I suppose you can consider this somewhat of a sequel article to “Trump’s New Immigration Plan: Do Democrats Oppose It Because They Want Slaves?" since it stays within the same topic that the Left opposes this plan. But I won’t be talking about the economic aspects of this plan. No, I’ll actually be talking about an exchange between CNN’s Jim Acosta and White House adviser Stephen Miller at a press briefing recently.
 
CNN’s Jim Acosta began by saying: “What you’re proposing, or what the President is proposing, does not sound like it’s in keeping with American tradition when it comes to immigration.” Afterwards, he began to quote a line from the Statue of Liberty’s famous poem: “The New Colossus”, written by Emma Lazarus: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” Then he followed that by saying: “It doesn’t say anything about speaking English or being able to be a computer programmer. Aren’t you trying to change what it means to be an immigrant coming into this country if you’re telling them you have to speak English? Can’t people learn how to speak English when they get here?”


First of all, Acosta is quoting The New Colossus as though it were an actual law, rather than what it is: A POEM! He’s basically saying: “You can’t do that because this poem in the Statue of Liberty says you can’t! Because that’s against immigration!” It’s just a poem. Quoting it makes no difference in the actual process of legislation. It’s not a LAW that the U.S. HAS to bring in people from everywhere. It’s a POEM meant to signify the U.S. as a place where those suffering from oppression and wish to live free are welcomed to this great Land of the Free. To the Land of Opportunity. It’s not a REQUIREMENT that we have to bring everyone in.
 
Second, it’s plainly obvious that Acosta doesn’t know what the conversation is about. “Can’t people learn how to speak English when they get here?” If we’re bringing in high-skill and high-intelligence workers, NO DUH THEY HAVE TO KNOW HOW TO SPEAK THE LANGUAGE! Those who don’t know how to speak and REFUSE to learn the language and still want to come here are often times ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS! The people that work as landscapers, janitors, low-wage farmers and maids in hotels! But those who, let’s use Acosta’s example, are computer programmers SHOULD KNOW HOW TO SPEAK THE LANGUAGE TO COME HERE!
 
And Stephen Miller agrees. Miller replied to Acosta with: “Well, first of all, right now it’s a requirement that to be naturalized you have to speak English. So the notion that speaking English wouldn’t be a part of immigration would actually be very ahistorical. Secondly,… the Statue of Liberty is a symbol of liberty lighting the world. It’s a symbol of American liberty lighting the world. The poem that you’re referring to was added later. It’s not actually a part of the original Statue of Liberty. But more fundamentally –“ and then he’s interrupted by Acosta.
 
Acosta: “So, you’re saying that that does not represent what the country has always thought of as immigration coming into this country?” To which Miller attempted to reply: “I’m saying that the notion of-“ before he was rudely interrupted once again.
 
Acosta interrupted with: “Stephen, I’m sorry. That sounds like some National Park revisionism. The Statue of Liberty has always been a symbol of hope to the world for people to send people to this country and they’re not always going to speak English, Stephen.” Miller then once again tried to reply with: “Jim, do you believe-“ before being interrupted once again by Acosta, who said: “They’re not always going to be highly skilled.”
 
I won’t write the whole debate between Miller and Jim-terrupting Acosta, but here is one key point of the exchange:

Acosta at one point asked:“… but this whole notion of well, ‘they have to learn English before they get to the United States’, are we just going to bring in people from Great Britain and Australia?” To which Miller told Acosta that he was shocked at the journalist’s statement that only people from Great Britain and Australia would know English. And then begins to expose Acosta’s “cosmopolitan bias” and exposing him as insulting those that come from other countries who know English. Funny enough, that includes yours truly.
 
I’ve said in the previous article that I, myself, am an immigrant. And I learned English well before my family even began the immigration process, because we knew we wanted to come to this country eventually. My mother spoke to me in English and Spanish since the day I was born, knowing that, at a minimum, a second language would be useful to me. And so, we did our due diligence and learned how to speak English (as best we could at the time) and eventually got here without the worry of not being able to speak to anyone here. Is it really too much to ask that other immigrants do the same if they want to come here? And why wouldn’t they want to be prepared and know English when they come here? Would they be looking to simply take advantage of the economic opportunities in the U.S. (as most illegal immigrants do)?
 
What I’m getting at is that this bill would actually HELP immigrants AND the country by bringing in the best of the best from other countries, so long as they are able to speak the language, support their families and contribute to the American economy. But the Left, who is definitely filled with complete anger and hatred towards Trump (and racism against immigrants whose native language is not English), thinks that this bill is awful, racist and bigoted, even though the bill is simply common sense: bring in the best. It’s the same as when a company hires someone. They only want the best for the job.
 
But the Left sees this bill as hateful towards immigrants (even though this particular immigrant doesn’t think so). They are so hateful that, in my research of The New Colossus, I found an article written on ThinkProgress.com (and you might already be able to guess the title, given the name of this obviously liberal site). I won’t be getting into the actual contents of the article, but this is the headline: “Stephen Miller attacks Statue of Liberty poem, echoing popular white nationalist talking point.” With the subheading being: “Online racists celebrated Miller’s performance.”
 
Yep, typical liberal, over-emotional response to a conservative’s logical argument. When they can’t say anything else, they resort to calling us racist. Well, at least you know, if you’re having an argument with a liberal, that you’ve won when they call you racist.
 
Proverbs 10:13
“On the lips of him who has understanding, wisdom is found, but a rod is for the back of him who lacks sense.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli

The mind of a liberal is quite interesting to analyze. Upon hearing Trump delivering a great, patriotic speech to the people of Poland, MSNBC terrorism analyst Malcolm Nance said: “That speech was the ultimate fulfillment of Osama Bin Laden’s ideology of the belief that there would be a clash of civilizations between what he views as his crazy version of Islam and the West.”
 
He continued with: “His version would eventually go into a war with the West and Trump seemed to embody and enshrine that belief that the West should steel itself for a clash of civilization with other cultures, other beliefs, which pretty much spelled out, you know, the Muslim world.”
 
So Trump saying that America and Poland protecting themselves from today’s evil forces is the same as KILLING AND IMPOSING SHARIAH?! Because THAT was Bin Laden’s ideology. In case this “terrorism analyst” doesn’t know: OSAMA BIN LADEN WAS A TERRORIST THAT SOUGHT TO IMPOSE SHARIAH ON THE WHOLE WORLD! Trump, on the other hand, WANTS TO PROTECT THE WORLD FROM THAT!
 
Upon reading the transcript of the speech, I was left with a huge sense of patriotism (something that I never got from an Obama speech). And if this 'analyst' knew anything about Polish history he'd know that Poland's is a history of constantly defending itself from the forces of evil that seek to destroy it. Trump acknowledged Poland’s fighting spirit and history and made Polish people proud to be Polish. And it made Americans at home proud of having elected such a great world leader.
 
But amidst all of that sense of patriotism and strength, an MSM analyst thought that it was akin to what a TERRORIST wants. “… the belief that there would be a clash of civilizations…” That wasn’t Bin Laden’s ideology. That’s WORLD HISTORY! The whole world has had a history of clash of civilizations and beliefs FOR MILLENNIA! Point to ANY war between two countries, and you will see a clash of civilizations and beliefs.
 
To say that a historical fact was a terrorist’s ideology is pure insanity. Bin Laden’s ideology was to kill, destroy and annihilate those who oppose Islam and impose Shariah Law upon the world. Trump’s ideology is to protect freedom and liberty across the world, and most importantly, within the United States. His ideology is to Make America Great Again. Bin Laden’s ideology was to make America into a pile of ashes.
 
What Nance said was completely ridiculous! But it’s the kind of thing that 1) gets ratings and 2) fuels the anger and outrage of an insane liberal base. It’s these kinds of words that led the would-be Republican killer to go out and try to mow down as many Republicans as he possibly could – thinking that he should get them before they get him. To compare Trump to the largest terrorist in history is the kind of thing that will lead another psycho to pick up a gun and try to kill Republicans and maybe even the president himself.
 
We can make fun of the Left for what they say all we want. What this guy said is certainly stupid and hilarious, but mostly to us sane people on the Trump Train. To us conservatives. To a nut-job liberal, it makes them believe that the president is a flat-out terrorist that will destroy the world. What the Left says, particularly when it’s something like this, can be very dangerous. Not that the Left cares. In fact, if it has to be this way in order to regain power, so be it. After all, they continued to bash Republicans and their health care bill ONE FULL DAY AFTER THE ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT!
 
And saying something along the lines of “Osama Bin Laden’s ideology was to make civilizations and beliefs clash with each other” is equally dumb and dangerous. One last time: CLASHES OF CIVILIZATIONS IS WORLD HISTORY! From small battles to large world wars, civilizations and beliefs are always clashing. Every battle the Jewish people fought to build the nation of Israel was a clash between the Jewish civilization and another civilization. Every battle the U.S. has fought was of American beliefs and values against enemies of freedom.
 
From the War for Independence to the War on Terror, each fight America has fought was to clash against another civilization and belief. One that could pose a huge threat to the American way of life.
 
Terrorism is one of those threats today, as largely recognized by Trump in his Poland speech. Terrorism and Globalism are the two huge threats for America and freedom. Those two are beliefs that go against the will of God. As such, those two are doomed to fail.
 
There’s a reason Trump said, in his speech, that Poland often fought against the forces of evil. He recognizes the evils of the world – past and present. He is able to recognize and call out the evil that is terrorism and the evil that is Globalism (though he didn’t specifically name it, just calling it “government and bureaucrats.”) And knowing that these two things are evil, we can rest assured that ultimately, God will utterly destroy these things. For there is no evil allowed in Heaven.
 
Hosea 7:13
“’Woe to them, for they have strayed from Me! Destruction is theirs, for they have rebelled against Me! I would redeem them, but they speak lies against Me.’”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli