Category Archives: The State

1: How Do You Know You’re A Neocon? Hint: It Has To Do With How You See US History

Cultural Marxism, History, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Military, Neoconservatism, Old Right, Political Philosophy, States' Rights, The State, War

A neoconservative will have hastened to condemn a wise and magnanimous man, John F. Kelly, for seeing redeeming qualities in Robert E. Lee.

Robert E. Lee. was an honorable man,” said White House Chief of Staff Mr. Kelly. How dare he! And how right he was. Lee was a great American.

When Lee resigned his commission as the colonel of the 1st U.S. Cavalry in April 1861 and subsequently took command of the state forces of Virginia, and eventually of the armies of the Southern Confederacy, he was only acting to “fight for his state, which 150 years ago was more important than country.”

John F. Kelly is an honorable and wise American.

Allen C. Guelzo, the author of the piece condemning Kelly, writes in the neoconservative, Cultural Marxist tradition, whereby history is painted over with a cheap patina of current political dogma, to conceal traditional, republican virtues of yesteryear.

Pat Buchanan on The Great Man.

UPDATED (12/19): Who’s Gonna Bust Robert Mueller’s Sham Proceedings? Meek Weak Jeff Sessions?

Constitution, Donald Trump, Law, Russia, The State

There is no limit, seemingly, to the power of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. In contravention of a quaint thing called the Fourth Amendment, Mueller has taken possession of “many tens of thousands of emails from President Donald Trump’s transition team.”

Jonathan Turley, of George Washington University in Foggy Bottom, D.C., said the legal territory Langhofer waded into is “a somewhat ambiguous area.”

“Why take the risk?” he asked of the Mueller team’s decision to go about obtaining the documents the way it did.

Turley said Langhofer is correct as far as claiming the documents are not the property of the General Services Administration, where Mueller’s team obtained them.

He said Mueller and his deputy, Andrew Weissmann, have a history of an aggressive style of handling cases, with the latter being accused of “prosecutorial overreach” by critics of the Enron scandal’s proceedings.

Turley said Mueller is possibly legally allowed to obtain documents this way, but that perception of the actions may affect the way the investigation is considered.

“Why do something this risky?” he asked.

Risk, Jonathan Turley, Esquire? What risk? There is no risk to Deep State operatives. Name one who has paid the price for taking us to war in Iraq or igniting the “Russia monomania.”

Who’s going to bust Robert Mueller’s sham, kangaroo proceedings? The meek, weak Jeff Sessions?

Of course, dumbo Napolitano claims differently than Turley.

Dumbo Napolitano’s BAB archive.

UPDATE (12/19): Contra Dumbo Napolitano, Dershowitz, no dummy, “Says Mueller ‘Playing Into Trump’s Hands,’ Should Have Obtained Warrant for Emails.”

Comments Off on UPDATED (12/19): Who’s Gonna Bust Robert Mueller’s Sham Proceedings? Meek Weak Jeff Sessions?

Written by on

Busting Statist and Scripture-Based Fibs for a Borderless America

Christianity, Economy, Hebrew Testament, IMMIGRATION, libertarianism, The State

THE NEW COLUMN IS “Busting Statist and Scripture-Based Fibs for a Borderless America,” now on the Unz Review. Or, WND.com. An excerpt:

When preaching immigration leniency and lawlessness in America, immigration bleeding hearts should lay off the Hebrew Bible, Leviticus 19:34, in particular.

The stranger that sojourneth with you shall be unto you as the home-born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

One Rev. Ryan M. Eller, on Tucker Carlson’s show, gave a dissembling and misleading reading of the tract, in mitigation of the immigration status of Kate Steinle’s killer.

The reverend glibly translated the word “sojourn” to mean citizens living among you, the latter having created, presumably, an immutable reality on the ground.

In appropriating the Hebrew text to his humanistic ends, Rev. Eller left-out that Leviticus 19:34 is a reference to strangers who are temporarily in your country.

A “sojourn” is a “temporary stay; a brief period of residence.” The Hebrew word “ger” means alien, stranger, not citizen.

The Hebrew Testament is not the New Testament. It’s not the text you want to use in spreading the Christian, “We Are The World” dogma. For it revolves around distinguishing the Jews and their homeland from the nations of the world.

What is commonly called the Old Testament, I read in the Hebrew, free of the bowdlerization that often accompanies the Christianized translations. As I read it, our Bible was not meant to meld the Jewish People with the world.

The opposite is true.

While it evinces ground-breaking exploration of natural, universal justice—and a lot of not-so-merciful meting out of “justice”—the Hebrew Bible is something of a parochial document.

Undergirding what Christians call the Old Testament is a message of particularism, not universalism. The ancient Hebrews would have been appalled by many a modern, left-liberal Jew who has betrayed the nationalistic message underlying the 24 best-written books ever.

Mercy and justice are all Leviticus 19:34 exhorts. The tract reminds the Hebrews only that they suffered in Egypt as slaves to the Egyptians. Consequently, the people of Israel are to be kind to the strangers living temporarily among them.

Were the biblical author to have added a parenthetic statement, it would’ve been: “Fear not, the stranger will soon be on his way, or chased away.”

The Christian Saint Joan of Arc was certainly steeped in a sturdy nativism. …

… READ THE REST.  “Busting Statist and Scripture-Based Fibs for a Borderless America” is now on the Unz Review. Or WND.com.

UPDATED (6/28/018): Another Of Judge Napolitano’s Un-Libertarian Brainstorms

Constitution, English, Government, IMMIGRATION, libertarianism, Media, The State

Leave a reply

I have a dossier on the guy. I’m talking about “Judge Andrew Napolitano, [who] Is [absolutely] NOT A Rightist Libertarian.” Ann Coulter has also lost her legendary patience with this TV personality posing as a legal scholar. Ms. Coulter had the good sense to demolish Napolitano’s ridiculous 14th Amendment jurisprudence.

Today Napolitano declared Vladimir Putin to be “the most dangerous man on the planet,” to all inhabitants, on all continents, practically.

A couple of months back, I made a note of another of Judge Napolitano’s un-libertarian infractions. As is his wont, Napolitano was empaneled on the Bret Baier show. “The Panel” was vaporizing about Tom Price, the Health and Human Services Secretary, who used chartered flights for government business, and subsequently resigned.

The usual banalities were exchanged, when Napolitano decided to show his “originality.” The Judge ventured that he didn’t much care that Price splashed out at the expense of the taxpayer, if this got Mr. Price to his destination quickly. After all, “argued” Napolitano, we want our government to be efficient. We want them to do things in a timely manner. No delays on the way. (If readers can locate the link, I’d be most grateful.)

No we don’t!

A libertarian wants the exact opposite.

Knowing how government “works”; knowing that practically everything a government official does is harmful, we libertarians want the state to be thwarted at every turn. If Tom Price needs to get from destination A to destination B to sign some giveaway bill, I want him traveling via … camel or walking. Unless it is repealing rights-infringing legislation, I want to see inertia and inaction in government.

What makes this libertarian happy is to be told that President Trump has not filled many a position in his administration. And when, likewise, The Economist saddles Dr. Carlson (in its latest issue) with the same “sin.”

As for the Judge’s “WTF If” columns, you know, the ones in which every sentence (x 50) begins with, “What if government was …  What if government was … “: More than of his atrocious writing style, this writing is an indictment of the syndicator’s piss-poor editor.

AP Dossier:

“Julie Borowski’s Wrong: Judge Andrew Napolitano Is NO Rightist Libertarian”

Andrew Napolitano: Some Libertarian

Ann Coulter Offers A Corrective To Judge Andrew Napolitano

Judge Napolitano’s Left-Libertarian Confusion

Fighting Words From Left-Libertarian Egalitarians

Napolitano-Koch Connection? (Sixth Sense)

The Neoconservative & Left-Libertarian Positions: Liberty Is Universal

14th Amendment Jurisprudence For Dummies

UPDATE (6/28/2018):

Judge Napolitano, to repeat, is a left-libertarian. Always said so. Above are my many blogs about his leftist exploits. In his latest column, Napolitano is essentially arguing that if X trespasses into your home, you can’t, in natural law, remove him. Crap. Not to conflate natural law with positive law, but I hazard that were you to research this bit of Napolitano legalism, you’d find he’s hiding/finessing certain aspects of due-process jurisprudence.

Discussion on Facebook.