Liberals are horrified by Gitmo, sane people are horrified by this:
As many as 20 to 30 former Guantanamo Bay detainees -- some of whom were released within the last three years -- are suspected by intelligence and Defense officials of having joined forces with the Islamic State and other militant groups inside Syria, Fox News has learned.
But hey, they’re only beheading and crucifying people.
One hesitates to call any Obambi statement the most illogical thing he’s ever said, but a remark yesterday on Ebola may qualify:
Q: Are you concerned, sir, that there might be some confusion between the quarantine rules used by the military and used by health care workers and by some states?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the military is a different situation, obviously, because they are, first of all, not treating patients. Second of all, they are not there voluntarily, it’s part of their mission that's been assigned to them by their commanders and ultimately by me, the Commander-in-Chief. So we don't expect to have similar rules for our military as we do for civilians. They are already, by definition, if they're in the military, under more circumscribed conditions.
The question was about why members of the military faced stricter quarantine rules. The fact that they aren’t treating patients would be an argument for looser quarantine rules. More critically, the voluntary or involuntary nature of their service has nothing to do with the capacity of Ebola workers to infect people. There is no constitutional right to fatally infect Americans that civilians enjoy but which service members have surrendered.
So I’m watching the football game last night featuring that team from Washington with the awful, no-good racist name, when there’s a promo for ABC’s Halloween-themed shows this week. It singled out one show, a new sitcom called black-ish. Which I only mention because the Halloween promotion has been branded a “Spooktacular” and you know ...
Remember when Obambi said he was a Muslim and had to be corrected by George Stephanopoulos? Now, in the wake of a study claiming that non-citizens may decide some 2014 elections, we have this:
Perhaps a bigger problem with utilizing CCES data to make claims about the non-citizen voting in the United States is that some respondents might have mistakenly misreported their citizenship status on this survey (e.g. response error). For, as Richman et al. state in their Electoral Studies article, “If most or all of the ‘non-citizens’ who indicated that they voted were in fact citizens who accidentally misstated their citizenship status, then the data would have nothing to contribute concerning the frequency of non-citizen voting.”
Okay, so these elections will be decided, not by non-citizens, but by individuals so deeply committed to the United States that they aren’t sure whether they’re citizens or not. Thanks for clearing that up.