Category Archives: Neoconservatism

‘Conservative’ Jennifer Rubin Calls Pelosi Reaganesque

Conservatism, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Neoconservatism, THE ELITES, The Establishment

Left out of this January 3, 2019, report is that Jennifer Rubin, a self-styled conservative, applied the Reaganesque adjective to … Nancy Pelosi, a malevolent progressive.

Rubin bills herself as a “conservative blogger at Washington Post, MSNBC contributor, recovering lawyer and friend of Israel.”  Cliches are Rubins’ stock-in-trade.

But as I apprised you before, more accurately, “Jennifer Rubin is a rubbishy writer.”

The Elites have all converged. They’re all neoliberals-cum-neoconservatives.

UPDATED (2/27/019): Immigration: A Look-Away Issue For Neocons & Lite Libertarians

Argument, IMMIGRATION, Labor, libertarianism, Multiculturalism, Nationhood, Neoconservatism, Race

Michael Medved does the same as does Tim Carney in explaining the dismal situation of the working class. From a tony event, far from the madding working-class, Carney tweets this:

“The working class has lost access to the strong institutions of civil society that are the infrastructure of the good life. That’s my thesis,” states Carney, “to explain immobility, retreat from marriage, and Trump.”

For working-class misery, neoconservatives and lite libertarians blame everything BUT mass immigration, diversity, loss of community and sense of place. Anything but the truth.

That’s my thesis.

Conservatives engage in WhatAboutism:

 

INTERVIEW: ‘Writer Ilana Mercer Takes On The Cato Institute’s ‘Left-Libertarianism’

Culture, Ilana Mercer, libertarianism, Neoconservatism, Paleoconservatism, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, The West

INTERVIEW: Big League Politics interviewed me on my paleolibertarianism under the headline: “Writer Ilana Mercer Takes On The Cato Institute’s ‘Left-Libertarianism.’” I didn’t think I took CATO on, but was just pointing out sharp distinctions, in reply to correspondent Seth Segal’s sharp questions. But OK. <g>

BIG LEAGUE POLITICS: Being a preeminent paleolibertarian thinker today, how would you define paleolibertarianism and how does it differ from standard paleoconservatism?

ILANA MERCER: First, let’s define libertarianism. It’s concerned with the ethics of the use of force. Nothing more. This, and this alone, is the ambit of libertarian law.

All libertarians must respect the non-aggression axiom. Libertarians don’t initiate aggression against non-aggressors, not even if it’s “for their own good,” as neoconservatives like to cast America’s recreational wars of choice. If someone claims to be a libertarianism and also supports the proxy bombing of Yemen, or supported the war in Iraq; he is not a libertarian, plain and simple.

As to paleolibertarianism, in particular. And this is my take. It’s how I’ve applied certain principles week-in, week-out, for almost two decades. So, some will disagree. In my definition, a paleolibertarian grasps that ordered liberty has a civilizational dimension, stripped of which the just-mentioned libertarian non-aggression axiom, by which all decent people should live, will crumble. …

… Read the rest. “Writer Ilana Mercer Takes On The Cato Institute’s ‘Left-Libertarianism’” is on Big League Politics.

Comments Off on INTERVIEW: ‘Writer Ilana Mercer Takes On The Cato Institute’s ‘Left-Libertarianism’

Written by on

Posse Comitatus? You’re Being Told That America Doesn’t Have Borders, So No Law Can Defend Her

Federalism, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Law, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Military, Neoconservatism, Secession, States' Rights

The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act: It’s the excuse parroted by almost everybody, Republicans included, for lack of vigorous military action against invaders on the border.

It took Ann Coulter to point out the obvious: “You can’t shoot … AMERICANS. You can shoot invaders.”

What on earth is The US Army for?

In effect, what you’re being told is, there is no law that’ll defend American borders.’

Or, America doesn’t have borders. Therefore, there is no law that can defend a de facto and de jure borderless country. And certainly some laws even prohibit a defense of America’s borders.

In truth, and according to the Congressional Research Service, as relayed by the Military Times, the Act means that “the U.S. military is not used to control or defeat American citizens on U.S. soil.”

The hordes amassed on the border with Mexico, rushing the port of entry in San Ysidro, Calif., are not Americans. They are not even very nice.

Posse Comitatus sets “limitation against active-duty U.S. forces conducting law enforcement on U.S. soil,” but watch how quickly military force will be used “to suppress insurrection or to enforce federal authority.”

Feeling free?

Comments Off on Posse Comitatus? You’re Being Told That America Doesn’t Have Borders, So No Law Can Defend Her

Written by on