The Left's tactical alliance with radical Islam

John Hayward writes at Breitbart about the

Left’s tactical alliance with radical Islam, a way of letting them know American liberals were fully on board with their quest to restrict the free-speech rights of U.S. citizens. A transaction was offered: we’ll give Islamists pride of place in our new speech-control regime, in exchange for political support. It’s the deal of the century for us, because we’re giving up nothing of value. We weren’t interested in drawing cartoons of Mohammed or insulting Islam anyway.

...Mrs. Jihad waltzed right through Obama’s vaunted “screening” process, the one he says American voters are bigots and fools to express reservations about, when it comes to flooding the United States with Syrian refugees. Mr. Jihad somehow eluded the all-seeing eye of our trillion-dollar Surveillance State, even though he was chatting with terrorists online and checking out ISIS propaganda. The killers swore fealty to the Islamic State at literally the same moment Obama was offering confident assurances ISIS could never pull off a Paris-style terror attack in the United States. Confronted with these failures, the Democrat Party – to a man and woman – has absolutely no idea what to do, other than smear law-abiding Americans who had nothing whatsoever to do with the crime.

And that’s where the raw, slavering hatred comes in. It’s palpable right now. The Left hates decent Americans so very, very much. They hate your religion, your independence, your stubborn refusal to submit. They hate your prosperity, your resourcefulness, and your refusal to believe their fairy tales about an Almighty State that can take care of everyone’s needs in a fair and just manner. They hate that you keep noticing their failures. They hate that you won’t let them import a more pliable electorate from other countries without putting up a fight. They’re furious that you won’t accept their sacred religious belief that everything is your fault, and you deserve generations of punishment for the sins of your fathers.

The very first reaction of liberals – the knee-jerk response of lefties with keyboards and Internet connections – was to attack Christians for daring to offer “thoughts and prayers” for the victims of the shooting. They did so with a speed and volume that strongly suggests coordinated effort.

These same liberals rushed to hold every pro-lifer, and indeed every Christian and Republican, in America responsible for the crazed actions of Robert Dear in Colorado. They were still pounding out op-eds along those lines when police scanners in California lit up with the name “Farook,” and it suddenly became necessary to spin on a dime and insist the ideology, religion, and political objectives of murderers are entirely irrelevant.

The New York Times headlined its profile of the Colorado lunatic, “For Robert Dear, Religion and Rage Before Planned Parenthood Attack.” Think they’ll be using a headline like that for the San Bernardino couple? “For Farook and Malik, Religion and Rage Before Christmas-Party Attack.” Of course not, because the Left has issued a fatwa that religion has nothing whatsoever to do with Islamist terrorism.

The Left is most focused and direct in their hatred of your guns, my fellow Americans, because they are a symbolic representation of everything else that is wrong with you. The Second Amendment (and, increasingly, the First) are viewed by liberals as archaic, irrational barriers against their power. They are united in their contempt for the idea that Government, the divine incarnation of Law and the General Will, could be restrained by laws. How can the makers of law be subject to it? Why, the very idea is perverse! When smart people with big hearts see the urgent need to Do the Right Thing and enact Common-Sense Laws, they should face no centuries-old speed bumps, or listen to modern-day libertarians whining about “due process.”

That’s how you get to the New York Times running an editorial that due process and the Second Amendment should simply be ignored at this moment of crisis. That’s how you get the emerging liberal dogma that Congress can be ignored, after refusing to give a far-Left President what he wants after repeated demands. The Constitution is anathema to the Left’s preferred system of government-by-crisis, in which they get to define the crises, and the “solution” always involves compromising the liberty of law-abiding citizens.

Guns are also an unacceptable totem of skepticism for the sacred State. Gun owners are frank about their desire to protect themselves, and their families, in the absence of police, who are rarely able to arrive at a crime scene in time to save every victim, despite their most sincere efforts. This is absolutely unacceptable to the Left, which views dead law-abiding citizens as acceptable collateral damage – indeed, they’re practically human sacrifices to the god of the State. (Elite liberals hold this belief, in part, because they’re convinced they personally will not be sacrificed, especially when they have armed personal guards.)

At this point, it should be clear that nothing terrifies Democrats more than the possibility that the next terror attack will be thwarted by an armed citizen. That would be absolute narrative apocalypse for them. They’ve put a lot of effort into cooking up phony statistics and writing tortured reports to “prove” that guns in the hands of lawful citizens are a net minus to public safety. If the next Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik take two in the chest from some NRA member with a concealed-carry permit… why, it would ruin hundreds of carefully-prepared Democrat gun control speeches!

If something like that happens, the Good Guy With a Gun had better be prepared for the mother of all online vettings – a hundred times more energetic than anything Democrats would demand for a presidential candidate from their own Party – and God help the hero if he ever said anything derogatory about Islam in public or online.

There’s an old joke about a drunk who insists on searching for his lost car keys beneath a streetlamp, even though he knows he didn’t drop them there, because the light is better. That’s how the Left predictably reacts at a moment like this: they make a feral lunge for the nearest group of law-abiding American citizens with politics they dislike. Power is most easily deployed against the law-abiding; statist threats work best against people with something to lose. Hate screeds are most easily written against people who have been culturally gagged from responding. Team Obama is worse than useless against terrorists, but they excel at threatening Americans who dare to use their Constitutional rights in disapproved ways.

Fighting Islamist terrorism is hard, as years of Obama’s failure can attest. Beating up good Christians and the NRA is easy, fun, and profitable. When a pair of well-prepared Islamist terrorists launches a planned attack on a Christmas party with pipe bombs and guns, the problems to be attacked are obviously the Christmas party and guns. That other stuff is too difficult to discuss, and it’s too obviously a result of Big Government failure.

The most incompetent President in American history, the man whose multi-trillion-dollar government can’t launch a website, demands absolute faith and the scourging of unbelievers. His demands grow more strident as they become more absurd. Innocent American citizens will be sacrificed to his true religion, the religion of the State — unless he and his Party are confronted and decisively defeated.

Read more here.