Author Archives: R.D. Walker

Milo Yiannopoulos makes a rousing defense of gay pedophilia

It should be noted that he denies that is what he is doing here. He says this is selectively edited. Here is what appears to me to be an unedited version of the interview. It should be cued up for you but, if it doesn’t work, start at about 1:01:30.

Here is a sample…

Yiannopoulos: This arbitrary — I’m just gonna — I’ll be quick. This arbitary and oppressive idea of consent which totally destroys, you know, the understanding that many of us have of the complexities and subtleties and complicated nature of many relationships. You know, people are messy and complex, and actually, in the homosexual world particularly, some of those relationships between younger boys and older men, those kind of coming-of-age relationships, the relationships in which those older men help those young boys to discover who they are, and give them security and safety and provide them with love and a reliable — a sort of a rock for when they can’t talk to their parents. Some of those relationships are some of the most —

Unknown: It sounds like priest molestation to me.

Ben: It sounds like Catholic priest molestation to me.

Yiannopoulos: And you know what? I am grateful for Father Michael. I wouldn’t give nearly such good head if it wasn’t for him.

Draw your own conclusions but it doesn’t really sound like conservatism as I know it.

2 Comments

A message from the President of the United States

15 Comments

Welcome to the American House of Mirrors

In the House of Mirrors, it is impossible to know what is real and what is illusion. What seems real is fake and what seems fake is real. Nobody believes anything they don’t want to believe and only believe what is pleasing.

Reality is subjective and truth is based on opinion. It is a world of solipsism in which knowledge of anything outside one’s own mind is unsure; the reality of the external world is negotiable.

That’s not to say that you are free to believe what you want. There are pressures to believe certain things and to disbelieve others. These pressures are not based on metaphysical reality but on tribal loyalty.

Loyalty to your tribe requires certain beliefs and to profess beliefs not sanctioned by the tribe is heresy that is punished with ostracism. You must support the tribe no matter what.

This is post postmodernism. Enlightenment rationality was based on metaphysical truths and marked with skepticism, distrust of grand narratives and ideologies and based on an understanding of human nature, a desire for progress and a belief in objective reality and morality.

The American House of Mirrors, instead, insists that knowledge and truth are the products of social, historical and political interpretations. Reality, in this world, is based on the politics of identity in every group from Black Lives Matter to the Alt-Right. Reality, we are being told, is defined by moral relativism, collective thought and group-referentiality.

In the American House of Mirrors rationality of the Enlightenment is being subverted and in its place is the political solipsism of identity politics in which reality is not metaphysical, but is defined by loyalty to political ties of blood and race and sectarianism.

24 Comments

Record number of Americans See Foreign Trade as Opportunity

I think a lot of what Trump is doing has the support of a reasonable plurality of Americans some, like limiting immigration from terror prone states even has a majority of support.

If, however, Trump thinks slf-imposing trade restrictions on the United States is going to be popular, he is in for a huge surprise. Americas, along with most human being who have lived over the last hundred years, recognize free trade as an opportunity for mutual benefit. They see free exchange as something free people do. They understand that allowing business leaders to managed their own complex sourcing of materials makes more sense than having the government impose it.

Here is Gallup.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A record-high 72% of Americans see foreign trade as an opportunity for economic growth. This is up sharply from 58% last year, after much debate about trade during the presidential election cycle.

About 90 percent of the suspicion I have for DJT is his rejection of the common sense, proven economics and liberty enhancement that is free trade and commerce. I am please to see that the vast majority of Americans agree.

8 Comments

The president is pleased with his press conference…

36 Comments

Harward Declines National Security Role

Evidently the Administration was requiring the admiral to use staff already in place rather than his own and he considered that unacceptable.

Vice Admiral Robert Harward has rejected President Trump’s offer to be the new national security adviser, CBS News’ Major Garrett reports.

Sources close to the situation told Garrett Harward and the administration had a dispute over staffing the security council.

Two sources close to the situation confirm Harward demanded his own team, and the White House resisted.

Specifically, Mr. Trump told Deputy National Security Adviser K. T. McFarland that she could retain her post, even after the ouster of National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Harward refused to keep McFarland as his deputy, and after a day of negotiations over this and other staffing matters, Harward declined to serve as Flynn’s replacement.

Harward, a 60-year-old former Navy SEAL, served as deputy commander of U.S. Central Command under now-Defense Secretary James Mattis. He previously served as deputy commanding general for operations of Joint Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg in North Carolina.

Harward would have been an establishment-acceptable pick and would have been difficult to control. I suspect Team Trump wanted to mitigate that by making sure they had friendlies on his staff. That was never going to fly with an Admiral or a SEAL.

They probably should have worked this kind of thing out before going public, huh?

More here.

42 Comments

WSJ: Sensitive Intelligence Withheld from Trump?

Evidently US intelligence agencies are leaking information to everyone in America except the president.

U.S. intelligence officials have withheld sensitive intelligence from President Donald Trump because they are concerned it could be leaked or compromised, according to current and former officials familiar with the matter.

The officials’ decision to keep information from Mr. Trump underscores the deep mistrust that has developed between the intelligence community and the president over his team’s contacts with the Russian government, as well as the enmity he has shown toward U.S. spy agencies. On Wednesday, Mr. Trump accused the agencies of leaking information to undermine him.

In some of these cases of withheld information, officials have decided not to show Mr. Trump the sources and methods that the intelligence agencies use to collect information, the current and former officials said. Those sources and methods could include, for instance, the means that an agency uses to spy on a foreign government.

More here.

19 Comments

Deep State Revolution?

Over at PJ Media they are deeply concerned about the deep state.

Mike Flynn, a good man who saw the enemy clearly, and had the courage to name it, saw Russia not as an enemy but a geopolitical adversary with whom we could make common cause against Islam — and who also vowed to shake up a complacent and malfeasant IC — was its first scalp, and an object lesson to new CIA Director Mike Pompeo should he have any reformist notions. As for the media, having previously failed to take down Trump aides Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway, Flynn was the next best thing; their joy today is unbounded.

Is this what you thought you voted for in November? Is this how you thought American democracy worked? Is this the country you want to live in?

Welcome to the Deep State, the democracy-sapping embeds at the heart of our democracy who have not taken the expulsion of the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party lightly. They realize that the Trump administration poses a mortal threat to their hegemony, and so have enlisted an army of Democrats, some Republicans, the “neverTrumpumpkin” conservative die-hards, leftist thugs, Black Lives Matter and anybody else they can blackmail, browbeat or enlist. They mean business.

Strong words. A political assassination of a good man by the deep state. There is something I don’t get, however, if Michael Flynn is a blameless target of a partisan attack from a hostile federal bureaucracy, why did Mr. Trump let him go? After all, it was Trump’s decision that he leave.

How does the deep state force the POTUS, against his will, to relieve a national security advisor? How can the media take down a member of Trump’s team without the cooperation of Mr. Trump? It seems to me that, if the president wanted Flynn in the White House, he would still be in the White House.

Discuss.

25 Comments

NYT and CNN report Trump team in contact with Russian agents during campaign

Here is the Washington Times.

The missives comes as multiple news outlets, including CNN and the New York Times, reported Tuesday that Russian officials were in touch with members of Mr. Trump’s team during the presidential campaign last year.

Advisers close to Mr. Trump were in “constant communication during the campaign with Russians known to US intelligence,” CNN reported.

Among those supposedly communicating with Russian nationals was former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, the report said. Mr. Manafort denied that he ever knowingly talked to any intelligence official “or anyone in Russia regarding anything of what’s under investigation.”

“I have never had any connection to (Russian President Vladimir) Putin or the Russian government before, during or after the campaign,” he told CNN.

Mr. Trump and his team have consistently denied any contacts between the campaign and Russian officials ahead of November’s election.

The New York Times did make this important disclaimer.

The intelligence agencies then sought to learn whether the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians on the hacking or other efforts to influence the election.

The officials interviewed in recent weeks said that, so far, they had seen no evidence of such cooperation.

So no evidence of, well, anything.

Several members of Team Trump have ties to Russia, this isn’t in dispute and never was. It is entirely plausible that they may have inadvertently spoken with Russian intelligence agents. It’s not like the agents wear uniforms. That isn’t in itself evidence of wrongdoing.

The optics are bad, however. Mr. Trump has flip flopped a time or two on just about every issue but he has stayed remarkably consistent in his positive assessment of Mr. Putin. He has demonstrated a willingness to harshly criticize China, Mexico, Germany, Australia… but not Russia.

For his part, Mr. Trump has engaged in angry Tweeting.

4 Comments

Obamacare’s individual mandate is dead

If the individual mandate is dead, Obamacae is dead.

The health law’s individual mandate requires everyone to either maintain qualifying health coverage or pay a tax penalty, known as a “shared responsibility payment.” The IRS was set to require filers to indicate whether they had maintained coverage in 2016 or paid the penalty by filling out line 61 on their form 1040s. Alternatively, they could claim exemption from the mandate by filing a form 8965.

For most filers, filling out line 61 would be mandatory. The IRS would not accept 1040s unless the coverage box was checked, or the shared responsibility payment noted, or the exemption form included. Otherwise they would be labeled “silent returns” and rejected.

Instead, however, filling out that line will be optional.

Officially, the law is still in effect. The Trump Administration simply refuses to enforce it.

The move has already raised questions about its legality. Federal law gives the administration broad authority to provide exemptions from the mandate. But “it does not allow the administration not to enforce the mandate, which it appears they may be doing here,” says Michael Cannon, health policy director at the libertarian Cato Institute. “Unless the Trump administration maintains the mandate is unconstitutional, the Constitution requires them to enforce it.”

“The mandate can only be weakened by Congress,” says Ellis. “This is a change to how the IRS is choosing to enforce it. They will count on voluntary disclosure of non-coverage rather than asking themselves.”

In any case, the enforcement of the individual mandate is the keystone that holds up the entire Obamacare edifice. Without the mandate, an actuarial death spiral is all but certain.

Obamacare has been in trouble for years but its collapse will now be attributed to sabotage rather than poor design.

Here is evidence the collapse is underway.

Health insurer Humana is leaving the Affordable Care Act’s public insurance exchanges for next year as it regroups after ending its proposed combination with rival insurer Aetna.

Humana Inc. covers about 150,000 people on exchanges in 11 states.

The insurer said Tuesday it had taken several actions to improve that business, but it was still seeing signs of unbalanced risk in that customer population. Health insurers have struggled to attract enough healthy people to their risk pools to balance the claims they incur from people with expensive medical conditions.

4 Comments

A New Abuse of the 10th Amendment

This time, however, you will probably support it.

The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (H.R. 38) would provide relief for America’s 14.5 million permit holders who want to be certain of their carry rights across state lines. Their need is acute: The number of concealed carry permit holders has tripled since Congress first attempted to pass a reciprocity bill in 2008. Donald Trump, our permit-holder-in-chief, has announced his support for an interstate reciprocity law. But is the proposed statute constitutional? Reciprocity for nearly all types of licenses—even driver’s licenses—depends on voluntary arrangements among states, a practice that comports with the Tenth Amendment. Can the federal government compel reciprocity for concealed carry permits?

To find an answer, we must look in an unlikely place: the Constitution’s Commerce Clause. The clause empowers Congress to regulate interstate commerce, but since the 1930s, legislators have used it as a pretext to regulate—well, almost anything you can imagine. Worse yet, the U.S. Supreme Court, under the flag of loose constructionism, has largely upheld these laws, creating increasingly Orwellian definitions of both “interstate” and “commerce.”

No the Commerce Clause will be used to force states to accept other states’ CCW rules, like it or not.

That’s right fans of the “living constitution”. That sword has two edges and cuts both ways.

76 Comments

Flynn out as National Security Advisor

His Russian contacts were problematic.

President Trump’s embattled national security adviser Michael Flynn resigned Monday night, after days of controversy over his past contact with the Russian ambassador.

Flynn, in his resignation letter, wrote that he “inadvertently” briefed top officials with incomplete information regarding a call with the ambassador.

“I have sincerely apologized to the president and the vice president, and they have accepted my apology,” the letter read.

Flynn, separately, told Fox News in an email: “I have nothing to be ashamed for and everything to be proud of.”

Trump has named Lt. Gen Joseph Keith Kellogg, Jr., as his acting national security adviser.

So. Three weeks in we lose a National Security Advisor because he lied about contacts with a quasi-hostile foreign power.

More here.

18 Comments

Is somebody asleep at the switch at SNL?

Why, it is almost like they are hacking on hallowed leftist tropes here. What’s up with that?

3 Comments

The Nature of Political Power

I posted this quote in a comment last night. I have reread it again and think it is worthy of a full post. It was written by P.J. O’Rourke in his book, Parliament of Whores: A Lone Humorist Attempts to Explain the Entire U.S. Government.

There is a lot of wisdom rolled up in this brief, economy of words. It is wisdom that many on the right understood during the Obama years but have forgotten as of late. It is wisdom many on the left ignored for years but have suddenly awoken to find them germane once again.

The reality is that these words are always relevant. Freedom and liberty are never the gifts of those who ambitiously pursue power. Those who pursue power are not engaging in the pursuit of it in order to throw it away. Men pursue power to wield power.

“Authority has always attracted the lowest elements in the human race. All through history, mankind has been bullied by scum. Those who lord it over their fellows and toss commands in every direction and would boss the grass in the meadow about which way to bend in the wind are the most depraved kind of prostitutes. They will submit to any indignity, perform any vile act, do anything to achieve power. The worst off-sloughings of the planet are the ingredients of sovereignty. Every government is a parliament of whores. The trouble is, in a democracy the whores are us.”

8 Comments

Little chance of civil asset forfeiture reform under Trump

Civil asset forfeiture is the legal principle that law enforcement can seize cash and property from those suspected of committing crimes even when suspects are never convicted or, in some cases, even charged with a crime. Trump has signaled that he supports the civil asset forfeiture as a tool of law enforcement and even commented that he would destroy the career of a lawmaker working to reform the law.

Trump signaled he would fight reform efforts in Congress, saying politicians could “get beat up really badly by the voters” if they pursue laws to limit police authority.

The comments could signal an abrupt halt to efforts to curb the practice under the Obama administration, which also had faced heavy criticism from civil libertarians and criminal justice reform advocates.

Brittany Hunter of the free-market Foundation for Economic Education wrote that the president’s “egregious comments” effectively destroy “any hope that his administration will be better on this issue than President Obama. In fact, the situation may very well become worse.”

According to the Institute for Justice, a civil liberties law firm, the Department of Justice’s Assets Forfeiture Fund generated $93.7 million in revenue in 1986. By 2014, the annual figure had reached $4.5 billion — a 4,667 percent increase. The practice surged for years under the Obama administration.

While critics believe the policy creates a profit incentive for law enforcement, police organizations say it is an important tool and charges of abuse have been blown out of proportion.

More here.

8 Comments

A little pointless fake news…

This is an article in the New York Post about a chamber atop Mt. Rushmore. It is about a historical vault designed by carver Gutzon Borglum.

Abraham Lincoln holds the history of our country’s past.

Literally.

Tucked inside Lincoln’s frontal lobe in Mount Rushmore in Keystone, South Dakota is a secret, inaccessible-to-the-public chamber.

The vault was designed by the monument’s sculptor, Gutzon Borglum, who envisioned it as a room dedicated to the history of the United States.

The article makes the point that the vault is in Lincoln’s head several times. It includes a photo.

I had actually been there and that wasn’t how I remembered it. So, I went to look. So, let’s go to Google maps…

Can anyone explain to me how that it is Tucked inside Lincoln’s frontal lobe?

I know it is nothing but Sunday afternoon trivia but it still raises the question: Why just make up fake news like this?

4 Comments

Discussion on Constitutional Rights

Do we have the right to wear shoes? It’s not in the Constitution so it’s not an enumerated right. Is it a right at all?

If congress passed a law and the president signed it banning shoes, would it be constitutional? Again, there is no mention of shoes or clothing of any kind in the constitution.

If a federal court made an argument that the spirit of the constitution includes a right to wear shoes and struck down the law, would the court be engaging in judicial activism? Would it be judicial overreach?

Discuss.

28 Comments

Trump tells Xi Jinping US will honor “One China” policy

The flirtation with Taiwan seems to have been short and sweet.

President Trump told President Xi Jinping of China on Thursday evening that the United States would honor the “One China” policy, reversing his earlier expressions of doubt about the longtime diplomatic understanding and removing a major source of tension between the United States and China since shortly after he was elected.

In a statement, the White House said Mr. Trump and Mr. Xi “discussed numerous topics, and President Trump agreed, at the request of President Xi, to honor our One China policy.” It described the call as “extremely cordial” and said the leaders had invited each other to visit.

The concession was clearly designed to put an end to an extended chill in the relationship between China and the United States. Mr. Xi, stung by Mr. Trump’s unorthodox telephone call with the president of Taiwan in December and his subsequent assertion that the United States might no longer abide by the One China policy, had not spoken to Mr. Trump since Nov. 14, the week after he was elected.

As was said here before, the status quo is pretty much the best possible situation for Taiwan. It would be reckless to risk that.

More here.

1 Comment

Anger over Obamacare repeal

When they passed Obamacare, many on both sides of the aisle knew its repeal would be difficult. Once a benefit is given, it is very, very hard to take away.

Much as Obamacare has been reviled, it has been a positive boon for its relatively small number of subsidized beneficiaries. Those people don’t want to see it go… even deep in Trump country.

More than seven years after angry anti-Obamacare town halls erupted across the country, raw emotions are boiling over again — this time, as the Republican Party under President Donald Trump gears up to dismantle Barack Obama’s legacy.

On Thursday night, two Republican members of Congress — Reps. Jason Chaffetz of Utah and Diane Black of Tennessee — were each confronted with impassioned constituents during simultaneous events. The shouted questions, emotional pleas and raucous protesters of the evening crystalized the GOP’s tough political road ahead as it forges ahead with rolling back Obama’s accomplishments, including the Affordable Care Act.

Mike Carlson, a 32-year-old student from Antioch, Tennessee, said that as an overweight man, he depended on Obamacare to stay alive.
“I have to have coverage to make sure I don’t die. There are people now who have cancer that have that coverage, that have to have that coverage to make sure they don’t die,” Carlson said. “And you want to take away this coverage — and have nothing to replace it with! How can I trust you to do anything that’s in our interest at all?”

More here.

15 Comments

Appeals court upholds ruling blocking Trump’s immigration order

Now it goes to the Supreme Court.

A federal appeals court in San Francisco upheld the suspension of President Trump’s controversial immigration order Thursday — a decision that could end up in front of the Supreme Court.

The panel of three judges on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused to reinstate the order after a federal judge had issued a halt to the order last week.

Trump issued the executive order, which placed a 90-day pause on immigrants from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Somalia and Sudan, on Jan. 27, causing chaos and outrage at airports across the country. The order also imposed a 120-day pause on all refugees, and an indefinite pause on refugees from Syria.

The case was given to the appeals court after a Seattle federal judge last week ordered a halt to Trump’s order. Judge James Robart issued a temporary restraining order after Washington state and Minnesota both sued. Attorneys from the Justice Department appealed Robart’s ruling, arguing that the president’s executive power gives him the authority to place restrictions on people coming into the country.

My initial reaction is surprise. I thought the court order that suspended the executive order was shoddy. I expected it to be quickly reversed.

Frankly, I wonder if the court didn’t feel like the POTUS backed the judicial branch into a corner. His heavy handed comments probably felt like a threat to judicial independence and, if so, perhaps this is a means of telling the world that they cannot be cowed. It wouldn’t be the first time a federal court ruled for the benefit of the court. Marbury v. Madison was all about that sort of thing.

So here is a little coaching for Team Trump. If you want a judge or panel of judges to rule in your favor, try to say things that make it easier – not harder – to do that.

You might not want to stand in front of the fusilade of tweets that is about to be fired.

53 Comments

Sessions Confirmed as Attorney General

1 Comment

A Message from the President of the United States

23 Comments

Killing Quotas

They are real in the United States of America.

6 Comments

Rule #1 for Open Carry: Don’t be an idiot

Here we have two fellows in Dearborn, MI who put on body armor and ski masks, armed themselves with an AKM and other sundry weapons and walked into the police station. It goes as about how you would expect.

On Monday, the Dearborn Police Department and a statewide open carry group condemned the two men’s action as irresponsible and reckless.

“I find this behavior totally unacceptable and irresponsible,” Police Chief Ronald Haddad said in a statement Monday afternoon. “This is not a 2nd Amendment issue for me. We had members of the public in our lobby that fled in fear for their safety as these men entered our building.”

Tom Lambert, president of Michigan Open Carry Inc., a gun-rights group, issued a statement supporting the police handling of the incident.

“Let us be clear, Michigan Open Carry Inc. in no way supports the actions of these individuals,” Lambert said. “It is our belief that their actions were reckless and primarily designed to draw attention and a response.”

More here.

8 Comments

A lesson for the Cobs…

We now have five SFRs: #5 Don’t make up stupid shit. You can link to others’ stupid shit but never, ever be the originator of stupid shit on this site. The less public the figure and the more stupid the shit, the more important this rule is. All cobs acknowledge please. 🙂

A Maryland blogger has been forced to pay a “substantial sum” to Melania Trump as part of a settlement for a defamation lawsuit over an article containing unsubstantiated claims that the first lady once worked as an escort, her lawyers announced Tuesday.

“I posted an article on August 2, 2016 about Melania Trump that was replete with false and defamatory statements about her,” Webster Tarpley, the 71-year-old blogger, said in a statement by Trump’s attorneys, according to the Washington Post.

Trump’s legal team declined to provide the settlement amount. Tarpley, of Gaithersburg, didn’t respond to requests from the Washington Post for comment, but his lawyer confirmed a settlement had been reached.

More here.

25 Comments