Category Archives: Republicans

UPDATE II: Rotten #Rubio (Rubio Has Stiff Competition: #MitchMcConnell)

Constitution, Foreign Policy, Iraq, Just War, Neoconservatism, Republicans

When he is not marshaling “Jeffersonian” lines from crap movies like “Taken” with Liam Neeson, presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio is demonstrating that only if shamed and embarrassed will he and his Republican rivals shy away from wars that are immoral from the inception, unjust, cost trillions in treasure and tens of thousands of precious lives, and flout American national interests.

CHRIS WALLACE TO SEN. MARCO RUBIO, R-FLA: This brings us back to Iraq and the question of the week, which is, given what we know now, would you have invaded Iraq back in 2003?
As we all know, Jeb Bush had a tough time answering that this week. Here’s what you’ve had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)

RUBIO: Oh, I don’t believe it was — the world is a better place because Saddam Hussein doesn’t run Iraq.

MODERATOR: After finding that there were no weapons of mass destruction, would you, if you knew that, have been in favor of the Iraqi invasion?

RUBIO: Well, not only would I have not been in favor of it, President Bush would not have been in favor of it. And he said so.

(END VIDEO CLIPS)

WALLACE: Senator, isn’t that a flip? Six weeks ago, it made sense to invade Iraq in 2003. Now you say it was a mistake.

RUBIO: No, they’re two different questions. It was not a mistake. The president, based on — this is the way the real world works. The president, based on the information that was provided to him —

[SNIP]

“We will look for you. We will find you. And we will kill you” is the atavistic line from “Taken,” repeated by Rubio in his many interviews.

UPDATE I (5/18): In The Rotten Department, Rubio Has Stiff Competition: Mitch McConnell. Via ABC:

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell underscored his support today for the controversial NSA program for bulk collection of domestic phone records, arguing it is essential to protecting the homeland.

“This has been a very important part of our effort to defend the homeland since 9/11,” McConnell said in an interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s ‘This Week.’ “We know that the terrorists overseas are trying to recruit people in our country to commit atrocities in our country.”

“Thank You For Your Service, Mr. Snowden.” F-ck Rubio, McConnell & Twitterers who unFollow me for loving liberty.

UPDATE II: Don’t let any Republican present you with this false choice. Republicans always say, “But what would you have done about Iraq?” That’s something of a non sequitur, an assertion intended to make you ASSUME something had to be done about Iraq. “The burden of proof is on he who proposes the existence of something, not on he who claims that it does not exist.” That was written 12 years ago.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

UPDATE II: 12 Year After #Iraq #Invasion, A Conservative (#LauraIngraham ) Gets It Right

Iraq, Just War, Middle East, Republicans

She’s saying what principled libertarians argued 12 years ago (and nearly lost their perches). But oh, how grateful we are for the crumbs of belated wisdom tumbling from the mouth of broadcaster Laura Ingraham.

“Jeb Bush … told Megyn Kelly that knowing what we know now about Iraq, he would absolutely still invade the Middle Eastern nation.”

Bush saying he would still invade Iraq – even after knowing what we know now – is probably going to be the stupidest thing we’ll hear anyone say. Fox News contributor Laura Ingraham apparently agrees, as she absolutely crushed Jeb’s comments on the Iraq War and suggested that something might be wrong with him. “You can’t still think going into Iraq now, as a sane human being, was the right thing to do,” Ingraham said. “That’s like you have no ability to learn from past mistakes at all… when the past mistakes were made by your brother. …
… And when Jeb suggested that Hillary Clinton would agree with him on Iraq, Ingraham hammered that idiocy as well. “No Hillary wouldn’t!” she said. “Hillary wouldn’t authorize the war now, if she knew what she knows now.” It’s true, Hillary Clinton has gone on record saying that she regrets voting for the war and that knowing what we know now she absolutely would not have voted for the invasion. …

MORE.

UPDATE I (5/13): I knew the source of the reporting above would come up on Facebook. My reply:

Truth matters to me; not the source of it. If those who read me learn anything at all, it is fierce independence; allegiances to no one. The report above is correct, no matter its progressive origins. During “W,” left-liberal Keith Olbermann was sometime a source for me. So what!

UPDATE II: Oh for the privileges main-streamers like Laura I. get. However immutable, truth is recognized only once they arrive at it independently, no sooner. All in the fullness of time; their time.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

Ted Cruz And The Loretta Lynch Confirmation

Conservatism, Drug War, Elections, Law, Republicans, Uncategorized

Claiming that the cloture vote was “the only one that mattered,” the staff of Ted Cruz excused the senator’s conspicuous absence from the Senate’s final vote, today, to confirm Loretta Lynch for attorney general. Cruz was probably “en route to Texas” for a fundraiser.

Who am I to argue with Ted Cruz on Constitutional matters? He’s a superb scholar on that front. It is, however, fair to point out that Cruz’ failure to register a vote on this final and ghastly nomination was unseemly.

Eric Holder’s only redeeming feature as attorney general was that he put a crimp in the War on Drugs and in “mass incarceration.”

Lynch was actually a drug prosecutor. The other thing Lynch had no shame in doing was shaking down banks: she extracted a “US$7 billion settlement” from Citigroup.

“The Senate later voted 56-43 to confirm Lynch. Cruz was the only member of the chamber not to vote.” (Politico)


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

Rubio’s Tax Plan To Redistribute Revenue

Republicans, Taxation

A tax cut is a reduction in tax rates. It means letting a poor sod (or serf) keep more of his rightful earnings. A tax credits is social tinkering or engineering such that certain politically desirable constituents benefit to the detriment of others. Not surprisingly, the latter is what Republican Marco Rubio proposes. Via the Wall Street Journal (ignore the WSJ’s praise for Rubio’s foreign policy belligerence; it ought to be obvious that I don’t care for the praise or the Rubio impetus):

… His recently announced tax-reform plan, introduced with Utah’s Senator Mike Lee, reflects the tensions inside the GOP. It proposes dropping the corporate rate to 25%, a consensus figure. But it proposes remarkably timid reductions in marginal tax rates for individuals, leaving the top rate at 35% on relatively modest incomes. Instead the plan’s centerpiece is a large, new tax credit—$2,500 per child.

With this proposal, Senator Rubio makes himself the party’s most visible ally of the “new” Republican idea that the Reagan tax-cutting agenda is a political dead end, and that the party now must redistribute revenue directly to middle-class families. It’s not clear how Candidate Rubio would hope to win a tax-credit bidding war with Hillary Clinton, who’d see and raise on the size of the credit and make it refundable to non-taxpayers. The Rubio tax credit looks like an obvious political gambit with no economic growth payoff. …


MORE.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

S.E. IDIOT & Jake Tapper Rubbish Ron Paul

Gender, Neoconservatism, Republicans, Ron Paul

In the event that you’ve failed to keep track of the succession of empty headed bobbing heads called on to impart their “analysis” on the idiot’s lantern—you’ll find everything you need to know about S.E. Cupp, “commentator,” in “Just Another Mouth in the Republican Fellatio Machine.” While Cupp is not as off-putting, banal and over-the-top as Jedediah Bila, she’s up there.

In any event, here is an exchange about Ron Paul between two of CNN’s towering intellects, Jake Tapper (an OK journalist when he sticks to reporting) and Cupp:

TAPPER: S.E., let’s start with you. I know you’re not Senator Paul’s biggest fan. But removing your views on him, he could be a serious contender, I think. …

… There’s one other elephant in the room, and that is Ron Paul, his father, who is — I don’t know how to say it without ending up with nine million tweets, but has very objectionable views to many Americans, to many Republicans, and has affiliated himself with some real crackpots on the right. I think that is definitely guarantee those tweets, but…

CUPP: [smirking smugly] Incoming.

TAPPER: How do you deal with that? How do you deal with somebody like Ron Paul?

CUPP: Rand Paul?

TAPPER: Yes.

CUPP: Yes.

Rand Paul sort of I think spent the past decade watching his dad run for president, and thought to himself, I can do that better. And so I think you have seen him moderate because he understands rightly that Ron Paul’s views were completely unpalatable.

So he’s starting from that, you know, far right or left — I don’t even know what to call it — place of Ron Paul and moderating toward the center. The trick is going to be to take the Ron Paul supporters, the young folks who liked Ron Paul’s libertarianism, and also make his — again governing philosophy, which is different from his libertarian philosophy, work for the center.

That’s going to be a tough thing to pull off. I know you’re confident he can, but I think he’s going to have a tough time with that.

MORE.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

Get Off Your Knees, Gov. Pence! (You’re Not In A Gay Bathhouse)

Individual Rights, libertarianism, Private Property, Religion, Republicans

“Get Off Your Knees, Gov. Pence! (You’re Not In A Gay Bathhouse)” is the current column. An excerpt:

Pretend the U.S. is as free as the Founding Fathers intended it to be. In this authentically (and classically) liberal America, no one can tell free men and women what to do with their property, namely their bodies, their abodes and their businesses.

The individual living in America as it was meant to be is free to run his business as he wishes, associate with those he likes, dissociate from those he dislikes or disapproves; hire, fire, rent to or evict from, invest and disinvest, speak and misspeak at will.

This hypothetical free man is at liberty to bruise as many feelings as he likes, so long as his mitts stop at the next man’s face. So long as he harms nobody’s person or property, our mythic man may live as he wishes to live.

Americans have been propagandized for so long; they no longer grasp the basic building blocks of liberty. A crude reductio ad absurdum should help:

A retail store selling Nazi memorabilia opens its doors in my neighborhood. I enter in search of the yellow Star of David Jews were forced to wear during the Third Reich. The proprietor, decked out in Nazi insignia and regalia, says, “I’m sorry, we don’t serve Jews.” “Don’t be like that,” I say. “Where else can I find a pair of clip-on swastika earrings?” The Nazi sympathizer is polite but persistent: “Ma’am, I mean no disrespect, but back in the Old Country, Jews murdered my great grandfather’s cousin and used his blood in the leavening of the Passover matzah.” “Yeah,” I reply. “I’m familiar with that blood libel. I assure you my own mother’s matzo balls were free of the blood of brats, gentile or Jewish. No matter. I can see where you’re coming from. I’m sorry for your loss. Good luck.”

There! Did that hurt?

Did I rush off to rat out my Nazi neighbor to the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice? Not on your life. A principled Jewish libertarian (with a sense of humor)—who believes in absolute freedom of association and the rights of private property—would doff his Kippah and walk out. …

… Read the rest. “Get Off Your Knees, Gov. Pence! (You’re Not In A Gay Bathhouse)” is now on WND.

Featured on The Unz Report:

“Is Anarcho-Capitalism Compatible with Natural Justice?” By Ilana Mercer


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint