Browse By

While Romney Rejects Trump, 20 Tiny Trumps Run The Halls of Congress

Today, Republican Party establishment insider Mitt Romney gave a speech rejecting Donald Trump as a presidential candidate. No one who would issue blanket bans to keep Muslims from entering the country is an acceptable Republican candidate, Romney declared:

“Mr. Trump’s bombast is already alarming the allies and fueling the enmity of our enemies. Insulting all Muslims will keep many of them from fully engaging with us in the urgent fight against ISIS, and for what purpose? Muslim terrorists would only have to lie about their religion to enter the country…. Mr. Trump is directing our anger for less than noble purposes. He creates scapegoats of Muslims and Mexican immigrants. He calls for the use of torture.”

It’s very nice that Mitt Romney has used his Republican party leadership position to clarify that excluding people from America on the basis of religion is unacceptable, just as it was very nice when the Republican party leaders of the House and Senate diverged from Donald Trump by unequivocally rejecting the Ku Klux Klan. Oh, it’s a little bit odd that within Republican circles rejecting the KKK and religious expulsion are seen as brave moves rather than the bloody obvious ones, but let’s give Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell credit for rejecting the KKK and religious cleansing.

The question is, will they reject the twenty tiny Trumps running through the halls of Congress right now?

H.R. 4218 and H.R. 4025 and H.R. 4031 are bills introduced to the United States Congress that would implement blanket bans on refugees. Why? Because they’re terrorists? No. Because the refugees are criminals? No. Each of these bills would reject refugees because of the religion of the refugees’ homelands. They are mirrors of Donald Trump’s call for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

Twenty Tiny Trumps Run the Aisles of Congress

Twenty members of the Republican Party in the House of Representatives have cosponsored these blatant bills. In the meantime, 242 House Republicans voted for a bill that would accomplish the same end, but using covert language to do it.

Twenty tiny overt Trumps in the House. Two hundred and forty-two subtle, covert Trumps. Will Mitt Romney and Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan repudiate them, too?

Of course not. To the Republican Party establishment, Donald Trump’s sin isn’t really that he’s a bigot. Donald Trump’s sin is only that he makes it look bad.

9 thoughts on “While Romney Rejects Trump, 20 Tiny Trumps Run The Halls of Congress”

  1. Dave says:

    I don’t know how many people from the Middle East you know, Jim, but the ones I know tend to respect strength. We can go off on his bigoted attitudes, but if one travels it becomes apparent that the whole world is unapologetic about even some of the most blatant bigotry. Racist and tribal attitudes in the ME abound, and it is something they understand. These are irregular times indeed, but Trump may be saying what people are thinking, rather than saying the unthinkable.

    By attempting to live up to some rather lofty, though perhaps unrealistic, ideals for such a long time Americans may be getting tired of putting on for the world and trying to act holier than the rest. It may not really be our perpetual responsibility after all to show the rest of the world how to behave. People around the globe are frightened by the rhetoric of Trump, but perhaps because it signals a potential President who may require cultural accountability from them, or threatens a reduction of American gravy for their biscuits, or threatens someone’s sociopathic plans.

    France has closed over 400 mosques since the Paris attack. Trump has closed no mosques. Why does the world care about Trump and not about President What’s His Name of France?

    1. Jim Cook says:

      Golly, Dave, you sound kind of “racist and tribal” yourself. Maybe you’re just projecting your assumptions onto other people.

      1. Dave says:

        Then again, maybe not. Being a “racist” would require one to believe that his/her own race is superior to others. I don’t see this much in the USA and therefore don’t project it onto my own fellow citizens. But that said, I do think vast numbers of Americans take Europe as an example of how things can work out in reality, with “no go” zones in a number of major cities and so on. Ask the Christians of Syria, Pakistan, Iraq, etc., what happens when Islam rules. People in the U.S. see this and no wonder they feel uneasy. As to what they are thinking, Donald Trump seems to know and he planks his platform with that uneasiness. Considering what’s going on around the world with radical Islam, not to have some concerns about how the welcoming can backfire I think to most people would seem a little foolish.

        1. Jim Cook says:

          A number of the supposed declarations of “no go” zones in Europe have been shown to be mythical, as demonstrated by the large numbers of white people who actually live in the supposed “no go” zones. Do you have proof of the “no go” zones as a reality, or are you just spreading a story you’ve heard?

          1. Dave says:

            No go zones refer mainly to areas where police and fire protection are limited in their response by refusing to enter or by doing so with trepidation, not that white people don’t live in or near these areas.

          2. Jim Cook says:

            Actually, a Fox News commentator ridiculously declared the entire city of Birmingham, UK to be a no-go zone for all non-Muslims. The UK had a good laugh about that.

            You really should stop spreading falsehoods that multiple fact-checking sites and news organizations have checked and utterly debunked.

    2. J Clifford says:

      The people from the Middle East I know, Dave, respect people who don’t use stereotypes to describe Middle Easterners as all being the same.

      It’s not lofty and unrealistic to suppose that the U.S. federal government can go forward without becoming a theocracy, deciding which religious are okay, and which must be prohibited.

      Trump is saying what a racist and sexist and otherwise bigoted minority of Americans are thinking. The rest of us are against these ugly utterances.

      Why close mosques, when the average annual death rate from Muslim terrorists in the United States is just TWO?

      1. Dave says:

        Are you including the World Trade Center in your average annual death rate from Muslim terrorists? If you are, that would make it more like 200/year.

  2. Stephen Kent Gray says:

    The Rand Paul plan of banning people from anti American countries like North Korea rather than on the basis of religion was much better. It was two or three dozen countries on the list. I only remeber North Korea.

    The Gary Johnson plan is allow refugees, but vet them extensively first. Any and all refugees who can go through an extensive background check can and should be welcomed into the country with open arms. Extensive background checks rather than banning is the way to go.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!