Category Archives: Reason

Trump’s Sublime (‘Hitlerian,’ In Liberal Speak) Immigration Address

Crime, Donald Trump, IMMIGRATION, Logic, Reason


A libertarian exhortation:


Trump on the Right to Choose:


Seriously? You want gov. to go back to basics?


All that vibrancy is costly:


Leftist logical fallacies:


Angel Moms are w/Trump; Michael Brown’s mom is with Hillary:


NumbersUSA does a good job:


Or, as I write in “The Trump Revolution”: “This is the historic majority’s last heave-ho”:


It’s so simple, isn’t it? At least it should be:


Immigration should benefit Americans? WTF!!!


And I, as an immigrant, know, too:


You mean to say under Trump, 9/11 Saudi students would have been expelled? Isn’t that contrary to our values?


Hope you know who lives among you:


No Syrians or Libyans welcome, well, because they could just go Jihad on us. Read about the callous calculus of averages your leaders hope you’ll buy into:


Criminals to be rounded up (even if this makes millionairess Rachel Maddow sad?):


Cities to become sanctuaries for the law-abiding:


Israelis do it best:


The Wall By Donald Trump:


Don’t forget The Visit, a prelude to the speech:

UPDATED (6/9/016): Cathy Young’s Blood Libel* Against Ann Coulter

Ann Coulter, Anti-Semitism, IMMIGRATION, Israel, Judaism & Jews, Reason

I’m Jewish, with all the baggage that entails (truncated family tree, etc.). But according to Cathy Young’s poorly reasoned and badly written hodgepodge, “Ann Coulter’s Anti-Semitism Runs Deeper Than You Know,” I, too, would qualify as anti-Semitic for questioning liberal Jews (that includes practically ALL so-called conservatives): They insist that while Palestinians have no right of return to Israel (agreed); the world has a “global Right of Return to the US.”

As I put it in “American Rabbis For Israel First” (August 8, 2014):

Ask any left-liberal American Jew if he supports a “Right of Return” to Israel proper for every self-styled Palestinian refugee, and he’ll likely recoil: “Are you meshuga? Never! That’s a euphemism for Israel’s demise.” The very thing he rejects for Israel, the liberal Jew is inclined to champion for America: a global right of return to the US for citizens of the world.

In “American Rabbis For Israel First” and, before that, on October 1 2010, in “Mass Immigration ‘End Of Days’ Scenario,” I suggested the apparently anti-Semitic (because logical?) notion that “mass immigration into America be looked at as a global ‘right of return'”:

Friends of Israel in America are unequivocal in standing up for that country’s right to retain its Jewish identity. What would become of that identity if all self-styled Arab refugees were to be granted the so-called right of return? Hatched by Israel’s enemies, this scheme will see millions of such refugees granted the right to immigrate to Israel proper, where they will overwhelm the Jewish majority. Friends of Israel know that Jews must remain numerically preponderant in the Jewish state if the prosperous, progressive nature of the country and its liberal institutions is to endure.

Think of mass immigration into America as a global “right of return.”

Now Young accuses Ms. Coulter of the thought crime for which I’ve long been guilty, too, because Ann wrote the following in Adios (2015):

The Young woman is foolish. She needs to show that for Ann to want for the US what Israel has claimed for itself through law is anti-Semitic. Young has not proven or argued this convincingly. The Young woman’s libel has no foundation in reason and argument.

Can Cathy Young, moreover, truly claim that Albion’s Seed founded this Christian country, America, with the view that it may one day happily become majority Muslim or Jewish or Buddhist; African, Asian or Arabian? Rubbish.

*****
* Cathy Young would probably decree it anti-Semitic to turn the term “blood libel” on its head and use it to denote defamation against a generally philo-Semitic Christian.

UPDATE (6/9): America is for the world, but Israel is allowed to stay civilized. Oy!

Donald Trump’s ‘He Started It’ Argument Is Libertarian

Conservatism, Donald Trump, Feminism, Free Speech, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Logic, Reason

Donald Trump’s ‘He started it’ argument, whinged CNN’s Anderson Cooper, is a five-year-old’s argument. Maybe. But it’s also the skeleton of the libertarian, non-aggression axiom: aggression against aggressors only.

First, context via Gawker:

During last night’s CNN-hosted Republican town hall in Milwaukee there was a funny, and perhaps even cathartic, exchange between Anderson Cooper and Donald Trump over Trump’s hounding of Ted Cruz’s wife, which culminated with Cooper telling Trump he was acting like a child while Trump insisted that he wasn’t acting like a child. …

MORE.

It’s not enough to malign something as childish. You have to show that the maligned childish thought or act is wrong. Children can be right, on rare occasions. Besides, the liberal left worships The Children (as do their partners among new, feminized, Michelle-Fields conservatives). Adults are the dolts in every Hollywood film. In liberal lore, those founts of knowledge and wisdom spring from the effing kids, mostly.

In this case, The Donald aka The libertarians aka The Kids are correct. Aggression against aggressors is justifiable.

Of course, verbal aggression is not the aggression libertarians are referring to when we apply libertarian law. Speech is not aggression.

Megyn Kelly’s Leading, Invalid, Elephant-Not-In-The-Room Question

Elections, Journalism, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Logic, Media, Propaganda, Reason, Republicans

Megyn Kelly gets away with a lot of antics, so why not this one at the debate in Des Moines, Iowa? There, Kelly referred to Donald Trump as “the elephant not in the room,” and asked Sen. Ted Cruz: “What message do you think Trump’s absence sends to the voters of Iowa?”

Kelly’s question is a leading question, not a probative question, because the question suggests the answer. Hers is a bad-faith question. I wish Donald Trump’s campaign had the analytical wherewithal to point out Kelly’s despicable antics.

And you know that when CNN approvingly describes (on “Outfront,” 1/29) a Fox News anchor as a consummate professional “staying above the fray”—said anchor is likely everything but. What the Left likes about the badly behaved and unprofessional Kelly, as chronicled in the more meaty version of “The Me Myself and I Megyn Kelly Production,” is that she reflects their side.