Category Archives: Republicans

NEW COLUMN: Self-Ownership & The Right To Reject The Pharma-State’s Hemlock

Conservatism, COVID-19, Critique, Democracy, Democrats, Government, Healthcare, Individual Rights, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Private Property, Republicans

Leave a reply

NEW COLUMN is “Self-Ownership & The Right To Reject The Pharma-State’s Hemlock.” It’s currently on WND.COM, The Unz Review, Townhall.com, The New American and American Greatness.

Excerpt:

It matters not that the few “Republican governors crusading against vaccine mandates are [allegedly] facing significantly lower approval ratings on their handling of the coronavirus pandemic than their counterparts,” as Politico purports. (Don’t believe Politico!)

What matters is that governors like Texas’ Greg Abbott, who “flat-out banned vaccine requirements, and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, followed up by vowing to sue the Biden administration.”

These two governors are unique in upholding natural, inalienable, individual rights—the right of self ownership, bodily dominion; the stuff mocked by President Joe Biden, wearing a ghoulish grin.

The Biden reference is to a recent, highly contrived CNN townhall, during which “moderator Anderson Cooper noted that as many as one in three emergency responders in some major cities are refusing to comply with city vaccine mandates.”

“I’m wondering where you stand on that,” inquired Cooper. “Should police officers, first responders be mandated to get vaccines? And if not, should they be mandated to stay at home, let go?”

“Yes, and yes,” replied the president.

Disinterred for the day, Biden went on to mock the quaint notion of bodily autonomy with a demented quip, “I have the freedom to kill you with my COVID. I mean, come on, freedom.”

Bodily autonomy, self-determination and self-ownership: Were our representatives to frame the vexation of vaccine mandates in the correct language of natural rights—we’d get the right answers, more likely to be followed by rights-upholding legislation.

But are Republican representatives doing so? Are our representatives who art in D.C. doing anything but wait in Tucker Carlson’s green room?

When it comes to Covid-19, only the following arguments are permissible as an objection to the Covid vaccine mandate. “Exemptions from employer-mandated coronavirus vaccines [are] in [these] three general areas“:

* natural immunity
* religious objection
* medical objection …

… READ THE REST. NEW COLUMN is “Self-Ownership & The Right To Reject The Pharma-State’s Hemlock.” It’s currently on WND.COM, The Unz Review, Townhall.com, The New American and American Greatness.

UPDATE II (11/16/021): Republican Argument Against COVID Mandates Indirectly Capitulates To Coercion

Argument, Business, COVID-19, Healthcare, Individual Rights, Natural Law, Paleolibertarianism, Private Property, Republicans

Leave a reply

It matters not that the few “Republican governors crusading against vaccine mandates are [allegedly] facing significantly lower approval ratings on their handling of the coronavirus pandemic than their counterparts,” as purported by Politico. (I don’t believe Politico.)

What matters is that governors like Texas’ Greg Abbott, who “flat-out banned vaccine requirements, and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis followed up by vowing to sue the Biden administration.” These two are upholding, natural, inalienable, individual rights—the right of self ownership, bodily dominion, the stuff mocked by Joe Biden thus:

During the event, moderator Anderson Cooper asked Biden his thoughts about reports of emergency responders in different cities refusing to comply with city vaccine mandates. Cooper asked Biden whether he thought such workers should be fired, encouraged to stay home or be allowed to keep their jobs.

Were our representatives to frame the issue of vaccine mandates in the correct language of natural rights, namely bodily autonomy, self-determination—we’d get the right answers, more likely to be followed by rights-upholding legislation.

But are Republican representatives doing so? Are our representatives who art in DC doing anything but wait in Tucker Carlson’s green room?

When it comes to Covid-19, only the following arguments are permissible as an objection to the Covid vaccine mandate. “Exemptions from employer-mandated coronavirus vaccines [are] in [these] three general areas“:

*natural immunity
*religious objection
*medical objection.

And one hears support for outcome-based coercion because it  works; rights-violations work. This latter argument is a scandal:

Leana Wen, an emergency physician and public health professor at George Washington University, said she approves of the administration’s push for employer-based mandates because “frankly nothing else was working.”

As an objection to the Covid vaccine, nowhere is a rights-based argument or an argument based on the right to question the safety of the vaccine being advanced by the idiots who represent us. “Exemptions from employer-mandated coronavirus vaccines are in three general areas” only.

Self-ownership is nowhere mentioned.

UPDATE I (10/26/021): Josh Hawley to the rescue (from Fox News’ green room).

Harmeet Dhillon Dishes on Republicans and Business:

UPDATE II (11/16/021):

Thank Trump for being the first GOP president in recent memory to do his bloody job and appoint justices who uphold the Bill Of Rights:

Judge Kurt Engelhardt issues stay on mandates. At play, “liberty of individuals to make intensely personal decisions.”

Hon. Kurt Damian Engelhardt, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, New Orleans, Louisiana and Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan, standing between The People and the effing Brandon Administration.

UPDATED (11/16/021): No-Information, Me-Me, FoxNews Broadcasters

Celebrity, Conservatism, Critique, Culture, Ethics, Etiquette, Journalism, Media, Republicans

Leave a reply

One of the biggest egos in an anchor’s chair at Fox New—she lives for the sound of her own voice—is Laura Ingraham. She generally monologues over her guests at length, and then informs them, “Hurry; you have 30 seconds to say your piece.” (a WND reader is on to her.) Although we’re living in grim times—the demented grin never leaves the face of zero-information Ingraham.

Almost as bad as Ingraham is Fox’s Jesse Watters. He absolutely blankets a guest’s input with his own self-important bloviation. The saving grace of Watters is that he is rather amusing.

Another strike, however, against Watters is that he was made BIG by Bill O’Reilly. O’Reilly kindly introduced Watters to viewers of “The Factor.” The younger man, however, has never publicly given O’Reilly credit, not least during the 25th anniversary celebrations of the network.

Watters, moreover, is not telling the truth when he says “The Five” was his first big gig on Fox News, as claimed. O’Reilly gave him a gig. Any gig on “The Factor” was big, because “The Factor” was huge. This makes Watters an ingrate.

UPDATED (11/16/021): Laura Ingraham can’t imagine or comprehend that a Netflix show called “You” is not about her.

This is a great clip of The Ego and Idiocy of Ms. Ingraham.

Actually Raimond Arroyo is the only person loud-mouth Laura ever lets talk without interruption.

NEW COLUMN: ‘Whip Or Rein’ Was Never The Question

Argument, Democrats, Hebrew Testament, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Nationhood, Republicans

1 Reply

NEW COLUMN is “In Praise Of Whipping Horsemen: ‘Whip Or Rein’ Was Never The Question.” It’s now on WND.COM, The Unz Review, CNSNews.com,
The New American, and American Greatness.

Excerpt:

Let’s see: Heroic horsemen rode to the rescue at Del Rio, Texas, along the U.S.-Mexico border. Republicans could’ve whipped the open-border Democrat degenerates with a first-principles case for sovereignty and self-defense, the thing Border Patrol horsemen were exercising so instinctively. Instead, the Right chose to beat around the bush, sweating the redundant details:

“Was it a whip or a rein?”

Who cares, when our border-patrol heroes—the last of the He-Men—were doing the work of the Lord! And, what on earth is wrong with the whip, in this context?

Did not the Lord teach—in The Book of Proverbs, through his emissaries—that, “He who spares his rod hates his son”? I believe Proverbs has a broader and deeper meaning: Libertine formative figures who fail to teach the young and the lawless right from wrong hate both their disciples and the society upon which they unleash them.

Let’s rewind: The reference is, as CNN put it, to “recent images that appear to show U.S. Border Patrol agents on horseback confronting migrants along the Rio Grande.”

“Videos taken by Al Jazeera and Reuters … show law enforcement officers on horseback using aggressive tactics when confronting migrants, who [were] largely Haitian, to prevent them from crossing into the US.”

So far so good.

“The Biden administration expressed horror,” promising to proceed aggressively against the poor horseback officers, who work in near-impossible conditions, without institutional support and for meager wages.

How does the Right respond? Republicans responded with a weak refrain: “Was it a whip or a rein?” they bickered. The horse-riding Border Patrol agents were wielding a rein, not a whip, was the sum of our side’s “case” in defense of our guardian agents.

That’s the anatomy of a typical Republican retort. It’s also why Democrats are the perennial winners.

There is only one winning—and correct—answer, in the case of the whip versus the rein, and it is this:

If it was not a whip, it ought to have been one, and if our Guardian Angel of the border used a rein as whip—then hooray for him. The End….

… READ THE REST of  “In Praise Of Whipping Horsemen: ‘Whip Or Rein’ Was Never The Question” on WND.COM, The Unz Review, CNSNews.com,
The New American and American Greatness.