On it goes. The professional grievance industry and Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) are up in arms because Congressman Mark Kirk (R-IL) had the temerity to say that “discrimination against young Arab males from terrorist-producing states” was warranted in the visa-awarding process.
How could it not be? Kirk was not saying that all young Arab males from those countries should be barred from admission. He was saying their applications should get extra scrutiny. That’s elementary. Sight unseen, in the course of a war against militant Islam, do we really have to pretend that a young man who wants to come here from Iran or Egypt rates no more attention from the Departments of State and Homeland Security than one from Luxembourg or Japan?
As night follows day, the “Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago” urged public officials to repudiate Kirk. Obama dutifully blathered that Kirk’s speech “indicates a cavalier attitude towards civil liberties,” while doing “a disservice to the public diplomacy process that’s required to win the war on terror.” All this as Jordanians buried another 56 innocents killed by young Arab men.
How many more Ammans – and 9/11’s, Balis, Djerbas, Istanbuls, Madrids, and Londons …, to name just a few – have to happen before we can be spared this ritual denunciation of common sense?
Memo to Sen. Obama: Aliens living overseas don’t have civil liberties under the American Constitution. Coming to this country is a privilege, not a right. Government’s first responsibility is the security of the governed. And whatever one may think of “public diplomacy,” your drivel does a disservice to the civil rights of Americans to live and have their government take common sense protective measures.