastern Europe, while welcoming relatively large numbers of
newcomers from Britain, Ireland, and Northern Europe.
The
1921 law had used the 1910 census to determine the base for the quotas;
by changing to the 1890 census when fewer Italians or Bulgarians lived
in the U.S., more of the "dangerous` and "different" elements were kept
out. This legislation reflected discriminatory sentiments that had
surfaced earlier during the Red Scare of 1919-20.
|
Total
Entering U.S.
|
Country of Origin
|
|
Great
Britain
|
Eastern
Europe*
|
Italy
|
|
1920
|
430,001
|
38,471
|
3,913
|
95,145
|
|
1921
|
805,228
|
51,142
|
32,793
|
222,260
|
|
1922
|
309,556
|
25,153
|
12,244
|
40,319
|
|
1923
|
522,919
|
45,759
|
16,082
|
46,674
|
|
1924
|
706,896
|
59,490
|
13,173
|
56,246
|
|
1925
|
294,314
|
27,172
|
1,566
|
6,203
|
|
1926
|
304,488
|
25,528
|
1,596
|
8,253
|
| *Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey. |
| U.S. Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1957 (Washington, D.C., 1960), p. 56. |
A
provision in the 1924 law barred entry to those ineligible for
citizenship — effectively ending the immigration of all Asians into the
United States and undermining the earlier "Gentlemen`s Agreement" with
Japan. Efforts by Secretary of State Hughes to change this provision
were not successful and actually inflamed the passions of the
anti-Japanese press, which was especially strong on the West Coast.
Heated
protests were issued by the Japanese government and a citizen committed
seppuku outside the American embassy in Tokyo. May 26, the effective
date of the legislation, was declared a day of national humiliation in
Japan, adding another in a growing list of grievances against the U.S.
(The
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 upheld the national origins
quota system established by the Immigration Act of 1924, reinforcing
these quotas.)
In
1965, the Hart-Cellar Act abolished the national origins quota system
that had structured America`s immigration policy since the 1920`s,
replacing it with a preference system that emphasized immigrants` skills
and family relationships with citizens or residents of the United
States.
Additionally, in April of 1980, during the Iranian Hostage Crisis, President Jimmy Carter cancelled all
visas issued to Iranians for entry into the United States and warned
that they would be revalidated only for "compelling and proven
humanitarian reasons or where the national interest requires."
So, what Trump proposed has been done before
Evidently,
no one ever told Obama and his Administration that when you point your
finger at someone, there are 4 other fingers pointing back at you.
On January 7th of this year, Abraham H. Miller wrote the following blog, featured on thehill.com...
At
the end of World War II, the Jewish survivors of Europe’s Holocaust
found that nearly every door was closed to them. “Tell Me Where Can I
Go?” was a popular Yiddish song at the time. Decades later, the
Christians of the Middle East face the same problem, and the Obama
administration is keeping the door shut.
America
is about to accept 9000 Syrian Muslims, refugees of the brutal war
between the Assad regime and its Sunni opposition, which includes ISIS,
Al Qaeda, and various other militias. That number is predicted to
increase each year. There are no Christian refugees that will be
admitted.
Why?
Because the Department of State is adhering with all the rigidity of a
Soviet era bureaucracy to the rule that only people at risk from
massacres launched by the regime qualify for refugee status. The rapes
of Christian women and the butchery of Christian children do not count.
No matter how moved Americans were this Christmas season by the plight
of their fellow Christ followers in Syria and Iraq, no matter how
horrific the visuals of beheadings, enslavement, and mass murder, the
Christians fleeing death do not engender the compassion of this
president.
The
Christians are being raped, tortured, and murdered by militias, not by
the Syrian government. This technicality condemns them to continue to be
victims without hope. And this technicality is being adhered to with
all the tenacity with which President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s State
Department manipulated quotas and created subterfuges to keep out the
Jews fleeing the oppression of Nazi Germany. Obama no more wants the
Middle East’s Christian refugees than Roosevelt wanted Europe’s Jewish
refugees.
We
have seen in the last several weeks that President Obama has no
difficulty using his “phone and his pen,” as he dramatically boasts, to
circumvent the law. When it comes to immigration, he had no difficulty
enacting an amnesty that a federal judge subsequently ruled
unconstitutional. He has had no problem circumventing Congress to change
the relationship with Cuba. This president has shown that he will push
back on the constraints of law when he wants to get something done.
But
there are not even such constraints when it comes to the Middle East’s
Christians fleeing the brutality of ISIS and Al Qaeda. The Department of
State chooses to adhere to a definition of refugees as people
persecuted by their own government. What difference does it make which
army imperils the lives of innocent Christians? Christians are still be
slaughtered for being Christian, and their government is incapable of
protecting them. Does some group have to come along—as Jewish groups did
during the Holocaust—and sardonically guarantee that these are real
human beings?
The
Christians would barely have to be vetted for ties to terror
organizations, which by their very nature do not take Christians.
Meanwhile, there is the uncomfortable issue that among the Sunni
refugees there are some in league with the Sunni terror militias. And
beyond that there is the equally uncomfortable question of the
acculturation of segments of the Muslim community.
That
our Muslim neighbors are as worthy of being good Americans as anyone
else is not an issue. That a highly active and prominent minority in the
Muslim community seeks to transform America is an issue and one that
cannot be overlooked, when taking in Muslim refugees. Will they be
vetted for seeking the transformation of America through jihad?
Whether
the recent violence in Australia, the murder of two New York policemen,
the Boston Marathon bombings, the growing list of victims of honor
killings in Western societies, the forced closing of streets in Paris
for Muslim prayers, the Muslim no-go and Sharia patrol areas of Britain,
the rape of infidel women in Sweden, or the call by Council on Islamic
American Relations that Islam is not in America to be another religion
but to transform America, there is a Muslim problem. That it is not a
problem precipitated by a majority of Muslims does not lessen its
dangers.
No
doubt the majority of the Muslim refugees will become good American
citizens, but the real concern is that a significant minority will not.
Yet, the Middle East Christians, even as a minority, do not pose
remotely the same kind of threat.
With
Christmas fresh in our minds, it is time for all people of good will to
say to the Obama administration that telling Christians awaiting death
that there is no room for them in the inn is not only unacceptable, it
is also, to use President Obama’s own words, “not who we are.” This
season, Christians need to make their voice heard. They should not act
as the Jews did, waiting for a president who had no intention of doing
anything, to do something.
If you were watching Saturday morning cartoons in 1977 on ABC, you would have seen this Schoolhouse Rock musical cartoon titled The Great American Melting Pot. It extolled the unique greatness of our American heritage.
For a while now, that heritage has been under attack.
The Immigration Act of 1924 was
passed because America had experienced an overwhelming flood of
immigrants, which strained the resources of our nation.
This act allowed all of these
immigrants to be assimilated into American Society and to actually
become Americans, in thought, word, deed, and LOYALTY.
An Liberal President Jimmy
Carter stopped Iranians from immigrating, because, just like the
situation we faced today with Radical Islam, we were AT WAR.
As the article from thehill.com
shows, Obama and his Administration are themselves being restrictive in
whom they allow to immigrate to America.
The only reason that they are
mad at Donald J. Trump is that he is attempting to thwart their plans to
rapidly import thousands of Muslims, and potential Democrat Voters,
into our country.
Like all Liberals, they remain oblivious of their own hypocrisy.
Until He Comes,
KJ