Reason Roundup

Confusion Reigns as Government Contemplates What To Do With Immigrant Families: Reason Roundup

Plus: RIP Charles Krauthammer

|

Protest
LENIN NOLLY/EFE/Newscom

Government officials are planning to move as many as 20,000 illegal immigrants to military bases in order to keep families together, per President Trump's recent executive order ending automatic separations of children and families. But the administration seems fairly confused as to how this will work, and wasn't able to confirm whether the 2,300 children who were already separated from their families will be reunited. According to The New York Times:

The 20,000 beds at bases in Texas and Arkansas would house "unaccompanied alien children," said a Pentagon spokesman, Lt. Col. Michael Andrews, although other federal agencies provided conflicting explanations about how the shelters would be used or who would be housed there.

It was unclear whether the military housing would also house the parents of migrant children in families that have been detained, and officials at the White House, Defense Department and Department of Health and Human Services said on Thursday they could not provide details.

The confusion is frustrating for folks inside the White House, Politico reports:

Frustrated White House aides said the damage created by the herky-jerky policy process is twofold. The president's sudden decision to sign the executive order threw off a planned House vote that could have set in motion the permanent legislative fix the White House has been seeking.

More importantly, these aides said, the original zero-tolerance policy championed by senior presidential adviser Stephen Miller was not run through the Domestic Policy Council, which Miller oversees. Some in the White House are also unclear whether the executive order is legal, which is something that would have been determined by a regular policy process.

The government has been referring to the existing accomodatons for children under 12 as "tender age" housing. Psychologists say that keeping such young kids away from their parents is emotionally scarring, according to The Huffington Post:

The consequences of this continued separation, especially for infants and toddlers, could be dire. Not only are they separated from their parents — who have loved and cared for them since birth — but shelter caretakers stepping into the void have reportedly been compelled to withhold physical touch from the children.

"We have to recognize that youth makes you more vulnerable. It does not protect you from an event like this," Ghosh Ippen said. "The No. 1 [priority] is to get these children back into the loving arms of a parent who can help them to calm down and regulate and who can really hold them as they express their feelings."

Reports from tender-age shelters that hold the youngest migrants reveal that there are toddlers melting down in distress but that the caregivers are not allowed to pick up, hold or hug the children. One shelter staffer quit after being forced to tell children separated from their parents that they couldn't hug one another.

Not to worry: Both Stormy Daniels and Michael Avenatti are on the case.

FREE MINDS

Legendary conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer died yesterday after a battle with cancer. He was 68.

A frequent Fox News guest and Pulitzer Prize winner, Krauthammer was greatly admired. He survived a debilitating accident in his early 20s that left him paralyzed from the waist down, eventually becoming a psychiatrist, a speechwriter in the Carter administration, and then an editor at The New Republic. While his views moved rightward over time, he was widely respected in liberal circles. Real Clear Politics' A.B. Stoddard, a close friend who appeared alongside him on Fox for a decade, wrote:

Being on the "Special Report" panel every week with Charles, from May of 2009 until August of 2017, was an honor and a privilege. He had a singular presence there, a towering intellect free of arrogance. But alongside his warmth and calm and ease, Charles concentrated intently because he cared deeply about his contribution to the topic at hand and the words millions would hang on. To focus himself, sometimes he mumbled quietly in French before we went live.

I've disagreed with plenty of things Krauthammer has written and said over the years. Still, I've found myself wondering what he would have said about the Trump administration over the past few months, had he been in better health. RIP.

FREE MARKETS

A San Francisco couple attempt to raise $1,500 on Facebook for immigrant children who were separated from their families by the U.S. government. In just four days, they raised $10 million. According to VICE:

"Most of us who donated today don't know each other, but we were brought together by a common sense of what is right and what is wrong," Charlotte Willner posted to the fundraiser's page on the night it was launched. "That clear moral commonality is what will sustain us. It transcends almost everything. It is an enduring sense of what America ought to be about."

Random people, coming together to voluntarily give money to needy children imprisoned by the government: sounds to me like a free market solution to a government failure.

QUICK HITS

  • What on earth was First Lady Melania Trump thinking when she donned a jacket bearing the message—"I REALLY DON'T CARE. DO U?"—for her trip to visit immigrant children? A spokesperson maintained that she wasn't sending any kind of message, but… come on.
  • ABC's Roseanne will return in the fall, minus Roseanne Barr. The network confirmed that it was working on a new sitcom featuring the various members of the Connor family who who aren't portrayed by insane racists.
  • An inside look at how the Kirstjen Nielsen confrontation was organized.
  • The feminist scholar who asked "Why Can't We Hate Men?" responds to criticism.
  • The Federalist's Jesse Kelly throws a temper tantrum.

Advertisement

NEXT: 13-Year-Old Charged with Felony for Recording Conversation with School Principal

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. What on earth was First Lady Melania Trump thinking when she donned a jacket bearing the message?”I REALLY DON’T CARE. DO U?”?for her trip to visit immigrant children? A spokesperson maintained that she wasn’t sending any kind of message, but… come on.

    A cry for help?

    1. Hello.

      All we’ve learned is that Obama knew how to play the game. Trump less so when it comes to this sort of stuff.

      1. Less so?

        Did you hear her speech at the Republican convention?

        She told that crowd that Donald Trump would never give them up–that he would never let them down……

        yeah.

        Think about it.

    2. I dunno but that’s some of the finest trolling of this administration yet.

      1. I used to think Melania is some passive gentle mother just wanting to raise her child so she puts up with Trump being a fat, ugly, asshole. I’m beginning to think more and more that her and Trump actually have a somewhat healthy relationship, she knows exactly what she’s doing, and she revels in the trolling as much as he does.

        1. She married up and Trump married young. Happens all the time.

          I hate the thing where American media likes to try and turn the President’s family into some royal family thing.

          I really think president spouses should not do much as it costs money for secret service.

  2. when she donned a jacket bearing the message?”I REALLY DON’T CARE. DO U?”?for her trip to visit immigrant children?

    Has anyone tried @ing Twitter yet to see if they’ll suspend her account until she tells us?

  3. ABC’s Roseanne will return in the fall, minus Roseanne Barr.

    if it’s anything like Garfield minus Garfield this could be dark.

    1. The ultimate in weak decision making abilities.

    2. ABC’s Roseanne will return in the fall, minus the ratings that Rosanne Barr brought with her.

      1. And with nobody to tell pussy-hat Jackie to STFU.

        1. Yikes!

    3. Replace Roseanne with Louie Anderson, and put some gender identity spin on it.

      Might as well go full-on PC.

      1. Keep the love scenes though…

        John Goodman hardest hit.

        1. Yikes!

  4. Daily Mail: Crying child on TIME cover ‘never separated by border control agents’ from her mother
    …In an exclusive interview with DailyMail.com, Hernandez, who lives in Puerto Cortes, Honduras, says that he was told yesterday that his wife and child are being detained at a family residential center in Texas but are together and are doing ‘fine.’

    ‘You can imagine how I felt when I saw that photo of my daughter. It broke my heart. It’s difficult as a father to see that, but I know now that they are not in danger. They are safer now than when they were making that journey to the border,’ he said….

    1. Fake news.

    2. There is no way the mainstream media is going to feature that news.

    3. It is not thst sort of thing has not been going on for years, like in sympathetic coverage for the Palestinians.

      1. Turns out the baby that was killed at the protest died of an entirely unrelated issue and the parents were paid to lie and claim he was killed by the Israelis.

        The media feeds blatant propaganda from activists without any sort of investigation or care if it is real, but only if it suits their narrative.

        Compare that treatment to how they treat pro-life activists.

  5. The feminist scholar who asked, “Why Can’t We Hate Men?” responds to criticism.

    …with exactly the kind of collectivist nonsense you’d expect.

    1. Yeah, it was pretty sad. I just sort of gave up about halfway through and began skimming, and then gave up entirely about 3/4 of the way in.

      “Why Can’t We Hate Men?”

      Well, I mean… you can, but it seems kinda bullshit.

  6. Professor: Learning Math Can Cause ‘Collateral Damage’ to Society
    According to a new textbook written by a professor at the University of Exeter, learning mathematics can cause “collateral damage” to society because it “provides a training in ethics-free thought.”

    “Reasoning without meanings provides a training in ethics-free thought,” Paul Ernest writes in “The Ethics of Mathematics: Is Mathematics Harmful?” ? a chapter of his book The Philosophy of Mathematics Education Today….

    1. 2 + 2 = genocide, it is known.

    2. This guy is “Emeritus Professor of the Philosophy of Mathematics Education”, so you can believe him.

      1. That is an awfully specific field to profess.

        1. The man knows derivatives.

          1. His class is integral to a well rounded philosophy education.

    3. 37 * 18 does not care if there are Christians around.

      1. 37 + 18 might though.

    4. Enter 2659004 * 2 into your calculator. Turn your calculator upside down.

      Proof that mathematics is responsible for gender inequality.

    5. Dude is in luck then. Most folk never learn math, they just learn arithmetic. And they forget most of that too.

    1. But holding bloody heads is cool.

    2. Who is Kathy Griffin?

      1. Good grief, just say you don’t own a TV and get it over with.

        1. What’s a TV?

      2. Was she the dog on Family Guy?

        No… she was a dog on Seinfeld. ZING!

        1. The dog on Family Guy is actually funny. In fact, the only funny thing on the show. I don’t think Griffin has ever been associated with anything funny. So, no she was not the dog on Family Guy.

  7. Judicial Watch Obtains IRS Documents Revealing McCain’s Subcommittee Staff Director Urged IRS to Engage in “Financially Ruinous” Targeting
    (Washington, DC) ? Judicial Watch today released newly obtained internal IRS documents, including material revealing that Sen. John McCain’s former staff director and chief counsel on the Senate Homeland Security Permanent Subcommittee, Henry Kerner, urged top IRS officials, including then-director of exempt organizations Lois Lerner, to “audit so many that it becomes financially ruinous.” Kerner was appointed by President Trump as Special Counsel for the United States Office of Special Counsel.

    The explosive exchange was contained in notes taken by IRS employees at an April 30, 2013, meeting between Kerner, Lerner, and other high-ranking IRS officials. Just ten days following the meeting, former IRS director of exempt organizations Lois Lerner admitted that the IRS had a policy of improperly and deliberately delaying applications for tax-exempt status from conservative non-profit groups….

    1. Lerner and Koskinen are such weasels.

      Better get the FBI to investigate them.

  8. The president’s sudden decision to sign the executive order threw off a planned House vote that could have set in motion the permanent legislative fix the White House has been seeking.

    I’ve heard that he didn’t really have a choice.

    Some in the White House are also unclear whether the executive order is legal

    I would LOVE to see someone grow the balls to challenge that EO in court.

  9. Government officials are planning to move as many as 20,000 illegal immigrants to military bases in order to keep families together, …. But the administration seems fairly confused as to how this will work

    Obviously the solution is to *ask the immigrants*.

  10. “I REALLY DON’T CARE. DO U?”

    The worst thing about it is that it’s a slight to the media. SMH

    1. It’s a slight to the English language, is what.

    2. Every single thing = outrage.

      1. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRR RRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

        1. ^ not enough outrage.

  11. various members of the Connor family who who aren’t portrayed by insane racists.

    Any guesses on how good The John Goodman Show will be?

    1. It will be good, man.

      1. S’all Goodman

    2. Why wouldn’t they just continue to call it Roseanne w someone else in the title role? At least that’s how I’d do it. In fact I’d try to imply the character was playing the real Roseanne Barr.

  12. needy children imprisoned by the government

    Y’all aren’t trying to tone down the histrionics in your quest to eliminate the nation’s sovereignty, are you?

    1. Not trying at all. It’s innocent needy puppy eyed children.

      1. At this point I’m just tuning in to see how ridiculous it gets. Rico’s giving Shikha a for her money.

        1. You accidentally that whole comment.

    2. Pearl clutching in the service of open borders is no vice, apparently.

      1. I wouldn’t touch those pearls or Reason arguments with a ten-foot pole, as they are shitty.

        1. +1 “Not pearls — anal beads”

  13. http://lidblog.com/john-mccain…..is-lerner/

    McCain staffer told Lerner to audit non-exempts until they collapsed. Now we know why the GOP wasn’t too interested in seeing Lerner held accountable. As anyone paying attention always suspected, the GOP establishment hated the tea party and wanted it dead just as much as the Democrats did.

    1. Party leadership doesn’t want their parties in power; they wish to remain party leadership.

    2. Well, McCain’s people did, but we knew they had no tolerance for dissent or freedom of speech for a while now.

    3. If anyone’s corpse deserves to be gibbeted, and left on display for years, it’s that fuckhead McCain.

      I should be a bigger, more refined person and let the hatred for that creature go.

  14. What’s divisive and mean, actually, is men with guns shooting up kids, rape camps, INCELs, wage inequality, women’s underrepresentation in government. Me writing this is not divisive and mean. Let’s have some perspective here.

    *facepalm*

    1. Rape camps? Uhhh

      1. You know cathy L, like the socialists did.

        First you take Korean women and put them in ‘comfort stations’, then you let battleweary Japanese troops visit the place.

        Or you can a nearly defeated WWII Germany and let Russian soldiers rape, torture, and kill as many German women as they want.

    2. I’m sorry, but why are we even wasting our time paying any attention to what this person has to say? I have better things to do with my time, like staring at a wall watching the paint dry.

  15. http://freebeacon.com/issues/d…..ded-dorms/

    Democratic Congressman wants taxpayer-funded dorms for Congress. I actually like this idea. Such dorms would inevitably be dens of iniquity full of sex, drugs, violence, and God knows what else. The scandals that would result from such a scheme would be priceless.

    1. Surround the dorms with barbed wire, minefields, and watchtowers with inward-facing machine guns and i’m on board.

      1. Put cameras in every room and create a 24/7 live stream on youtube.

        1. “I won’t rest until the problems of my constituents are solved.”

        2. The resulting mass loss of American appetites would put a dent in the obesity problem, that’s for sure.

          1. Worst porn channel ever.

            1. Oh please, we all know you’d love to see Chuck Schumer get titty fucked by Mitch McConnell.

              1. I think Moobs Schumer would be the one doing the fucking there.

                1. I think Schumer gets to fuck McConnell’s waddle.

                  1. *wattle

                    1. Chucky in a gimp suit, slurping on McConnell’s turtlesque neck flap like it was an ice pop [vomits]

                    2. Mitch hides his g spot somewhere under that flap.

        3. Big Brother featuring Big Brother. Brilliant!

    2. Those fucking Congressmen make $175,000 minus all the outrageous taxes they want Americans to pay.

      They can afford to rent apartments and shack up together near D.C.

    3. Combine them with illegal immigrant detention facilities. win-win.

    4. Heh, if any of them think they’re getting shortchanged they’re free to quit and get a job somewhere else.

    5. Crazy. For a while I’ve wanted all of Congress to be required to live in prison style barracks with a curfew and lights out time. There would be 24/7 surveillance of course. There would be armed guards, of course, to make sure they are in their cells by curfew and to search for contraband.

      1. And frequent drug tests.

  16. I’ve disagreed with plenty of things Krauthammer has written and said over the years. Still, I’ve found myself wondering what he would have said about the Trump administration over the past few months, had he been in better health.

    Because, of course, that’s what everything’s about here now.

    The above quote is one of the most depressing things I’ve read here that wasn’t about, you know, authorities ripping a family asunder & killing their pets. It’s one thing to conclude the bloggers here have gotten so petty, it’s another to actually read it from one of them.

    1. Yeah, wondering what one of the most important conservative commentators would have said about the current Republican administration is just so petty.

      1. important… commentators

        There is not this idea.

  17. A legal immigrant having to go visit a bunch of illegal immigrants because of a bunch of proggies crying crocodile tears. I bet she’s thrilled about it!

    1. Psst, Melania was an illegal immigrant.

      1. Ummm… no. She entered the country multiple times through perfectly legal means. She then married a US citizen.

        To liken that to the families who attempted to invade US borders and then claim ‘asylum,’ while sucking on the US taxpayers, is just as ridiculous as all of the other bullshit arguments you make Rev.

      2. More lies from Cathy L. Big surprise.

        1. Tony’s female persona is just as tedious as the original.

          1. I assume Cathy is just who Tony is now.

            1. He transitioned? So brave!

  18. Government officials are planning to move as many as 20,000 illegal immigrants to military bases in order to keep families together, per President Trump’s recent executive order ending automatic separations of children and families

    So our military readiness is being compromised because we have to house illegals at military bases because there is not enough facilities to house these people?

    These immigrants are not political refugees, they are poor. They have zero reason to be granted asylum.

    Deport them all.

    1. The proggies got their wish. Now it’s going to be pushed as a ‘Japanese internment camp’ dog whistle. Someone will go take more photos of crying kids and this’ll survive the news cycle for at least a couple of more months. This shit is so predictable.

      1. The lefties have no idea how many Americans are for ending non-Americans taking advantage of America’s rules on immigration.

        They will find out election 2018 and definitely when Trump gets reelected in 2020.

    2. So our military readiness is being compromised

      Yeah, sure.

      1. Oh, I forgot we don’t call them “US military bases’ anymore.

        They are “immigrant bases’.

        1. Future Democrat base

      2. Gotta be ready for the Ruskie invasion, don’t you know.

        1. Who knows.

          Maybe a Mexican and South American invasion?

          Maybe having a strong military, that is not too expensive in peacetime, keeps other nations from trying to attack the USA.

          1. That’s certainly nice and unfalsifiable at least.

    3. Notice how the opposition has a convenient answer for any action that Trump takes here. It’s pretty clever, when you think about it.

      1. The answer is TDS?

        1. The only action he could take for which they don’t have an answer would be completely open borders, because that is the goal of the left and of this magazine.

          1. Then they would say he didn’t do it fast enough or just wants to use the immigrants for racists reasons.

            Most of the media are hacks who have TDS rage. Many on Reason staff included.

    1. Ugh, that jacket is so 2 years ago. How gauche.

  19. “What on earth was First Lady Melania Trump thinking when she donned a jacket bearing the message?”I REALLY DON’T CARE. DO U?”?for her trip to visit immigrant children?”

    Back in the day, there used to be this thing called “slumming”. Wealthy people would dress like plebeians, sometimes, for fun. You could go out and mix with the common people–“people watching”, sort of like going to the zoo except you get to get in the cage with the animals.

    That Zara clothing is made for slumming. Wealthy, fashionable people like Melania don’t know what it’s like to be with common folk anymore. It never occurred to her, I’m sure, that the message on the coat would be interpreted as if she didn’t care about children. The message on the coat means that she knows she’s dressed down–and she doesn’t care what you think about her fashion sense today.

    That’s what she was trying to communicate, but everything about her screams “Let them eat cake”. Look at this photo:

    http://www.shiftlondon.org/wp-…..00×600.jpg

    Look at the world behind the flag. That’s the world she inhabits. She’s not one of us. She’s a trophy wife.

    . . . but she was really trying to show concern, and she shouldn’t be hated on for that. I don’t feel sorry trophy wives anywhere, but she doesn’t deserve to be hated on for this.

    1. The message on the coat means that she knows she’s dressed down–and she doesn’t care what you think about her fashion sense today.

      Or, it could mean she doesn’t care for the Donald’s policies and hopes neither does the reader.

      Am I doing this right?

      1. No, you’re not doing it right.

        1. It means she doesn’t care for the Donald’s policies and hopes neither does the reader.

          Better?

          1. Stop it, Rich. Only Ken knows what it meant.

          2. You’re not accounting for why a woman with an unlimited wardrobe whose steeped in the fashion world would choose to wear an army canvas jacket.

            A better explanation doesn’t only account for what the message means, it would also account for why she chose to wear something like that.

            Wearing an army canvas jacket might seem like a regular choice to people like you. Melania wouldn’t wear denim unless she wanted it to communicate something ironic.

            1. Please to tell, o Melania whisperer, what ironic communication was happening at this photo op for schools?

              1. The irony is that Ken has no idea what he is talking about with Melania?

    2. She’s hot and everyone is envious.

    3. Yea Ken, she has zero idea what up serfs are like. She comes from Slovenia which was part of Commie Yugoslavia.
      Her family was Commie poor. She worked from age 5 to get money for her family to move to better Commie poor housing apartments.

      She became a relatively successful model and then met and married Trump.

      Maybe Melania Trump has something to say about all the lies being told on the immigration issue and just does not want to be a First Lady wanna-be President like Hillary and Michelle Obama were.

      You open border have lost your minds on this issue.

      1. She has zero idea what being a commoner is like anymore.

        She’s a gold digging trophy wife who met Donald when he bought out her modeling agency in the hopes of turning it into a personal dating service for himself.

        People should go after her for that if they want.

        She still cares as much about crying children as anybody.

        1. Thanks for clearing that up Ken. I’m glad you know everything about her.

          I don’t know much about her because I don’t know her and the media won’t do any honest background piece on her.

          She spent her wages early in life to move her family to better housing. Seems like a person that loves family to me.

          Women can have a modelling career and meet rich men/women to have a family with.

          1. You don’t know much about her, but you feel like you have to defend her for some reason?

            That’s not much different from people who don’t know much about her but feel they have to attack her–because she’s married to Donald Trump.

            1. You talking nonsense Ken and that is not like you. I am addressing your comments more than defending her.

              I am just being honest that I don’t know much about her and neither do you. Your making assumptions and you know what bad assumptions make?

              You were right that the more hostile the open border people pushed Americans, the more Americans would reject any compromise on easing immigration rules.

              Congress is going to change the immigration rules in a manner that open border people really hate. I have already contacted my Rep and Senators to cut immigration quotas by 50%+ and set up to more quickly deport people. A 5 minute hearing should suffice.

    4. I think the jacket faux pas is indicative of her not having the best publicist, and the media likely making something out of nothing. Nothing more, nothing less.

      1. She just started playing chess. Give her a break.

        The lefties and open border people still don’t know how to play chess.

        1. I’d let my Bishop spend a Knight with that Queen, IYKWIM

          1. With pawns watching? You perv!

            1. Yes, you and John can watch.

              1. John isn’t into the skinny. It is known.

                1. I didn’t want to leave out any of the Trump pawns, regardless of their preferences.

                  1. You really got my wallet with that rook move.

  20. “I REALLY DON’T CARE. DO U?”

    No.

    1. I’d say “not sure” but then, I’m afraid we’re already in Idiocracy.

    2. What difference, at this point, does it make?

  21. http://www.americanthinker.com…..ygate.html

    A former FBI agent explains Spygate and what likely happened given what we know.

    It is a long article but the bottom line is that the FBI was using the NSA to improperly spy on political opponents of Obama. In April of 2016, the head of the NSA shut that off. The FBI then turned to a preliminary investigation of Manfort based on his Russian connections to replace the information they could no longer get from NSA. This effort included likely trying to entrap Donald Trump Jr at the Trump tower meeting. After Jr. didn’t take the bait and Trump fired Manfort after learning of his Russia connections, the FBI then used the fabricated dossier to get a FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page. It is a great and informative read. And incredibly damning of DOJ, the FBI and the Obama administration.

  22. What on earth was First Lady Melania Trump thinking when she donned a jacket bearing the message?”I REALLY DON’T CARE. DO U?”?for her trip to visit immigrant children? A spokesperson maintained that she wasn’t sending any kind of message, but… come on.

    Yea, she should have wore a “Remain Calm” outfit.

    1. She was thinking correctly that Trump’s supporters would love it and his critics would go insane and make fools of themselves. These people are not hard to manipulate.

      1. Good for her. Peter Fonda said Melania’s kids should be kidnapped and given to pedophiles. I am sure she has learned how to troll lefties like her husband.

    2. Or a sheet of aluminum foil.

      1. Its pronounced “hot-tin foil” when its a model’s wearing it.

  23. The Federalist’s Jesse Kelly throws a temper tantrum.

    Guys like Jesse Kelly, and Kurt Schlichter, and a handful of others, make money and clicks and bucks by rhetorically inciting civil war. It’s strange how the self-proclaimed Super Patriots on the right so gravitate to these hucksters. Actually, it’s not strange at all.

    1. rhetorically inciting civil war

      Not inciting, recognizing. You really don’t think the next step for left wing mobs is more left wing mob violence?

      1. Bullshit. You really think people like Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders and Obama want to set up things like gulags and death camps and impose authoritarian Soviet-style communism? You are out of your mind if you think that.

        1. You really think people like Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders and Obama want to set up things like gulags and death camps and impose authoritarian Soviet-style communism?

          They have violent followers who do, that they don’t bother trying to control. Open your eyes.

          1. Yes. They have violent followers who do. Who are a fringe minority. Every political movement has fringe nutballs who advocate for some pretty terrible things. I’m sure you can find some libertarian somewhere who advocates for mass killing sprees or something. And people like Schlichter and Kelly deliberately overplay and drum up these fears in order to feed into your victimhood complex and to generate clicks and bucks for themselves.

            They are a lot like the fake Tea Party organizations that sprung up after 2010. They popped up all over the place but did nothing to advance any constructive solution to anything. All they did was raise money for themselves and maybe put on a rally for something. But they were good at sending out blast fundraising emails to their huge lists with scary headlines like “OBAMA WANTS TO TAKE YOUR HEALTHCARE! Donate here to stop this!” They were grifters through and through. The Schlichters are following in the same tradition. But now the bogeyman has been replaced with “THE LEFT” which is never well-defined, and always identified with its most extreme elements in order to sell fear.

            1. The SA was a fringe minority. So were the Bolsheviks. You don’t need the majority to be violent. All you need is a small group of people who are and are willing to terrorize your political opponents. The entire history of the left is one of using the violent fringe while denying association with or responsibility for their actions.

              1. So your argument, is that Hillary and Bernie and other members of the left-wing political establishment are analogous to Hitler and Lenin, giving a wink-wink approval to violence committed against conservatives by their fringe members. Is that it?

                Actually, I’m pretty sure that Hitler and Lenin didn’t give just wink-wink approval to violence, they full-on endorsed revolutionary violence. Where are these people *in positions of power* in this country now?

                You’re just pulling a Godwin – “they are scary Nazis!”

              2. So were the Jacobins, the Chinese Communist Party in the 40s, and the Khmer Rouge.

                Lenin understood that the revolution depends an utterly committed, fanatical vanguard of the proletariat. He also understood that terror is essential to a successful revolution.

                1. A small committed minority can foment a revolution, yes.

                  A small committed minority can also just fizzle out and do nothing.

                  There’s lots more examples of revolutionary minorities fizzling out than actually being successful.

                  You all WANT to believe that the radicals on the left are the new powerful revolutionary socialist vanguard, because it satisfies your inner biases about how “the Left is evil”. (While at the same time deriding them as spoiled snowflakes, natch.)

                  Once again, if this is a repeat of 1930’s Germany or 1940’s China, who is the modern equivalent of Hitler or Mao on the left? Obama? Don’t make me laugh.

            2. They aren’t few enough in number to be ‘fringe’. The Dems encourage their violence to play good cop/bad cop “give us what we want or they may get violent”.

              Anyone willing to mob another person is willing to get violent. The odds of things escalating are too high for anyone to mob someone without that possibility in mind.

              1. I suppose if you only watch Fox News, you might come away with the impression that violent radicals represent mainstream left-wing thought.

                If you are going to assess the threat honestly and fairly, you will acknowledge that the problem of political violence in this country is very small. Even Jesse Kelly had to resort to an analogy with Native Americans instead of using actual modern examples of widescale violence like those perpetrated against Indians.

                But if you are going to assess the threat honestly, then the Schlichters and the Kellys wouldn’t get their clicks and bucks. So we can’t have that!

                1. Bottom line: You are being conned by listening to people like Schlichter and Kelly. Just like many Republicans got conned by the Tea Party grifters after 2010. If you want to willingly sign yourself up for a con job, then go right ahead. But at least understand what you are doing.

                  1. Every mob is an implied threat of violence.

                  2. Bottom line, there are literally dozens of example of left motivated political violence that have occurred over the last few years including the attempted murder of multiple Republican congressmen on a baseball field. The left has and always has had a political violence problem. Your unwillingness to admit that fact just makes you a typical leftist Jeff.

                    1. Yes there are dozens of examples. Dozens. Literally dozens. In a nation of 300+ million people. Over the span of several years. What is that, about 10 per year? Most of these are little more than disorganized street fights. YES the Scalise shooting was awful and horrible which all sane people denounced immediately, on left and right. How this compares to an organized terror mob like the SA in pre-Nazi Germany is beyond me.

                      And once again, if we are reliving 1920’s Germany, who is the Hitler figure on the left, who is not at all shy to defend and encourage this violence?

                    2. Yes there are dozens of examples. Dozens. Literally dozens. In a nation of 300+ million people. Over the span of several years.

                      It doesn’t take many. How many examples of people being murdered for drawing Muhamad are there? None that I can remember. But does anyone do it? Very rarely last I looked.

                      Moreover, there are large mobs of hooded leftists who show up at speeches and rallies that they don’t like and proceed to beat the shit out of anyone there. If you don’t think there is a leftist violence problem, go put on a Trump hat and walk through Berkley or downtown Portland and get back to us.

                      Things like Antifa exist because people like you do nothing but pretend it doesn’t exist and try and ensure nothing is done about it. You are so unwilling to admit any fault in your side, you allow it to commit any sort of excess up to and including the attempted murder of public officials while still denying there is any problem. You are not a supporter of such violence but you are absolutely an enabler of it by being part of the larger left that refuses to admit it exists or could be a problem.

                    3. “Antifa” is the same group that existed in 1920s and 1930s Germany, with the same sponsors and even the same logo and name. It’s a violent communist paramilitary group funded by moneyed members of The Tribe.

                    4. I’m too late to this party to matter, but I wanted to mention that it’s really super odd how there aren’t all these attempts on left-wing politician lives. It’s curious it’s so one-sided, generally speaking, isn’t it?

                2. We can see them riot. They are not protesters. Protesters peacefully protest for a reason.

                  Radicals use violence because spoiled babies grown up and think throwing molotovs gets Americans on your side.

        2. Want to?

          No.

          But they will. If they get the power they want. Just like every single one of their predecessors has. It’s how Marxism works. The ‘corrections’ that need to be implemented as reality drifts ever further from where Marx (and all other leftists) said it should be lead invariably to a totalitarian police state.

      2. But the Schlichters and the Kellys peddle this type of nonsense because they are peddling to the conservative victimhood fantasies. That if only the media/universities/Hollywood/government/etc. weren’t holding them down, everyone would be a rock ribbed conservative wanting to shoot illegal invader border trespassers on sight. It’s nuts. They can’t convince people that their people are right, so they instead blame the other side for victimizing them.

        1. “They can’t convince people that their people are right, so they instead blame the other side for victimizing them.”

          You’re right, the lefties sure are whiners.

    2. I like how he opens with a very detailed description of a literal scalping, and then immediately backtracks to “but I’m just speaking metaphorically, haha”. And then continues on talking about making “them” hurt, and suffer, and so-on.

      But he never really says what this “metaphorical” scalping will literally look like. I’m drawn to two conclusions.

      (A) The “I of course mean metaphorical, not literal” was a lie, and he literally wants conservatives to murder their political opponents.
      (B) He has no idea what this is supposed to look like, he just thinks people should be angry.

      (B) seems more likely then (A), but the lack of any idea, in the editorial or the comment section below it, of what these “metaphorical” scalpings would actually look like is kind of glaring. A call to action that leaves out the “action” part is just weird.

      1. He is not that good of a writer or thinker. He is not the worst but he isn’t that good. He manages to be right about a lot of things but such a poor writer and thinker he can’t make a compelling case for his positions. He is like most pundits on the right one of those people that I can’t figure out why they were given the platform they have. Basically, the guy sitting next to you at happy hour is just as likely to have a smart and interesting opinion about things as your typical political pundit. I don’t know where these guys come from but you would think they could find a better caliber of people to do what they do.

      2. I think it’s a little of (A) and a little of (B).

        He definitely wants people angry. Without anger he cannot sell his fear.

        But I also think that he along with a bunch of other conservatives, really believe the line that they’d win a civil war because “they have all the guns”.

        1. Yeah because there are not entire websites on the left like Salon who do not do the exact same thing. Pull the mot out of your own eye before you start lecturing anyone else.

  24. Trump denies Japanese children needed exercise!

    “Japan halts evacuation drills simulating North Korean missile attack”
    […]
    “TOKYO: Japan has halted evacuation drills simulating a North Korean missile attack in the wake of historic talks between Washington and Pyongyang, local media reported Thursday.
    Government officials did not immediately confirm the reports, but authorities in one town told AFP they were suspending a drill planned for next week on orders from Tokyo.”
    https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/
    news/defence/japan-halts-evacuation-
    drills-simulating-north-korean-missile-
    attack/articleshow/64679061.cms

    Won’t he think of the CHILDREN?!

    1. They’ll regret cancelling these drills the next time Godzilla and Ghidorah come back.

  25. Trump wants to privatize the Post Office:

    “The Trump administration is proposing to restructure the U.S. Postal Service with an eye to taking it private, a step it said would cut costs and give the financially burdened agency greater flexibility in adjusting to the digital age.

    The recommendation is part of a sweeping plan to reorganize and trim the size of the federal government. The broader plan, which would require congressional approval, drew mixed responses on Capitol Hill after it was released on Thursday.

    . . . .

    Privatizing the Postal Service would provide greater freedom to raise prices and negotiate pay and benefits, according to the White House’s proposal. A private postal operator could cut costs by delivering mail fewer days a week and to more centralized locations, it said, and give the agency access to private capital to fund operational improvements.

    . . . .

    The American Postal Workers Union, which represents 200,000 postal workers, objected to the idea of privatizing the agency.

    —-WSJ

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/tr…..1529659801

    My guess is that Robby is opposed to privatizing the post office because freedom of speech.

    ENB is probably opposed to privatizing the post office because prostitutes are actually sex workers.

    Shikha Dalmia probably opposes privatizing the post office because of immigration.

    At any rate, there’s no point in mentioning it. It might triggers somebody’s TDS.

    1. Privatizing the Post Office would be the best thing that Trump has done so far. Just eliminating it and letting the delivery services that are already in place take over would be even better.

      1. Too bad it’s mentioned in the Constitution. That sucker is never going away.

        1. Congress is authorized to establish a post office, but it is not required to do so.

          1. Some judge will read the entrails and decide otherwise.

            1. We are lucky that those same treasonous judges you are referencing have not declared all other private postal service illegal.

      2. Sorry, not recognizing any ray of sunshine here.

        The term “Privatization” as used by the common political animal and as generally understood by the unwashed masses means contracting out pieces and parts of the USPS’s functions. At best, you see any added efficiency wiped out by replacing the postal service bureaucracy and unions with a postal service contractors’ guild but the more likely scenario will be that same guild piggy backing onto the other “stakeholders” with the old postal service bureaucracy changed from actual, albeit inefficient service providers to an army of compliance officers and general snoops and busybodies*.

        *for much of the same phenomenon see defence contractors, road builders and the American Society of Civil Engineers and the army of planners, reviewers, inspectors and compliance officers that occupy the various state and federal agencies that police the same.

        1. IOW, the record of “privatization” is not that good. Even though contracting out various government functions has led to efficiencies and cost reductions in delivery, they have have rarely lead to meaningful reductions in government budgets for those services.

          This is mostly because the notion that these things are “essential services” remains. There is never anyone considering the idea that possible these services do not need to be provided at all.

          1. BTW, I’m also not looking for Donald Trump, a lifelong Democrat* to significantly change the direction of things.

            *when he first came to the attention of the public in the 1970s he promoted himself as an advocate of Liberal Democratic causes.

            1. So far, I see that he has not changed.

              1. He still seems to have absolutely no problem with using government power to help some people by taking away from others.

    2. Awesome. Free the Post Office! Remove the shackles and set it free!

      1. Eliminating it altogether makes it much harder for Oprah to simply recapture it from the evil capitalists in 2021.

        Socialists know how to commandeer not build.

        1. Quit stealing OBL’s material!

  26. The Federalist’s Jesse Kelly throws a temper tantrum? No, the Federalist’s Jesse Kelly writes another article.

    1. Pretty much this.

      He and Schlichter and a bunch of other big-talking fear merchants on the right are just there to throw fuel on the fire of conservatives’ anxiety and victimhood complex. They offer nothing constructive to the conversation at all. It’s basically the conservative version of Robert De Niro’s “Fuck Trump” screed at the Oscars. Woohoo, he hates Trump. Big fucking deal.

  27. “House GOP proposes major cuts to food stamps with passage of 2018 farm bill”
    […]
    “The House of Representatives on Thursday passed the 2018 farm bill, which includes an overhaul of the federal food stamp program that could result in cuts of up to $20 billion in direct benefits over 10 years, opponents say.”
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/food/article/House-
    Republicans-propose-sweeping-cuts-to-food-
    13015556.php?cmpid=gsa-sfgate-result

    Not sure; it might contain more pork, too, but none of the headlines dealt with anything other than cutting free shit, so at least part of it is worthwhile.

  28. Something happened at the Chron last night, and someone is in bad trouble. THIS ran in the Editorial pages:

    “An inside look at the Trump-Kim summit”
    […]
    “He also received from Trump a suspension of joint U.S.-South Korean military exercises, which, like pretty much every Trump initiative, prompted sharp criticism in Washington. Such exercises are important symbolically, which is why Kim dislikes them.
    Cancellations are, however, not unprecedented. President Bill Clinton did it uselessly for the current Kim’s father in 1994. And President Barack Obama canceled U.S. exercises with Israel when Iran objected.”
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/
    An-inside-look-at-the-Trump-Kim-summit-
    13015433.php

  29. R.I.P., Charles.

    The guy was a truly eloquent analyst.

  30. “Psychologists say that keeping such young kids away from their parents is emotionally scarring.”

    Really?

    At the risk of Matt Welch accusing me of “whataboutism,” since when has government in general, and the left in particular, been concerned about the “emotional scars” that result from separating children from their parents? Or did it take the arrival of Donald Trump for them to realize that government snatching children from their parents might not be a good idea?

    1. Elian Gonzalez has no comment.

  31. Um, how exactly are they going to use that $10M to help migrant kids? Aren’t they in government custody?

    1. Since when has reality changed some people from making money off pulling the heart strings of Americans?

    2. Hire Private Investigators to track down their parents, since there’s a non-zero chance that the FedGov will be unable to do so?

  32. Static Line-
    Fast, cheap and reliable.

    1. Catapult.

  33. Immigrant kids wearing tinfoil from head to toe: Libertarian moment?

    1. Welch waxing poetic about the glory days for Libertarians during the Obama administration might be peak wokeltarian. What a golden age the Obama Administration was for Libertarians with its illegal war in Libya, assassination of American citizens, rampant abuse of the FBI, DOJ and IRS and government sponsored destruction of the private healthcare system. Great times indeed.

    2. They’re hotpockets for our lizard king overlord.

    3. It’s called a space blanket. It folds up into a tiny thing.

  34. I find it interesting that the radical Trump-hating left, which hates the nuclear family, traditional marriage, traditional gender distinctions, and roles, now thinks it’s important to keep families together when those “families” are illegal immigrants. Not to mention, that 80% of the children do not have parents to be separated from because they were killed on the journey here by the wild west thugs that dominate large swaths of Mexico.

  35. Another official Day without Fist of Etiquette. I hope you all learned your lesson.

  36. Hey man if you don’t give your country away, you’re a meanie-head bigot. This is libertarianism in the current year+3.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.