Posted on

Some people only know one amendment and they don’t understand consequences.

I think everyone knows that guy. The one says he needs all those guns because he must defend liberty. And while I support an individual right to bare arms, I never actually think that liberty is the reason why that guy wants those guns. I’ve been to gun shows. I’ve fired long guns. I can tell the the difference the major types of firearms. I’ve seen the gun culture props they sell at gun shows.

Those guys have been busy talking about Antifa. And BLM. And arguing that the protests justify their arguments about guns. They need them to protect themselves from BLM and Antifa. Did you see the riots? The vandalism? All the looting?

So I have a whole list questions for those second amendment defenders who spend all that time bragging about how willing they are to use arms to defend themselves and thier liberty from government tyranny.

If there is any looting, vandalism or arson will you and your side obey curfews and allow the police to restore order before continuing?

If looting, vandalism and arson occurring during your gallant defense of liberty, does that invalidate it?

Will innocent civilians be killed in your defense of liberty? Will uniformed police, national guard or US military be killed in your defense of liberty?

Why do I see so many fake liberal hunting licenses but I never see any tyrannical government agent hunting licenses? How is this related to defending your liberty from government tyranny.

Why do I see so many symbols of vigilantes combined with symbols of support for law enforcement? Do you guys know the difference between vigilantes and law enforcement?

So…. Will your defense of liberty be free of looting, vandalism and arson? Will civilians be killed? Will the police be shot at? What side do you expect the police to be on? Would it be free of grievance killing of political opponents? Would there be a difference between vigilantes and law enforcement? Explain it to me. Own it.

What I always conclude is they want those guns because they want to shoot at and kill political opponents, which I usually assume means liberals, activists, people who call them racists for flying a racist flag; and not the police which they assume will be on their side and empower them to kill. And they assume the they will get away with blaming the looting and vandalism on the other side.

So go ahead and shoot deer. But don’t lie to me at tell me it’s about liberty.

Posted on

Republicans love Socialism almost as much as they hate Americans

All the current discussion about Coronavirus bailouts for hotels, hospitality,  skittish markets and the energy sector reminded me of this chart from a few weeks back.

Trump’s signature domestic policy is a big government socialist wall built on confiscated private property just like Khrushchev built. His signature economic policy is tax payer funded subsidies to guarantee equality of outcome for farmers hurt by his anti-market policies. Nothing about that should surprise you, the GOP has made it perfectly clear that this is an endless supply of dirty socialist money for the demographic that votes for, fights for and funds the campaigns of the Republican party. Everyone else can drop dead.

If you have trouble understanding the process that leads the GOP to defend 19 billion for farmers to not sell food while cutting 2.5 billion in food stamps for people who would like to buy food then just think back to these core narratives of the 2016 campaign:

  1. Poor white people in the rust belt are poor because of Mexicans and China and bad trade deals. They need a person to put them first and act on their behalf to correct this injustice that others have done to them. People who disagree with this are commies/hate America/are out of touch elites.
  2. Poor people of color in urban areas are poor because they are lazy and have a bad culture, they have a victim mentality. They need to learn to take care of themselves, stop claiming victim status and expecting other to fix their problems. People who disagree with this are suffering from white guilt/being politically correct/are SJWs.

So it doesn’t count as socialism if the people getting the redistribution are white Republican voters in red states. Or industries that fund Republican campaigns. And as sure as the sun sets in the west; every time a tornado, hurricane or flooding ravages a deep red state you can count on the same GOP that blocked money for injured 9/11 first responders to trip all over themselves to air drop money into rural white communities to make them all whole again.

Republicans love socialism. For themselves. Everyone else can drop dead.

Posted on

Rubio's Statement on the President’s Impeachment Trial is Incoherent Nonsense

“ultimately, voters themselves can hold the President accountable in an election, including the one just nine months from now.”

If Rubio really wanted to voters to hold the president accountable he would have asked for documents and witnesses so the voters could get the full story and make their choice as informed citizens.

By allowing the president to block all documents and block all first hand testimony, Rubio is actively preventing the voters from making informed decisions. Instead, the voters will hear a he said she said debate without all the relevant facts and be unable to hold the president accountable for his actions.

Let’s apply this simple test: If Rubio’s goal was to get voters to vote without knowing what the president did thereby being unable to hold the president accountable; is there anything Rubio would have to do differently?

From: medium.com

View at Medium.com

Posted on

I think I know why 70% of Republicans want Bolton to testify.

The gap between GOP voters who want John Bolton to testify (70%) and GOP senators who want witnesses (somewhere between zero and 4/51) can be completely explained once you consider that GOP voters think Trump is innocent because they believe the Fox news version of events and GOP senators know he is guilty because they actually know the actual truth.

This also explains why right wing media has turned on Bolton.

“New poll says 82% of all Americans want John Bolton to testify for Trump’s removal trial, including 70% of Republicans,” Scott Dworkin, co-founder of the Democratic Coalition, tweeted Wednesday morning, using the trending hashtag. “So the GOP Senators have a choice to make. They can side with the American people, or they can be traitors for life and side with Trump.”

From Newsweek  #WeWantWitnesses Trends After Report That Mitch McConnell Doesn’t Have The Votes To Block Witnesses In Trump Impeachment Trial

Posted on

Never Trump Jurassic Park

I find myself warning my liberal friends about Never Trumpers too often. I am imagining myself as a tour guide at a Jurassic Park themed Sunday talk show, calmly warning my liberal friends to keep a safe distance from those Never Trump Raptors knowing damn well my liberal friends are being fooled by the Raptors feigned timidity just enough that we are all in danger of being eaten by those same Raptors when we least expect it. That will be during the next mid term, we have all seen this movie before.

We all want to believe that there is some common ground that supersedes the GOP desire to run up the deficit and gut social security and medicare. We have all convinced ourselves that there was common ground not that long ago. But we should never fool ourselves into thinking that the Never Trump Republicans represent a way forward to a return to common ground. This just isn’t the situation we find ourselves in today.

Case in point:

Chomp chomp chomp. See what Raptor Evans is doing? He’s trying to divide someone from the pack before going for the throat.

False equivalency aside, I don’t particularly dislike Evan. My biggest issue with him is his complete shock and dismay that his party would jeopardize national security for political gain. Well, Evan, a quick look at your bio shows that you were in the CIA in 2003. That is the same year Valerie Plame’s career in intelligence was destroyed to settle a grudge with Ambassador Joseph Wilson after he exposed George W Bush’s lie about Yellowcake Uranium from Niger during the build up to W’s disastrous Iraq war. All of this happened when Even was serving his country in the CIA. Did he not notice that his party jeopardized national security for the sake of political gain while he worked on behalf of out national security? No one talked about this around the CIA water cooler?

Every single Never Trump Republican, minus a few here and there who were too young; were part of the Bush years. They saw the exact same culture of lies, of foreign policy disasters. They all saw an aircraft carrier turned into a backdrop for a campaign commercial. The torture memo. This simply can not be stressed enough: they were all totally ok with it.

This gets me to the bigger point here. As much as Evan might dislike Trump, there is no reason to think Evan or any other never Trump would be happy with any Democratic candidate. As soon as a Democrat is in the Whitehouse, those Raptors are going to be much less timid. They’re all going to discover the deficit went up. They’re going to decide that we need a grand bargain. Do you think they’re going to be in any way open to the idea or working with Bernie or Warren or anyone on improving services? Or bringing the troops home? Or doing anything that would help a Democrat win a second term?

When looking at a never Trumper, always ask yourself “What side of the containment gate are they?”

Posted on

Bret Stephens should show the same respect to the man who called him a bedbug that he demands we show to Nazis on campus.

“So I was surprised to receive an email from Bret Stephens last night. The subject line read “From Bret Stephens, New York Times.” The provost of my university was cc’ed on the message. Stephens had found a tweet that I had written earlier that afternoon. Riffing on the headline “Breaking—there are bedbugs in the NYT newsroom,” which was drawing rounds of Twitter jokes, I had written “The bedbugs are a metaphor. The bedbugs are Bret Stephens.” The tweet had landed with a thud (nine likes, zero retweets), and I went about my day.”

Republican attempts to shut down free speech on campus because his feelings were hurt. None of the free speech concern trolls who stand up for Nazis could be reached for comment.

From: esquire.com https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/amp28829576/bret-stephens-bedbug-david-karpf-interview/?__twitter_impression=true

Posted on

The National Review will Shiv you in your liberal back in a heartbeat

“If 1998 Bill Clinton ran in the Democratic primary today, he’d be instantaneously labeled a far-right bigot. His support for the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the Defense of Marriage Act, and “don’t ask, don’t tell” alone would label him as a conservative culture warrior. His crime bill and his views on illegal immigration would render him a racist bigot, and his balanced budget would block the dramatic expansion of the welfare state contained in Medicare for All and the Green New Deal.”

And…

“But those who care about the health of the American republic cannot and must not ignore the fact that our most powerful cultural cohort just keeps radicalizing.”

From: nationalreview.com

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/white-progressives-polarizing-america/

The National Review makes it clear that there is no good faith gained by compromise with the right. Work with them, they shiv you the way they spent eight years going after Clinton. Stand on principal and you’ll be attacked as a radical.

And these are the non-crazy Republicans. The ones who discuss climate policy without conspiracy theories.

This article could have been a fair and generous call for moderation. It isn’t. It is pure identity politics that puts the focus on what people call themselves rather than what policies they prefer. Democrats are way more unified on policy than on what to call ourselves.  Any trip to PEW Research over at http://www.people-press.org will tell you that. And Democratic policies are way more popular with a broad plurality of Americans.

Again, these are the non-crazies.

Posted on

Concern Troll Veterans of the Obama Drone Wars still silent as Trump escalates.

“The 2016 executive order was brought in by then-President Barack Obama, who was under pressure to be more transparent.

Since the 9/11 terror attack, drone strikes have been increasingly used against terror and military targets.

The Trump administration said the rule was “superfluous” and distracting.”

In the 2016 election cycle I head so many people talk about Obama’s Drone war and how it would be worse under Hillary and at least Trump would get us out of stupid wars. None of those concern trolls have said a word. And I really doubt they cared about the issue other than as a way to score points in debates with liberals.

From: bbc.com

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47480207

Posted on

Why aren’t you willing to die for my liberty?

 “Do you believe the hospital has a right to refuse to treat me on the basis of race, and that the government has no moral or legal imperative to require the hospital to treat me?

…

For the record, after a brief silence, my radio caller acknowledged that while the death of someone like me might be an unfortunate byproduct of his limited-government perspective, he still stood fully behind his philosophy on principle.”

Not surprised. Libertarians think you should be willing to sacrifice your life for their liberty but also think it is a bridge too far to think they should pay taxes to defend the lives of others. There is no grand principle here, regardless of what he is saying. For the most part, they are perfectly willing to accept the social security and medicare benefits they’ve paid for while they suggest others be willing to die for their liberty.

From: thedailybeast.com

https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-blacks-arent-libertarians

Posted on

N.R.A. Magazine Draws Criticism for ‘Target Practice’ Headline With Photo of Pelosi and Giffords

“The photo, taken last month at an announcement about proposed legislation to expand background checks for firearms purchases, carried the headline in large letters: “Target Practice.””

They are about killing people, not defending the Constitution. They want guns to go after liberals and kill them. They keep telling us that. Stop taking them at their word when they claim they want guns for defending themselves from the state. They want those guns to short-circuit the constitution when they personally disagree with a law, a party or a legitimately elected representative.

From: nytimes.com