Archive for Mind Games

2/6/2017 The Deplorables versus the Depraved

But, of course, this sort of thing doesn’t matter.

First, the lawsuit could have been dismissed by the district court (or the court of appeals) in whole or in part for lack of jurisdiction. Second, the district court did not give the required legal reasoning in its order to justify the TRO. Third, the court had no business enjoining the executive order nationwide, instead of just in the two states. But fourth, once the district court issued the TRO, the appeals court had no authority to touch any other aspect of this legal challenge until it reaches the next stage of litigation.

Ken Klukowski explains the Travesty of Legal Errors in Immigration EO Lawsuit – “Washington and Minnesota’s lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s immigration executive order (EO) showcases a cavalcade of legal errors.”

But having made those errors, there is nothing the Justice Department can do until the TRO is superseded by a preliminary injunction (PI). A TRO expires within 14 days of being issued, unless another event overtakes it first.

Given the liberal makeup of the Ninth Circuit, however, the Justice Department faces an uphill fight in San Francisco. More likely this issue is heading to the U.S. Supreme Court, meaning that President Trump’s EO—and immigration as a whole—could become a major topic of discussion in the confirmation process of the Supreme Court’s incoming ninth justice, Neil Gorsuch.

Byron York also weighs in: Justice Department demolishes case against Trump order – “James Robart, the U.S. district judge in Washington State, offered little explanation for his decision … Now the government has answered Robart, and unlike the judge, Justice Department lawyers have produced a point-by-point demolition of Washington State’s claims.”

the Justice Department argued that Robart’s restraining order violates the separation of powers, encroaches on the president’s constitutional and legal authority in the areas of foreign affairs, national security, and immigration, and “second-guesses the president’s national security judgment” about risks faced by the United States.

The government brief supported the president’s decision on both legal and constitutional grounds, starting with the law. And that starts with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952

On the larger question of the Trump order’s constitutionality, the government makes a very simple point: foreign nationals in foreign countries do not have U.S. constitutional rights

strength of the case does not assure victory. As Laura Ingraham, the conservative radio host who also served as a clerk for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, tweeted on Sunday: “The law is on Donald Trump’s side. Doesn’t mean that the courts will follow it.”

Ilya Somin beclowns himself, again, trying to explain Why Trump’s refugee order is unconstitutional –“On its face, the order does not discriminate on the basis of religion” but, of course, he knows better as words only mean what he thinks they ought to. He goes into a tortured explanation about why a temporary ban of visitors from countries where citizen documentation is suspect that were selected by a previous administration is really a religious ban and not a security issue. Then Somin ignores precedent and diminishes that part of the Constitution he does not like.

A more reasoned approach is Focusing on temporary visas as protected “liberty interests” in the challenges to Trump’s Immigration EO – the key argument here is about a topic not explicit in the EO which is the matter of current visa and green card holders with established U.S. residence. The EO is being treated as if it was a lot more than it is.

In order to analyze that hybrid constitutional/statutory question, however, one needs to focus on the most legally plausible constitutional interest at stake that would counsel for a narrow construction of the President’s power. In my view, the EO’s point of greatest vulnerability is its depriving long-term U.S. residents with non-immigrant visas of their interest in entering the United States and returning to their homes, families, workplaces, and schools. By contrast, the claim that the EO violates equal protection faces a steeply uphill battle. Disparate impacts on Muslims are not sufficient to trigger strict scrutiny (although the smoking gun of Trump’s campaign speeches as well as Giuliani’s boasting about creating a “Muslim ban” might suffice to shift the burden of proof). Moreover, nationality-based discrimination is still deeply embedded in our immigration system, despite the 1965 move away from national quotas. The Hart-Celler Act of 1965 still maintains per-country limits on immigration, and, more recently, national categories similar to those in Trump’s EO were used to exclude immigrants from the visa waiver program in the Terrorist Travel Prevention Act. I do not see federal judges eager to overturn all such nationality-based distinctions in immigration law in the name of equal protection.

Daniel Greenfield: Judge James Robart is the swamp that Trump must drain – “This is the radical judge who endorsed the racist Black Lives Matter hate group from the bench and illegally blocked President Trump’s order to keep Americans safe.”

This is why there is so much concern about SCOTUS and rogue justices and one of the major issues that help elect Trump. James A. Lyons essay on Restoring America’s leadership and security – “President Trump’s political revolution points a way forward” is pertinent here, too.

It is interesting that a Democrat on a talking heads panel was totally outraged and disgusted by Trump setting aside Putin murders with a ‘U.S. does it, too’ comment and then seeing a CBS Poll: Two-Thirds of Democrats Say Islam, Christianity Equally Violent reported by Neil Munro.

Almost seven out 10 Democrats believe Islam “encourages violence… about the same as other religions,” according to a new CBS poll.

The trusting attitude towards Islam is revealed in the February 2017 poll follows 17 tumultuous years of attacks against Americans motivated or shaped by Islamic ideology throughout the United States

Progressive and left-wing activists say much violence is caused by Christians, although few make the argument that the violence is motivated Christian doctrines.

Sarah Gustafson: Obama’s higher education record: a low bar for Betsey DeVos – “critics will continue to frame her as dangerously inexperienced. Even the slightest misstep will be held up as proof she’s out of her depth.”

critics should grade DeVos on a curve, with the midpoint set at the Obama administration’s less-than-elegant higher education policymaking. Let’s review that record.

Reviewing the follies of the Obama administration’s higher education agenda is not meant to be (completely) cynical. There are lessons here for DeVos. Making good higher education policy is challenging. And the stakes are quite high: bad policy and slipshod implementation put students’ futures and taxpayers’ dollars at risk. DeVos must treat postsecondary education with as much consequence and care as she would elementary and secondary education policies.

But the lesson for everyone else: the left-of-center politicians and advocacy groups who worry Betsy DeVos lacks higher education experience treated the Obama administration with kid gloves each time the administration botched a new reform. Take their sudden worry that DeVos will commit all sorts of policy blunders with a grain of salt.

Noting some whistle-blowing by Delingpole: NOAA Scandal Gives Trump The Perfect Excuse To Drain The Climate Swamp

In the field of energy and climate, President Trump has said that there is a massive swamp that needs draining.

But his efforts are being resisted at every turn by all those lying scientists, bent politicians, rent-seeking businessmen, and Soros-funded activist groups who insist: “What swamp? What crocodiles? What leeches? Nothing to see here!”

What does this all mean in terms of science? Not much. As we’ve seen above, there have been strong suspicions about Karl et al’s paper since the moment it was published.

In terms of the climate propaganda wars, on the other hand, it is huge: this is a blow from which the Alarmist establishment may never recover for it gives the Trump administration just the excuse it needs to sweep clean the Augean of corrupt climate science once and forever.

Trump is now in the perfect position to demand that climate-related scientific bodies in receipt of government funding (ie all of them) make their code and data available to the public.

This gets interesting because there is a massive effort to ‘save the data from Trump’ as the Left knows he is going to destroy it. The Left knows a lot of things, it seems, that are rather strange when viewed in the sunshine of reality. See John Bates on Climate scientists versus climate data on Dr. Curry’s blog – “A look behind the curtain at NOAA’s climate data center.”

I read with great irony recently that scientists are “frantically copying U.S. Climate data, fearing it might vanish under Trump” (e.g., Washington Post 13 December 2016). As a climate scientist formerly responsible for NOAA’s climate archive, the most critical issue in archival of climate data is actually scientists who are unwilling to formally archive and document their data. I spent the last decade cajoling climate scientists to archive their data and fully document the datasets. I established a climate data records program that was awarded a U.S. Department of Commerce Gold Medal in 2014 for visionary work in the acquisition, production, and preservation of climate data records (CDRs), which accurately describe the Earth’s changing environment.

Robert Knight: Left uses violence but decries ‘speech as violence’ – “Respect for faith and family trumps ‘the power of the people’” – “In the upside down world of leftist activism, speech is violence while actual violence is an appropriate response.” The Boy Scouts caving to Leftist bullying is the example.

Another form of anarchy is the violence done to language in the name of ideology. Without common understanding of the meaning of words, we cannot communicate, much less engage in meaningful dialogue.

The enemies of civilization in America figured out long ago that they could control debates by controlling language. In order to avoid the smear of “extremism” and to get along, most people reflexively adopt the new terms. You know, turning homosexuality into “gay,” abortion into “choice,” gambling into “gaming,” smut into “erotica” and government spending into “investments.”

One reason that Donald Trump evokes such fear and hatred among progressives is that he avoids politically correct phraseology. It’s not that he didn’t get the memo; he tore it up and sent it back in tiny pieces.

The mobs at Berkeley and the go-along-to-get-along leadership of the BSA might regard themselves as the vanguard of a cultural revolution, but they’re just peddling their own forms of anarchy. While they drift into nonsense, a quiet revolution is taking shape below the radar that aims to reestablish respect for the permanent things of faith, family and freedom. Not to mention sanity.

J. Christian Adams provides another example of “ violence done to language in the name of ideology.” Why the North Carolina voter ID case matters – “It’s actually an attempt to preserve the Voting Rights Act.” – “Because voter ID is overwhelmingly popular, and because courts have largely supported it, they are trying to change what the Voting Rights Act means.”

They may never admit it, but the civil rights industry is tired of spending millions of dollars only to lose most voter ID fights in court. Instead of declaring defeat, the strategy has shifted to changing the rules of engagement, and trying to transform the Voting Rights Act into something it isn’t.

On appeal, however, the judges ruled in the exact opposite direction for North Carolina: claiming that the state went out of its way to intentionally discriminate against minorities. It did this by substituting its own version of the facts, even though appeals courts don’t see witnesses, and even though experts for the United States were found to be not credible.

This difference between two courts was because of how the Voting Rights Act was read.

There is more at stake than the integrity of elections. If the Court does not intervene, the nation could see one of the shining achievements of the Civil Rights era be politicized.

Rebecca Hagelin has the ‘compare and contrast’ down pat in Thank God for Kellyanne Conway – “She’s one of the smartest, most kind, most thoughtful people you could ever hope to meet. And the mass media are intent on destroying her.”

the deeper reason for the particularly venomous attacks aimed at Kellyanne is so simple that it’s sophomoric: The media are professionally embarrassed that Donald Trump won the election despite their repeated attempts to kill his campaign. So, they have decided to destroy the one who made that victory possible.

While the media elites publicly ignore the fact that Kellyanne made history and should be lauded as a role model for all women who have struggled in the male-dominated political arena, they secretly obsess over the fact that she beat their pants off.

And they really can’t accept the fact that their woman, Hillary Clinton, was beaten by a man whose “right-hand man” is actually a conservative lady.

Thank God that Kellyanne continues to fight and win. And mark my words: She will keep fighting, with millions of Americans cheering her on.

Michael Filozof says The United States Cannot Survive as Presently Constituted – “With slight shades of difference,” wrote George Washington in 1796, Americans “have the same religion, manners, habits and political principles.”

The inauguration of Donald Trump sparked national protests – obscene, vulgar, and crude — by the Left. Over sixty congressional Democrats boycotted his inauguration. Plans to impeach him were in the works – before he had even done anything.

the Constitution of 1787 no longer articulates a set of shared principles. For practical purposes, today there are two separate and unrelated constitutions – a constitution of the Left, and a constitution of the Right. The Leftist constitution includes the rights to abortion, anal intercourse, and gay marriage. The Right, reading the “supreme law of the land” as it was actually written, sees no such rights anywhere in the U.S. Constitution.

The Right regards America’s Founders as men of achievement, morality, and virtue. They see our European heritage as praiseworthy, for it gave us the Enlightenment, Industrial Revolution, electricity, medicine, clean water, automobiles, powered flight, and landed men on the moon.

The Left sees the Founders as wicked, greedy men who cheated innocent Indians and enslaved innocent blacks. Whites of European descent raped and destroyed the pristine environment with global warming, imposed monogamy and heterosexuality upon women, and subordinated the “peaceful” cultures (like Islam) of black and brown people.

Why waste time and effort trying to persuade people who cannot and will not be persuaded? If Californians want to ban guns, parade around in bondage leather, and allow illiterates and criminals to cross the border to receive government benefits, let them. Ohioans and Michiganders ought not be forced to go along with it.

But the present situation is untenable. The nation is like a car careening down the road, with two people fighting over the wheel. One pulls the car left, the other swerves back to the right.

Sooner or later, a crash is inevitable.

Jazz Shaw: Can the government rein in disruption and riots hiding under the guise of “protests?”

The old school idea of “protesting” which I grew up with has changed a lot in the 21st century. This new school of protesters focuses on “disruption” as the vehicle for their efforts as opposed to the old school, quaint concept of simply marching on sidewalks, in parks or designated areas with signs and songs. … At some point along that trail we crossed the line from protesting to rioting, and while we can debate the exact moment when it happened, we’re there now.

Robert Rohlfing: The Long War Of The Left – “The Left’s Long War is far from over, we see it now more than ever being exposed and played out not only in this nation, but on the world stage as well. With each battle they are losing ground, but they are not down and out.”

Judi McLeod: The Civil War Known as the Deplorables Vs The Depraved – “Obama’s legacy of hate is just beginning to show its hideous face. Words have meanings, elections have consequences and propaganda is changing the world into one where outrageous lies masquerade as truth. The worst is yet to come.”

Matthew Vadum: The seditious left – “Prosecute the Berkeley rioters by enforcing federal law.”

It’s the Deplorables versus the Depraved. 

Leave a Comment

2/5/2017: Measuring and observing Angst

On the Fake News front is an ‘alternative facts’ bias in the form of labeling the Washington judge as a Bush appointee. The other alternative fact is that the judge was appointed as a normal consideration to a Senator in the state. Which of these ‘alternative facts’ is chosen for headlines indicates whether or not the attempt is to push a false narrative or not. The judge’s behavior makes the reality clear.

Patterico describes The Judge Who Halted Trump’s Immigration Order Has Made Some Wacky Rulings In The Past – “Today, we are learning more about that judge . . . and some of it is unsettling.”

Will Baude wonders about The deadly serious accusation of being a “so-called judge” – “to call him a “so-called” judge is to hint that he is not really a judge, that he lacks judicial power. … I hope I am reading too much into this. But I am positive that this is not the last time I will be writing about judicial decisions and judicial authority.” Consider context. Trump was talking layman and not lawyer. So, yes, Baude was reading way too much into a Trump tweet. The error is so obvious that it lends credence to a concern about bias and, therefore, accuracy, of the essay.

You may have heard about the Doomsday Clock getting set ever closer to Armageddon. Because Trump. Never mind that as real estate mogul with high value properties all over the globe he’s got more incentive to avoid a nuclear holocaust than nearly anyone else. Dave Taylor describes why The Doomsday Clock is a Measure of Liberal Hysteria, not Armageddon

The Doomsday Clock was created by a group of scientists who managed a publication about nuclear warfare research called the Bulletin of The Atomic Scientists. The clock itself first showed up back in 1947 and its starting position was “seven minutes to midnight,” with midnight symbolizing earth’s end.

Predictably, the media has gone bananas: “Thirty seconds closer to global annihilation!” NBC News trumpeted,

But where were all these alarmed journalists when the clock’s keepers moved Doomsday’s countdown from six minutes to midnight to three minutes to midnight during Barack Obama’s presidency?

As the deafening silence about the clock during Obama’s presidency suggests, the Doomsday Clock has long been a partisan, not a scientific, device.

As for the Doomsday Clock, it’s probably best to heed the advice of one of its critics, who notes that it is “a more reliable measure of liberal angst than the risk of a nuclear holocaust, and it should be treated as such.” Turns out that what we really need these days isn’t a countdown to nuclear Armageddon, but more levelheaded and nonpartisan scientists.

Looks like this one, too, is more fodder for the problems in the propaganda machine that is being cataloged by more and more pundits.

Karin McQuillan says the Democrats Find a Use for Violence – “Democrats are rejecting the heart of our democracy: the peaceful transfer of power via the ballot box.”

Democrats are scared stiff that Trump’s sensible, practical polices will make our country safer, boost our economy, and deliver jobs to blacks and millennials. That’s why they are running around in pink hats and black masks, beating dissenters up literally or verbally.

This is not the 1960s. This is not a mass movement protesting an unpopular war or supporting civil rights legislation. We have Obama’s community agitation, not Martin Luther King’s nonviolent resistance.

First, progressive violence reinforces the messages of identity politics, to keep their side from hemorrhaging support.

Second, Democrats liked it better before Trump, when conservatives kept their heads down and their mouths shut.

Democrat power relies on millions of unpaid thought police.

Third, violent speech and actions by Democrats are meant to define Trump’s policies as abnormal.

The fourth strategic goal: provoke a national crisis.

Some Americans will end up hurt, beat up, and perhaps worse. Democrats don’t care. Republicans are non-persons; their bloodied faces and concussions are acceptable collateral damage for Democrat power politics.

Democrats’ violent refusal to accept their loss of the presidency and Congress should be a national scandal.

John Hinderaker is asking What, really, is the Democratic Party? – highlighting projection.

Kevin Williamson in National Review … takes off from the observation that the Democrats are not making any serious effort to block such Trump nominees as Satan Jeff Sessions, but instead have trained their guns on the seemingly-innocuous Betsy DeVos. His argument is that a familiar slander against the Republican Party may actually be true as applied to the Democrats

Do the people who run the Democratic Party really care about the social issues, other than as a cynical means to fire up their base? The evidence suggests that the answer is No

Williamson’s conclusion:

What is the Democratic party? Is it a genuine political party, or is it simply an instrument of relatively well-off government workers who care about very little other than securing for themselves regular raises and comfortable pensions?

If I were a progressive, I’d be curious about that.”

Introspection is difficult so it is rather rare, especially on the left. That is why there is so much angst that can be seen in behaviors typical of denial and dissonance.

Leave a Comment

2/4/2017: Blindsided by preconceptions and a closed mind makes you a target

It’s not the new administration upsetting the applecart. Now the judiciary has set itself above established and explicit executive authority and in a most fundamental area. It used to be that the concern about terrorism was that it only took one lapse in security but a judge has now tossed that idea aside. It used to be that the executive could determine who could be allowed into the country but a judge has now tossed that aside. It used to be that citizens had special rights that non-citizens did not have but a judge has now tossed that aside. Andrea Noble reports Federal judge halts Trump’s immigration order – the judge has decided that the lawyers in the DoJ were incompetent and that many others who cannot find support for his view were wrong also. Basic concepts of precedent and prudence have been set aside for partisan ideological satisfaction even in the area of national security.

In written arguments in the Washington case, the Justice Department defended the president’s order and his authority “to suspend or impose restrictions on the entry of aliens into the United States.”

“Every President over the last thirty years has invoked this authority to suspend or impose restrictions on the entry of certain aliens or classes of aliens, in some instances including classifications based on nationality,” DOJ attorneys wrote.

Judge Robart’s written order, issued several hours after the court hearing, indicates that the plaintiffs successfully demonstrated that they would “suffer irreparable harm” if the court did not intervene.

The Associated Press reported that Judge Robart asked Justice Department attorneys whether there had been any terrorist attacks by people from the seven counties listed in Mr. Trump’s order since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

“The answer is none,” Judge Robart said. “You’re here arguing we have to protect from these individuals from these countries, and there’s no support for that.”

John Sexton observes that “Politico notes this setback came just a few hours after the Trump administration prevailed in another lawsuit against the executive order.” In other words, it is warfare by attrition with no holds barred in attempting to subvert the established social order.

Slashdot may have a clue as to the “immediate harm” idea: Microsoft’s H-1B Workers Cited In Motion That Successfully Blocked Trump’s Travel Ban – “Washington’s technology industry relies heavily on the H-1B visa program.”

Washington ranks ninth in the number of applications for high-tech visas. Microsoft, which is headquartered in Washington, employs nearly 5,000 people through the program. Other Washington companies, including Amazon, Expedia, and Starbucks, employ thousands of H-1B visa holders. Loss of highly skilled workers puts Washington companies at a competitive disadvantage with global competitors.

Trump might get a ‘twofer’ out of this as the H-1B visa holders replacing American skilled workers has been on the burner for quite a while. It also provides fodder for those who endlessly complain about inhuman corporate interests except Trump is shown here as fighting those interests. That’s in addition to the national security and immigration promise fulfillment.

On a similar front is the civil war being conducted by the deep state. Andrew Restuccia, Marianne Levine And Nahal Toosi say Federal workers turn to encryption to thwart Trump – they make it clear that the enemy isn’t the criminal or the terrorist but rather the people and their nation. If you run a company and encountered employees as described in the article, what would you do? should you do?

Federal employees worried that President Donald Trump will gut their agencies are creating new email addresses, signing up for encrypted messaging apps and looking for other, protected ways to push back against the new administration’s agenda.

At the EPA, a small group of career employees — numbering less than a dozen so far — are using an encrypted messaging app to discuss what to do if Trump’s political appointees undermine their agency’s mission to protect public health and the environment, flout the law, or delete valuable scientific data that the agency has been collecting for years, sources told POLITICO.

Just what is it that provides any basis for these fears of a “small group of career employees”? Such fears add to the concerns. Not only do you have employees who are plotting to undermine their employer, you also have indications that they are irrational in their behavior.

Russell Paul La Valle notes The Trump opposition: Hell hath no fury like Democrats’ scorn

Trump’s destruction is nothing less than the moral battle for the soul of America, and his sacrifice will reconcile God and the Democrats for the mortal sin of ever allowing him to be elected president in the first place.

Reaching this level of hatred and contempt has required cultivation.

John Sexton picks up on one example of where this hate can lead: Dakota Access Pipeline protest leader charged with inciting a riot, 74 arrested – “Dakota Access Pipeline protester Chase Iron Eyes was arrested this week and has been charged with inciting a riot, which is a felony.”

It might be helpful to the protesters if Iron Eyes were the spokesman for the Standing Rock Sioux and could be portrayed as a victim here. But in fact, the actual spokesman for the tribe, Dave Archambault, published a statement on the tribe’s Facebook page Wednesday which was very critical of Iron Eyes, albeit without mentioning him by name.

If you’re wondering, it was Chase Iron Eyes who called people back to camp this week despite a recent vote by the tribal council asking all of the remaining protesters to vacate the land before floods wash them and all their voluminous garbage into the river.

Chuck Ross: Look Who Funds The Group Behind The Call To Arms At Milo’s Berkeley Event

The left-wing group that helped organize the violent shut down of the Milo Yiannopoulos event at the University of California, Berkeley on Wednesday is backed by a progressive charity that is in turn funded by George Soros, the city of Tucson, a major labor union and several large companies.

And on its Facebook page, the group asserted that the vandalism and arson were not “violence.” Instead, the group argued that Yiannopoulos and Trump perpetrate violence through the policies they support.

Again, constructed outrage based on manufactured pretenses that displays projection more than any constructive effort to advance their stated purposes. Ace notes that Newsweek Enthuses Over Political Violence, Saying “Protesters” “Schooled” Milo Yiannopolous and the city of Berkley aren’t too concerned about the implications of riots that destroy property and commit assault and battery.

Allahpundit noticed the potential for ‘good cop, bad cop’ tactics in a Nikki Haley Russia blasting at the U.N. Another insight is Video: Kellyanne Conway on the “Bowling Green massacre” that didn’t happen – “when you’re a top White House advisor and the single most ubiquitous surrogate for the president on American TV, unreliability about a terror attack is a very bad trait to display, whether the mistake is innocent or not.”

But the heavy media coverage of her mistake today, in treating this as a “can you believe it?” mega-gaffe and an example of the “alternative facts” that Conway infamously touted a few weeks ago, is also being unreliable in glossing over her underlying point. She’s defending Trump’s temporary refugee ban by noting that dangerous people have been admitted to the United States before — which is true, and the two Bowling Green scumbags are paradigm examples. There was no “massacre” and she deserves to be called on that, but if you worry about letting people in from Iraq and Syria because you’re afraid they might have an interest in bombs and jihad, well, the Bowling Green incident gives you reason to worry. She misremembered it as a successful attack, but the intent to kill American soldiers was there — enough so to secure federal convictions.

If the press wanted to fact-check Conway effectively on this, they’d skip the buzzers and do what Elizabeth Nolan Brown did, asking the question of just how many refugees have gone bad like the pair in Bowling Green. The answer, according to a 2015 study: Three — out of 784,000.

Good point on the overblown ‘Conway Lies’ meme but missing the fundamental ‘it only takes one’ on the terrorist meme or, in this case 3 out of 784,000. That’s, of course, the 3 known terrorists. It’s like voter fraud where what you don’t know can be either a reason to ignore (the Left’s view) or a reason to check (Right’s view).

Andrew Malcolm says Donald Trump’s setting so many fires Democrats can’t keep up – “What is it exactly these congressional Democrats want instead?”

Perhaps you’ve noticed a fair number of protests, many of them violent, since Hillary Clinton was not elected president.

Perhaps you’ve also noticed the Democrat minorities in Congress opposing pretty much every single thing involving the man who was elected president Nov. 8

There is — and was — no main message.

That thematic void can be politically lethal in American elections.

Remember Alexander Hamilton or maybe someone else saying, if you don’t stand for something, you will fall for anything? Well, the converse is true too: If you oppose everything, you stand for nothing. And that’s the muddy path that Democrats Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and their Gang of No has taken.

You may not agree with many or any of his actions. Or like his loud style. But the strategic truth is, in creating just two main themes, the unpredictable media magnet Trump has lit so many fires that Democrats under their elderly leaders can’t decide which to fight. So, they’re fighting them all, none effectively. Everybody watching the not-exactly spontaneous protests and the on-camera anger has their own tolerance level for outrage. But at some point, everybody has one.

“We need to be guided by a positive message about economic growth for everybody and a country that includes everybody,” Connecticut’s lonely Democrat Sen. Chris Murphy said sensibly. “We can’t respond to everything. You have to decide what to respond to based on what your vision for the country is.”

Good luck with that these days in Washington.

Steven Hayward, in his The Week in Pictures: Trump Train Keeps on Rolling Edition says “it appears the only thing that can possibly slow down President Trump is carpal tunnel syndrome.”

Michael Sainato says Everything Trump Is Doing, Establishment Democrats Set in Motion – “In 2006 Obama, Clinton, Biden, Schumer and 20 other Democrats voted in favor of a physical barrier to be built along the US-Mexico border.” This sort of comparison and contrast just makes it worse because it makes it clear that the opposition is really inane protest.

The Democratic Party has actively participated or remained complicit in several of the policies and plans now being pushed by the Trump administration, despite their rhetoric conveying a blanket opposition.

Establishment Democrats have acted outraged over Trump’s plans to develop a Muslim registry, but their criticisms were nowhere to be found when Bush and Obama had one in place between 2001 to 2011.

In order to develop serious opposition against Trump’s Presidency and the Republican-dominated Congress, Democrats need to face how their political cowardice and questionable policies enabled Trump’s ascendancy. … Understanding the Democratic Party’s past wrongdoings is vital to develop a recovery plan, but so far the Democrats continue to remain entangled in the policies that they claim to oppose from the Trump Administration.

Ed Morrissey expands on a point Rush Limbaugh made: Robert Reich: “Rumors” that Berkeley riots were a right-wing false flag, or something

Is it possible? Er … sure, in a theoretical, paranoid-conspiracy construct, I suppose. We’d have to believe that is using its money to fund roving bands of thugs that only seem to appear when conservatives go to speak on campuses or when Republicans get inaugurated as presidents. And if you believe that, you can also believe that our friends at Breitbart have figured out how to travel through time to stage the 1999 WTO riots in Seattle, which featured similar tactics by people dressed and acting in an almost identical manner

Godwin’s Law [wikipedia] has been taking hits. The Left says it is suspended because Trump is just like Hitler in every vile way imaginable. There is a good explanation of This Hitler Nonsense on Regie’s Blog. His father “toured post-war Germany extensively in 1957 and ’58 as a child performer. And he often recounts the stories.”

These and other intense experiences in Germany sent my father on a life-long quest to understand this sociopath (Hitler) and the country that allowed itself to be dragged into one of the darkest chapters in world history. My dad is a Hitler/Nazi buff the way Indiana Jones’ dad was a Holy Grail buff.

As the son of a man with this hobby (one might call obsession) I learned a lot about Hitler and the Third Reich just by osmosis, growing up. My father would weave WWII stories into his sermons.

But the truth about Nazis isn’t funny at all. It’s bloody and horrible and gut churning. And it involves machine guns and butchery and inhumanity on a scale that takes your breath away.

The idea of comparing an American president to Hitler is just as absurd …from any angle, in any context.

Hitler took over a small, failing state that didn’t have separated government, enumerated powers or checks and balances. … His entire political career was violent from the beginning. … He disarmed the population, then nationalized healthcare and education.

Hitler was a real life murdering sociopath. He wasn’t just a charismatic speaker who incrementally fell into bad behavior. He wasn’t just a racist corrupted by unfettered power. In other words, you or I probably couldn’t end up being Hitler. A garden variety KKK leader probably couldn’t end up being Hitler either …or a community organizer …or a New York real-estate tycoon. It’s not that easy or simple.

But if you study enough about it, you realize the guy vetting and banning refugees is probably not Hitler …the guy CREATING refugees probably is.

If we keep looking for Hitler in every United States president we disagree with, we’re not going to recognize the real one when he actually shows up …in a different country.

Here’s a bit of the Californication of Nevada that might be on the positive side of the ledger, reported on TechDirt of all places. Good News: Nevada’s Strong Anti-SLAPP Law Is Constitutional – “SLAPP stands for a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. In short, SLAPP suits are lawsuits where it is fairly obvious that the intent of the lawsuits is to stifle free speech, rather than for a legitimate purpose under the law. “

the ruling basically recognized that Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statute was similar to California’s (much older and much more broadly litigated anti-SLAPP) law, and that Nevada courts can use California case law for its own anti-SLAPP cases

Dan Calabrese says Trump’s blunt style throws foreign leaders into a tizzy—and has them rushing to meet with him – “Establishment voices think Trump is an out-of-control bumpkin who has no idea what the proper way is to operate on the world stage.”

One of the biggest mistakes of the political establishment – one they show no sign of grasping – is that when they constantly complain about how Trump is violating all the norms of politics, the presidency and international relations, they totally miss that this is exactly what the people who voted for him wanted him to do. And they totally miss that he is doing it intentionally and with purpose.

Career diplomats are appalled because their job description usually involves preserving the stability of the established global order. If stability is disrupted, a diplomat thinks that’s a crisis.

But there’s a concept in business called order from chaos. It holds that what appears to be order might actually be little more than a set of norms with which you’ve become comfortable. It’s not really producing anything positive, but it feels comfortable to you so you continue to operate according to it. An outside party can come into an organization and observe that the established order is not producing the desired results, but it can be difficult for those who have operated within the established order for awhile to see that.

Coyote Blog provides a Global Temperature Update – “I just updated my climate presentation with data through December of 2016, so given “hottest year evah” claims, I thought I would give a brief update with the data that the media seldom ever provides.” He’s probably a bit more in line with the “consensus” than the alarmists and shouters and the ideologues. There are graphs and charts and a bit of preening as well.

Blindsided by preconceived fantasies on so many fronts …

Leave a Comment

2/3/2017: Kill the chicken and let the monkey watch

David French: If We Can’t Unite Against Rioting, We Can’t Unite at All – “Public officials should find riots more appalling than free speech” but it is questionable whether this is the case right now. French provides examples from the crowd to the mayor to the Lt Governor.

In the United States of America, rioting to stop free speech is unlawful and reprehensible. Period. Full stop. It’s not “understandable.” It’s not excusable. There should be no tolerance and no sympathy for people who pepper-spray young women, beat bystanders senseless, and tear up property because they’re mad that another human being is speaking. Last night’s spectacle in Berkeley, Calif., was disgraceful.

What you’ll notice (and what you’ll experience, if you ever find yourself in the middle of violent left-wing protest) is that the rioters and the “peaceful” protesters have a symbiotic relationship. The rioters break people and destroy things, then melt back into a crowd that often quickly and purposefully closes behind them. They’re typically cheered wildly (to be sure, some yell at them to stop) and often treated as heroes by the rest of the mob — almost like they’re the SEAL Team Six of left-wing protest.

it’s entirely improper for a public official to declare what kind of speech is or is not “welcome” in American communities. Or to place free expression in the entirely fictional (legally speaking) category of “hate speech.”

The thing that is so galling — and so destructive — is that we know that if the ideology of the rioters were flipped, if they were wearing #MAGA hats, the entire university world, the mainstream media, and every Democratic politician alive would be united in a full-throated declaration that the apocalypse was upon us, that “Trump’s America” was unequivocally a dark, violent, and hateful place.

If our nation can’t unite unequivocally and without reservation around the notion that rioting to stop free speech is reprehensible and unlawful regardless of the ideology of the speaker, we are not only losing respect for our core constitutional values, we’re losing respect for the rule of law itself. The unraveling continues, and every public official who dares to muster up more anger at free speech than at violence — or who equates free speech and violence — is doing his part to rip at the very fabric of our civil society.

French also provides another example of Fake News: Don’t Believe Claims that Trump ‘Botched’ the Yemen Raid – “many journalists are rapidly reaching the point of maximum credulity — they’ll immediately believe virtually anything negative about Donald Trump, not matter how thinly-sourced or implausible.” This particular operation is also another ‘on the Democrat’s Watch’ being misapplied to Republicans tactic.

Journalists spread the Reuters report far and wide, but anyone with the slightest experience in complex special operations missions should have been instantly skeptical. The anonymous attacks on Trump look a lot more like ass-covering than whistle-blowing. Absent truly extraordinary circumstances not outlined in the report, these officials seem to be relying on reporters’ ignorance and willingness to believe anything about Trump to cover to deflect criticism of a dangerous operation that turned out to be even more dangerous than anticipated. That happens in war. It happened all the time when I was in Iraq.

So, no, don’t believe claims that Trump botched the raid in Yemen. He didn’t plan the operation, and we don’t want him planning operations. We want presidents to rely on professionals. But those same professionals will tell you that war is terrible by its very nature, and no president can guarantee victory without cost.

There’s also Fake News of the ‘we won’t mention that’ variety. Here’s Something For Schumer To Cry About: Polls Show Public Backs Trump’s Travel Ban – “If you haven’t heard of these polls, don’t kick yourself. The mainstream press isn’t exactly parading them around.”

The Trump-hating Huffington Post’s poll, conducted by YouGov and released on Thursday, shows that only 44% of the public opposes Trump, while 48% back him and another 8% aren’t sure. (You have to scroll far down Huffington Post’s main page to find it.)

So, even biased poll questions can’t get anywhere near half the public to oppose Trump. And his executive order gets significant majority support when it is accurately described.

For the international implications, see Spengler: Why Middle Eastern nations support Trump’s immigration halt – “The US president’s measure has had precisely the result he intended, giving succour to those engaged in an existential war against jihadist elements.”

Glenn Kessler provides some Fact Checking: Senate Democrats’ misleading language on a 60-vote ‘standard’ for Supreme Court nominees – it’s a bit more than the usual gotcha’ fact checking the WaPo usually offers and provides some insight into rationalizing denial.

But you can see, in Durbin’s remarks, the slippery language that Democrats use to give the impression that achieving 60 votes is some sort of Senate “standard.” Even in his amended remarks, Schumer went on to say “60 votes is the right standard for this nominee.”

Let’s explore.

Democrats are being slippery with their language. Sixty votes is not “a standard” for Supreme Court confirmations, as two of the current justices on the court did not meet that supposed standard.

There is a separate issue of whether Republicans will have to invoke cloture to end a filibuster — and whether Gorsuch could meet the necessary 60 votes to proceed to a confirmation vote.

On this one, Betsey Newmark says “Hmmm. Notice a trend in those most recent six nominees? Republican senators were willing to vote for a qualified nominee even though they ideologically disagreed with that nominee’s positions. Democrats willing to do so are much fewer.”

While Talk Radio Host Michael Savage Cautions Trump About Inner Circle – “‘Godfather of Trumpmania’ says ‘too much, too soon’,” Fay Voshell is describing Trump’s Political Blitzkrieg

Over the last eight years, the Left has taken the offensive continually while Republicans either capitulated, cooperated, procrastinated, or employed purely defensive maneuvers that amounted to a finger in the dam.

It’s been barely two weeks since Donald Trump has taken office and Democrats are facing a political blitzkrieg.

Stunned political operatives like Nancy Pelosi don’t recognize President Trump is not interested in guerilla warfare tactics, but has put into effect a broad-based offensive against the very citadels of liberal power and bloated government.

Democrats are unused to a total war offensive, as they have relied on relentless guerilla warfare and the long march. They are even more unused to being on the defensive, and are ill-prepared to fight defensively. They are aghast over the Trump tactics being applied against them, are assuming the old weapons once applied so effectively against their political enemies still work.

Trump correctly discerned that ordinary citizens who desire nothing more than to be left alone to enjoy peace and while at an actual job or sitting by their undisturbed hearths are sick to death of constantly being roiled by the incessant demands of the latest approved victim of the month. They are fed up with the constant assaults on authority and on their faith. For them, the old tactics from radicals’ playbooks dating from the 1960s have become merely irritating and meaningless liturgical chants rather than urgent and legitimate calls for justice.

However, it is still wise to put on helmets when engaged in guerilla warfare and facing sniper fire. There are still many battles to be fought, though it might appear liberalism is in the position of Custer during his last stand.

But due to Trump’s broad front against the excesses of liberalism and the tacit complicity of some with leftist goals, at least conservatives are on the offensive and conducting total warfare for the first time in a very long time.

Ace has an essay getting into the ‘leave me alone’ idea: Why Can’t the Left Accept a Defeat? – “Because Their “Politics” are a Messianic Cult, and Every Religious Zealot Knows You Cannot Repeal the Kingdom of Heaven Come to Earth.” He also notes in another post “We cannot have a country in which one party is praised for obstruction and the other demonized. … If there are two classes of citizenship in a society, then we have no society. We just have the law of the jungle in which violence can be expected to solve many disputes.”

Getting to know the President’s men: Austin Ruse provides A Bannon Apologia – “there is the seeming contradiction; Bannon is a deeply thoughtful pugilist who does not care what you think. Some will say this is a recipe for disaster. I say it’s just what we need.” It brings to mind Matthew 7:16.

Much of what he has said is Bannon riffing, having fun, shocking the lefty reporters. What the left and sadly some conservatives have done is take these quotes and spun dystopian fantasies about Steve Bannon. The best glimpse into the thinking of Steve Bannon is the lecture he gave via Skype to a conference at the Vatican two years ago. You can find the transcript online. There is also his interview with Kimberly Strassel a few months ago in the Wall Street Journal. What you will find is not a cartoon villain but a deeply thoughtful man.

The SJW or Social Justice Warrior has been taking hits. Perry de Havilland thinks GamerGate was the canary in the coal mine. Never heard of it? Some of the comments provide a good summary and there is also a link to Elizabeth Fogarty.

The Gamergate controversy is the result of a combination of separate, yet related, issues. Firstly it is a call for ethical reform in the games press, primarily in the form of disclosure of either personal or financial conflicts of interest between a journalist and a subject they are reviewing or reporting on. Secondly, it is a response to ideological manipulation of the gaming industry, and the censorship that has occurred as a result of this. These two things are, in fact, related, because we are seeing the praise of this manipulation by members of the gaming press, as well as praise of the censorship of discussion by members of the gaming press. This combination of the lack of objectivity and fact checking with the desire to adjust or omit truths in order to appeal to a particular “group” is in no way exclusive to games journalists, but rather is indicative of a larger, more universal issue in how we all receive news.

There is a cancer and it’s isn’t confined to the political arena.

Leave a Comment

2/2/2017: pheromones

The report is that the Seahawk’s QB sees nothing good coming from the new administration. He is not alone. But one has to wonder about their perceptions. For example consider Pinkerton: Trump Lays Down the Law to Big Pharma, Embraces the Cure Strategy

The basic thrust of Trump’s idea can be stated simply: Health insurance is important, but health itself is more important. In other words, as vital as health insurance might be—including the battle over Obamacare—the reality is that health insurance of any kind is only as good as the treatment system backstopping it.

To that end, on Tuesday morning, speaking to those “pharma” chieftains, the President made six basic points about medicines and cures

Or how about the news out of UCB this morning about the riots to protest a gay conservative speaker and shut him down? The evidence is quite clear that there is a lot of positive coming from the new administration and a lot of destruction and negative coming from his opposition.

The queen of snark has been rather quite lately but the recent news storm may have provided a stimulus. Ann Coulter: Give Me Your Tired Arguments… – “Everything said about President Trump’s “Muslim ban” is a lie — including that it’s a Muslim ban.”

The New York Times wore out its thesaurus denouncing the order

Amid the hysteria over this prudent pause in refugee admissions from seven countries whose principal export is dynamite vests, it has been indignantly claimed that it’s illegal for our immigration policies to discriminate on the basis of religion.

This is often said by journalists who are only in America because of immigration policies that discriminated on the basis of religion.

Game playing in the Senate is getting results. Maybe the wrong kind of results, though. Here’s from Sen. Orrin Hatch via Hatch on Senate Dem Delay Tactics: ‘They’re a Bunch of Juvenile Idiots’

Hatch noted the action was unprecedented and referred to the Democrats as “juvenile idiots.”

“My gosh, first time in my history and the history of the Finance Committee that Democrats even refuse to show up for hearings and for markup,” Hatch said.

“It says they’re a bunch of juvenile idiots is what it says,” he added. “It’s one thing to wage a good fight and do the best you can. And we understand that. But to just not even show up, not even come? That’s another matter. And so today I invoked the rules. We went ahead and put both nominees, Mr. [Steven] Mnuchin and the congressman [Tom Price] out.”

They’ve lost the elections and now they don’t even show up for work as they have sworn an oath to do. Ed Morrissey hits implications in Hatch: I had to change committee rules while Dems “cower in the hallway”

What makes this exceptionally foolish is pulling this stunt on Orrin Hatch — one only two Republicans publicly arguing to allow Senate Democrats to keep the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees (Susan Collins is the other). Hatch may not change his mind easily on this point, but Democrats had better believe that they just taught him a lesson about the level of comity he can expect from the next two years or more. They couldn’t have picked a worse venue for their impotent stunt, and now Hatch has set a precedent that can’t be easily walked back either. Dumb, dumb move.

VDH is calling it Our Game of Thrones – “Trump’s opponents believe that they are bleeding him from a thousand nicks.”

In contrast, the Trump people may believe that the Left is becoming so unhinged that their inflated rhetoric has lost all credibility and eventually becomes counter-productive. In Napoleonic terms by attacking everything, the Left is attacking nothing.

Second, by raising the stakes, they bring out of the woodwork the true malevolence of the Left such as the adolescent boycott of the inauguration by many in the Congress, the unprofessionalism of the media typified by the Martin Luther King bust fiasco or Michael Cohen’s nonexistent Prague meetings, the unhinged behavior of the acting attorney general, the repulsive rhetoric of a Madonna or Ashley Judd, and the creepy talk of journalists abroad of assassination.

In that sense, the executive orders are pheromones that draw out and expose unattractive predators.

The loser, as in all strategic collisions, is he who more slowly misreads constantly shifting public opinion and is more guided by ideological zeal rather than empiricism and so doubles down on rather than modifies a failing strategy.

The best indices of who seems to be getting the upper-hand are of course polls on particular issues and on Trump’s favorability — and the unity or lack of among congressional Republicans.

Suzanne Fields cites Rudyard Kipling When the truth is ‘twisted by knaves’ – “President Trump is paying the price of a policy badly executed.” What is interesting is that the reasoned debate about the immigration order has devolved to its manner of promulgation and not its legality or importance.

The poem, “If,” counsels aiming for truth even when it’s “twisted by knaves,” and the plentiful knaves abroad today not only believe they have a monopoly on the truth, but are good and pure of heart and entitled to impose their “truth” on everyone else.

It’s necessary to argue with reason and attention to facts because it’s the only way to have an honest debate about how to keep America safe in the age of terrorism. Characterizing the president, as one prominent journalist did, as “deranged,” cheapens conversation and ignores the rational reasons that led to his decision to prescribe “extreme vetting” on refugees from the seven countries identified by the Obama administration as breeding grounds for terrorists.

No matter what this president does, angry antagonists on the left will object, protest and make decent disagreement impossible. The actual facts of the president’s order have been submerged in invective and loose talk.

Luboš Motl dissects an example in Leonard Susskind’s dumb attack on Steve Bannon

Such cheap oversimplified and unambiguously hostile labels simply cripple the political culture and reduce the intellectual standards that participants of the political debates expect from each other. This dumbing down and constant repetition of hostile slogans was an important reason why most Germans gradually lost their democratic instincts during the 1930s.

This insanity should stop. Susskind and others should simply get used to the fact that the only thing that has happened is that they have lost the election.

Cal Thomas picks up on this with The left’s narrative – “Having run out of ideas, their only strategy is to protest.”

Democrats have run out of ideas, even bad ones, and have nothing left but name-calling and protests. The fact that voters have rejected their agenda has not yet resonated with them. They are like people who attend oldies concerts and wave their hands in the air, eyes closed, singing “The Age of Aquarius,” like it is 1969 again. For them, the sun isn’t shining in, it’s setting. That narrative hasn’t changed.

The narrative can be jaw dropping. OregonMuse provides examples in Trump: The Universal Solvent – “Open Question for this Open Thread: What amazing things could Trump accomplish and how would the MSM spin them into failures?”

When I first read it, I thought the guy was making fun of knee-jerk progressive journalists. Then I realized “holy crap, he’s serious.”

This statement is jaw-dropping: “If it was, then this is result of Trump rhetoric”. WTF? It’s like he’s got the story already written before ascertaining the actual facts.

What it all boils down to is:

Trump Is To Blame For Everything

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is getting a lot of notice these days because his story is one of a win against fierce protest from the Left and established interests. Mike Gecan takes the Walker story and a sports analogy to explain How Democrats are getting played – one thing he misses is that the left’s playbook, or as Thomas calls it, the left’s narrative, is becoming well known and there is very little imagination in its use.

Many Dems either don’t know how to relate to people with moderate or mixed views or they don’t want to. They prefer rock stars and celebrities to bus drivers and food service workers. They like cute sayings and clever picket signs, not long and patient listening sessions with people who have complicated interests, people who might not pass the liberal litmus test.

Don Surber gets in on this by stating that Hatch joins the Party of Trump – “It is time to ignore their belligerence and incivility.”

Democrats tried this crap in Wisconsin in February 2011. Remember the shouting mobs Democrats sent to the Capitol in Madison? Meanwhile, Democrats left the state to try to stop the vote in the legislature.

But Republican Governor Scott Walker did not bend, and he became the first governor in our nation’s history to survive a recall election.

Ed Morrissey has more on the narrative – and its consequences. Begala: Should we let this duly-elected president fill Supreme Court openings?

This Supreme Court opening wasn’t “stolen” — it was a case of “sauce for the goose.” Democrats have a habit of creating and imposing “rules” that benefit themselves, only screech about the shock, shock of having to abide by the rules and policies that they created themselves. That has been especially true about confirmation of Trump’s Cabinet picks after Harry Reid set a precedent by wiping out the use of the filibuster for presidential appointments other than the Supreme Court. Having allowed Barack Obama to stack the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals with that stunt, Senate Democrats are now staging boycotts of Senate committee meetings in a vain attempt to reinstate the filibuster on these appointments by other means.

Republicans simply played by Democrats’ rules, and Democrats are furious about it. Perhaps in the future, they should refrain from unilaterally setting precedents and “rules,” but the only way to teach them a lesson is to make them pay for it — which is precisely what Republicans did last year. That way the lesson sticks.

The Fake News of Alternative Facts is a lawyer’s technobabble, David Allison explains. ‘Alternative facts’: A common legal term – “The phrase “alternative facts” is used in law and is known to most lawyers” and it was put in public by a lawyer. One can depend upon the Left to twist it into Orwell.

Again, factually true, but facts are not a reliably valid substitute for the truth.

Despite such distinctions, critics will continue to posit that the only conceivable intention of using of the term “alternative facts” would be to obfuscate truth. Such a claim is not self-evident.

Our folklore, too, is filled with the challenges presented by the delicate relationship truth has with facts. Surely, we are all familiar with the story of the blind men and the elephant.

when Chuck Todd upbraids Kellyanne Conway with the claim that “alternative facts are not facts; they’re falsehoods,” he is not only wrong, but propagating an ignorance born out of lazy and shallow thinking. But this is not surprising, really, since when it comes to telling half-truths, or presenting alternative facts, the liberal mainstream press is more notoriously guilty than any other group currently out there.

This is an important consideration in evaluating intellectual integrity. That would be why those who study perception and facts versus truth make careful distinctions and allow for unknowns.

Leadership is showing. Gabby Morrongiello says Morale at Homeland Security has ‘skyrocketed’ under Trump

Kelly’s remarks to reporters, and his willingness to enforce laws that the administration believes will protect Americans, “re-energized a lot of us because for so long we’ve been vilified for doing our jobs, and here was someone finally standing up for us,” said one Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent who was not authorized to speak on the record.

One DHS source praised Kelly, but was careful to note that Trump also deserves credit for the sudden boost in agency-wide staff satisfaction. The source highlighted the president’s visit last week to the department’s Washington headquarters, during which he signed his first two immigration-related executive orders and offered encouraging words to employees.

This sort of thing does not please the Deep State. It does illustrate how an effective CEO rallies the workers. Scott Adams made the call and his forecast is showing credibility.

Leave a Comment

2/1/2017: enough already: from Fake Science to Fake News to Deluded and worse

Alex Berezow says Don’t Let Partisans Hijack The ‘Science March’ – he’s noted that the Left has another partisan political protest banner flying under false color.

The problem is that this message is aimed at one particular side of the political spectrum. The Right is more likely to reject climate change and evolution than the Left. Absent from this paragraph are warnings against the rejection of nuclear power, GMOs, and vaccines, and admonishments for the embrace of organic food and alternative medicine, which are stronger with the progressive Left and its leadership. Those issues aren’t even mentioned, which looks like they don’t want to alienate one side.

Regardless of where one stands on this issue, the question remains, “What does this have to do with science?” Nothing. It’s social signaling meant to excite one side of the political spectrum.

As if often the case with the ‘trying to be nice’ folks, Berezow stretches to find a ‘both sides do it’ analogy. What he noted is that the Left is trying to ‘steal’ science from the right much as the Democrats are trying to claim Trump ‘Stole’ Neil Gorsuch Seat from Obama. i.e. the Democrats are engaged in projection.

In a fundraising email, the Democratic National Committee said (original emphasis): …“Donald wants to put Judge Gorsuch in the Supreme Court seat the GOP stole from President Obama. Add your name to tell the Senate to reject his nomination.”

Republicans declined to move Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, through the Senate, based on the principle — articulated by then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) decades before — that a Supreme Court Justice should not be confirmed in the last year of a lame duck administration.

This nomination protest has devolved into such nonsense because the judge was nominated to the appeals court not long ago and approved by unanimous vote. His record and resume are stellar. Therefore, the rationalization of the protest has to be manufactured via innuendo, falsehood, and Fake News. Consider Pelosi: Gorsuch Is Bad If You ‘Breathe Air, Drink Water, Eat Food, Take Medicine,’ Trump Picked Him to Distract from EO – consider the implications of this assertion. Or take a look at how Democrats have turned on one of their colleagues in a display of malfeasance in their job. Democrats Drag Out Jeff Sessions’ Confirmation Fight and Trump Cabinet confirmations stalled by Democrats’ tactics. There is a contrast offered by one of the Left’s new heroes. Picking and choosing: Fired AG defended Obama’s unlawful immigration amnesty – She refused to support Trump’s EO but did support Obama’s even after a federal court declared it unlawful. i.e. for the Democrats, lawful orders are to be disdained, unlawful orders – if by a Democrat – are righteous.

The people have had their say. The Democrats are showing the people just how little they care and how far they will go to impugn the country and its people. Ed Morrissey explains the people part in Obama’s Solicitor General to liberals: Confirm Gorsuch

It’s worth noting that all of these issues played out in the general election. In fact, Democrats from Hillary Clinton all the way down the ticket campaigned explicitly on eliminating the Hyde Amendment so that federal dollars could go to Planned Parenthood explicitly to subsidize abortions, apart from defending the federal subsidies they already receive. Donald Trump repeatedly cited the Hobby Lobby and Little Sisters cases as examples of runaway regulation that infringed on free exercise of religion. Hillary Clinton and the Democrats wanted to expand ObamaCare, the platform that created the issues with Hobby Lobby and the Little Sisters; Donald Trump and the Republicans wanted to repeal ObamaCare. How did the election turn out for Democrats — and not just at the presidential level? Poorly, as I recall.

Elections have consequences. So do extreme arguments and positions, both in an electoral context and outside of it. Katyal understands that, but don’t bet on most of his allies on the port side of the political boat to follow him rather than the exhausted extremism of Slate.

Consider ‘Nuclear’ cloud hangs over pick of Gorsuch for Supreme Court – “Eleven years ago this week, Democrats made history by attempting the first — and to date only — partisan filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee.” To avoid having Republicans emulate their tactics, the Democrats, at least in the lower courts, changed their procedures.

Glen Reynolds notes that “That’s roughly equivalent to the game former President Obama played by nominating Merrick Garland last year. Obama dared the GOP to consent to someone somewhat conservative, but hostile to the 2nd Amendment — or risk an even worse selection made by President Hillary Clinton.”

Now the Left is being faced with the fact that raising the stakes also raises the conflict. They have made it clear that violence in the streets is of no concern to them. The question is whether they will take it as far as they did the last time they got this upset (asw one pundit said “when Lincoln freed their slaves”). J. Robert Smith picks up on this noting that It’s Escalating: Defiance and Calls for Violence among Democrats – “Making America safer is exactly what they’re opposing, blubbery words about compassion and inclusion aside.”

Calls or suggestions of violence haven’t bubbled up among Democratic leaders. Let’s hope they never do. All Chuck Schumer could muster the other day at a presser about Trump’s executive order was to sob. (Perhaps Chuck needs his estrogen level checked?) But defiance among Democrats is on the rise. It’s becoming strident.

Or consider Byron York: Dems escalate anti-Trump offensive – “From Washington State to Washington DC, Democrats across the country are stepping up what some call “The Resistance

Finally, as The Resistance organized itself and pushed on multiple fronts, a new supporter spoke up to encourage the protesters — former President Barack Obama, who managed to stay out of his successor’s affairs for all of 11 days.

Trump nominees will be slowly confirmed, well behind the pace of earlier administrations, in coming weeks and months. But the Democratic offensive will likely intensify — perhaps resembling a national version of the desperate Democratic protests against Wisconsin Republican Gov. Scott Walker when Walker’s agenda threatened key Democratic constituencies in 2011.

Walker won that fight, but only after Democrats threw everything they had at him. Trump can expect no less.

John Hinderaker wonders Can Insanity Succeed?

There is, of course, no constitutional crisis. But the Democrats are going beyond the usual hyperbole. Shockingly, their just-defeated vice-presidential nominee, Tim Kaine, is urging the party’s faithful to make like Brownshirts …

I don’t believe any major American political figure has previously urged his followers to fight in the streets; not since the Civil War, certainly. Things may be about to get even more dangerous for Americans who dare to show their support for our duly-elected president, and for our democracy.

What they need is a good spanking.

At the polls, I mean. The Democratic Party has been in decline for a number of election cycles. The verdict on the Democrats’ strategy of synchronized hysteria will be rendered in November 2018. My guess is that after two years, most voters will have seen enough of the Democrats’ vileness. Watch for the Democrats to slide nearer to irrelevance in 22 months.

But Thomas Lifson says Gorsuch nomination a lose-lose for the Democrats – “The Dems always look and find “victims” of some decision of a Republican judicial nominee and state therefore that he or she will not protect women, minorities, Muslims,” (see Pelosi for an example). Lifson points out that the filibuster rule debate is working against Democrats up for re-election in Trump heavy states. The assumption is that the nomination will succeed and the Democrats can only decide if it is going to be by the ‘nuclear option’ or the will of the voter. Either way, they lose.

A part of the Democrats problem is being exposed and put on the table about national security. How Trump strengthens national security – “The executive order turns up the heat on known sponsors of terror.”

Mr. Trump campaigned on making America safe again. He was elected based on his campaign promises, which he has been implementing in rapid fashion. And while the usual suspects in the bureaucracy aren’t happy, the American people approve.

Dissent is an important aspect of the American ideal, but the argument moved by the Democrats that American leadership is “cruel” and “like Hitler” is more than wrong and embarrassing — it invites contempt and emboldens the very terrorist groups who make the same argument to their craven army of murderers.

Shaming and threats are big items in the Left’s playbook. Jazz Shaw explains with an example: How Harley Davidson caved to the SJW on a Trump visit – Interesting how a company with a manly image caves so easily.

Can you imagine that? The progressives wolves are very well organized and they are stalking the new president’s every move. What was there to protest about this trip? Is anyone really objecting to creating more manufacturing jobs in Milwaukee? That’s doubtful, even among Democrats. No, the protesters simply wanted to shut the event down because Trump was there and if Harley Davidson appeared as if they supported him they would be made to pay.

What we’re seeing is the beginning of a national level campaign similar to what the SJW has been so successful in doing at the state and local levels. If you can make enough noise and keep CNN’s cameras on the scene 24/7 you can get major businesses to do your bidding in the political arena.

This is the new special snowflake playbook. If you can’t win at the ballot box or the halls of the legislature, stomp your feet and create a spectacle. Knowing that the majority of the media will rush in to provide favorable coverage you can scare off business and punish pretty much everyone in the area – even those who might be inclined to agree with you.

Also check out the case of Taylor Gourmet, a Beltway local hoagie shop, whose owner got caught shaking hands with the President about cutting small business regulations. Then there’s Welcome to the era of “transgender Boy Scouts” provides another example

Something has obviously gone very wrong in that home and it’s not the little girl’s fault whatsoever. At eight years of age kids aren’t thinking about sex and their bodies aren’t even close to puberty in all but the rarest cases. Eight year olds should be out playing hopscotch, jumping rope and getting into the usual sort of trouble that younger elementary school kids get into. But this one clearly lives with parents who are exposing her to massive doses of SJW propaganda and filling her head with strange ideas.

But we’re talking about kids here. This isn’t a social trend… it’s a criminal offense. (Or it most certainly should be.) At an age suitable to be in the Cub Scouts and even the earlier ranks of the Boy Scouts, children have no idea about these things and are easily influenced by what they pick up in the home and on social media.

But now, hang on to your hats because the Boy Scouts have been cowed into submission by the special snowflakes. We’re going to have girls in the Boy Scouts, which means they’ll probably be heading out to live in the cabins together at summer scouting camps. Speaking as someone who did that every summer for about six years as a kid, the immediate and obvious question comes to mind. What could possibly go wrong?

The mind doth boggle.

Used to be Boy Scouts promised to be morally straight. G. K. Chesterton had something on understanding Democrats in his quote for the day: “A good novel tells us the truth about its hero; but a bad novel tells us the truth about its author.”

As for Trump v Resistance, consider VDH on The Democrat Patient – “If progressives were to become empiricists, they would look at the symptoms of the last election and come up with disinterested diagnoses, therapies, and prognoses.”

Trump essentially ran against a united Democratic party, the Republican establishment, the mainstream media (both liberal and conservative) — and won.

He was outspent. He was out-organized. He was outpolled and demonized daily as much by Republicans as Democrats. Yet he not only destroyed three political dynasties (the Clintons, Bushes, and Obamas) but also has seemingly rendered the Obama election matrix nontransferable to anyone other than Obama himself.

Any reasonable post-election autopsy for a party would identify certain inconvenient truths.

For now, the Democratic-party strategists are doubling down on boutique environmentalism and race/gender victimhood, while hoping that Donald Trump implodes in scandal, war, or depression. They are clueless that their present rabid frenzy is doing as much political damage to their cause as is the object of their outrage.

While York is describing strategy on the left, Reynolds notes that Trump is in that, too: Trump Files With FEC For 2020 Election Bid, Outmaneuvers Nonprofit Organizations.

A document from the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) indicates that Donald Trump took steps last week to outmaneuver nonprofit organizations, leaving them unable to officially campaign against him over the next few years of his Presidency.

The move is consistent with Trump’s campaign promises to reduce the financial influence of private special interest groups on Washington.

The Democrats are not alone. Buckley: Time for Roger Goodell to provide answers to Patriots fans

Just a guess here, but I believe Goodell will be fielding some questions from Boston media members today, and for one simple reason: He can’t hide forever. And that’s a nice jumping-off point to our Questions Roger Goodell Must Answer for Patriots Fans,

People will be held to account for their behavior.

An there’s a lot more. It looks like Trump is taking a position on CNN like Limbaugh on MSNBC. The EO in immigration gets solid support from the public, including Muslims. The Senate appears to be setting aside quorum rules requiring Democrats present if the Democrats boycott the meeting. This is what the country voted for and that is a full and vigorous engagement in the battle for security and culture and the U.S.A. itself.

Leave a Comment

Strategy, Tactics, and Policies

It took four hours to fire a politically partisan acting AG who put ideology over the law. It’s taken a bit longer for most of the ‘violates constitution’ and other fake news to peter out to crocodile tears and nitpicking about process. Occasionally, something appears that gets out of the swamp and the ingrained presumptions about an evil or incompetent President. For example, consider what Trump said to front line personnel when he ‘just assumed’ they’d get the job done. Demonstrating confidence in people to be competent and do their jobs has an impact. There’s strategy and leadership to be seen elsewhere, too.

Joel B. Pollak talks strategy in What Trump Has Achieved Through the (Not) #MuslimBan – With the Left triggering their coordinated protests and judicial action and the Establishment pondering what was done, Pollak gets in the why – strategy of the action.

few seem to have noticed that Trump has made several strategic gains.

Those gains are secure even though the courts have issued a temporary stay on the executive order; even though the left is using protests to fundraise and mobilize political support; and even if the order is eventually revised to be more lenient.

The first and most important thing that Trump has done is put the world on notice that the United States is now serious about preventing terrorism from reaching our shores.

The second achievement is that even though President Trump’s executive order is not a “Muslim ban” — indeed, it does not even cover 87 percent of the world’s Muslims — it turns out to be useful for people to think that it is.

The third achievement is that Trump has restored the credibility of American power.

Whatever the other merits or flaws of the “Muslim ban,” we are clawing our way back to geostrategic advantage. The left does not understand that. For once, their mendacious dishonesty is useful.

Cameron Reddy takes another look at Trump Strategy in Saul Alinsky in the White House…Still? – “So now could the shoe be on the other foot?”

Which side is in the right on these issues of Trump’s “lies” may be of some importance, but something much more fascinating – groundbreaking – is taking place: President Trump is using the left’s playbook to stunning effect. I am not alone in seeing the connection between Alinsky’s Rules and Trump’s approach. In Real Clear Politics, Richard Porter notes that “the folks that seem to have best learned from Alinsky’s instructions … are Steve Bannon and others on the Trump team.”

Again and again we see leftists flailing helplessly, shouting their own coarse vulgarities. (Recall the sign reading “f— you, you f—— f—” poetically marched down Washington’s streets during the women’s march.). Just as Alinsky foretold, behavior such as this deeply undermines claims to sanity and legitimacy and simultaneously forces its believers to consume precious time and energy defending their way of life.

Perhaps inadvertently, Politico Magazine portrayed the left’s confusion and anxiety when it published these words: “It’s hard to know when Trump is just being Trump and when he’s fundamentally transforming the American experiment.”

Whether or not the president knows it, he is giving Alinsky a run for his money

James Delingpole: Trump’s Climate Plans Just Made the Media’s Heads Explode – “The occasion was a press conference hosted by the Global Warming Policy Foundation for Myron Ebell, head of the Trump administration’s Environmental Protection Agency transition team. Satan’s Emissary, as liberals prefer to think of him.”

They couldn’t believe what they were hearing. They curled their lips. They laced their questions with the bitterest scorn. But they didn’t really tune into Ebell’s measured, silken, soft-spoken answers because, hell, they knew what he was saying just had to be wrong and they didn’t really understand what he meant anyway.

Perhaps the main reason for going, though, was to witness at first hand one of the main reasons why the Great Global Warming Scamsters have got away with so much for so long: the abject failure of the media to do its job and interrogate the alarmist narrative.

Valerie Richardson says North Dakota wants hired pipeline protesters to pay state income taxes – “After spending more than $22 million on the Dakota Access pipeline protest, North Dakota wants to make sure any paid activists remember to submit their state income taxes.”

Next up is the Senate. There is the Democrat stance to filibuster any court nominee no matter circumstances, qualifications, or any other consideration. This is a part of the package of slow walking nominees and otherwise obstructing effective governance in any way possible. The 2018 elections are giving some Democratic Party Senators pause on this approach. They have been leaving a scorched earth in the previous administrations efforts and can now get a glimmer of what they have wrought. It should give pause. It will be interesting to see what the current administration does and whether the Establishment can figure out what is important to examine and what is irrelevant.

Leave a Comment

Closest analogy: The Effect Slim Whitman yodels have on Martians

Heads Explode. The minions of the left were prepared. They immediately went to sympathetic judges. The pronouncements about Trump incompetence, sloth, stupidity, etc, etc, were all lined up and ready to go. But what happens when you actually take a look at the stimulus to try to validate the response? Uh, Oh.

Compare and Contrast: Benjamin Wittes on Malevolence Tempered by Incompetence: Trump’s Horrifying Executive Order on Refugees and Visas to Thomas Lifson on the Stunning media malpractice on Trump suspension of entry .

Wittes exposes his bias saying “Color me skeptical that this is the real purpose” and his arguments are more political opinion than legal analysis. For the latter, he accepts anti-Trump rumors and pronouncements at face value. So he does not accept what was actually written but rather what he wants it to say and bases his conclusions on hearsay rather than evidence.

Lifson addresses the incompetence and malevolence judgments by noting that “The latent fingerprints of Democrat icons, especially ex-president Obama, are discoverable all over President Trump’s executive order of the 27th titled, “Protecting the nation from foreign terrorist entry into the United States.” He then cites and quotes those fingerprints so you can see for yourself.


Newmark cites Alder on this as Alder also thinks it is sloppy, etc. The problem is that Alder also notes that “in normal circumstances” there wouldn’t be any controversy about the validity of the EO. That implies that the only thing really wrong with the EO is that it came from Trump. That gets back to the editorial noted below about “the dark view of the President.”

John Hayward: Seven Inconvenient Facts About Trump’s Refugee Actions – The Fact Checkers are twisting themselves into knots trying to support the hysteria but nearly all of the outrage is based on Fake News from the religious based ban to the historical precedent.

The hysterical reaction to Trump’s order illustrates the very thing that worries advocates of strong immigration security: Americans’ security is the lowest priority, far below progressive ideology, crass political opportunism, and emotional theater.

On another of Trump’s ‘Lies’ is put to the test by Rowan Scarborough; Conservative groups press states to overhaul voter lists, combat fraud – 

One reason there are few investigations may be that suspected voter fraud happens in heavily Democratic districts, where it would take a Democratic prosecutor to investigate the people who vote for the party.

Washington Times: The dark view of the president – “An unhinged media has a duty to sober up, keep calm and carry on.”

The hatred of Donald Trump grows darker, more frightening and more irresponsible.

This irresponsibility speaks volumes about how far out of touch the arbiters of the national culture are with rest of America. Steve Bannon, a senior adviser to the president, remarked earlier this week that “they don’t understand this country. They still do not understand why Donald Trump is the president of the United States.”

The mighty organs of the media have a special responsibility to keep calm and carry on, as difficult as that may be. The guardians of the truth, as they regard themselves, must first figure out what the truth is.

Skepticism is healthy and necessary, and it’s a pity that it was in short supply in the White House briefing room over the course of the last administration. The press (loosely defined) and the larger media must resist the temptation to assuage its guilt by adopting an attitude that anything about Mr. Trump goes, the meaner and more irresponsible the better. This encourages recklessness in others.

See the Sunday reflection: Matthew 5:1-12 as it seems pertinent here.

Many of the arguments from the Left fail on a first inspection. Trump is a successful real estate developer with high value properties all over the world not to mention his success going upstream to win his office. That sets a high bar for those with TDS. Stupid, slothful, careless, incompetent, and other such allegations as are common and frequent, especially in the immigration issue, cannot be considered rational as they don’t accommodate the readily available evidence anyone can see. That is why the ‘dark view’ is so insidious as it denotes no acceptance of any civilized standard of behavior based on reality and respect for integrity or other people.

Leave a Comment

No Holds Barred! Let the lawsuits begin. seriously and literally

The desperation mounts. You’d think riots were bad enough but, no. Now we have political spies. As noted earlier, the release of a recording of a GOP meeting in Pennsylvania required permissions not obtained. Now it appears that a Woman impersonated lawmaker’s wife, snuck into GOP retreat. This gets elevated in implications because she bypassed Secret Service protections of the Vice-President.

Meanwhile, a Federal judge is working to circumvent national security as well. But DHS will continue to enforce Trump’s travel ban – “Stephen Miller, a senior adviser to the White House, said, “Nothing in the Brooklyn judge’s order in anyway impedes or prevents the implementation of the president’s executive order which remains in full, complete and total effect.”

The DHS said in the statement that they “will faithfully execute the immigration laws, and we will treat all of those we encounter humanely and with professionalism.” They also added that they plan to ensure the safety of the American people by making sure those entering the U.S. pose no threat.

Stephen Dinan: First lawsuit filed to challenge Trump’s refugee policy – “Officers told Iraqi man’s attorneys to ‘Call Mr. Trump’” … “The lawsuit said the Trump order is unconstitutional because it discriminates based on someone’s country of birth, and “was substantially motivated by animus” toward Muslims.” As one of the first comments noted, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (see also Wikipedia) is the law on the topic. A key from Dinan is the “ substantially motivated by animus” as that shows bias. What ‘animus’ there is is clearly stated as being about Islamic Terrorists and if such a bias is contrary to the Constitution, it’d require changing the oath of office for many federal employees and elected officials.

Sundance has a bit better explanation of the judicial activism: New York Federal Judge Intercedes To Clear Airports of Current Limbo Visa Holders… – “The judge did not rule on the legality of the executive order, nor did she say that others who have not yet arrived in the U.S. can be allowed to proceed.” Several other judges whose jurisdictions include international airports have also joined in on the ‘Limbo Visa Holders.’ This can get interesting as the ‘border’ up to now for airplane passengers has always been defined as a part of the ‘international’ designation for the airport. These judges want to turn that upside down.

This is another of those paradoxes such as the distinguished law professor illustrated (see a previous post) that an EO to follow the law was somehow un-constitutional. To see just how much disdain the Left has for national security, see Andrew Blake: ‘Lady Liberty is crying,’ Democrats declare in wake of Trump’s visa, asylum executive order – there is the usual: heart string tugging, reduce to the absurd fallacies, misperceptions so bald you’d think them intentional, … just more effort by the Left to gaslight the public.

Joseph Klein says Law And Order Returns To The Border – “President Trump begins fulfilling his promise in two historic executive orders.”

President Donald Trump is doing something incredibly rare for a politician in Washington, D.C. He is keeping his word. Two of the most important of his campaign promises were to stem the flow of illegal immigrants into this country and to suspend the admission of “refugees” from countries prone to terrorism until a system of “extreme vetting” is put into place.

After eight long years of Obama administration policies that endangered the security of the American people, President Trump is placing Americans first — before illegal aliens and self-declared “refugees” from terrorist prone countries.

The president began fulfilling his promises on immigration by signing two executive orders on Wednesday at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), whose responsibilities include overseeing immigration and border security. Mr. Trump also took part in a ceremony installing his new Secretary of Homeland Security, retired Marine General John Kelly. In his remarks following the signing, President Trump emphasized that DHS is a “law enforcement agency.” He added that “beginning today, the United States gets back control of its borders.”

The Trump administration is anticipating roadblocks put in its way by legal challenges, including activists’ exploitation of environmental laws to block construction of the wall. However, the administration should be able to prevail and move forward expeditiously. The REAL ID Act of 2005 gives the Secretary of Homeland Security “the authority to waive all legal requirements such Secretary, in such Secretary’s sole discretion, determines necessary to ensure expeditious construction of the barriers and roads” along U.S. borders. Federal district courts have exclusive jurisdiction to hear challenges to the Secretary of Homeland Security’s determination, but a “cause of action or claim may only be brought alleging a violation of the Constitution of the United States.” Melinda Taylor, an environmental law professor with the University of Texas, said, “The new administration has a wild card they can pull and it’s in this law. The language in this law allows them to waive all federal laws that would be an impediment to building any type of physical barrier along the border, including a wall.” Actually, “the authority to waive all legal requirements” in the statute would extend to state and local laws and regulations, as well as federal laws. The president’s constitutional authority derives from his fundamental constitutional duty to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” – in this case, the nation’s existing immigration laws.

Two things here. One is that Trump anticipates obstructions such as seen in today’s news. The second is that existing law is on his side. Note the requirement for a “violation of the Constitution of the United States.” That is the one being created to support the Limbo Visa Holder case. Support of that view is likely to be difficult. As Klein says “While leftists and other pro-Islamists will undoubtedly cry foul and may go to court in an effort to overturn this executive order as allegedly discriminating against Muslims on religious grounds, President Trump’s action is well within his legal authority.”

Former President Obama put Americans’ lives in danger by his ill-advised immigration and refugee policies. He also released scores of suspected terrorists from Guantanamo Bay despite at least a 30 percent recidivist rate. President Trump, by contrast, is showing that he means what he says in making the protection of the American people his first priority.

Jazz Shaw: So the courts want to fight the President on immigration policy

So things really blew up overnight, eh? There were all sorts of “spontaneous” protests popping up at airports around the nation in response to the new executive action on immigration and refugees. (If you were watching liberal Twitter you saw how “spontaneous” they really were. This was coordinated nationally.) But of more interest are the actions taken by several judges hearing appeals from some of the travelers who were being detained. In response, one judge in New York imposed a stay on portions of the executive order, while another in Boston attempted to block the entire thing. (NBC News)

I have zero doubt that this is going to turn into a mess in the courts. Keep in mind that if you go to the correct areas (such as Boston) you can find a judge to say almost anything, but this will eventually need to be sorted out. That’s going to be an educational experience for plenty of us because many questions regarding immigration policy can be very complicated. We’re dealing with non-citizens in different classifications as well as wrestling with the distinction between deporting people who are in the country versus denying entry to those who are not. And that’s an important point, because non-citizens inside the country, while not having the same level of rights as citizens, still maintain a more powerful position than those on the outside trying to get in. Deporting someone is always much more complicated than simply barring a non-citizen from entering.

William A. Jacobson shows why Most claims about Trump’s visa Executive Order are false or misleading – “You should read the actual EO, because most of the media and leftist pundits either have not or are lying if they have.”

It is possible to criticize the EO and Trump visa/refugee policy without hyperbole and fakery. That opponents feel the need to make false and misleading accusations is a signal that they fear losing the policy argument on its merits.

National security also involves Russia. Evgeny Lebedev takes heart in the Churchill bust episode. Thawing the permafrost with Russia – “There are good reasons to work with Vladimir Putin against a shared threat.”

Whether due to that anachronistic dogma or because their careers depend on a deliberate misreading of the geopolitical runes, America’s political and military classes will try to block any Trump-Putin embrace, citing alleged cyber-interference in the election and occupation of Crimea as twin disqualifiers of an alliance that offers our best hope of crushing Islamic terrorism. They will say Mr. Putin means to invade the Baltics as the next stage of a master plan to recreate the Soviet Union, never mind that his teetering economy is in no shape to absorb their populations.

Although I was born and spent my earliest years in Moscow, I make no claim to special insight. “I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia,” was how Churchill put it in his enigma speech. Nor can this Russian emigre.

But one high priest of realpolitik said this when asked just this week if he agreed with Joe Biden that Mr. Putin’s main aim is to destabilize the West. “No,” replied Henry Kissinger. “We are worried that this is his objective. He is worried that our objective is to undermine him.”

The time has come to end this vicious spin cycle of mutual suspicion. Rebuilding trust won’t be easy. Accommodations would have to be made and sealed at a suitably trumpeted summit or conference. Yalta II, even. Mr. Putin agreeing to respect Ukraine’s borders, the West conceding Russia’s right to Crimea.

About the EO: A number of people are talking about Trump flooding the zone with so many headline grabbing pronouncements. Others range from amazed to giddy to outraged that Trump is doing something no newly elected President before him has done: follow up on campaign promises with alacrity. The Left’s line on all this is that it is hasty action not well thought out and a total mishmash illustrating incompetence and whatnot. Ed Morrissey cites CBS: This week in executive orders … – “President Trump has issued fifteen executive actions, and CBS provides a scorecard.“ This casts doubt on the Left’s line.

To paraphrase Stanley Kubrick, have conservatives and populists stopped worrying and learned to love the EO? Not really, no, but it helps to understand the nuances of executive orders and presidential memoranda. CBS’s Rebecca Shabad makes the distinction:

“Seven days into his first term, Mr. Trump has issued more than a dozen executive actions, which include a government-wide freeze on new and pending regulations, the reinstatement of a policy that bars U.S. funding to health providers abroad that discuss abortion as an option and a call for the construction of a physical wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

“Most of the actions taken so far are technically presidential memoranda, and four have been executive orders, which have the force of law and must be published in the Federal Register. Historically, presidents have embraced the executive order as a tool to use when there’s a lack of action from Congress.”

Shabad misses one nuance; executive orders have the force of law within the executive branch, not outside of it. To the extent they conflict with existing statutes, they have no force at all. This was the issue with Barack Obama’s executive actions, most of which did not come in the form of EOs.

Trump’s EOs, in comparison [to Obama’s], have so far mainly stuck to exercises of authority within the executive branch’s jurisdiction, and not crossed over into conflicting with statutes.

Paul Mirengoff: An under-reported fact about the Trump presidency – “The first week of Donald Trump’s presidency received wall-to-wall coverage from the mainstream media. His every word was fact-checked, after a fashion.”

But on the whole, the mainstream media seems to be missing or under-playing one significant angle on the nascent Trump administration. The president is keeping his campaign promises.

Personally, I think it’s ridiculous to demand that Mexico pay for a wall designed to advance U.S. interests. I have mixed feelings about coercing a U.S. company not to build a plant outside the U.S. I’m okay with a 90 day suspension of entry for people from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen, but can understand why some find this problematic.

Each of these policies or practices, though, fulfills a campaign promise. President Trump is doing what candidate Trump said he would do.

It turns out that Donald Trump needed to be taken both seriously and literally.

Luboš Motl has two posts worth review this morning. Unreasonable university calls for a civil war against Trump and Trump’s Blitzkrieg against the rogue and fake U.S. government “scientific” tweeters.

At some moment, you could think that the climate hysteria is the most important “value” that the leftist folks really care about. But as the ongoing screaming shows, multiculturalism is ultimately above the climate hysteria. People from universities – including various people I know and sometimes like – are writing petitions, urging their colleagues to fight and resist, and all stuff like that.

The reason is that Trump has fulfilled his campaign promises and suspended the arrival of people from unsafe Muslim countries.

– – –

While the stupid media discusses big questions such as the size of his inauguration crowd and the length of his tie, the new U.S. president is working hard. We’re being assured that virtually all of his campaign promises were meant very seriously.

Thousands of hard left scholars have signed a petition against the suspension of the Syrian refugee program and similar reductions of the immigration from the Muslim world. I’ve spent some five minutes by looking at the list of the signatories and I know about 20-30 of them in person. They’re fine and smart people, please don’t make a mistake about it. They’re just wrong about politics. And it’s also interesting to realize how many people could have been signed but they’re not. I find it clear that the non-signatories are a silent majority.

However, something else is happening in the underground movement, e.g. on Twitter. A bunch of unofficial “resistance or rogue Twitter accounts” of some U.S. government agencies related to the environmental sciences has emerged … It’s not clear who runs these accounts and whether they’re employees of these institutions at all. They don’t have to be. In fact, they don’t have to be Americans at all. In particular, it’s consistent with everything I know that all these accounts are run by William Connolley, the British Green Party apparatchik notoriously responsible for 90% of the alarmist bias in the Wikipedia’s articles related to the climate change.

So enjoy your fake news on fake NASA, EPA, HHS, and other accounts but the rest of us will be pleased that you will regain your status of self-evident crackpots who sleep at the treetops and you won’t be able to influence the fate of the United States of America which you basically could in recent years.

You’d think a Sunday would be a day of rest, a day a bit quieter than the weekdays. Whoops. 2500 words of note from only the first level of the stack. Come to think of it, this is Pro-Bowl day. That’s on ESPN at 5 p.m. PDT. That game has a reputation for being watered down and not serious football. Maybe that’s the antidote? 

Leave a Comment

1/28/2017: That was OK. This isn’t.

The standard of what was acceptable in the previous administration provides an objective indicator for analysis. There are two components to examine. One is a shifting standard and the other is how that shift is rationalized. Ian Hanchett provides an example Maher: Obama’s Dishonesty Was ‘Within the Normal Parameters’ – Trump’s Isn’t

“Friday’s broadcast of HBO’s “Real Time,” host Bill Maher stated that untrue statements by President Obama were “within the normal parameters” while President Trump’s aren’t.”

Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist stated, “Obama said, repeatedly on the campaign, not once in a tweet, but again and again and again in speeches, that he was never going to raise taxes on anyone who earned less than $250,000 a year. That lasted 16 days, before he did.”

Maher responded, “Okay, but that’s within the normal parameters of what politicians do. Saying you see 3 million people that don’t exist is not.”

That sounds cute, of course, but the real issue is to resolve just who it is, Maher or Trump, that is seeing, or not seeing things. That is why Trump called for an investigation to find out who is seeing what. This case illustrates Maher shifting standards rationalized by ad hominem. There is a close analogy to Schumer’s broken promise about nominees. Shifting standards rationalized by logical fallacies are not conducive towards solving problems but many, especially in the media, seem to prefer that approach.

Donald Lambro has a bit saner approach about Trump and the facts – “Evidence suggests the 2016 election was not tainted by fraud.” His essay is headed by a misleading AP picture to provide a taste of what is to follow. The title is also interesting because the Democrat’s mantra is that the Russians skewed the vote and the popular vote was against Trump. In trying to rationalize this shift, Lambro goes ad hominem: “It was an issue that gnawed at his ego and that he has not been able to drop since the election…” This ignores the fact that the issue gnaws at Democrats and the media that continually try to use it to delegitimize the election. It is a Democrat talking point that is the source for the 3 million claim. It is the longstanding Democrat opposition to such ideas as Voter ID that raise concerns.

Lambro tries to put the focus on selected studies that can be interpreted as not supporting Trump’s claims about voting. That misses the point raised and attempts to to move the issue to trivia. Then he brings in the crowd estimates and “alternative facts” to support his ‘Trump Lies’ thesis. Again, he gets into misperceptions and shaky interpretations of statistics and misleading source data. That doesn’t stop the grand accusations presented with an aura of fact. Conway came up with ‘alternative facts’ to give the media an out, to allow for misperception and differing views of statistical or incomplete data. The Left missed that and now is trying to cudgel the Trump camp with it. All too often, it becomes apparent that those with the ‘alternative facts’ that go well beyond a reasonable interpretation are on the Left, not in the administration. More pictures and other data surface that show that the brouhaha source was off base. Additional studies come up that show the voter fraud problem is indeed a concern. More Fake News about the administration in major media gets retracted.

For more on these ‘alternative facts’ see Jom Hoft: Confirmed: More People, More Hotel Rooms Booked for Trump Inauguration than Either of Obama’s – William Campenni: Illegal Aliens Really Do Vote – a Lot – Deroy Murdock: Why Do Democrats Fear Trump’s Probe of “Fake” Voter Fraud? – John Sexton: Freakout of the day: Trump Photoshopped his hand in White House photo – Ed Morrissey: Correction of the year? The Atlantic regrets …. Update: And regrets … – the ‘facts’ aren’t quite as clear as Lambro, Maher, and others in their camp would like to believe.

This same angst shows up in response to other antics. Mercedes Schlapp describes The very mixed messages from an unwelcoming march – besides all the vulgarity in the Women’s March:

Simply put, the Women’s March represented some women, but by no means all. For too long the Democrats have claimed to champion women’s rights by lecturing us on how we need to think. The march followed the familiar playbook, with the liberal pro-abortion agenda front and center. Many women don’t agree with this agenda and feel that the liberals have become too extreme on these social issues.

The mainstream media gave wall-to-wall coverage to the Women’s March. In fact, Newsbusters reported that the major broadcast networks devoted 129 times more coverage to the march than to the 2016 March for Life. It’s a lock that Friday’s 2017 March for Life, which my family will be attending, will similarly get nowhere near the media exposure of the Women’s March on Washington.

I want my daughters to grow up in a culture and society where everyone is respected, especially the most vulnerable and innocent. Unlike the Women’s March, a gathering dominated by of darkness and anger, the March for Life will offer an uplifting, spiritual and positive message — a message vitally important for all women to hear.

For those worried about Trump, check out Kelly Riddell on The just war on the EPA – “The EPA and its counterparts need reining, a measure that’s long overdue.” The worry is another shifting standards example. What was OK, even if it was unethical or illegal, in the past is now to be protected from an administration that is portrayed as being unethical and illegal in action to clean the swamp.

EPA staffers — who reportedly cried and had to take days off for counseling after Donald Trump won the presidency in November — are in full revolt. After the Trump administration took away their social media accounts and froze their grants, a rogue staffer at the National Park Service tweeted out climate facts.

Tasked with unilaterally carrying out former President Barack Obama’s climate change policies by decree — because such legislation would’ve never made it through Congress — has emboldened many career bureaucrats within the EPA to become radical, partisan activists.

They don’t work for the American people, but rather to advance their environmentalism agenda. For some it almost takes on a religious fervor.

So yeah, there’s partisan problems at the EPA.

Scott Pruitt, Mr. Trump’s pick to lead the agency, knows this all too well. He’s sued the agency 13 times, and understands its culture of executive overreach, lawlessness and environmental activism. That’s why he’s the perfect man for the job.

And that’s why the liberals, and radical left career staffers at the EPA, are freaking out.

On this front there’s also John Sexton about Flooding expected at Dakota Access Pipeline protest camp – The location will make rescue difficult and then there’s the usual Leftist mob trash problem.

Tribal Chairman Dave Archambault warned about this back in November. From Vice: “I heard that they’re digging pits down there for their human waste. That’s a flood zone. So when the floodwaters come up, that waste is going to be contaminating the water. We’re no different than the oil company, if we’re fighting for water. What’s going to happen when people leave? Who has to clean it up? Who has to refurbish it?”

Archambault tells the AP, “There is a lot of debris, abandoned cars. When the flood comes all of that stuff is going to contaminate the environment.”

Scott Johnson: Extreme vetting, here we come – “President Trump began to fulfill one of his signal campaign promises yesterday with the promulgation of an executive order addressing immigration from Muslim countries yesterday.” Johnson cites the NYT which has posted the text of the EO.

The order proceeds through a series of cross-reference to other laws that renders it incomprehensible on its own terms.

According to Shear and Cooper, the order suspends the entry of refugees into the United States for 120 days, and Syrians indefinitely. It also suspends immigration from seven Muslim countries for only 90 days, while ordering priority be given to visas for Christians from Muslim nations (I don’t see the religious distinction in the text of the order). The seven Muslim countries are Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.

Shear and Cooper want to imply that differentiation among faiths for the purposes of the order is unconstitutional: “Mr. Trump also established a religious test for refugees from Muslim nations: He ordered that Christians and others from minority religions be granted priority over Muslims.” The Constitution, however, only bars religious tests for office or “public trust.”

Despite its difficulty, the order is worth reviewing in its entirety. The following provision, for example, should resonate with citizens of sound mind

In other words: Fake News Alert! The ‘alternative facts’ available for misperception and outright bias in perception creating what is not in the EO in order to bash Trump are easily seen.

Betsey Newmark started off yesterday with administration leaks and a ‘woe is me’ approach. What she was talking about appeared to be more a matter of transparency than leaks. For something more serious, Scott Johnson wonders At GOP retreat, whodunnit? – there may be consequences on this one.

Taking a quick look around online this morning, I believe that Pennsylvania is one of 11 or or 12 states that requires all-party consent for the recording of conversations as a general rule. The applicable law is set forth under chapter 57 of Pennsylvania’s criminal code (Title 18 of the Pennsylvania statutes). The general prohibition is set forth in § 5703. The law does not apply under circumstances where the speaker lacks a reasonable expectation of privacy. The exception is derived in the definition of “oral communication” set forth in § 5702.

What does come out of all of this is that the Left is going to any length to try to find meat for their ‘alternative facts’ fodder.

About that Doomsday Clock Glen Reynolds notes: “as Brendan O’Neill put it on Facebook: “The same media attacking Trump for making stuff up is now excitedly reporting that a bunch of scientists have moved the imaginary hand on an imaginary clock half-a-minute closer to an imaginary apocalypse. #fakenews.” The absurdity with pending Trump nuclear apocalypse is the fact that the last person who’d want such an event is a real estate developer with world wide multi-million dollar holdings. See also They scream about Trump having nuclear codes, but the hawks of WWIII reside on the left – “Ask them why Trump – a supposed Putin puppet – would start a nuclear war when it would decimate his international finances and destroy his puppet master’s country in the process, and you’ll get one of two things: a blank stare or deflection.” Logical consistency goes with intellectual integrity and can be used to evaluate positions and arguments.

Leave a Comment

1/27/2017: Death by a thousand cuts: A Samurai turns the tables.

Trump may be delivering death by a thousand cuts – or maybe he is applying that fable about boiling the frog slowly enough so that it doesn’t notice it is getting cooked until too late. Consider:

Glenn Harlan Reynolds: Trump is playing with the press – “when the press is constantly attacking him over trivialities, it strengthens his position and weakens the press.“

The first thing to understand is that one of the changes going on with Trump generally is the renegotiation of various post-World War II institutional arrangements. One of those is the institutional arrangement involving the press and the White House.

Brian C. Joondeph: Trump Playing Rope-a-Dope with the Media – “Notice how each story knocks the preceding story off the front pages and the evening news?”

All the while, Trump is taking body shots from the media. Letting them believe they are effective fighters, standing up for truth, social justice, and their favorite left-wing causes. They think they have Trump on the ropes. Yet behind the scenes his agenda marches along. Rope-a-dope.

Every day is Christmas. Presents under the tree each morning begrudgingly reported by a media still fussing over whether Trump or Obama had the larger inauguration crowd. A question that will never be answered for certain and doesn’t even matter.

Trump continues to take the blows from the media and the left, dodging and weaving as they tire themselves out, and in return throwing jabs that they don’t see coming.

Ace on Steve Bannon: The Media Is the Actual Opposition Party and It Should Just “Keep Its Mouth Shut” Until It Figures Out Why People Hate Them – This is a link to a link by another link. The depth is its own indicator. Allahpundit, also at Hot Air, says ”It’s not so much “shut your mouth because you have no right to criticize” as “do less talking and more listening and you’ll be better at your jobs.” Also see Ace’s The Media’s Incompetence and Ignorance Is a Bigger Problem Than Their Bias – “Lots of “WOW” reactions about senior State officials resigning.”

The IBT Editorial: Illegals Did Vote In November, And Trump Is Right To Investigate – “This week, John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky, who have both tracked voter fraud extensively, detailed multiple specific examples of noncitizens casting ballots in U.S. elections. Among them: …

Jonah Goldberg [no Trumpist he and it shows]: ‘America first’ isn’t a Trump creation – “Granted, it’s more complicated than mainstream journalists would have you believe.” (advice Goldberg needs to take unto himself)

The America First Committee was founded in the spring of 1940 by isolationist students at Yale University and quickly became a major national movement — though it was never the purely right-wing phenomenon many claim. … The entire purpose of the America First Committee was to keep FDR from dragging the U.S. into another European war. Given the still fresh memory of the horror — both at home and abroad — of World War I

That Mr. Trump could so easily adopt “America first” without being hobbled by its negative connotation was a political coup.

Byron York: Trump’s radical immigration plan: Enforce the law – “There’s one fundamental difference between the new White House and the old when it comes to immigration: Barack Obama ordered his administration not to enforce a number of immigration laws. Donald Trump has ordered his administration to enforce them.”

Wesley Pruden: A nation derided for doing the right thing – reference The Gipper:

Immigration, both the legal and the illegal kind, is destined to be a contentious issue in America forever. That’s the price of living in the place where everybody wants to be.

This tempts some people to lead with their emotions when they talk about immigration. If you engage these folks in a conversation about immigration, you have to expect to be called Scrooge (or worse) if you say America’s borders must be secure and there must be a fair, firm and orderly way to accommodate newcomers.

But no nation in the world allows open borders, and America is the only nation in the world that is chided for doing what every other nation does. America has always kept the front door slightly ajar, and how far ajar has been an issue always simmering, and sometimes — like now — on the boil.

The Republicans, depicted as churls, skinflints and worse for trying to lead the way on restoring immigration sanity, have tried twice in recent years to “regularize” the border.

We’re still a nation of immigrants. We always will be. That’s a source of strength. But a nation of immigrants doesn’t have to be a nation of saps. The Donald understands that.

Matt Mackowiak: While the Democrat-media axis recoils, Trump keeps his promises – “the collective freakout over everything President Trump or his team says or does is reaching unprecedented levels in modern history.” … “Before rushing to judgment, can’t we all simply just wait a few months and see what the results of these policies are?”

Ed Morrissey cites The Dude on Trump: Maybe we should all just abide, man – “Jeff Bridges has advice for Republicans, Democrats, Donald Trump, and everyone else: Just take it easy, man.” If The Dude isn’t your cup of tea, try The Pope.

Glenn’s [see Reynolds, above] advice to the press is very similar to that from Francis and El Duderino (if you’re not into that whole brevity thing, man) — patience and discipline. However, Glenn is very skeptical that the media is capable of either. Perhaps we can set the example.

Thomas Lifson: “It’s your feel-good video of the day.” Trump-hating flag burners in Iowa absolutely, positively foiled – “The Supreme Court may rule that flag burning is protected expression under the First Amendment, but that doesn’t mean that it is acceptable to endanger ordinary citizens, who also have rights to express themselves. In this case, with a fire extinguisher.”

Two members of the group, Osgerby and Kelli Ebensberger, also of Iowa City, were charged with violating Iowa City’s public burn ordinance, a simple misdemeanor punishable by up to 30 days in jail or a fine of up to $625.

A delivery truck driver noted the blaze and grabbed his fire extinguisher to put it out. Open burning is considered a public hazard and he arrived on the scene just in time.

There is a … You Might Be A Democrat list – (h/t Jeff Foxworthy) with some additional contributions, it is getting to be quite a list and extensive summary of the ‘thousand cuts’ that have been noticed.

John Sexton notes that Democrats have settled on a ‘scorched-earth’ approach to Trump – “Democrats are now worried Schumer is too willing to compromise and are demanding a harder line. The problem, of course, is that they don’t have the votes to really block anyone without Republican help.” Scorched earth policies are attrition warfare. It only works if you have the muscle like in Sherman’s march to the sea in the war between the states or in the airpower in WW II bombing campaigns. Everybody loses. The only question is who runs out of something to lose first.

Its one thing when the opposition plays fast and loose with perceptions and promises. It’s another entirely when it is within a working group. Jemma Lifhits takes a look at one step over the line and its consequences. Republicans Rethinking Relationship with Schumer after Pompeo Incident. What gets lost in this incident is how it isn’t just politics as usual.

“I guess what we’re going to have to do is to find out when he does make a deal, is he speaking for himself or is he speaking for the Democratic caucus?” he said. “You didn’t have to wonder about that when you were dealing with Harry Reid.”

Harry Reid is no model for comity or honesty but he did lead his party in a way that Republicans could depend upon his positions as being those of his party in the Senate.

Victor Davis Hanson: Fake News: Postmodernism By Another Name

In sum, fake news is journalism’s popular version of the nihilism of campus postmodernism. To progressive journalists, advancing a leftwing political agenda is important enough to justify the creation of misleading narratives and outright falsehoods to deceive the public—to justify, in other words, the creation of fake but otherwise useful news.

John Hinderaker: Press Pretends to Fact-Check Trump, But Only Misleads Readers – “We have seen this pattern over and over: Donald Trump says something that may be debatable or exaggerated, and in their quest to bring him down, reporters and editors publish “fact checks” that are more misleading than what Trump said in the first place. It happens every day.”

Luboš Motl: Trump’s crowd and leftists’ fake news and propaganda – “Moreover, I am highly concerned with the brutally obvious inconsistency in these leftists’ claims “whether they care about the size” and “whether they are actually claiming that Trump lies”. You may see inconsistent claims in most anti-Trump tirades about this issue.” – A good start to figuring out what the deal is with those mall pictures.

Andrew Follett: Scientist Plan March Against Trump After Ignoring Obama’s Science Problems For 8 Years – “A group of “science enthusiasts” are planning a march on Washington, D.C., to protest President Donald Trump’s supposed anti-science policies. …Organizers said it’s part of a movement by “scientists and science enthusiasts in protest of the policies of the United States Congress and President Donald J. Trump,” and specifically focuses on “science denial” by Republicans … But these same scientists were quiet under the Obama administration.”

For more Fake News on SciTech, see Jessica Hall: Trump administration immediately starts trying to muzzle scientists – “Memos obtained by different media outlets show that the Trump administration has ordered scientists at the EPA not to communicate with the public, and definitely not the press. They also show that, despite earlier reports, Trump has not attempted to put a gag order on the USDA.” What’s the Fake News here? It is that there is no muzzling of scientists. The story is about standard and routine expression of government policy, not censorship. The ‘scientists’ are not muzzled, they just can’t use the authority of office to express their opinions. Consider also “Trump’s assertion of control over the EPA makes sense in light of his campaign’s vendetta against climate science.” Vendetta? Wow. The essay constructs a villain out of whole cloth, one that even rudimentary objective examination will show is honest to goodness Fake News based on paranoia and ideological fixation. – for why this is so, see Lord Monckton’s Ten for Trump and America (climate disengagement at hand).

Ilya Somin exposes his TDS in explaining Why Trump’s executive order on sanctuary cities is unconstitutional – and then “The order indicates that sanctuary cities “that fail to comply with applicable Federal law do not receive Federal funds, except as mandated by law.” So following the law is unconstitutional? Somin is constructing a case not based on the evidence to hand but rather on his misperceptions that belie such evidence and show inordinate bias.

Tim Cushing ignores the preamble to the Constitution and asks Do You Want A Police State? Because This Is How You Get A Police State – “But is the “anti-police atmosphere” really “wrong?” and then cites Obama DoJ anti-police reports. This is the rather typical misdirected outrage. It is also the ‘all or none’ logical fallacy. Police are necessary and, as with any governmental agency, they must be held accountable. That is not the false reality that Cushing has created as illustrated when he ignores administrations that demonstrated a lack of regard for law but instead castigates one that has shown regard for the laws of the people.

Leave a Comment

1/26/2017: Campaign promises used to be a joke; now it’s Gaslighting

A few days in and it is beginning to look like the campaign promises were an actual to-do list.

Stephen Hayward says Looks like we’re just going to have to inaugurate a new regular feature here on Power Line, which I’ll call “The Meltdown Notes.” We’ll have to exert some discipline to keep it from becoming an hourly update.” He may have something …

The Washington Times: They said it couldn’t be done – “The Donald would never redeem extravagant campaign promises.” Enforce the existing law?

“From here on out I’m asking all of you to enforce the laws of the United States,” he told the Homeland Security Department, delivering the instructions live and in person. “They will be enforced, and enforced strongly. We do not need new laws. We will work within the existing system and framework.”

This is the pushback against the flabby enforcement of the immigration laws that many wanted but few dared expect.

That is what is strange more than anything else. The campaign promises actually having weight is indeed unusual but the follow through on those promises with the structure of existing law is incredible. No new toothless laws. No outrageous out of bounds executive action. Just follow the law.

And then there’s that bit about “live and in-person” … that’s the MBWA ethos (management by walking around popularized by HP) on display. Another example is the CIA visit. Paul Mirengoff gets off on this with Trump at the CIA, Part Two – and concludes: “Give me a break. The mainstream media never showed concern for morale at the CIA when Obama was releasing terrorists and Holder was persecuting agents. The mainstream media isn’t concerned about it now. The mainstream media is just looking for ways to bash President Trump.”

But Wait! There’s More! Andrew P. Napolitano is amazed. Donald Trump, revolutionary – “In Obamacare, the president sides with individuals against the government.”

He ordered that regulations already in place be enforced with a softer, more beneficent tone, and he ordered that no penalty, fine, setoff or tax be imposed by the IRS on any person or entity who is not complying with the individual mandate, because by the time taxes are due on April 15, the IRS will be without authority to impose or collect the non-tax tax, as the individual mandate will no longer exist. Why take money from people that will soon be returned?

Then he ordered a truly revolutionary act, the likes of which I have never seen in the 45 years I have studied and monitored the government’s laws and its administration of them. He ordered that when bureaucrats who are administering and enforcing the law have discretion with respect to the time, place, manner and severity of its enforcement, they should exercise that discretion in favor of individuals and against the government.

It looks like what we have here is bald faced selective enforcement – but in favor of the individual and against the government? And not dismissed or ignored law but just ‘kinder and gentler’ with no hurry enforcement? With a rationale that the law will change, soon? There are indeed some revolutionary concepts in government as it has been up to now.

Dan Burton thinks Trump’s trade stance is right on the money – This is an issue because many of the current trade agreements hew to the free trade ideology. The problem with that is what happens when ideology meets actual practice. There are oversight agencies to assure compliance with agreements and the U.N is providing an example of where those can go awry. Trade is not simple and nations can engage in various tactics to give themselves an edge.

Burton says “in the 1960s, 24 percent of American workers were employed in manufacturing, today only 8 percent. “ and “Many experts say the shift away from manufacturing was inevitable.” Mark Perry fell into this trap by noting that it was productivity that was the proper measure but missed the concept that automation and other productivity enhancers that displace the workforce should not mean to eliminate it but free it to do more. That phenomena has been behind a lot of government effort to assist people in finding new careers and in training for new skills. That, in turn, gets into looking at government effectiveness in these efforts.

Kellyanne Conway struck a nerve and Suzanne Fields explains about Telling the post-truth with alternative facts – “Statistics, once a reliable guide, have become arrogant, insolent and discredited.” The media, of course, is trying to force an alternate reality: “Alternative facts are not facts,” Chuck Todd told her. “They’re falsehoods.”

Fudging facts — turning them into “alternatives” — is both science and art in the nation’s capital. Everyone remembers Bill Clinton’s famous denial of hanky-panky in the Oval Office as depending on “what the meaning of is, is.” The Obama White House spun the most egregious example of fake facts with its assertion, on all the networks, that the Islamic attack on the American consulate in Benghazi was inspired by an obscure American-made video and kept the fake facts alive for days. Everyone at the White House knew better.

In the intellectual world, where standards once disciplined language and the philosophical canon required precise definitions rooted in common appreciation of reality, the debate over ideas is devoid of indisputable evidence testifying to facts. Stephen Colbert of “Comedy Central” coined the word “truthiness” to describe what speakers want to be true rather than what they know is true. The Merriam-Webster dictionary a decade ago called it the word of the year. Media in the last election, dominated by Hillary fans, suffered from acute truthiness.

This particular problem isn’t just in the matter of estimating crowd sizes or public preference polling. For an example of hard core statistical malfeasance, consider the Climate Alarmists famous Hockey Stick. That was subject to rigorous mathematical exposure as being not only ‘alternate facts’ but also false facts but such exposure didn’t matter much to the many who depend upon it to support their ideology of catastrophic human caused climate change.

One of the big ‘alternative facts’ stories is that of voter fraud. For years, the Left has thrown everything it could at voter ID and similar measures to improve election integrity. Their position has always been that there is no proof of any voter fraud. That is, until they lost the last election and then they decided there was massive fraud at the hands of the Russians. But they still denigrate Trump’s claim about voter fraud as another Trump Lie. David Sherfinski and Stephen Dinan say the Watchdog sees need for election fraud probe – “Many wonder why Trump complains.”

More than 140 jurisdictions across the country have more people registered to vote than their entire voting-age populations, according to a watchdog group that says there is reason to have the kind of investigation into voter fraud that President Trump called for Wednesday.

The League of Women Voters said the claims were false and that it was odd for the winner of an election to call for an investigation.

So, who to believe? The League of Women Voters and others on the Left are looking at one particular election while Trump and the watchdog group are looking at the process involved in all of the elections. Then there is the precautionary principle. Those on the Left see no need for precautions while others think prudent and reasonable precautions are a good idea. Who is obsessing on the Russians but ignoring the graveyard voters and other anomalies uncovered in voter rolls? Who is personalizing the issue versus who is not? For more on this, see Jazz Shaw: Even if there were zero voter fraud, wouldn’t you want to know rather than just guess? – find out how the murder rate in NYC is a factor.

An IBT Commentary: President Trump Gets His Wall — Thanks To Democrats

It’s a classic case of a political party being too clever by half. Many Democrats, fearful of an electoral backlash, signed on to the idea of building a wall knowing that they could stall it in Congress. If they won control of both houses, the bill to build a wall would become a dead letter. They thought they had killed the idea for sure in 2008, by amending a spending bill to essentially defund the project.

So they were for the wall before they were against it.

Now the Democrats have been hoisted by their own petard, so to speak. Their cynical vote to approve the wall was pure political theater to fool voters back home that they were really doing something to control rampant illegal immigration into the U.S. In fact, they weren’t interested in doing anything about it.

The rant of the day: How Losing My Political Values Helped Me Gain My Freedom [Warden] – this is a gut reaction to the ‘both sides do it’ fallacy.

There’s a frustrating game that the left plays with conservatives. It’s an Alinksy tactic called, “Make them live up to their values.” … The left loves to exploit these shortcomings–every Christian who falls short of perfection is a hypocrite; the social values candidate you voted for just got arrested for drunk driving. Haha, everything you believe and advocate is now discredited. … They got away with it for years, waving away the lies, hypocrisy, indiscretions, and criminal behavior from their own politicians while beating the right mercilessly with the missteps of their own. It’s effective because the right always maintains a baseline of integrity not displayed by the left

I will attack, attack, attack, attack using their own tactics against them until they learn their lesson.

What I will not do is let them play my values against me ever again. I don’t need to prove that I’m better than them. I already know it.

On the Fake News front: Gaslighting seems to be a word getting a lot of use lately. David Wolfe says this is “a form of emotional abuse that causes a victim to question their own feelings, instincts and sanity, giving the abusive partner power and control.” His list of 10 signs “you’re most likely being gaslighted” provides interesting material for examining the concept. There are efforts to play the media as the victim of Trump’s gaslighting but the reality is that the media has been gaslighting Republicans for ages and Trump is mirroring their efforts back on them. Perhaps one of the more telling indicators of what is going on with this is the many ‘what if a Democrat did this’ contrasts that are becoming more common.

Consider Willis Eschenbach on AltUSNatParkService – “After the Trump Administration told the Department of the Interior to shut down all their Twitter accounts because they were being used for partisan political purposes by Democratic government employees, some National Park Service employees got in a huff about how their rights were being violated. So they put together a new Twitter account called AltUSNatParkService.”

They’re organizing meetings and the like because of these fears. Gotta say … I’m getting tired of people trotting out their fears and using these fears to justify all kinds of actions. I get it that folks are afraid. And I know that the fear they feel is real. But that is not sufficient reason for me to automatically take their fears seriously and buy into their fright, particularly if nothing untoward has happened to date. It’s just baseless fears.

In any case, they’ve shot themselves in the foot. They are putting themselves out as if they represent or are part of the real National Park Service, both by their name and even to the extent of using the official arrowhead emblem of the Park Service on their Twitter site, as seen above. … Why is their using the arrowhead a huge mistake? Because using it is not just a bad idea. It is a crime to use the official NPS “arrowhead” emblem without specific permission from the NPS

For more in this vein, see Tyler O’Neil Is President Trump Launching a ‘War on Science?‘ – “scientists … allege that President Donald Trump’s administration has slashed funding, gagged scientific findings, and pressured them to abandon “science-based policies.

Leave a Comment

1/25/2017 flooding the zone, overwhelming the senses

Fallout from the riots continues as people notice the vulgar and destructive and uncivil behavior.

Tammy Bruce: This divided nation – “The Woman’s March deepened the chasm between liberals and the rest of the country.”

With the media coverage surrounding the so-called women’s marches on Saturday you’d think we were watching some sort of organic, spontaneous uprising, much like, oh, the tea party. But it wasn’t. There has been excellent commentary in the days that followed exposing the fact that the march wasn’t about women at all; it was about leftist politics. And group therapy.

But this is what the left has always done — co-opt a genuine issue of concern within society and then use it, like parasites, to further the failed and deadly policies of the left. While America got sucker-punched for the past eight years, we will recover. The Democratic Party, not so much.

Democratic leadership, the political bureaucracy and legacy media want Americans to believe there’s a Grand Canyon-sized division in this country. And they’re right — it’s between themselves and the American people.

There’s a lot brewing. “Last week, Reps. Kevin Yoder, Kansas Republican, and Jared Polis, Colorado Democrat, reintroduced the Email Privacy Act, a bill that will protect Americans’ privacy rights from bureaucratic overreach by updating the grossly outdated 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA)” [Williams]. – “Forty years ago, Congress enacted the Hyde Amendment — a law that continues to this day to proscribe federal Medicaid funds from being used to subsidize abortion in most circumstances” and now HR7 would “Make the Hyde Amendment and other current abortion funding prohibitions permanent and government-wide” [Smith]. – “Under the CRA, unless Congress disapproves of a rule, the regulation becomes law by default. The REINS Act would reverse this, canceling any major regulation Congress does not explicitly approve” [Burnett].

On the Trump front, today was announced as immigration and security day for the President’s Pen. The National Park Service is learning that it has a new boss and that tweeting irrelevancies related to the climate change religion is now inappropriate [Wolfgang]. The a priori propaganda machine assumption that the new administration lies like no other has the usual ‘Splinter and Beam’ problem while, on the beam side of things, “What’s most encouraging about the episode, though, is that Team Trump is not rolling over” [Martin]. The DOW has topped 20,000 for the first time.

Democrats used a Senate committee looking at national security to put up their favorite picture an Jim Hoft reports that CNN Quietly Releases Updated Pic Showing Trump’s Inaugural Crowd Size Greater than Obama’s 2009 Inaugural Crowd – this is the source of the current “Trump Lies” meme.

The media remained silent on the crowd size numbers when it was clear that Trump was crushing Hillary in this area. But late last week the media finally reported that crowd size does matter. CNN (Fake News) reported that President Trump’s crowd size was much smaller than President Obama’s crowd size in 2009, and CNN provided two pictures to show the difference.

However, the pictures in the article show the crowd size for Obama when he was speaking during his 2009 inauguration with the crowd from Trump’s inauguration approximately 3 hours before Trump spoke.

In part, this crowd size thing was pushed because of the discrepancies noted between Trump and Clinton campaign rallies, especially in light of polling and media rhetoric. It’s use by Democrats illustrates an attempt at rationalization, much like the popular vote mantra, and denial. Its appearance in committee illustrates that partisan politics has a higher priority for Democrats than does national security.

Howard Kurtz has more on this: Split-screen presidency: Media favor controversies over Trump’s fast start

In just two days, President Trump has met with corporate honchos, union chiefs and auto executives, courted congressional leaders, frozen federal hiring, killed the Pacific trade deal and moved ahead on two major pipelines.

So are the media filled with headlines about how he’s off to a fast start?

Not exactly.

A front-page New York Times headline says “Meeting with Top Lawmakers, Trump Repeats an Election Lie.”

This is the split-screen reality of the new administration. In television terms, the main image on the screen is the 45th president’s actions, and in a small box on the bottom right is the distraction du jour—Trump declaring war on the media, tweeting something provocative or making an unsubstantiated claim.

Thomas Lifson picks up on this by asking Why are so many media people puzzled that Trump keeps bringing up illegal votes? – “The MSM outlets are nearly unanimous that President Trump is “lying” and presenting “deliberate falsehoods” to the American public about illegal votes tipping the majority to Hillary Clinton in the election. The mantra is that there is “no evidence,” so Trump is “losing his credibility” and will no longer be believed.”

All of these warnings about lies coming from a president come at the hands of media outlets that rarely if ever used the word “lie” with regard to President Obama’s many prevarications on serious issues, such as the video causing the Benghazi attack and the Obamacare promise of keeping your plan and your doctor. These were politically consequential lies that I do not recall CNN warning about, as this morning’s newscast warned Trump about losing his credibility.

If Trump’s media enemies like CNN once again ignore the March for Life, they will discredit themselves. It is very clear to me that President Trump intends to destroy the credibility of his media enemies.

That is the context in which his multiple remarks concerning illegal votes has to be understood. I think President Trump knew that if he made remarks about illegal voting, the media would spring to action and present the opposite position and would characterize his thinking as a lie. The problem with this is that a lack of evidence is not proof for the contrary position. … The very act of asking for voter ID is considered discriminatory by many, including some in the courts.

John Fund has written and co-authored two well documented books on the extent of vote fraud. The MSM are now demanding proof for Trump’s assertions, opening the door for the Trump administration to conduct a detailed investigation of vote fraud, which has to have been a strategy all along. When the investigation will be attacked as an effort at “vote suppression,” the Trump administration will have media demands for data to point at.

In other words, the media is being played. Their own proclivities are being used to lead them into efforts that contradict their desired message. This will create dissonance and it already has. That is going to stimulate behaviors that further undermine their propaganda efforts.

The Guardian is reporting that a half dozen journalists got caught up in the rioting and charged with felonies. “Based on the facts and circumstances, we determined that probable cause existed to support the filing of felony rioting charges,” William Miller, a spokesman for the office, said in a statement. “As in all of our cases, we are always willing to consider additional information that people bring forward.”

The IBD editorial asks Can Trump Win His Battle With The Unionized, Bureaucratic ‘Deep State’? – they are worried about public sector unions.

What is surprising is that no recent president has taken a serious whack at our out-of-control bureaucracy, which has become a fundamentally undemocratic part of our government, unresponsive to the people, arbitrary, overpaid and hyperpoliticized. It is a giant impediment to change and reform.

Trump’s battle with what some call the “deep state” promises to be epic. But in the end, the only way to make government work as intended is to abolish public employee unions entirely. Government workers shouldn’t answer to union leaders, but to the American people, their employers.

The show continues ….

Leave a Comment

Primal Scream Day after

What was the riot all about? Nobody seems to know for sure, especially the rioters. Between that and the Fake News there is a lot of analysis going on that the Primal Scream Day may have done more damage to the Left than anything else. What is becoming more clear is that those engaged in screaming, vulgar, rants are protesting their own positions.

A proper response to the insanity, bigotry, hatred, and vulgarity shows up on occasion. See the FoxNews story about a Woman kicked off plane for berating Trump supporter in viral video. Note the response from the other passengers:

Koteskey said, however, the reactions of his fellow passengers were heartening.

“As the lady was removed I saw that I was surrounded by blacks, Latinos, Asians, and whites, all who had chimed in asking her to be removed and who had defended me,” he wrote on Facebook. “I was touched and moved knowing later that not all these people were Trump supporters. The black man who took the seat next to me was a registered Democrat and he and I had a very good discussion about the beauty of free speech and coming together when people insult and commit acts of violence just for having differing views.

“It truly was a great demonstration of AMERICA and its people coming together and standing up for one another.”

Luboš Motl comments on this: “Maybe many of the leftist spoiled brats in the U.S. must prepare for a wobbly ride because so many exemptions from the laws and rules that they have enjoyed throughout their life will no longer work for them.”

A Sane Look at EO1 provides another example. David Catron says it’s The Right Prescription: Trump’s Obamacare Order Is Bigger Than You Think – “It is no mere sop to his supporters nor is it a symbolic gesture.” What is worthy of note is that the Executive Order is about following the law, not trying to bypass it. That includes the recognition that ObamaCare must be changed by law and not fiat.

Section 5 shouldn’t even be necessary. It merely requires that executive agencies follow the law when they promulgate new rules and regulations. The atrocious record of the Obama administration, however, has been such that Trump and his advisors felt the need to remind the various agencies that they are not above the law: “To the extent that carrying out the directives in this order would require revision of regulations issued through notice-and-comment rulemaking, the heads of agencies shall comply with the Administrative Procedure Act and other applicable statutes in considering or promulgating such regulatory revisions.”

The reality that his opponents have forgotten is that much of Obamacare can be repealed by this executive order for the same reason the justly reviled contraception mandate can be tossed onto the ash heap of history. Even the much-hated individual mandate can be effectively neutralized by simply expanding the eligibility for hardship waivers to anyone without insurance coverage. It just takes the stroke of a presidential pen, and Donald Trump has clearly shown with Friday’s executive order that he isn’t afraid to wield that particular weapon.

Joel B. Pollak takes up the Propaganda Machine efforts as Fake News: Three Mainstream Media Lies on Trump’s First Day – “The mainstream media lost no time in attempting to undermine President Donald Trump, as opposed to actually reporting information.”

After eight years of kowtowing to Obama, they have suddenly discovered a civic responsibility to hold the government accountable. But they are focusing on minutiae, and in some cases actually telling lies, both of omission and commission. That risks alienating the public even further — making it harder, actually, for the media to act as watchdogs.

Lie #1: President Trump was focused on the crowd size at the inauguration.

Lie #2: President Trump insulted the CIA.

Lie #3: The anti-Trump protests in Washington, D.C. were important.

The crowd size thing is particularly indicative. It was based on a snapshot taken from the Washington Monument that contrasted with a similar snapshot take at the 2008 inauguration. The contrast became a rationalization for TDS of the ‘vox populi’ fallacy variety. Much like with the ‘warmest year evva’ claims, the analysis should be about the motivations and methods behind the assertions rather than the assertions themselves. Here’s from Glenn Reynolds:

Trump knows that the press isn’t trusted very much, and that the less it’s trusted, the less it can hurt him. So he’s prodding reporters to do things that will make them less trusted, and they’re constantly taking the bait. They’re taking the bait because they think he’s dumb, and impulsive, and lacking self-control — but he’s the one causing them to act in ways that are dumb and impulsive, and demonstrate lack of self-control.

This leads to a more subtle example of bias. In this case, it’s Taylor Millard about Thank Barack Obama for Donald Trump’s war on the media – The topic is a Saturday press briefing and he thinks “Sean Spicer has become a bit of a laughingstock for some of his Saturday night comments to the media.” What Spicer said was “There’s been a lot of talk in the media about the responsibility to hold Donald Trump accountable. And I’m here to tell you that it goes two ways. We’re going to hold the press accountable, as well.” Millard says that “only support our beliefs that Trump doesn’t really support free speech.” The question is how holding someone accountable can be construed as not supporting the Constitution? Free speech is not a license to speak unchallenged and the Administration has never expressed any proposal to censor others. It has only challenged veracity and often with rather obvious credibility based on reality.

Another item needing a bit of examination is The Soros Coincidence. Scott Johnson cites research of Asra Nomani published in the NYT that revealed the coincidence.

Johnson also takes a look at a Rumor of Schumor and finds Republicans are still surprised when they find they can’t trust Democrats. “In case you didn’t know this about Schumer: what a weasel.”

Paul Mirengoff takes a look at Trump at the CIA – this is an example of Trump bypassing the barriers of the swamp establishment.

As has been the case for months, the mainstream media has an ally in John Brennan, the anti-Trump former CIA head. A spokesperson for Brennan said:

“Former CIA Director Brennan is deeply saddened and angered at Donald Trump’s despicable display of self-aggrandizement in front of CIA’s Memorial Wall of Agency heroes. Brennan says that Trump should be ashamed of himself.”

Brennan’s hyperbole confirms his status as a hyper-partisan and a Trump hater.

In its self-absorption and desire to slam Trump, the media has intentionally missed the real story of the Langley visit. The real story is Trump’s show of support for the CIA.

The distinction between the brass and the rank-and-file also sets up an easy refutation of the media’s claim that Trump is a hypocrite for blasting the CIA and then coming to Langley to praise it. Trump was blasting John Brennan and his crew, not the folks he addressed yesterday.

If your new boss, a crass guy, comes to your house for dinner, he’s going to talk loud, brag, and possibly burp, even if you serve dinner on china handed down from your great-grandmother. But the main takeaway will be that the boss thought it worthwhile to dine with you, and that he praised you and expressed his support.

Make it clear. Put it on the table. Confront the obfuscation, misperception, propaganda, deceit, dishonesty. 

Leave a Comment

Resistance vs Honorable Opposition – choosing between sounding good or being effective

It just doesn’t quit.

Ed Morrissey: The narcissistic petulance of “the resistance”

Those weren’t protests — those were attempted revolutionary acts, which fits right into the hyperbolic and irresponsible language adopted by the very same people who lectured us on accepting the results of elections just three months earlier.

In a self-governing republic with established democratic processes, there is no honorable role for “resistance.” What are they “resisting,” especially before the new administration even takes office? Free and fair elections — the kind that this particular group hadn’t lost in twelve years. They only believe in elections when it gives them access to power.

Rather than take on the honorable and difficult task of the opposition party and rebuild themselves for future success, some on the Left have decided that they’re victims of oppression. To excuse that and their actions that have followed, they now wrap themselves in the mantle of the free French in World War II, or perhaps more relevantly, those few and brave dissidents in actual dictatorial regimes like Cuba. That’s not only ridiculous, it’s an insult to those who have had to fight true oppression and who had self-governance stripped from their hands, to the extent they had it at all.

The “resistance” styles itself as anti-fascist, but they are the fascists. They don’t like the outcome of the election, and now they want to seize power by force and intimidation. And everyone who contributes to this hysteria and uses the hyperbolic language of revolution is adding to the environment in which these groups take action.

The American people spoke in this election, not just in the presidential race but at every level of governance, and they rejected Democrats and the Left. It happens; Republicans had the same experience in 2006 and 2008, and spent their time fitfully repositioning themselves to appeal to voters, at least in relation to Democrats. You’re not a “resistance,” you’re an opposition, and your arrogance and self-regard are at least part of the reason your side lost in November. Grow up, get real, and perhaps rethink the decisions to cling to the calcified leadership that led you into your political dead end.

Jazz Shaw says The White House web site for law enforcement has… changed

One of the first items which sent liberals to the fainting couches was the disappearance of the climate change page under the issues section. (The old URL is now just a broken link.) This was viewed in some quarters as a sign of the End Times approaching. The page’s apparent replacement with the America First Energy Plan only poured salt in the wound.

But that wasn’t the page which first caught my attention. Also in the White House issues section was a bold proclamation having to do with the nation’s law enforcement officers and it has nothing to do with finding more efficient ways to lock up cops. The title reads, Standing Up For Our Law Enforcement Community and it’s a doozy.

Carr: President’s ‘dark’ speech a ray of light for millions

The inaugural speech was “dark” — that’s the storyline among the Democrats and their allies in the Fake News industry. It was “radical,” “Hitlerian,” or maybe Mussolini-ian — or both, according to Comrade Chris Matthews.

But mostly it was dark. What else could it have been? If it was all sweetness and light in America, how far would Donald J. Trump have gotten in his campaign?

How out of touch can anyone be to be offended by a president who says: “It is the right of all nations to put their own interests first.”

Leave a Comment

What exactly are these people protesting?

Jazz Shaw explains why There are no longer any rules of engagement in political warfare. It’s heavy.

Perhaps the most unusual thing about yesterday’s bizarre political landscape (which reminded me of a bad Salvador Dali print by the time it was over) was that virtually nobody in the mainstream media seemed to find it unusual. I’m speaking, of course, about the women’s march which unfolded on the National Mall and in a number of other cities. The reaction of the press was to cover these events as if it were not only the most natural and expected thing in the world, but completely justified and glorious.

The reporters go on to describe how the participants were “inspired” to be there and hail the marchers as, a like-minded sea of citizens who shared their anxiety and disappointment. It’s almost as if they were covering the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade. But not all the action was taking place out in the streets. In the enclaves of liberal movers and shakers, announcements were going out detailing the vast sums of money being earmarked to defeat Donald Trump or at least battle him at every turn. Of course, much of the cash is coming from David Brock and his friends. (Politico)

And if all that wasn’t enough, liberals have already kicked off an effort to impeach the new president.

So what’s missing from all of this coverage, you might be wondering. It’s not hard to identify. There is a complete, stunning silence among the media lambs in terms of the utter rejection of the election results which is on display. Yes, there are huge numbers of people protesting and the cable news coverage is such that they allowed Madonna to drop three F-bombs on the crowd before cutting away from her foul mouthed tirade. There’s a carnival atmosphere to the whole thing, even if it’s more akin to the Carnival of the Bizarre.

He goes on the explain the false point he saw so often in the assertion that ‘both sides do it.’

So no… there is no equivalency here. But as far as I can tell, the gloves are now fully off and there are no longer any rules on the political battlefield. Democrats and liberals in vast numbers are trying to destroy the Trump presidency before it’s even begun and the silence of the Fourth Estate has placed the media seal of approval on the effort. They are hoping to shut down the executive branch and are clearly willing to engage in a scorched earth policy to achieve that goal. So the next time a Democrat winds up winning the White House, you can expect the same in return. I don’t care if they elect a white man, a black woman or a transgender Latino pirate. I don’t want to hear any kvetching from MSNBC about racism, sexism or any other isms. Everyone is free to simply swamp the public square and reject the election results if they don’t like them, no matter what the next president has done or, more likely, not even had time to do.

Progressives started this phase of the war. Sadly, since there’s no way to win, nobody is going to be able to finish it.

The focus of most discussion has been about the assault on culture in other areas like religion. What Shaw highlights is that there has also been an assault on governance. Many of the customs and traditions that have held the country together have been torn asunder or set aside. The sources for this assault have become quite clear. There is a way to win and Trump described that in his inauguration speech. We will see if the people carry through. 

Leave a Comment

Bigotry driven hate on display and a bit of Moonbattery tossed in for good measure

It’s the day after. The womyn gathered in such large numbers that the original parade route had to be changed. The media is concentrating on the vacant seats at the inauguration set up for the Democrats who don’t believe in democracy and ignoring the masses on the mall and the masses trying to get past security checkpoints. Some of those checkpoints had been blockaded by protesters and a number of the violent protesters are facing felony charges. The NYT is reporting Soros links to dozens of organizations behind the womyn’s gathering. And egregious Fake News in the Left’s Propaganda Machine are being noted. It’s a new era.

Roger Simon has a calm rundown on the The Pointless Paranoia of the Women’s Marches.

I am no stranger to protesting … But I have come to think over the years that too much demonstrating can get to be a bad habit, like smoking.

Now I’m not talking here about the Gloria Steinems and Michael Moores, for whom protest is so much a way of life they couldn’t exist without it.

I’m talking about the rest of us, especially, this weekend, a fair percentage of the women of America who descended on our nation’s capital and elsewhere in impressive numbers.

Excuse me if I don’t get it. What exactly was motivating them?

So back to square one. What was the purpose of Saturday’s demonstrations? None, I think, meaning nothing substantive in the provable sense. They were propaganda. Basically the protests were media and social media ginned-up events intended to continue opposition to the myth, not the reality, of a Trump administration for political purposes.

Which leads me to a final point — people who demonstrate all the time should consider they risk morphing into a collective version of the boy who cried wolf. When there’s something really worth protesting, no one believes them anymore.

For a bit less calm view, with pictures, see Sundance on the Making Moonbattery Great Again….

Most of America knows the organizers of the various “Women’s Marches” today did not construct women’s events, they constructed events for women who are anti-Trump and voted for Hillary Clinton, ie. liberal women. After all, billionaire George Soro’s financing is behind more than 50 groups who organized the various events.

There is a specific type of moonbattery exhibited by people demanding they must not be defined by their body parts, while they simultaneously hold up signs defining themselves by their body parts. An intellectual irony seemingly lost almost all the marchers.

On the Fake News front, WaPo has an excellent example of the innuendo version. Matt Zapotosky: Trump White House vows it won’t coddle ‘the rioter, the looter, or the violent disrupter’. His first clue is in picking up the “carnage in America” quote and attempting to minimize it: “That is true, though lethal violence remains low by historical standards.” Another example is “The statement noted rioters, looters and disrupters, but it made no mention of people’s First Amendment rights to free speech. The only amendment it mentioned was the second, the right to bear arms.” As if free speech is going to be abridged by considering rioting and looting as a crime rather than free speech. Finally, he brings in the case of Eric Garner with the BLM based debunked Fake News errors of the past to end with the idea that it is the authority that is criminal, not the criminals. 

T. Becket Adams says It has been a really bad week for journalism and provides a litany of examples.

It has been a particularly embarrassing week for the press, and it’s only Saturday.

For an industry that’s as disliked and distrusted as Congress, there’s a lot of work that media need to do to win back viewers’ trust. There’s no room for error, especially now that there’s a subgenre of “news” that has zero basis in fact, and is created from thin air for the sole purpose of generating cash.

But learning to be more careful and even-handed is apparently difficult for some in media, and this week was especially rough for newsrooms that are already struggling to regain credibility.

In no particular order, here are some of the most embarrassing media moments from this week:

There’s the NYT hit on Perry, The MLK bust, The Gelernter slam, Christian prayer shaming, bullying MKL III, First Lady website resume juice, and the website revision paranoia. This last showed up in local news about downtown protests. That was a ‘woman on the street’ interview with aimlessly wandering people thinking they were protesting something that illustrated that they were out only due to ignorance, bigotry, and hatred with nothing constructive in mind. One cited the last of testimony of support for LGBT causes on the White House website as his cause for paranoia.

This is the sort of blind hatred that Thomas Lifson notes in The conspiracy to impeach Trump already launched.

It should be crystal clear to all Americans that his political enemies are searching for any pretext to launch an impeachment effort to unseat President Trump, once they think it would have a chance of success. Given the level of animosity toward Trump in his own party, and the possibility of midterm election losses for the president’s party (the normal pattern in American politics), these efforts can’t be dismissed as impossible.

We know about this secret conspiracy because of a leak to the Washington Free Beacon.

If this sounds like a sales pitch, that’s because it is. Brock functions only with the funding of rich leftists like George Soros and his allies, and his humiliating failure to deliver for them in the 2016 election leaves him no option but to escalate, in hopes the suckers donors will throw good money after bad.

The sales pitch presents a well-oiled machine already operating:

I have little doubt that the megaphone of the White House will be employed to publicize this memo. What are the odds that Brock will blame the Russians? But the Vast Leftwing Conspiracy has been exposed laying out its plans in serch of a pretext for all to see.

The left is counting on media support to make its case for impeachment work. But that is a diminishing asset for them, and the Trump administration has signaled that it is ready to help dispatch the ailing members as they collapse. I think it is time to ask prominent Congressional Dems if they are willing to condemn the effort to impeach before a pretext is even available.

One of the problems here is that the Democrats have established precedent to set the bar very very low. The analogy is their invocation of the ‘nuclear option’ that handcuffs their opposition to nominee ‘advice and consent’. For impeachment, they have shown that even behavior egregious enough to get a president expelled from the bar is insufficient to remove him from office.

Leave a Comment

Saturday after

Andrew Malcom takes a look: Of 45 presidents, Trump joins a super-select group who were not politicians. Excluding George Washington, only six of 45 presidents have not come up through the political ranks.

all six have been members of the Republican Party or its predecessor, the Whigs.

Half were retired generals, in effect, military chief executives. Two were wealthy businessmen, successful civilian executives. One was a career government executive who is the only person to ever head the executive and judicial branches of America’s government.

Only two of the six served two terms.

It is really rather remarkable that, over more than 200 years, Americans have chosen presidents outside the swamp more than 10% of the time.

Douglas V. Gibbs provides a bit more evidence than the Intelligence Community did on the Russians supporting his theory for who was involved in trying to corrupt the election: WikiLeaks: Hillary Clinton Bribed Republicans to Influence Election.

Never mind the Russians. It was Hillary Clinton who was actually trying to sabotage the 2016 Presidential Election, according to a WikiLeaks release.

The information released shows that the Hillary Clinton campaign staffers bribed six Republicans to “destroy Trump”.

The evidence includes an email from John Podesta to Huma Abedin discussing diverting Clinton campaign funds to various Republicans who were secretly on the Clinton payroll.

Ed Morrissey describes why the Inaugural shows ‘The Resistance’ is an attack on democracy.

At a time when the nation set out to celebrate the peaceful transfer of authority, activists on the left descended on the nation’s capital to show just how fragile that can be.

A self-governed nation must have ways to hold elected officials accountable, and the existence of peaceful, law-abiding demonstrations can assure us of the health of our liberty.

That, however, was not what we saw on Inauguration Day. It didn’t start on Inauguration Day, either, or even on Inauguration Eve. This started immediately after the election, when those on the losing side of the election began dubbing themselves “The Resistance.”

This grandiose and pretentious appellation insults those who actually have to live under authoritarian regimes, including Cuba, whose oppressed no longer have the promise of expedited asylum if they manage to reach the United States, thanks to the outgoing president’s actions in the final hours of his term.

Those who lose elections in free countries are the opposition, and can fix that by winning the next election. Instead of asking why they lost, the “resistance” decided to pretend the loss of an election amounts to oppression and have adopted the language of revolution to rally themselves.

That incendiary language didn’t just get adopted by a few on the fringe, but by many on the left, including some in the news and entertainment media.

After they lost, the activist left refuses to accept that fact and instead wants to grab power at the point of a stick, the blunt side of a brick and the business end of a riot. That’s about as far from “anti-fascist” as it gets.

What we have seen in Washington this week is not a rational or lawful exercise of freedom of speech but a violent temper tantrum by those who will accept no governance other than their own rule, regardless of the expressed will of the electorate. That will be a lesson voters should learn and consider for the next election — and beyond.

There are reports that the ACLU has already started filing lawsuits, the carping about personal financial records and imagined conflicts of interest continue unabated, that attacks on the President’s young son have already started, that Democrats are doing everything they can to oppose just because a Republican is trying to do something and taking offense at any slight imagined or otherwise, and hyperbolic excessive pessimism about everything … i.e. business as usual for the Left. The question is whether it will be damped by public shaming or, as it has for the last few years, be fanned into hatred and violence.

The apologists take the ‘everybody does it’ excuse. That is a denial of what is readily evident as the Right does not engage in wholesale riot, property destruction, or adamant opposition no matter the position.

The new President has offered an invitation to all to come aboard and address inner city poverty and violence. Will the Democrats join in the effort or will they continue to oppose and impugn and build walls and isolate themselves? Will they continue to obsess on the words he uses to describe that violence or join in to address the problem?

Leave a Comment

Emotional Science and Irrational Politics and the Media’s fingers in both

ACSH: Media Think World Of Science And Health Will End On Inauguration Day 2017 – “a substantial number of Americans, goaded on by a sensationalist press and the hyperpartisan echo chamber of social media, strongly disagree. One could be forgiven for thinking that America is diving head first into a new Dark Age… or worse.” FUD Mongering headlines are cited. Then there’s the question: Are Science Journals Politically Biased? Editor-In-Chief Of ACS Journal Refuses To Discuss Editorial Policy – “there is a small but growing perception among Americans that scientists are becoming politically biased. Indeed, surveys have confirmed that Democrats vastly outnumber Republicans in academia. And, over the last few months, the behavior of high-profile scientific journals has only served to reconfirm these perceptions of bias.”

It is difficult to avoid the perception of bias among the public when editors at journals are condemning a new president before he has even taken office.

Given the oddity of preemptively declaring war on an administration before it has taken charge, I was curious if ES&T Letters had published any editorials critical of President Obama. After all, he presided over at least two extremely controversial policies that were decided by politics rather than science

Combined, the message being sent by the scientific community is loud and clear: “We will give preferential treatment to politicians we like, and we will refuse to even consider treating fairly those we don’t.” That’s hardly an attitude befitting a scientist; on the contrary, it is what we would expect from a partisan or TV pundit.

Such conduct is bad for science. The honor and privilege bestowed upon this “secular priesthood” ought not be abused. Currently, science continues to earn widespread admiration from both sides of the political spectrum. And though a large majority of Americans still believe scientists are politically unbiased, that reputation will erode unless the scientific community makes a better effort to behave that way.

That horse has already left the barn and the concerns are a day late and a dollar short.

Ian Hanchet: Krauthammer: Young Man Starting Fire at Anti-Trump Protest Has ‘A Whiff of ISIS To It’ – “[I]t tells you how completely weird the parents and the other people out there are. These are the same people who show up at the IMF meetings, and world bank, the Occupy Wall Street. You ask them, ‘Why are you out there?’ They’re completely incoherent. … I mean, these people ought to be medicated.”

I think the real culprits here are the people who ought to be the adults. The one’s who ought to set an example, and that’s the one-third of Democrats in Congress, who will refuse to attend, and actively boycott the inauguration. I think that is scandalous. An inauguration is not the celebration of party victory. It’s a kind of civic sacrament for something that it is exceedingly rare in the world, which is the transfer of power, uninterrupted now for 240 years, the longest anywhere on earth. That’s something that you celebrate.”

Valerie Richardson picks up on this as Trump trashing and bashing becomes a permanent role for political left – “Is the political left getting ahead of itself in bashing and trashing the Trump White House?”

Nobody expects the losing party to celebrate after a presidential race, but political analysts say the postelection frenzy of fundraising, war rooms, protests and social media hysteria represents an alarming departure from the traditional stoic acceptance of years past.

“A democracy only works if the factions, the divisions are done peacefully and resolved peacefully, and compromises are made,” Mr. Horowitz said. “There’s a honeymoon after the election in which the losing party defends the legitimacy of the election result. That’s why we’ve had peace since the Civil War in this country.”

Democrats say Republicans didn’t make it easy for Barack Obama, who had barely got comfortable in the White House before the tea party announced its arrival with a march on Washington in September 2009.

On the other hand, conservatives never tried to upend the 2008 Electoral College result by urging electors to defect, or called for his impeachment before he took office, or organized dozens of demonstrations to coincide with his inauguration.

Fixating on Mr. Trump also prevents Democrats from promoting a positive message for voters, especially if he winds up scoring policy victories early on in his administration.

“His job is to produce for the American people,” Mr. Gingrich said, “and frankly, to the degree that the Democrats decay into just being the anti-Trump party, they will keep themselves in the minority a long time.”

Jon Fleischman: Dems Boycotting Trump Should Burn American Flags, Too – “When elected federal legislators announce that they are boycotting the official swearing-in of the new president, they are not protesting the person that was elected, they are protesting America itself.”

But I believe that for an elected member of Congress ,being on hand to affirm and support this peaceful transition of power between chief executives is their responsibility — one they are shirking to make a cheap political statement that does more to diminish themselves than anything else.

Thomas Lifson says Wynton Marsalis nails it on performers boycotting the inauguration – “Make people cheat you to your face, son.”

As some performers disgrace themselves with dishonored vows to leave the U,S. upon Trump’s election and petulant bullying of peers who dare express willingness to perform at the inaugural, a genuine star has put them all to shame. Wynton Marsalis posted an essay on Facebook that deserves to be read in its entirety

Mike Kimmitt describes The Democrats’ acidic petulance – “Still posted on the CNN website is a months-old interview that again reveals the stunning phoniness of today’s hard-left Democrat-press complex.”

Earnest believes that the rapidly diminishing numbers of Democrats remaining in Congress and in state houses across the land are so convinced of their own righteousness that the most revolting display of petulance is not only acceptable, but encouraged.

With thousands of anarchists conspiring to disrupt or curtail inaugural events, Democrats in Congress are essentially urging them on with their acidic behavior.

CNN did its part with a stunningly irresponsible report in which it wistfully speculated that Democrats might be able to maintain the White House if Trump were assassinated before being sworn in.

The dangerous garishness of the Democratic Party and their sycophants in the press and on the streets of Washington, D.C. is as unprecedented as it is shameful.

On the State Left’s Propaganda Machine Kelly Riddell notes The one-sided coverage of Donald Trump – “Everybody, including the Never-Trumpers suffers for it.” Wesley Pruden picks up on consequences as a A hearty last laugh for the Donald – “Donald Trump’s greatest contribution to America will be his stripping the media, particularly the overpaid and undereducated television media, of its last pretense to fairness and objectivity.” Jennifer Harper says Battered mainstream press limps into uncharted age of Trump, social media – “There’s no press honeymoon now and not much chance for one in the future.” Warren L. Dean Jr. fits in here, too with his look at The Democrats’ ‘dossier’ – “Spying on Russia’s mischief, or even faking it, is a dangerous game.”

“Our new president is a master of communicating directly with the world in his own way, and social media enables him to bypass the press,” said veteran pollster John Zogby. “Meanwhile, the mainstream press is out of the loop, suffering from fewer viewers and subscribers, and threatened by serious distrust from the public. Ironically, the media seem to need Trump more than vice versa because he is such good drama and copy for them.”

Then, if you are into FUD Mongering, consider Andrew Blake: Passwords of top Trump appointees leaked online after earlier data breaches: Report – “Cabinet members identified in the report had their internet passwords compromised and leaked online as a consequence of high profile data breaches suffered by LinkedIn, MySpace and other websites hacked between 2012 and 2016, Channel 4 said.” This is why the prudent person manages his passwords according to accepted best practices, unlike Podesta. The fear being spread is that anyone can now read the incoming official’s private correspondence. The reality is that the incoming officials are rather more prudent than the outgoing officials as there were no such leaks as envisioned by the FUD Mongerers in the Propaganda Machine.

Charles Hurt: Donald Trump the Revolutionary – “He is coming to change many things in the lives of Americans.” Indeed, the fear of change is what is driving much of the TDS hysteria. But consider:

From the darkest corners of the bloated federal bureaucracy to the bright marble columns of the Supreme Court, Mr. Trump’s mandate is as broad as it is dramatic. Illegal immigration, international trade, education, Obamacare and America’s war against terrorism are all on the table for complete overhauls.

Refreshingly, Mr. Trump’s mandate is not a partisan one. He owes very little to the Republican Party and absolutely nothing to the Democratic Party. He handily defeated partisans on both sides of the political aisle.

He also owes nothing to any industry or special interest group except the voters who elected him and the free market system that made him a billionaire. He is owned by no one.

As a result, Mr. Trump stands poised to reinvent the entire federal government in favor of the American people alone. He is a tireless agent of disruption and an unbending force for creative destruction.

Donald Trump would not know a “talking point” if he saw one. He could barely get along with the teleprompter.

But he could talk.

And in plain English, he promised to re-invent the federal government from the ground up. People here were shocked, horrified, scandalized, frightened. But, outside Washington and the establishment media, people loved it.

Jazz Shaw on the bitter end of the Obama Era provides a wrap up.

The proceedings have started. There is much more commentary and news. Time for a breather.

Leave a Comment

1/19/2017: Smears, Worries based on nightmares, and other emotional issues

There’s so much more but this is already up to near 2500 words.

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University, published a ‘twofer’ of his thoughts today. One is about the racial disparity in crime and the other about international trade. Both are top agenda items for the new President. Here are selections from Dr. Williams thoughts.

Black Crime: The FBI reported that the total number of homicides in 2015 was 15,696. Blacks were about 52 percent of homicide victims … and over 90 percent of the time, the perpetrator was another black. Listening to the news media and the Black Lives Matter movement, one would think that black deaths at the hands of police are the major problem. It turns out that in 2015, police across the nation shot and killed 986 people. Of that number, 495 were white (50 percent), 258 were black (26 percent) and 172 Hispanic (17 percent). A study of 2,699 fatal police killings between 2013 and 2015, conducted by John R. Lott Jr. and Carlisle E. Moody of the Crime Prevention Research Center, demonstrates that the odds of a black suspect’s being killed by a black police officer were consistently greater than a black suspect’s getting killed by a white officer. Politicians, race hustlers and the news media keep such studies under wraps because these studies don’t help their narrative about racist cops.

Today’s level of lawlessness and insecurity in many black communities is a relatively new phenomenon. … The presence of criminals, having driven many businesses out, forces residents to bear the costs of shopping outside their neighborhoods. … Politicians who call for law and order are often viewed negatively, but poor people are the most dependent on law and order. … Ultimately, the solution to high crime rests with black people. Given the current political environment, it doesn’t pay a black or white politician to take those steps necessary to crack down on lawlessness in black communities.

International Trade Thuggery: Some American companies relocate in foreign lands because costs are lower and hence their profits are higher. Lower labor costs are not the only reason companies move to other countries. … One of the unappreciated benefits of international trade is that it helps reveal the cost of domestic policy. … My argument here is not against the costly regulations that we impose on ourselves. I am merely suggesting that we should appreciate the cost of those regulations. The fact that a good or service can be produced more cheaply elsewhere helps.

Trump’s threats to impose high tariffs on the products of companies that leave ought to be a worry for us … President Barack Obama has circumvented the Constitution and Congress through executive orders. … One wonders whether Trump plans to broaden that power by implementing trade tariffs through executive order. … By the way, all trade is fair in the eyes of the parties trading, or else they would not trade. It’s third parties who seek to interfere.

His worry is indicative. He is worried about the incoming president where the worry is speculative but just notes the reality of his worry about the current president. He also illustrates that his base concern isn’t so much executive abuse of the Constitution as it is of the regulatory agencies run amok.

Tucker Carlson ‘interviewed’ one of the House Boycotters and demonstrated that the boycotters concerns were ignorant of Trump’s published positions and ideas and that the Representative had much in common with Trump’s views despite asserting no common ground.

On the Russian blame game (one of the two most common Leftist excuses for losing several thousand elections country wide): “It should come as no surprise that the Democratically commissioned dossier is virtually incredible.” … “The strangest part of this story is that the so-called intelligence community in the United States reportedly got bamboozled into briefing President Obama and President-elect Trump on the dossier, and possibly presenting a summary of it to them.” … “The real story here is that the perfidious Russians were themselves being spied on.” [Warren L. Dean Jr]

It’s “Drunk on Group Think” (Kennedy). What makes it remarkable is that it is an anti-civilization effort based on blatant ignorance and dishonesty. It makes it clear that many Democrats have effective governance very low on their list of priorities and grievance politics at the very top. Trump inauguration boycott grows to third of Democratic caucus – “President-elect’s feud with John Lewis fuels unity. ” Even the Washington Times is showing the Left bias here. A cursory look at the Lewis ruckus reveals it was a Lewis feud with Trump based on fake news (The Russians and the LA/NYC vote) and ignorance of Trump’s positions. No matter. That’s just intellectual integrity and that is not valued much on the Left.

“It seems fairly unprecedented this number of people would boycott and in such a formalized manner,” said Barbara Perry, presidential studies director of the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia.

House Democrats know a thing or two about boycotting Republican inaugurals — a handful skipped the 2001 swearing-in of President George W. Bush — but the only event comparable to this year’s exodus in terms of scale is the 1973 inauguration of President Nixon.

David Sherfinski: Newt Gingrich on boycotters: Why would you ‘abandon America’? – ““They’re childish and silly. The inauguration is not about Republicans. It’s not about Donald Trump,” Mr. Gingrich said.” On the up side is the idea that they are making this clear to the public at large. This perfidy in politicians has much to do with Trump winning the election and the antics of the left like the aggressive bullying and the pompous boycotting may help educate others who have not yet understood the lesson.

On the bias in evidence front, Douglas Ernst reports that Bill Maher puts Hollywood ‘bubble’ on notice: ‘We’re the losers now’ – ““It’s very insular, just the liberals talking to themselves, which they are very good at doing,” Mr. Maher said.” Then there’s this: “It is a very troubling idea that the FBI is politicized. When the internal police department is politicized, that’s a place I don’t want to be on the wrong side of — I mean, that’s fascism.” He ‘forgets’ that the FBI issue was based on the politicization of the DoJ and efforts to dance around top down pressure and the AG meeting with the suspect. That bias about pending Fascism also misses what has been happening in the IRS and other agencies. i.e. there is a who lotta’ projection going on.

Robert Oscar Lopez says Want to Know Why Trump Won? Just Ask His Supporters – He highlights why the TDS temper tantrums are so dangerous. The tantrums feed into the angst that elected Trump. The election was the proper, the peaceful way for the angst to speak. If it is not heard then other ways to speak will happen.

If you have never been publicly accused of bigotry, you may have a difficult time understanding what political correctness means for the ordinary citizen who cannot afford to be fired, does not retain a personal lawyer, has no publicist, and lacks the resources to rescue his reputation from the onslaught of a left-wing character smear.

“Bigot! Hater!” These used to be allegations that might make one less attractive on the social scene, but nowadays they are as deadly as being accused of sorcery in 1690 in Massachusetts, or of sodomy in 1890 in London, or of Communism in 1953 in Washington, D.C.

Since Trump won, I find a huge burden lifted from me. So much of people’s ability to make me afraid to speak honestly pointed ultimately to Obama’s presence at the top of the chain of being, to marshal civic powers against anyone accused of hate. Without the IRS, the Department of Justice, the intelligence community, and the whole federal behemoth backing up the P.C. troops on the streets, we are…free.

It feels wonderful, and Trump isn’t even president yet.

S.E.Cupp has her opinion, too: Democrats, please control yourselves: Trump derangement syndrome will not help win policy fights – “If Democrats want to project strength and confidence in their ability to survive in the era of Trump — and one day defeat him — they have a long recovery ahead.” People are observing and many understand what they see.

In the hours and days following Trump’s toppling of Hillary Clinton, liberals around the country collapsed into seizing, heaving piles of inconsolable apoplexy. And it’s led to some truly tragic, and embarrassing, behavior among some.

Snit fits about every little thing are not an effective way to oppose a President’s agenda.

Party leaders and activists don’t look defiant, resolved and unified; they look alarmingly insecure, weak and spastic.

She falls into the ‘both sides do it fallacy’ – can you find any mainstream Republican kicking and screaming in response to Obama like we see now by Democrats in response to Trump? But, in this case, that is a minor issue in her main point that “if we want to get through this, and maybe get a Democrat or another Republican elected in four years, we need to pick ourselves up, put our heads down, and go to work.”

Don Surber takes up the compare and contrast in President Trump and Obama — a Tale of Two Palms – It highlights the fact that Trump, and much of his cabinet, are entering government after retiring from successful careers while the Obamas, and the Clintons, and Harry Reid entered government as paupers looking for wealth and fame in government service. He illustrates the absurdity about these ‘unfit’ judgments and complaints about lack of experience or lack of qualifications directed at Trump.

Only after he succeeded in life, did Donald Trump seek the presidency.

Then there is Barack Obama, a man who built nothing and did nothing prior to running for office. He wrote two books, did he?

Trump wrote 18.

As an over-rated community organizer once said, You Did Not Built This.

By the way, the Clintons and the Obamas mooched off friends to vacation in Martha’s Vineyard. Both Bushes and Reagan went to their own vacation places.

On the typical Leftist smearing of the ‘Republicans are going to push grandma off the cliff and kill women and children variety’ is John Merline asking Are Those ‘ObamaCare Saved My Life’ Stories Legitimate?

But the relevant question isn’t: “Did ObamaCare help some people?” The relevant question is: “Could the same benefits have been achieved at lower costs?

Did ObamaCare help some people? No doubt.

Are there a better, cheaper, more competitive, less intrusive ways to expand insurance coverage by making it more affordable?

Given ObamaCare’s enormous price tag, the disruptions it’s caused, the false promises made to get it enacted, the market implosion it sparked, and the ongoing lack of public support, the answer to that question is also a definitive “Yes.”

On the Fake News front is the IBD on Media Malpractice In The Age Of Trump – “For eight years, it was virtually impossible to get reporters interested in legitimate Obama administration scandals. Now, reporters are so eager to run scandal stories about the incoming Trump administration that they are making them up.” The example is the attempt to smear nominee Tom Price.

In other words, there is no story here, much less a scandal.

The fact that CNN pretended that there was one says nothing about Price’s ethics. It does, however, say plenty about the blatant partisan bias of today’s “independent” press.

The rant of the day award goes to Colin Flaherty on Trump and Obama’s Legacy of Racism – “Racial quotas and affirmative action is an essential part of every cubicle in every office in every department. Top to bottom … white people have to fix that. Because black people are not responsible for their own behavior. .”

Now the only question is whether Trump and his army are going to be ready to take the helm of a federal government that has made racial resentment a fundamental organizing principle of its existence. Part of the DNA of every policy in every nook and cranny in every federal office.

Or whether they think this cancer of institutional racial resentment can wait another day.

On the gun control issue Jazz Shaw says A roundup of illegal guns in Washington, D.C. proves telling – “one thing we do know is that the vast, vast majority of firearms used in crimes were not bought at the local gun shop by someone who passed a background check.”

one of the bright spots at the Washington Post has been the work of Colbert I. King. While we obviously don’t agree on everything, he usually covers the D.C. metro beat and his reporting is generally fair and critical of the district’s government where deserved. He’s done a lot of work on the outrageous but often unreported crime rate and the problems residents have been facing on that score. This week he looks at a collection of weapons confiscated from criminals and highlights some important information. Shockingly for the WaPo, it doesn’t point to an immediate demand for stricter gun control laws. In fact, a closer look indicates almost precisely the opposite.

think about the work the district police are doing. They are finding a relatively huge number of guns considering that D.C. has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. And pretty much all of those guns were obtained illegally. Keep that in mind next time you talk to someone pushing for more background checks and tougher restrictions on legal firearms purchases.

Stephen Hayward manages to come up with both a smear and Fake News and media malfeasance: Washington Post Goes Full Retard – “And people in the media wonder why Trump, and much of the population, think the media is the enemy.” The case is dissected.

You may have seen the latest claims about ‘warmest evva’ – Luboš Motl explains what’s going on in GISS: 1998-2016 comparison suggests a trend of 2 °C per century.

Leave a Comment