It's just difficult to not feel like there's an agenda when there's obvious hypocrisy. On one hand we want to build a wall to keep people from coming in illegally. And yet people who are going the legal route with work visas and green cards are now also being denied.
That's not hypocrisy at all. There is no right for any foreign national to come to the United States. The demand for them to apply legally isn't there just to be a pain in the butt because paperwork and delays are fun, it's there to say who can and cannot come into the country.
I'm reminded of how many times I've seen the flowchart of how difficult it is to come to this country legally as evidence that illegal immigration is acceptable. All I can really do is shake my head because I see the two as utterly separate issues.
Conservatives can argue specifics and try to find justifications, but that doesn't deny the pretty obvious fact that policy is being generated in the shadow of xenophobia.
Talk to Europe about how well mass immigration and taking in refugees from such countries is working out for them. Immigration policy should not be simply left up to shouts of xenophobia and romantic notions of the Statue of Liberty. It should be discussed as adults trying to figure out the best policy for the country.
For myself, not bringing in citizens of these countries hardly strikes me as unreasonable or unjustifiable.
Add in the fact that the countries not under sanction happen to just be the ones where Trump has business interests just seems to highlight the hypocrisy even more.
Look, I know it's fun to beat up Trump, but I also know you and everyone who has brought this up is intelligent enough to realize that the countries not on this list had a whole lot more to do with diplomatic reasons than personal enrichment for Trump.
We've got a long four years ahead of us with plenty of real scandals, and I don't feel like having to stick up for him on made-up ones. If we're going to view treating the Saudis and such with kid gloves like every single other administration does as well as proof of anything, then I don't know what to tell you. I sure as hell don't like it either, but that's been the status quo over there for many decades now and it's hardly proof of corruption that Trump hasn't upended that particular table in the past week and thrown things into even more chaos.
I'm already having flashbacks to Halliburton being the explanation for every single Bush Administration decision in the Middle East. And, yes, Trump should have done more to separate himself from his company, but I'd hope everyone would at least try to distinguish what is business as usual going back decades from what might be a legit gripe.