I’m certainly not going to defend Cheeto Jesus’s consistency. He’s been all over the place. The current lurch of the drunken sailor that is his policy is toward lower taxes and less regulation, so I’ll go with that because there is at least a chance he was serious.
But I will defend him on the “founder of ISIS” statement. ISIS was started because Obama and Clinton created a vacuum with the US pullout in Iraq. They fanned it further by deposing Col. Qaddafi in Libya, who was pretty much like the creepy uncle you stay away from at Passover. He’s weird and probably slightly dangerous, but mostly harmless, if you watch yourself and don’t let him near your drink. We should have left Col. Creepy in power, as a slow but steady change was taking place as he aged and normal people took over.
And, to add to it, Obama and Clinton apparently ran guns to ISIS out of Bengazi (or permitted it to happen, if you prefer the softer explaination), again siding with the radical Islamist over the creepy, but generally contained Syrian dictator.
Etc. So, Obama might not have a ISIS membership card, but he should be on their Ramadan Card list. He put everything in place to create them.
That’s all fine (no dispute from me and Obama deserves a considerable portion of the blame for ISIS), but Trump has, at least twice to my knowledge, said Obama founded ISIS.
HH: I’ve got two more questions. Last night, you said the President was the founder of ISIS. I know what you meant. You meant that he created the vacuum, he lost the peace.
DT: No, I meant he’s the founder of ISIS. I do. He was the most valuable player. I give him the most valuable player award. I give her, too, by the way, Hillary Clinton.
HH: But he’s not sympathetic to them. He hates them. He’s trying to kill them.
DT: I don’t care. He was the founder. His, the way he got out of Iraq was that that was the founding of ISIS, okay?
This would be my (soft) Counter, JB. (Because I don’t completely disagree).
With the exception of HW Bush keeping Saddam in place after the 1st Gulf War (why “W” went counter to this has never been clearly explained…)
For the better part of the 19th/20th and into the 21st Century…it has been US POLICY (not “Obama/Clinton” Policy) to dispose of thugs, Dictators, Killers and Madmen…run guns (Iran Contra). etc.
In the Middle East, this as proven to be extremely BAD policy, (because that with the exception of Israel; people seem to “behave” better under Warlords, Dictators and Thugs)…but U.S. Policy nonetheless.
This is where I get into disagreement with the “that damn Obama” people.
From the other portion of the interview, where Hugh makes the exact argument JB is making and Donald disagrees:
HH: I know what you’re arguing…
DT: You’re not, and let me ask you, do you not like that?
HH: I don’t. I think I would say they created, they lost the peace. They created the Libyan vacuum, they created the vacuum into which ISIS came, but they didn’t create ISIS. That’s what I would say.
DT: Well, I disagree.
HH: All right, that’s okay.
DT: I mean, with his bad policies, that’s why ISIS came about.
HH: That’s…
DT: If he would have done things properly, you wouldn’t have had ISIS.
HH: That’s true.
DT: Therefore, he was the founder of ISIS.
Did anyone notice I’ve repeatedly called Cheeto Jesus an idiot in various ways?
But, in this narrow instance, said idiot is correct in instinct, if not terminology. He wouldn’t have deposed Col Quadifi, probably supported Mubarak, and wouldn’t have left Iraq (and thus Syria) a vacuum. The captain points in the general direction on a ship and the crew makes it so. That’s more instinctual than anything. On this, he has the right instincts.
And while I am heaping faint praise on Sir Orange of the Might Coif, I will say I am rather pleased he picked up National Review’s proposed ideological tests for immigrants ---- no person holding radical anti-gay, antisemitic, or extreme misogynistic beliefs are allowed in. Yes, that will disproportionately affect Muslims, but anti-Nazi policies affected Germans disproportionately, too. It’s perfectly Constitutional and reasonable.
Why Hillary wants to import people who make the Westboro Baptist Church look sane is beyond me.
I am not sure I follow. I will give the instance of the Shah of Iran. He was a real prick. He tended to throw radical Muslims in prison, or just kill them, because they hindered progress of Iran.
Iran, in the early 1970s was a wealthy, highly-educated place. Christians and Jews lived there in relative peace and safety. Women ran around in short shirts, drove, voted, and went to college. (And could do things like own property and divorce their husbands.)
Along came Jimmy Carter who didn’t like the Shah because the Shah was a bad guy, in an idealist Western way. The Shah killed people without trials. Religion was oppressed.
Of course, the Shah was killing radical Shia Twelvers and said Twelver cult were complete loons who wanted to bring the end of the World via nuclear destruction so their hidden Iman can come out of his well.
(Not joking.)
Well, Jimmy pressured the Shah to have fair elections and to stop killing said loons. Said loons, being a noisy and dangerous plurality, however, took over and started the collapse of the Middle East we see today – still desiring to end the world in religious ferver.
So, yes, the USA has backed some bad guys, like the Shah. We did so because the options were far worse.
This is a lesson the Democrats have never understood. Some countries are not meant to be democratic. They need a thug to keep the lid on the bigger thugs. Some sort of representative democracy pretty much only works in Japan (recently) and the Western World (recently), and only then by great effort and balance.
Sir Orange of the Stupid Hair also gets this. Hillary is too PC to admit the natural state of man.
It is one thing to correctly state that Obama’s poor choices lead to a situation where ISIS could form. It is a completely different thing to say that Obama’s poor choices make him the founder of ISIS.
That’s like saying Woodrow Wilson founded the Nazi party because he left Europe post WWI.
I mean, Hewitt spelled it our for him (not that dissimilar to when he practically spelled out what the nuclear triad is) and Trump took off at a dead sprint into conspiracy theory left field.
Using this logic I suppose GWB, Condi Rice, and Dick Cheney are all co-founders as well.
I must say this is probably the best argument I’ve seen for Trump foreign policy. And therein lies a problem. To this point Trump has hardly approached a level of sounding like he knows what he is talking about. Even guys like Sen. Jeff Sessions can go on TV and make an eloquent argument for Trump’s stances, but the man can’t even do it himself. I really believe that if he has had any decent ideas, he has them by accident.
