Our rhetoric on refugees has been unhelpful

Ruth Marcus on Nov 22, 2015

So if the public is anxious over admitting Syrian refugees, that is understandable, not evidence of un-American prejudice. This is why Obama, before unloading on Republican politicians who ought to know better, should have acknowledged public concern, not seem to berate people for it.

"My expectation is, after the initial spasm of rhetoric, that people will settle down," Obama said. Such dismissiveness doesn't help his case.

Ron Klain, Obama's Ebola czar, tweeted out this smart advice: "First, must acknowledge fears & address -- not dismiss as illegit (that only exacerbates fear & fuels doubts about leaders' candor). Second, must explain that NOT acting -- giving into fears -- is more risky (i.e., blocking refugees will RAISE the threat to the US). Third, must show that gov't has a plan to manage the risk -- not ignoring risk, but taking active, serious steps to reduce it. "

Clinton, by the way, followed this model in a speech Thursday, noting the imperative of vigilant screening before arguing that "slamming the door on every Syrian refugee ... is just not who we are."

Let's hope. Donald Trump has said it may be necessary to close mosques and create a national database of Muslims. Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush called for sorting refugees by religion. Chris Christie would exclude even 5-year-old orphans. Ben Carson referred to "rabid dogs" and tried to raise money off the issue.

What's the bigger risk: that terrorists posing as refugees will slip through in a year or two, or that young Muslims here will listen to this bigotry and become radicalized? The answer seems obvious.

========

Ruth Marcus' email address is ruthmarcus@washpost.com.