We don't discriminate, we're Democrats

'After careful consideration of the issues, I vote for the female'

Vetting Refugees from the Middle East

Balancing American Values with 

Actually Getting Something Done

We Could Save More

Ok, granted, the Syrian situation is not a holocaust, but after three years the U.S. has been little more than a witness to the 230,000 deaths and 4.7 million refugees running from the Syrian civil war.

Between the barrel bombs of Assad and numerous ISIS atrocities, almost half the 11 million population has had to flee the country.  While many wait in nearby Arab countries, Europe has stepped up over this last year to take in vast numbers.  Still, there's no end in sight, supplies are needed and winter is coming.

Winter is Coming

The Obama Administration has allowed only 1800 Syrian refugees into the U.S. over the last three years.  It was a decision based on country of origin and, evidently, by sex and age since only 2% of the these refugees were men of "fighting age."

The current refugee screening process involves up to nine government agencies (moving at DMV-like speeds) scanning available information to see if any red flags are raised.  If not, they are let in after one-and-a-half to three years.

A number of Republicans and the American population itself have expressed significant reticence to allow in Muslims.  A few days ago the House passed (with a bipartisan vote) a fairly watered-down measure that simply requires the three main directors of such agencies to positively assert that they believe the refugee not to be a threat.  Unfortunately, this will screen out refugees with little verifiable background, but it also prevents extremists from getting in who simply didn't have their name on a watch list. 
Despite the bipartisan support, President Obama roused himself from his on-going Syria-strategy formulation to threaten to veto any change to the current process.  He also raised the U.S. target to 10,000 refugees from Syria over the next year.  President Obama then climbed up on his soapbox of moral rectitude to roundly decry the possible separation of Muslim refugees as "not the American way."

- - -

Now we get to the crux of the matter.  Considering that the overwhelming concern is U.S. acceptance of Islamic extremists, or those most likely to turn that direction, perhaps we could do MORE for the Syrian refugees.

Remember, it was the Administration itself that was fine with the de facto age and gender discrimination on the mere 1800 Syrian refugees accepted so far.  So, yes, it would be discrimination on the basis of religious affiliation to screen out Muslims, but simultaneously that is virtually the only factor that matters.  Religious discrimination of some form is entirely the motivation behind Islamic extremists - as we've seen; it's the Yazidis, Christians and Jews that get the special treatment from ISIS (and the Assad regime in the past).    

What if the United States carefully vets the Administration's proposed 10,000 refugees of any religion, but then accepts another 140,000 refugees whose non-Muslim religious affiliation can be positively confirmed?  The screening gets much simpler.  That's 140,000 less people shivering in cold refugee camps through two more winters in the Balkans, and essentially a relief valve that allows the European refugee agencies to concentrate on those remaining.

Is it worth it?  Is saving more lives worth the hit to our non-discriminatory value system?

In order to expedite refugee processing,

the FBI has decided to employ

Enhanced Interrogation Techniques

(The editorial above is a follow-on to my brief proposal made here, back in September.)

And you thought jail time was only a requirement in Louisiana...

Aside from the grievous disservice and abuse of the public’s trust in the course of the corruption,

“Ganim had…cost the Bridgeport community millions of dollars.”

I am all for reform of the nation's criminals and accepting them back into society, but maybe the good people of Bridgeport should have considered a trial position such as City Treasurer or Tax Collector before entrusting him to such a responsible position.