Reason Roundup

Donald Trump's Response to Hong Kong Protests Leaves Much To Be Desired

Plus: Farewell to the author whose work inspired Ross Ulbricht to create Silk Road, Trump's toy tax gets delayed until Christmas, and more....

|

After the second day of violent clashes between police and protestors in Hong Kong, and with China moving tanks near the city in a show of force, the supposed "leader of the free world" offered a few remarks on the authoritarian crackdown:

"The Hong Kong thing is a very tough situation—very tough," President Donald Trump told reporters on Tuesday while vacationing in New Jersey. "It's a very tricky situation. I think it will work out and I hope it works out, for liberty. I hope it works out for everybody, including China."

Later, he took to Twitter to offer another equally pathetic assessment of the situation.

For someone who imagines himself as a tough guy "counter-puncher" and who has no qualms about criticizing China's behavior on other issues, Trump's assessment of the protests in Hong Kong is as milquetoast as could be. Remember, some of the protesters—who are rightfully concerned about how a new extradition policy to China will erode the civil liberties enjoyed by Hongkongers—are literally waving American flags as a symbol of freedom. The same flag that Trump will go to the mat to defend if it is criticized by an American football player. The same flag Trump has literally hugged in a flailing demonstration of patriotism. Citizens of Hong Kong aren't Americans, of course, but they recognize something about the importance of American iconography that Trump seemingly cannot grasp: for all its flaws, America remains a beacon of freedom to the world.

That's a fundamental failing of "America First" nationalism. It encourages myopia about conflicts like the one unfolding in Hong Kong—conflicts where American influence and diplomacy could help tip the scales towards freedom or at least limit the potential for an authoritarian crackdown.

There are, of course, limits to what can be done. America couldn't stop the Soviet Union from rolling tanks into Prague in 1967 and couldn't prevent the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989. If China wants to crush the dissidents in Hong Kong, it will do so.

But the words and actions of an American president still matter—to the people in Hong Kong and others who oppose authoritarianism around the world. Instead of rising to the occasion, Trump has shrunk from the task. It's obvious that he enjoys the attention that he receives for being president. It's clear that he relishes the ability to drive the news cycle with a tweet and to opine on culture war issues that have very little to do with the office he holds. But the Hong Kong crisis has revealed, yet again, how completely in-over-his-head Trump is when it comes to the important things.

Hongkongers and concerned observers might also wonder: What has happened to Trump's "beautiful" friendship with Chinese President Xi Jinping? If an American president is going to try to be "friends" with dictators and authoritarians, but then fails to use those relationships to steer those dictators away from doing authoritarian things—then all the president has accomplished is enabling authoritarianism.


FREE MINDS

J. Neil Schulman (1953-2019). Alongside Night, Schulman's 1979 dystopian novel about an economic and political crisis that drives large amounts of commerce into black markets makes a case for voluntary exchange as the basis for almost all human interactions. Based on the work of Samuel Edward Konkin III, a libertarian philosopher, the book was endorsed by Milton Friedman, won the Prometheus Award, and has been credited with inspiring Ross Ulbricht to create the dark web marketplace Silk Road.

In 1975, Schulman wrote a profile of sci-fi luminary Robert Heinlein for Reason, which you can read here.


FREE MARKETS

Trump's trade war got a little more confusing on Tuesday. The White House announced that it would delay some new tariffs until December 15 to avoid having those taxes fall on American consumers during the Christmas shopping season.

That directly contradicts the administration's oft-repeated (and untrue) claim that China is paying for the tariffs.

How did the White House decide which tariffs to delay? Axios reports that the temporary reprieve will only apply to items where more than 75 percent of U.S. imports come from China. Why 75 percent? "The significance of the 75 percent cutoff is unclear," writes Courtenay Brown.

Sure, why not. Economic nationalism means drawing arbitrary lines and pretending they have objective significance. There isn't a whole lot of logic to the way Trump's trade war is being conducted anyway.


QUICK HITS

Advertisement

NEXT: Restraining Order Issued to Ban Unwanted Contact with Mayor by City Commission Candidate

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. It’s a very tricky situation. I think it will work out and I hope it works out, for liberty. I hope it works out for everybody, including China.

    SEND IN THE TROOPS.

    1. Wait.wait.WAIT. I thought crossing borders was a right.

      American military troops have a right to enter China via their open borders.

      1. Wait.wait.WAIT. I thought crossing borders was a right.Only to a free county discounting the open borders bullshit) How long since you’ve pulled the “coming for your guns scam,.

        And what caused you to assume that Hong Kong residents have the same or more rights as we do?.

        1. Ahahahah your stupid ass can’t even close tags properly Whihny ahahahahaha

        2. 2 html failures in just a few days. #learntocode

        3. We’re like a pack of wild dogs!

        4. Gee, Hihn, you didn’t link to your own statements as you normally do when claiming you have !!!!!PROOF!!!!!
          You just fucked up in general.

        5. HIHN HAS FUCKED UP……..AGAIN!!!!!!!! (Smirk)

          ABSOLUTE PROOF OF HIS STUPIDITY!!!!!!!!!! (Snort)

          1. BEND OVER RON PAUL WORSHIPPER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Sneer)

      2. Poor Hihn

    2. Hello.

      Er. Eric, how is this America’s problem?

      Reason on one end ludicrously supports open borders and now interventionism?

      Where are the lazy ass cuck Brits in all this?

      I can’t follow the logic of this ostensibly libertarian magazine anymore. It just seems to be ‘Shoot TDS first, and then worry about the principles later’.

      1. Hello,

        Er, Rufus, he never said it’s America’s problem.

        He spoke only of diplomacy and influence, stressed those are very limited as direct action, a whole paragraph. That has long been America’s position as leader the free world.

        He phrased the nationalism poorly, Trump has chosen to abandon America’s long-time leadership as a beacon of hope. 99% of the time. Lady Liberty has been that beacon to the world. But after or during extreme tragedies, by politics or nature, our Presidents have assumed the beacon role..

        It’s not a “problem,” any more than TV ads are run to solve problems. They’re mostly to improve or maintain the image.
        In this arena, that’ what leaders do.

        I can’t follow the logic of this ostensibly libertarian magazine anymore.

        As a general rule, people who use the lame TDS conspiracy dodge are far right, or Trump supporters.

        When Presidents assume that role, it’s not just a beacon of hope. He’s also saying “Americans are standing with you. That’s who we are.”

        Eric and you seem at opposite extremes on nationalism, good or bad. How dare you state that libertarian principles require us to agree with you.

        Principle. You’ve shown the principles of (obviously) an authoritarian … who DOES suffer EDS . Eric Derangement Syndrome.

        1. Blah, blah, Hihn.

          Not enough all caps.

        2. Count them. How many others will lie about Eric’s article … with no more than infantile nah -nah -nah nah nah nah ?

          Pitching hand grenades requires no skills and minimal intelligence.
          Building a tank is far more difficult, requiring both skills and intelligence .. and in this case, literacy. Reading is a low-level skill.

          1. Fuck off, hihn

          2. Eric boehm = hihn

            1. Certainly seems like WHihn wants to at least suck him off.

            2. Explains why reason doesn’t enforce its own ban.

          3. Fuck off, Hihn.

          4. “Count them”

            How many times you’ve WHihned in this thread?

            A fuck ton.

        3. “”When Presidents assume that role, it’s not just a beacon of hope. He’s also saying “Americans are standing with you. That’s who we are.”””

          And then what? If the tanks start rolling, what do you expect Trump to do?

          1. I know people are going to hate me for saying this, but seriously Hihn, I would like to hear your opinion on this.

            What do you think Trump should do if the tanks start rolling and protesters are dying?

        4. Trump has chosen to abandon America’s long-time leadership as a beacon of hope.”

          Why is what Trump not doing and different then when Obama did nothing during the Iranian protest or when Bush ignored Tinamane square riots. No president can really do anything without the threat of war so keeping it low key is often best

          1. Well there was Libya, and now they have a slave trade.

        5. Fuck off, Hihn

  2. Stacey Abrams will not run for president but is willing to be anyone’s veep.

    same

    1. Who?

    2. I just want everyone to know that I will not run for president either.

      1. But are you willing to be anyone’s veep?

        1. I’ll consider it.

    3. She’s too fat to run.

      1. She’s too Socialist to win.

      2. I’ll bet she could run……. if she was trying to catch the ice cream truck.

  3. Oh lord, I actually like a bunch of those bands. Sections 1 and 3 most likely.

    1. Never heard of them.

    2. Seriously? FFS #9 is the ONLY section worth a shit. And AX7 has gotten way too soft.
      Going to Slipknot this weekend!

  4. Trump went to Pennsylvania to give a speech on energy policy and ended up talking about the Academy Awards.

    only fair since some celebrities bring up climate change on the red carpet

    1. They aren’t Presidents. Why do you expect no more of our President than from”some celebrities,” who are only celebrities. Very low expectations from our President,

      Sadly, WDS doesn’t work well when it’s expanded to. Whataboutism Derangement Syndrome,
      .

      Unofortunately

      1. Fuck off, Hihn.

      2. “Why do you expect no more of our President than from”some celebrities,” who are only celebrities”

        Because I’m not a starfucker.

        1. Because POTUS is a long way from the God Emperor that Reason, Hihn, Tony, and the other ButtPlugger seem to want leading the US?

      3. ‘Whataboutism’ is just another word for ‘history’.

    2. People like Trump because like Reagan he doesn’t always stay to the written script and goes off topic with little stories just like every conversation normal people have. Did he not also discuss energy policy?

  5. “We’re doing this for the Christmas season. Just in case some of the tariffs would have an impact on U.S. customers.

    The tariffs won’t impact Americans, we’re just waiting to zing the Chinese in mid-December as a Christmas present to ourselves!

    1. Trump just got tired of all the winning.

    2. They definitely don’t impact me. I don’t buy Christmas presents for anyone.

  6. Sexy links > econ links.

    Buhm. what did you do with ENB, you fiend?

    1. Boehm is very judgmental. Makes me not want to read the daily update, and skip straight to the comments like I do for every Shikha feature.

      1. It’s been pretty awful this week that’s for sure.

  7. The NY Post does it again with its cover.

    Scroll down for today’s cover.

    1. +10

    2. The article in the link is a pretty good read, too.

      1. Indeed it is.

  8. Trump fights China over free trade: Eric Boehm throws tantrum

    Trump advocates freedom and does not militarily intervene in Hing Kong: Eric Boehm throws tantrum

    Me thinks Eric Boehm has TDS and should seek medical help.

      1. Is Boehm Reason’s own Fredo?

  9. The prison guards who were supposed to be keeping an eye on Jeffrey Epstein reportedly fell asleep on the job—literally!

    Chloroform will do that to you.

    1. Or some pieces of green paper in an envelope.

      1. Birthers never change.

        That explains why they lose the culture war.

        1. Lose would imply an ending. But by your own logic isn’t it time to pack it up and send the boys home.

          1. He’s a loser.

          2. Clingers have been losing the culture war throughout our lifetimes. They seem destined, for several important and welcome reasons, to continue to lose for decades more.

            Unless you guys have figured a way to totally turn this thing around!

            1. “Clingers have been losing the culture war”

              Oh dear, it seem you’ve reverted to your cliches and crutches again.

            2. Loser.

              /flashes L on forehead.

          3. Lose would imply an ending.

            They can lose forever, til the end of time. And likely would.

            It has been a long time since I saw anyone portray birtherism as as a superior ….. what? … delusion? They’ll never win.

            1. Was it a win for his publisher? That’s the source of birtherism.

              You do know that up to 2007, some of Obama’s bio material said he was born in Kenya. I don’t know if he was or wasn’t. I tend to think he wasn’t. But if you want to talk about birtherism, at least be honest about its source.

              1. Plus, one of the few actual qualifications to be President is be a Natural Born Citizen.

                Asking questions about whether the candidate is and to prove it if there is skepticism, is 100% normal.

                1. Since that’s a requirement, asking for proof of that makes more sense than asking for tax returns.

                  1. +1

                  2. Ummmm…they’re asking for tax returns from Trump. The Bad Orange Man. Totally different that asking The Literal Messiah to prove his qualifications for the presidency.

                    Duh.

        2. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland
          August.14.2019 at 9:39 am

          Birthers never change.

          That explains why they lose the culture war.

          So you agree that it wasn’t the Russians then.

      2. Or being a union worker.

  10. So exactly what should Trump (the USA) be doing about Hong Kong?
    “Strong statements”? Has no effect on communists. Sad.
    Tariffs? Been there, doing that. Not working. Sad.
    Send troops and start a war with a nuclear superpower?
    What, EXACTLY do YOU propose, Eric?

    1. Draw a red line in the sand?

    2. That’s my question. The interventionists always cry “but we aren’t talking about boots on the ground” but they dismiss anything less as “too soft”.

    3. High priority, expedited immigration status for all Hong Kongers, with lower barriers for importing any and all money, movable capital and talented brains from one of the richest per-capital places in the world?

      1. That’s great for the small fraction who want to come here with their assets.

        1. Most of the ones who wanted to leave already exploded the Vancouver housing market.

      2. Just annex Hong Kong as a US territory.

    4. A recession is coming, so gotta start sniffing around for a nice war opportunity.

      1. war is also a good way to end your debt to a nation, unless you loose of course and there would be no winners in a war with China

    5. y“Strong statements”? Has no effect on communists. Sad. Why would they have to? Past Presidents have also taken command as — Eric said it — Leader of the Free World. Did you miss that. The also convey both sympathy and shared hope,

      That’s not just the victims. It shows the entire world what we are. If you never suffer a severe tragedy. You’ll never learn how much even mere words are appreciated, IF they convey hope and sympathy.

      It also shows the world what America is. But we’ll never have leadership until we have an actual leader

      One small positive, at least this was not as bad from Trump, as his totally shameful response to Charlottesville. And his lying. To support neo-nazis and racists … whose assaults even led to cold-blooded murder.

      1. Fuck off and die, Hihn.

      2. Lolololo you’re so fucking stupid WHihn.

      3. You’re lying.

      4. It also shows the world what America is. But we’ll never have leadership until we have an actual leader

        And by “actual leader”, of course you mean “Infallible God Emperor”.

        One small positive, at least this was not as bad from Trump, as his totally shameful response to Charlottesville.

        Once again Hihn: WHAT EXACTLY WAS HIS SHAMEFUL RESPONSE? (If you respond with a single sentence quote taken out of context you’re just proving you’re a liar.)

  11. Trump went to Pennsylvania to give a speech on energy policy and ended up talking about the Academy Awards.

    The energy it took all those brave actors to stand up and applaud each other’s bravery in the resistance?

    1. There was no shooting in texas. See the news /s

    2. My thoughts, from an earlier sparsely attended thread:

      Activist protesting ICE threaten families of contractor.

      “We know where all your children live throughout the country … John Bulfin you have kids in [bleeped out], you have kids in [bleeped out],” the protester shouted. “We know everything about you and you won’t just be seeing us here.”
      “We know where you sleep at night,” another protester shouted. “We know what kind of dog food you buy your dogs.”
      “We’re not actually joking,” the protester said before shouting the location of where Bulfin lives. “John Bulfin you go to [bleeped out], you go to church on [bleeped out], you live on [bleeped out the] road. We are not joking.”

      This, one day before someone shot up ICE offices in Texas.

      I wonder if this will be treated as seriously as a random anonymous person on the internet opining about judges and woodchippers?

      ‘Cause I know which one I’d take more seriously.

      (in fact, I’m pretty sure that if you shout something like that at a bunch of the folks around here you stand a good chance of getting shot on the spot.)

      1. This is straight up terrorism. One of the ways you use terrorism is to target the cops and judges and make law enforcement impossible. But reason is okay with it because Orange Man Bad and open borders at any price.

        1. If you wanted to overthrow a government, taking on the agents of the state is probably the best method.

          Most of these Lefties don’t really wont to overthrow the US Government, they just want to make sure the current duly elected Trump cannot win and set back their illegals voting plan.

        2. Yeah, its too bad this country was founded on terrorism, right? I mean, all those guys fighting their legitimate government, making it impossible for them to govern.

      2. Shoot into the crowd. Keep shooting until all those protesters are dead or bleeding out. Except one or two. After some ‘enhanced interrogation’ over a few weeks, release the, back to their nests. Then they can explain to the other progtard traitors what awaits them.

        1. OK, that’s…worrying.

          Why don’t you just crawl back into whatever hole you’ve been hiding in?

  12. http://saraacarter.com/exclusive-google-insider-turns-over-950-pages-of-docs-and-laptop-to-doj/

    A former Google insider claiming the company created algorithms to hide its political bias within artificial intelligence platforms – in effect targeting particular words, phrases and contexts to promote, alter, reference or manipulate perceptions of Internet content – delivered roughly 950 pages of documents to the Department of Justice’s Antitrust division Friday.

    The former Google insider, who has already spoken in to the nonprofit organization Project Veritas, met with SaraACarter.com on several occasions last week. He was interviewed in silhouette, to conceal his identity, in group’s latest film, which they say exposes bias inside the social media platform.

    Several weeks prior, the insider mailed a laptop to the DOJ containing the same information delivered on Friday, they said. The former insider is choosing to remain anonymous until Project Verita’s James O’Keefe reveals his identity tomorrow (Wednesday).

    He told this reporter on his recent trip to Washington D.C. that the documents he turned over to the Justice Department will provide proof that Google has been manipulating the algorithms and the evidence of how it was done, the insider said.
    Google CEO Sundar Pichai told the House Judiciary Committee in December, 2018, that the search engine was not biased against conservatives. Pichai explained what algorithm’s are said Google’s algorithm was not offensive to conservatives because its artificial intelligence does not operate in that manner. He told lawmakers, “things like relevance, freshness, popularity, how other people are using it” are what drives the search results. Pichai said even if his programmers were anti-Republican, the process is so intricate that the artificial intelligence could not be manipulated and it was to complicated to train the algorithm to fit their bias.

    Google did not immediately respond for comment on the insider’s claims, however, this story will be updated if comment is provided.

    1. Those who consider Sara Carter a reliable source (or a journalist) are inconsequential.

      1. Those who are illiterate are inconsequential. Learn to read rev. Even with your low IQ, you should be able to do it.

        1. The literate do not use random capitalization.

          My point concerning Sara Carter and the dopes who respect her work stands.

          Carry on, clingers.

          1. The literate do not use random capitalization.

            Okay but that doesn’t make you any smarter or literate.

            My point concerning Sara Carter and the dopes who respect her work stands.

            If you were not retarded, you might know that is an ad hominem fallacy. You are just dumber than a post Rev.

            1. Come on John, shooting the messenger is the best argument our betters can muster.

              1. He wants Don Fisticuffs Lemon or Fredo Cuomo to tell him what to think and believe.

              2. TrickyVic, does that mean I have finally convinced you that shoot the messenger demonstrates a failure (to rebut the message) and/or ignorance on the issue?

                All it does is make the “shooter” feel Manly. Most cyber-bullies suffer very low self-esteem, like most bullies offline, in playgrounds and on the streets

                1. “”TrickyVic, does that mean I have finally convinced you that shoot the messenger demonstrates a failure (to rebut the message) and/or ignorance on the issue?””

                  It’s a logical fallacy when applied to a debate. It does not prove anything. I’ve known that for a long, long time.
                  Only your arrogance would think it’s attributed to you.

          2. “”The literate do not use random capitalization.””

            Hihn hardest hit.

          3. “The literate do not use random capitalization.”

            iPhone

            1. Excellent.

          4. dOn’T USe raNdoM capItAlizAtIon! hErP deRp!

        2. I’m literate. John, and your source is connected ro PROJECT VERITAS — the rough equivalent of their bullshit video on fetus parts.

          In three cases, the words on the side did not match the words being spoken!! And their assertions FAILED to lead to charges Part of the Deep State conspiracy? Only hardcore, diehard, totally submissive loyalists failed to see obvious wrong words,. or that it went nowhere.
          The same folks who belied Birtherism, that the “alt-left” initiated the violence in Charlottesville, that Trump had a “record Electoral College margin — 39,000 voter!!

          The same folks who refuse to accept that Trump’s first two years added more debt than Obama did AFTER 8 years. (CBO 2024 forecast) . And he just added more! Fiscally. he is the absolute worst President since R — and FDR inherited the Great Depression; Obama the Great Recession … then handed Trump the longest recovery EVER for an incoming President

          He’s runninm Americxa

          1. Trump is running America as badly as his businesses … EVERY actual business FAILED, six went bankrupt.

            1. You don’t know anything about business. So your observations are meaningless babble.

          2. Poor hihn.

      2. “Those who consider Sara Carter a reliable source”

        This from you. Lol.

      3. The source is the 950 pages of documents handed to the DoJ you blithering moron.

      4. Is there a more typical progressive move than smearing the writer when the content doesn’t fit the narrative?

        1. Not even reading the article for a byline is probably more common. Reading things may counter their truth. Best not to even attempt to educate themselves.

    2. Reason doesn’t care John. Conservatives have been calling this out for months and every Reason podcast and article results in “it’s a private company” and “you can sue them if you want”

      They never bring up the fact that lawsuits happen months and years after the crimes are committed, and the damage will have already been done by the time it’s settled. And the reason they never say that is because they don’t mind the election getting thrown to the left because they’ll have their open borders and can continue to pretend to care about the welfare state.

      1. That and reason does not do in depth articles on the lawsuits based on these claims.

        reason says what it says to silence you from bringing it up anymore. reason gets stories from Twatter accounts. Without FB, Twatter, and other social media reason staff would have to work harder to produce their shitty articles.

      2. It is all about open borders with reason. No other value or policy is more important or not subject to sacrifice for the all important open borders.

        1. Election 2020 is coming up.

          If reason doesn’t help get some Democrat elected, then Trump gets 4 more years to roll back more Lefty policies.

          Plus, if Democrats lose the House again it would give the GOP (who have a few less RINOs and more Republicans in office) the power to step up rollbacks.

  13. Russia is evacuating a town near where a small nuclear reactor appears to have exploded, killing several scientists.

    I knew HBO would find a way to do a second season.

    1. +100

  14. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D–Hawaii) is stepping away from the presidential campaign trail for two weeks of National Guard training in Indonesia.

    Yeah, probably Putin’s national guard.

    1. National Guard training…. in Indonesia? I haz confuse.

      Don’t national guard training exercises usually involve showing up at the local base and doing a couple of weeks of PT and equipment maintenance?

      1. I told yuz guyz that she was NOT a Natural Born Citizen.

      2. I think the NG has been doing training outside of the US for a few decades.

    2. So does any part of this training involve AR-15s? Or the more deadly military equivalent with the murderous selector switch?
      A democrat with a gun? I don’t know if I should laugh or go hide.

  15. The inverted yield curve predicts a Trump recession.

    Clingers hardest hit.

    1. I guess not having to worry about losing your job is one advantage to living in a sheltered workshop for the mentally deficient. Be careful rev, in hard economic times, care for the mentally deficient is one of the first things to go.

      1. Not fair, John. What about all of the mentally deficient grocery baggers out there? I mean yeah, Rev can’t stay employed at his local Kroger store because he wouldn’t stop touching himself while haranguing customers, but still.

    2. “Predicts” a recession? Don’t you read Paul Krugman, Art? We’re already in a recession. When Russia hacked the 2016 election, it immediately caused a global recession, with no end in sight.

      #DrumpfRecession
      #KrugmanWasRight

      1. Exactly, and the media is complicit by covering it up by running fake news stories about all the companies that claim they can’t find additional workers.

    3. “The inverted yield curve predicts a Trump recession.
      Clingers hardest hit.”

      Tell that to Krugman; Dow near $26K
      Asshole bigots hardest hit.

    4. This is one of the more reasonable posts you’ve made because yeah, a recession is just about the only way Trump can lose.

      1. You figure the electorate has become more rural, more superstitious, more white, more bigoted, and more backward than the one that gave Trump a shot at a longshot run through the Electoral College a few years ago?

        1. “rural, more superstitious, more white, more bigoted, and more backward”

          There you are with those sad written crutches again.

          1. The programming always kicks back in after a couple of posts.

            1. It’s sad really, anyone with any real education could avoid such embarrassments.

          2. It’s the best our betters can do.

            1. Yes, it seems that it really is.

    5. And it supposedly has for over a year now.

      Oops! See that’s the thing about predictions. They have to be useful, not some vague inference.

      1. If you make predictions long enough, you may luck into being correct, see broken clocks.

      2. The story now is that the yield curve inverting in 2005 was the canary in the coal mine leading up to the 2008 recession. Just 3 short years later. I guess whatever it takes for the idiots to comfort themselves.

    6. Funny, NPR was pointing out this morning that, while it can indicate an upcoming recession, it doesn’t always work out that way.

      1. That’s because the econy has been roaring while the curve has been inverted for some time now. They’re covering their asses.

        1. But how they will gloat when a downward marker actually does cause a slow down.

        2. No, they actually want a recession. So what if people lose jobs, savings and houses? Anything to make Orange Man Bad.

          1. Yup. At this point, a bad Recession is really the only realistic way that Trump might not win re-election.

            If we do have a market correction and Trump plays hands off the economy, it will recover faster than if he does something stupid like Bush and Obama did. This means that a market correction soon might recover long before the election to give Trump the win. A market correction more near the election might cause no real effect until after the election.

    7. I like the format here with the lines indenting the responses. It makes it much easier to skip to the end once ‘certain’ posters show up.

    8. Arty, it’s cute you cut and pasted that. Clearly your owners told you to do that. As you have no understanding what any of that means.

  16. http://hotair.com/archives/jazz-shaw/2019/08/13/dem-warns-scotus-pro-second-amendment-ruling-will-lead-court-packing/

    Democratic Senator to the Supreme Court “Start ruling the way we expect you to rule or we will pack the court”.

    But remember, it is Trump who is destroying our institutions.

    1. Enlarging the Supreme Court would be following the rules.

      Clingers hardest hit.

      1. No it wouldn’t. but dipshit fascists will never control both the Senate and the White House again.

      2. Threatening to enlarge the Supreme Court as a way to get a desired result on a specific case is an outrageous abuse of power. These senators should be censured at the least and their letter denounced.

        1. Outrageous is the very word that came to my mind when I read this. Their oath clearly means nothing to this crew.

          I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

          <a href="https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Oath_Office.htm&quot;

        2. Funny how lefties are constantly trying to change the rules whenever the current ones don’t work out in their favor.

          1. That Democrat strategy likely started when they agreed to let the federal government regulate slavery as of 1808 and then got upset that Americans were trying to end slavery.

            Then they coudn’t just leave the Union, they had to start a war.

      3. “Enlarging the Supreme Court would be following the rules.
        Clingers hardest hit.”

        SCOTUS finally has some folks who are at least familiar with the constitution.
        Asshole bigots hardest hit.

        1. The members of “The right” on the court often cross lines to vote with the left. Particularly Roberts, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

          How often do the 4 left wing justices cross lines and vote with the conservatives? Remember the last time Kagan joined a 6-3 conservative majority? How about our wise Latina, how often does she vote with the conservative block? Cause I’m gonna posit never. In a contested decision, they always stick together.

          But our Democrat leadership in the senate says that the court is sick and needs healing…. because there are more conservatives than liberals. And by liberals we don’t me liberty, libertarian, or even libertine. We mean partisan democrats.

          1. “”But our Democrat leadership in the senate says that the court is sick and needs healing…. because there are more conservatives than liberals.””

            That’s a nice political way of saying they are threating the court because the majority of the court might not decide things the way that want.

            1. Vic….Yeah, but it makes me wonder. Roughly 90 years ago, FDR was having a hell of a time getting his New Deal programs through judicial muster. FDR would propose a program, Congress would pass enabling legislation…and SCOTUS would shoot them down.

              Then came the Court-packing drama. But afterwards, something else happened that we do not read much about. Very shortly afterward, the ‘Stich in Time Saved Nine’ SCOTUS decisions came out and the New Deal was in full force afterwards.

              Might the Democrats be trying to do the same thing. Influence jurisprudence through threats to judicial independence?

              1. It appears so.

      4. It’s also a tacit admission you’re losing.

        So please, continue admitting you are losing.

        1. Why, RALK is undefeated! Just ask him

      5. Nine sounds like a good number.

        1. Or ninety. Sounds good too.

          1. Fuck off Shreek

            1. Hey, I was just being a smart ass. No need to insult me that way.

              1. My apologies.

          2. Yeah, but the most liberal judge on SCOTUS didn’t say that.

    2. They are scared of a precedent being set by the obvious unconstitutionality of what NYC did in that law. They do not much like being on th he wrong end of stare decisis.

      1. Yup. Lefties fully understand how dangerous a Pen and Phone can be to their agenda.

        It’s why they try to use a pencil and soup can phone to try to stop Trump’s rollbacks.

    3. Why should jurists on the Supreme Court care if they get more colleagues? They can’t reduce their pay or fringe benefits. They just keep on their jobs as if nothing happened.

  17. Pakistan might ban single-use plastic bags.

    I stan packing groceries in paper bags.

    1. It’s the only problem they have.

    2. Wheres the boehm article decrying the tax on consumers?

  18. ATTN 2000s high school grads of the alt persuasion: where are you sitting???

    Far right, obviously.

  19. Man who advocated mass shootings, killing federal agents had huge arsenal in home: feds

    Notice the definition of what constitutes “threats” is really being taken for a ride. Even the NY Post says this guy “advocated mass shootings”.

    I do believe that advocating anything is fully protected by the 1st Amendment.

    1. The MSM Propagandists also make it out that 10,000 rounds of ammo is some scary thing.

      People like me and that I know, can supply a small army with weapons and ammo.

      1. I’ve never had 10,000 rounds at a time, but back when I was competing in pistol matches I often bought in lots of 5000 (all I could reasonably store). The matches themselves ate up at least 1000 rounds a month, and more was expended for practice. Buying in bulk is the only way to make it affordable. (High-power rifle competition is even worse; a lot of guys I knew were only able to afford it because they did their own reloads.)

        1. When you have automatic weapons, you need a lot of cheap ammo to fire.

          The advantage of having your own shooting range and brass retrieval system.

  20. Stacey Abrams will not run for president but is willing to be anyone’s veep.

    Even Trump’s?

    1. Trump would never. He does not want to lose Georgia by having her on the ticket.

  21. “Stacey Abrams will not run for president but is willing to be anyone’s veep.”

    Abrams is a genuine American hero. Unfortunately, similar to how Hillary Clinton was cheated out of the Presidency, Abrams was cheated out of the governorship of Georgia. But rather than just complain, she’s doing something about it:

    I am excited to announce the launch of #FairFight2020, a comprehensive initiative to staff, fund, and train voter protection teams on-the-ground in battleground states across the country. Join our fight to protect the vote at fairfight2020.

    Since Republicans can only win by cheating — Russian hacking, voter suppression, etc. — it’s critical to prevent them from using any dirty tricks in 2020.

    #LibertariansForAbrams

    1. I picture a headline like ‘Ice cream truck drivers on strike. Stacey Abrams hardest hit’.

  22. So Reason is not only for welfare for immigrants, they also want the President to interfere in the internal workings of a sovereign nation.

    Ladies and Gentleman: The Internet’s Leading Libertarian Website!

  23. Am I to understand that the criticism of Trump here on Hong Kong is that he is not being enough of a bellicose interventionist?

    Is this kind of like how he went from a mad warmonger risking a nuclear exchange with North Korea to being Kim’s back pocket in less than a year’s time?

    1. Seriously. I read this post and thought “WTF?”

      Then again most Reason writers have serious cases of Trump Derangement Syndrome, so it’s not surprising their views on any issue would be based on what Trump’s perceived position is at any given time.

      If Chinese troops enter Hong Kong I look forward to Reason going full New York Journal and demanding the US Navy step in.

    2. Orange Man Bad, the first rule of Liberaltarianism

  24. So Reason wants war with China now? Or at least to plausibly risk it?

    Short of outright nuclear war, it’s hard to imagine a greater recipe for global human suffering than a war between the US and China. Trump – an inept buffoon who should not be trusted to run a whelk stall – has, in remaining restrained for once, probably done the best foreign policy of his administration.

    I have to admit, I’m about to stop visiting the site. The quality of analysis lately is appalling.

    1. Just go straight to the comments. Better analysis of an issue.

      1. Well, a long time ago on a web site far, far, away – – – – – –

        Lately not so much.

    2. Said this a thousand times, but when one writer from the Reason staff writes something on their blog, that is not “Reason” taking a position. It’s the writer’s personal ramblings.

      Reason puts out a print magazine that has actual editorial oversight. The blog is just a blog.

      1. And you’re not correct no matter how many times you say it.

        This is published at Reason.com

        The “Reason puts out a print magazine” is hopelessly frozen in the 20th century.

        1. Yeah, the whole “this is the writer not ‘reason'” BS is nothing but a version of the No True Scotsman fallacy.

          Also, I don’t see anything wrong with holding reason accountable for everything they put on their website considering that they were happy to ruin Ron Paul’s Presidential campaign over a couple of newsletters that bore his name and nothing else.

          1. John, this comment might seem pretty random, but I offer sincere thanks and congratulations for your comment, because by my recollection it constitutes only the third time I’ve ever witnessed “No True Scotsman” used correctly in calling someone out. People constantly use it to malign people for applying a test for membership in a set, when it’s actually about modifying premises to arrive at a selected conclusion. It drives me nuts.

            Good point re: RP, too.

            1. sarcasmic hated that his crying “No True Scotsman” fallacy never silenced people.

              Its laughable that Libertarians cannot say that they support x, y, and z and those who support the opposite are NOT Libertarians.

          2. +10000

      2. The magazine articles are of a higher quality. That doesn’t mean they don’t ever suffer from the same problems, and it doesn’t mean the so-called blog (now not even called that, after the re-design) is above criticism. It’s still an organ of the magazine (which has electronic-only subscriptions), which is an organ of the foundation, which is supposed to be libertarian and based in reason.

        Notice that when they publish good content by good libertarians, they insert a line at the bottom saying it isn’t Reason’s opinion, as opposed to ” is a reporter at Reason.” They even do that for Stossel, who they host on the effing site!

    3. See Dalmia.

      Talk about weakest links.

      1. Shika is their best writer based on clicks metrics

        1. “Best” is the wrong word.
          “Most valuable”, or maybe “strongest” would be better

        2. It also means I no longer recommend anyone read Reason articles. I used to do that all the time.

    4. Coming soon:

      ‘The Reason case for starting WW3’

  25. …credited with inspiring Ross Ulbricht to create the dark web marketplace Silk Road.

    Then check Chuck Schumer’s alibi.

  26. Hispanic El Paso residents flock to gun shops, ranges after mass shooting

    Uh oh. More 2nd Amendment supporters. I will look forward to Lefties calling gun owners White supremacists when clearly non-White people own guns.

    1. The party of slavery does not want anyone to remember that gun laws were created with the express purpose of keeping blacks from having guns.

      1. Exactly.

  27. Democrats continue to rediscover the value of federalism.
    Don’t worry. They’ll forget all about this as soon as they want to impose something on the states.

    1. The are entirely utilitarian and will change their position on a dime if t provides an advantage in the moment.

      1. Just like Reason

  28. “For someone who imagines himself as a tough guy “counter-puncher” and who has no qualms about criticizing China’s behavior on other issues, Trump’s assessment of the protests in Hong Kong is as milquetoast as could be.”

    There is zero chance of his comments having any effect on the situation at all, but I guess he should bluster and shout to make sure his next meeting with the commies is as tough as possible.
    Eric, there’s reasons you’re the ‘editor’ assigned to the AM links and he’s POTUS.

    1. If he had blustered with tough talk that would be criticized.

      1. As was said of one of the Bush POTUS:
        When he walked across the Potomac, the NYT headlined:
        “Bush Can’t Swim!”

    2. So Boehm is criticizing Trump for not acting like the caricature of Trump that lives in Boehm’s head who Boehm thinks is irredeemably irresponsible. Somehow he thinks that is great insight he should lead the Roundup with.

      1. It is just the usual “Orange Man Bad”.

    3. For the unhinged lunatic they make him out to be they sure do rely on his every word.

      The gospel of the Orange Man Bad:

      SAD!

  29. For someone who imagines himself as a tough guy “counter-puncher” and who has no qualms about criticizing China’s behavior on other issues, Trump’s assessment of the protests in Hong Kong is as milquetoast as could be.

    Yeah, well, it’s not our business to be in. Besides, I’ve heard that you can’t take anything he says seriously anyway so what would be the point of him saying anything?

    1. There isn’t any point of him saying anything. You are finally starting to figure this out. Did you get hit on the head or something? You actually said something smart for once.

      1. I’m not surprised you idiots are too stupid to understand sarcasm.

        1. $park¥ is the Worst
          August.14.2019 at 11:49 am
          “I’m not surprised you idiots are too stupid to understand sarcasm.”

          In your case, we can assume it’s idiocy. And ignore any claim of ‘sarcasm’.

        2. Ahahahahah you mean like you did fuckwit ahahahajaj

          1. Fake Tulpa: “I know you are but what am I?”

            LoL

    2. How many decades did it take you to realize words mean jack shit sparky? Actions are what matters. People can talk shit all day, it’s where they expend their actual energy and what they do that matters. The belief that words are more important is why liberalism is so destructive as they seek to eliminate dissent.

    3. “Besides, I’ve heard that you can’t take anything he says seriously anyway”

      Jesus Christ, clubbing you over the head does work.

  30. Oh, for pete’s sake:

    “Trump went to Pennsylvania to give a speech on energy policy and ended up talking about the Academy Awards.”

    Seek help Eric.

    1. All Eric got was a crummy T-shirt.

  31. Again, I care for the Hong Kongians, but this is more the UK’s issue than ours, right? I’m just imagining how we’d have taken it if China tried to get involved with Ferguson

    1. That is a fair point. That being said, if China does send in tanks to slaughter it’s citizens, maybe that is a clue that we shouldn’t be trading and investing there.

      1. When a dem gets elected in the WH again, any economic action such as tariffs will become the right thing to do.

    2. “this is more the UK’s issue than ours”
      “this is more the UK’s issue than ours”
      “this is more the UK’s issue than ours”
      “this is more the UK’s issue than ours”

      (Bart Simpson writing on the black board)

  32. Reason roundup.has turned into deep thoughts on orange man bad by eric boehm.

    1. +100

  33. “are literally waving American flags as a symbol of freedom. ”

    I love how Reason hops back and forth between “America is the global symbol of freedom” and “we should fund the welfare of the world and if you don’t want that you’re not libertarian”

    What a shit show

    1. Freedom=Free Shit.

    2. I thought waving the American flag was a sign of white supremacist, slavery advocating, bigotry.
      That’s what some football player said – – – – – –

  34. So, you got smacked around pretty good about calling Trump’s response to Hong Kong protests milquetoast….

    So here’s your chance to set them all straight…
    What exactly could he have done to avoid your scorn? What statement could have been issued, what sanctions proposed, what troops deployed, what sites bombed?

    Because I suspect that if he had said “The US condemns these actions in the strongest possible terms” you’d have said that it was empty bluster.

    And I suspect that had he announced any sort of sanctions, you would have decried his belligerence.

    And I suspect that had he made any concrete moves, like moving warships or announcing some sort of retaliation like recognizing Taiwan, you’d have decried his recklessness and lack of foreign policy experience.

    So I’d really love to hear what it is that he could have done that would have inspired you to say “great job, Mr. President! You really handled that well!”

    1. The answer is ‘there’s nothing he could have done’.

      Reason simply believes Trump is a clown and that’s what they’re going with.

      The fact he’s steering clear of entanglements so far should make libertarians happy. Unless they believe in American exceptionalism and the need to be a moral and political beacon abroad by inserting itself in foreign affairs. ‘We always did it so why is Trump stopping the charades?!’

      A statement of support is enough I reckon. But not sure if this would please anyone set in their opposition to Trump.

      Reason seems all confused in their stance on the role of government in foreign policy and national security.

      You have Dalmia ranting and raving against Trump on immigration on one end and others who mock him for not bombing Syria or ‘do something’ in China.

    2. Resign. Boehm would probably endorse that happily.

      It would do fuck all to help Hong Kong but Boehm would finally be done with his TDS.

      1. I wonder what some of these people are going to do with themselves when Trump is no longer president (whenever that occurs). I think some of them will be just plain lost; their lives will have no meaning.

    3. I think the point here, is that since Trump already decided to engage in empty bluster ANYWAY, his bluster should be more forcefully supportive of the pro-liberty protestors.

      Yes it is all virtue signaling on some level. But if he’s going to virtue signal, why be half-assed about it?

      1. How shocking. Jeffrey prefers empathy rhetoric to actual actions.

        1. How shocking, Jesse prefers baiting and trolling to actually reading.

          1. Cry more bitch, and don’t you have rapists to import.

            I mean seriously, are you a little gurrl? Because you constantly cry about literally everything and everyone.

          2. Pedo a Jeffy’s daddy don’t best him nearly enough, and now WE lay the price. Maybe if we get lucky. Some illegal will make it all the way to Toronto and stage an ultra violent home invasion on Jeffy’s place, where the result is a savagely tortured Pedo Jeffy.

    4. Not looking for a “great job”, but what Boehm thinks is the least worst move would be enlightening.

    5. There is something to be said for the fact the Trump has all the energy and time in the world to regularly tweet for days about rando shit, how much he loves Kim Jong Un, and personal beefs, but the best he can do about this situation where people might actually die is that one weaksauce Tweet?

      1. You know that Trump has staff to tweet for him too?

        1. Domt you just marvel at the stupid simplistic shit all these people say about Trump?

          1. It’s pretty shocking how ignorant people can be.

  35. “For someone who imagines himself as a tough guy “counter-puncher” and who has no qualms about criticizing China’s behavior on other issues, Trump’s assessment of the protests in Hong Kong is as milquetoast as could be. ”

    JFC, do you want him to be more presidential or not. Make up your mind.

    1. More presidential. But his tweets on Fredo Cuomo were priceless.

      I’M TORN!

      1. +10

  36. >>Trump’s assessment of the protests in Hong Kong is as milquetoast as could be.

    you often jump the gun and look foolish in the end

  37. Apparently foreign intervention is libertarian now?

    1. Haven’t you heard? Libertarian is the new neo-con!

      1. I think most Libertarians are acutely aware that foreign interventions can lead to war. There are a million ways to promote and expand freedoms around the World without war.

  38. When push comes to shove, Xi tells Trump where he can put his trade deal. Then Xi tells the US Navy to stay away which is further proof of Xi’s contempt for Trump’s electorally driven cowardice. Tariffs delayed are the white flag showing Xi that Trump is now his bitch. Xi can do anything he wants to because Trump’s weak personality, driven by what others think of him, can’t bear the thought of losing the 2020 election, which he will despite the extraordinary incompetence of the Democrat field.

    Trump will be able to add the presidency to his list of losing ventures. The man obsessed with “winning” will forever be remembered as the ultimate loser.

    When a few tens of thousand of Chinese troops raid Hong Kong and drag off hundreds if not thousands of protestors, you can be sure that Trump will issue a really mean Tweet expressing his “disappointment” and hoping to conclude a trade deal. Then Xi will tell Trump to go to hell.

    1. “”When a few tens of thousand of Chinese troops raid Hong Kong and drag off hundreds if not thousands of protestors, you can be sure that Trump will issue a really mean Tweet expressing his “disappointment” and hoping to conclude a trade deal””

      If Xi does that, what do you think the US response should be?

      1. Vic….I’ll take that one.

        Militarily, nothing. HK is not our fight. There is no vital US interest there that I can see.
        Politically, let the Congress do the ‘verbal flame throwing’. POTUS Trump does not have to say anything.
        Media, this is where I might ‘go to town’ quietly. Dial up the coverage of the Uighur concentration camps. The intent is to make the world isolate China under a unrelenting, constant barrage of negative publicity.
        Economically, more deregulation, work at taking away developing nation status at WTO.

        This would be a good start.

        I don’t understand the ‘Armchair Generals’ clamoring for ‘action’. No! This is where we really need to be circumspect, and then hit China with everything we have in our economic, media, diplomatic and political arsenal when they have been isolated and under attack from all sides.

        1. Solid reasoning.
          Won’t happen.
          Too many in the ruling class are in China’s pockets.

          1. I think that Atlas Shrugged is basically right about the correct course of action. My problem with Trump is that he’s allowed Xi to back him into a corner where the tariffs will send the US into a recession giving “proof” that capitalism has failed and only Warren-Sanders can save us. Trump can’t win an election with 7% unemployment, negative economic growth and an 18,000 Dow Jones. That threat makes it impossible for Trump to actively oppose China in the ways that AS suggests.

            The correct course to avoid a deep recession is to drop our tariffs completely, slash spending (including especially regulatory agencies), deregulate much more and then slowly end all trade with the Chinese mainland. Offer the world free trade with the US but only if they stop buying stolen IP from China.

            The US market is far more attractive than the Chinese. Even Iran knows that.

    2. You Chiphile anti-Americans are a fun bunch, cowering in fear and self-loathing that you must project onto others.
      “China is omnipotent and invincible, the US can’t win! If we don’t appease, they’ll stomp us! Also, we should go to war for Hong Kong even though we’re so much weaker than the glorious China!”

      1. I don’t think that the Chinese are invincible. In fact, their entire economy is disintegrating from the corruption that always rises up in totalitarian states.

        The last thing that I want is a totally unnecessary shooting war with 1.4 billion people. Xi’s status has been raised by Trump and the world sees it. Xi’s power is an illusion maintained by people like Trump who constantly refers to the tyrant as “his good friend”.

        China’s claims about their economic growth are nonsense. They’ve probably been in a recession for over a year. Job losses in the millions, companies abandoning China for Vietnam and Mexico and their European customers going into recession and buying less and less from China.

        Why do you think that the mainland is trying to subdue HK? The contrast between the two is obvious and if the mainland populace becomes too aware of this, it could be the end of Xi’s dreams of world conquest.

        Trump talks about how China needs us more than we need them and then he delays the tariffs which implies the exact opposite. China has made no concessions, the act of one in control of the situation. Trump appears to be begging for a deal, the act of one who is desperate.

        The country in economic trouble is dominating the country with positive growth. Trump is the reason for this.

  39. E̶c̶o̶n̶o̶m̶i̶c̶ ̶n̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶a̶l̶i̶s̶m̶ Government means drawing arbitrary lines and pretending they have objective significance.

    Fixed!

    *barf*

  40. “Trump’s toy tax?

    Does that include prostitutes?
    I hope not.
    I’m taxed to the limit as it is.

  41. conflicts where American influence and diplomacy could help tip the scales towards freedom or at least limit the potential for an authoritarian crackdown.

    Are you willing to go to war over Hong Kong?

    Because if you’re not, what is diplomacy going to do? The Chinese know we won’t start shooting over this – HK is not Taiwan where we have a long history of defending it. And that’s not a Trump thing, no President would have been willing to shoot. It is, after all, a former *UK* polity, not US.

    Speaking of which – why no mention of the failings of the UK government to . . . even talk about the situation? Boris isn’t even putting out milquetoast tweets.

  42. Reason last week: “Trump’s tariffs have needlessly damaged our relationship with China.”

    Reason this week: GOT DAMN THAT PUSSY TRUMP IS NOT STANDING UP TO CHINA!!”

    1. +10

  43. It encourages myopia about conflicts like the one unfolding in Hong Kong—conflicts where American influence and diplomacy could help tip the scales towards freedom or at least limit the potential for an authoritarian crackdown.

    Ah, this must be the “Libertarians for Global Interventionism & Military Action” forum! How very libertarian of you!

  44. This is a remarkably dense take, especially for Reason.

    It’s one thing for a president to spout inflammatory opinions about economic issues.

    It’s another thing for a president to do the same about military operations with the only other country on the planet that would test our military.

    Trade war with China isn’t great. Actual war with China would be disastrous.

  45. Anything involving Trump leaves much to be desired. Guy is a buffoon of the highest order.

  46. #MAGA

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.