[caption id="attachment_267391" align="aligncenter" width="600"] Macedonian policemen clash with migrants at the Greek-Macedonian border, near the northern Greek village of Idomeni, on Thursday, Nov. 26, 2015. Scores of migrants stranded at Greeces northern border have clashed with police while trying to force their way into Macedonia. Macedonia toughened rules for migrant crossings earlier this month, restricting access to citizens from countries typically granted asylum in Europe, including Syria and Afghanistan. (AP Photo/Giannis Papanikos)[/caption]
Today Senate Democrats plan to try and kill the bipartisan legislation to enhance background checks on Syrian and Iraqi refugees. In November a bill that would require FBI and other federal security certification of each new incoming refugee from the two countries easily passed the House on a veto-proof vote of 289 to 137. Republicans were joined by 47 Democrats who voted for the more thorough background checks in response to the terrorist attacks in Paris, which were carried out in part by Syrian passport holders posing as refugees.
According the Washington Post's Karoun Demirjian, many Republicans see the House bill as a reasonable middle ground between Barack Obama’s plans to expand Syrian refugee resettlement, and Donald Trump’s proposal to temporarily ban all Muslims from the U.S.:
Trump sparked a firestorm following the ISIS-inspired attack in San Bernardino when he called for a “total” ban on Muslims entering the United States, at least for a while. Other Republican leaders raced to disavow his comments and distance themselves from Trump on the issue.
I see it as a common sense approach to defend America from Paris-like attacks, more San Bernardino-like attacks and to prevent sexual attacks like those being conducted by migrants invading Europe. That is real immigration reform.
Nevertheless, Democrats' pandering began immediately as soon as the bill passed the House. Allegedly in response to bellyaching from pro-immigrant, refugee, and Muslim groups, Democrats promised to block the bill with a filibuster and President Obama has threatened to veto the bill. But that was just the start of the pandering.
Shortly after the House passage of the common sense bipartisan immigration reform, it was revealed by the Orlando Sentinel that the American Muslim Democratic Caucus of Florida became the newest officially recognized caucus of the Florida Democratic Party. The purpose of this new arm of the Florida Democrats is to get Muslim-Americans registered to vote — as Democrats. Why, when Muslims make up less than 1 percent of the state's population, according to the Pew Research Center? According to the Sentinel, "even relatively small constituencies can have a big impact on elections. Florida is an evenly divided state in presidential election, and small number of votes can determine who wins the state's 29 electoral votes — more than 10 percent of the total needed to win the presidency."
The Democrats didn't stop the pandering there. During a Democratic National Committee (DNC) Executive Committee meeting the DNC made the pandering official policy of the Democrats' national party by adopting a resolution condemning the anti-Muslim rhetoric of the 2016 presidential campaign. If you care to you can read the pandering resolution here.
Nor did the Democrats' pandering start after the passage of the House bill. In October Hillary Clinton Tweeted a campaign video containing this shot of Hillary wearing a hijab. And don't forget Muslims played a critical role in Democrat James Webb ousting then incumbent Republican Sen. George Allen.