Donald Trump

Republicans Choose Trumpism Over Property Rights and the Rule of Law

Trump is just who he said he'd be four years ago. By rallying around him, Republicans are choosing to brand themselves in his image.

|

In more placid times, news that the president of the United States was encouraging aides to break the law by seizing swaths of private property along the southwestern border to build a wall might have caused more than a day's ripple.

After all, legitimate controversy over the promiscuous threat of eminent domain (as well as illegitimate fears of a NAFTA Superhighway) dogged former Texas Gov. Rick Perry for a full decade, prompting him to eventually abandon his dreams of a Trans-Texas Corridor tollroad. And Perry wasn't out there dangling pardons and barking "take the land" to his staff.

As former Fox News and current CNN host Alisyn Camerota asserted Wednesday, "Any time there was any suggestion about President Obama using eminent domain for anything, Roger Ailes, and therefore Fox News, blew a gasket about the idea of seizing private land."

We are accustomed to some ideological shape-shifting when the White House changes teams. But what's so striking about this week's slate of immigration-related controversies — including the one that supplanted the land-grab pardon: the administration's new rules governing potential citizenship for the children of U.S. service people abroad — is that none of it should come as a surprise.

This is how Trump ran, this is how he won the GOP primary, this is how he beat Hillary Clinton, this is how he has governed. So the question for Republicans becomes, is this how your party will henceforth be known?

Four years ago this month, Trump and the rest of the GOP field engaged in some of the most gruesome restrictionist one-upsmanship American politics had seen in at least two decades. People rightly remember the "rapists" accusation in the president's campaign kickoff, but some of the real crazy came later: Trump telling NBC's Chuck Todd that the U.S. citizen children of illegal immigrants — of which there are an estimated 4 million — "have to go." Vowing to deport legal Syrian refugees. Ending birthright citizenship, Constitution be damned (a stance that, sadly, many of his competitors aped).

That Trump rocketed to the head of a crowded field with such startling rhetoric and policies suggested a conservative appetite for immigration enforcement that would never have been sated by Mitt Romney's "self-deportation" stance (which Trump back in November 2012 called "maniacal") or John McCain's embarrassing about-face on big-picture immigration law reform. Before you knew it, candidate Bobby Jindal was using words like "invasion," Scott Walker was pondering a wall on the northern border, Chris Christie was proposing to track legal immigrants like FedEx packages, and even hapless old Jeb Bush was warning darkly against "anchor babies."

Meanwhile, Trump in the fall of 2015 was distancing himself even further from the field by proclaiming that the government's use of eminent domain to seize private property from one owner in order to hand it over to another, as was codified by the infamous 2005 Supreme Court ruling Kelo vs. the City of New London, was "a wonderful thing." When it was pointed out that Kelo was (deservedly!) unpopular across the political spectrum, the candidate said, with confident inaccuracy: "I fully understand the conservative approach. But I don't think it was explained to most conservatives."

In fact, private property rights used to be foundational to the conservative movement. What Trump was advertising here was that he didn't care. And that Republicans cared a hell of a lot less than they claimed to.

How many times have you heard a variation of the following from someone you know who voted for Trump? "He went too far with the rhetoric sometimes, and I didn't like the way he talked about __________ [fill in the blank]. But …" Usually that "but" would have something to do with Clinton, or the complacency of the political establishment, or the perceived smother of political correctness. Depending on the Trump voter, there might even have been some expectation that his wilder ideas would be constrained by the more mundane realities of governance.

There is no such cause for hope in 2019. Trump is who he said he'd be, minus a surprise or two (including, happily, criminal justice reform). And, having faced not even token resistance from Republicans in the allegedly co-equal legislative branch, Trump is redefining the GOP in ways Ronald Reagan would not recognize: Anti-trade, anti-grace, anti-refugee.

As new GOP presidential primary contender Joe Walsh asked of his "fellow limited government conservatives" in a tweet this week, "You do have a problem with a President demanding the federal government go ahead and seize private land and then promising to pardon those who seized the land. Don't you?"

They don't. At least not as expressed yet in either job-approval polls or primary match-ups. If Republicans want to distance themselves from the kind of overreach that used to make their skin crawl and have any claim on being the party of limited government, capitalism and the rule of law, the time to begin changing that is not November 2020, it's now.

This article originally appeared in the L.A. Times.

Advertisement

NEXT: Hard Lessons From the Russian Civil War

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. We got it, Matt, Orange Man Bad.

    Oh,VERY bad, you say? Oh well, we’d all better become socialists. Right, comrade?

    1. Yes!!! There are NO other choices, other than “Orange Man Bad”, and people who are to the left of Stalin!!! It is known!!!

      Orange Man bad?!? He BAD, all right! He SOOO BAD, He be GOOD! He be GREAT! He Make America Great Again!

      We KNOW He can Make America Great Again, because, as a bad-ass businessman, He Made Himself and His Family Great Again! He Pussy Grabber in Chief!
      http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/donald-trump-scandals/474726/

      “The Many Scandals of Donald Trump: A Cheat Sheet”
      He pussy-grab His creditors in 7 bankruptcies, His illegal sub-human workers ripped off of pay on His building projects, and His “students” in His fake Get-Rich-like-Me reality schools, and so on. So, He has a GREAT record of ripping others off! So SURELY He can rip off other nations, other ethnic groups, etc., in trade wars and border wars, for the benefit of ALL of us!!!
      All Hail to THE Pussy Grabber in Chief!!!

      Most of all, HAIL the Chief, for having revoked karma! What comes around, will no longer go around!!! The Donald has figured out that all of the un-Americans are SOOO stupid, that we can pussy-grab them all day, every day, and they will NEVER think of pussy-grabbing us right back!

      1. I have no clue what point you are trying to make. Your comment has nothing but poor sentences filled with vulgar. Its not very effective.

        1. The Trumptatorship is “filled with vulgar” would be a good summary.

          “What comes around, goes around” would also be a good summary.

          I didn’t mean to be a vulgar… “Pussy” is short for “pussy-cat”… Not meaning to pussy-foot around here, but greedy and selfish people will walk into your house, and, if they like the sleek fur and warm purr of your pussy-cat, they will just grab it and steal it from you! That’s what I mean by “pussy-grabbing”!

          So in light of these facts, check out the below, along with my belief that supporter of The Trumptatorship are wanting Trump to “pussy grab” for them and theirs… Read carefully, and think about it…

          These voters simply cannot or will not recognize the central illusion of politics… You can pussy-grab all of the people some of the time, and you can pussy-grab some of the people all of the time, but you cannot pussy-grab all of the people all of the time! Sooner or later, karma catches up, and the others will pussy-grab you right back!

          1. “…So in light of these facts,…”

            You seem very much confused. You’re bullshit attempts at ‘cleverness’ are in no way facts.
            You’re just one more whining TDS victim.

            1. Your comments are nothing but poor sentences filled with vulgar.

              1. I’d normally say hes not gonna fuck you, but sqrsly might.

                1. What a great line that was. Best thing I’ve read here for a while. Thanks to all of you who fill their sentences with vulgar.

                  1. You’re welcome you fucking bitch.

          2. ╔════╗───────────────╔═══╦═══╦═══╦═══╗─╔╗╔╗╔╗
            ╚═╗╔═╝───────────────╚══╗║╔═╗╠══╗║╔═╗║─║║║║║║
            ──║║─╔══╦╗╔╦════╦══╗─╔══╝║║─║╠══╝║║─║║─║║║║║║
            ──║║─║╔═╣║║║╔╗╔╗║╔╗║─║╔══╣║─║║╔══╣║─║║─╚╝╚╝╚╝
            ──║║─║║─║╚╝║║║║║║╚╝║─║╚══╣╚═╝║╚══╣╚═╝║─╔╗╔╗╔╗
            ──╚╝─╚╝─╚══╩╝╚╝╚╣╔═╝─╚═══╩═══╩═══╩═══╝─╚╝╚╝╚╝
            ────────────────║║
            ────────────────╚╝
            ____________________________________________________

            1. Indeed. I for one plan to revel in the pure agony it will inflict on the deserving hordes of progtards everywhere. I will likely have a sweatshirt made, emblazoned with ‘Four more years of Trump. Suck it progtards’. To wear the day after the election.

              I make my own fun.

    2. Republicans have sold their souls over Trump.

      1. Orange man Satan?

        1. “Orange man Satan?”

          Pretty much this!!!

          Here is the latest from Orange Satan:
          After allthat is documented in the article above, The Trumptatorship has figured out a NEW way to score points with his base… On its way to us shortly now…

          Anyone recall the Iran-Iraq wars of the 1980s? Lots of it was fought in low-laying salt-water marshes. Very tough terrain for Iraqi military vehicles… And it is expensive to bring in bunches of rocks or logs to raise up the mud to make roads. But there were BUTTLOADS of Iranian corpses just laying around for free! So the Iraqis just limed ’em up (for rot-proofing), and lined ‘em up and laid ‘em down to make roads! Lime ’em up, line ’em up, lay ’em down!

          So Der TrumpfenFuhrer now wants to steal a page from the Iran-Iraq war! The Mexicans won’t pay for His Walls?!? Make raids on Mexican peasant villages, round up conscript wall-building labor, and build the wall out of the limed-up corpses of illegal sub-humans!!! (Or at least the top-rim of the wall, for max psychological intimidation). For every American soldier killed in the effort, there will be reprisal shootings of 200 more illegal un-Americans!
          Don’t say no one warned you of what is coming! Trump wants to “win” at any costs!

          1. Trump wants to “win” at any costs!

            So, basically, he’s exactly what the Dems have been claiming about every “face of the GOP” political figure since Goldwater?

        2. You don’t actually have to make any value judgments about Trump to confidently say that Republicans have betrayed their principles to promote Trump and his agenda.

          1. Economic prosperity, addressing Chinese protectionism, border security, not getting into more wars, and deregulation of the economy.

            Yeah, we really hate ourselves for all this winning.

            1. What dimwits, such as eunuch, consistently fail to realize is that Trump didn’t create an agenda. He won because he was the first R in a long time who adopted the agenda conservatives have been clamoring for.

              1. Pretty much. He’s running on the platform George W. Bush ran on in 2000…he just didn’t abandon it like Bush did a couple of months later.

                Get the government out of the way, stop China from undercutting American businesses with protectionism, stop starting new wars, take care of America’s interests first…it’s really not that tough.

                Honestly, he’s better than Reagan…almost Coolidge-esque. I’d love to see the spending tightened, and he has absolutely tried to do that (he actually proposed defunding several departments), but he can’t force Congress to go along, yet.

                1. Although it wouldn’t surprise me if he started reducing several departments with or without Congress. Seriously, the DoEd could easily be reduced to less than 600, perhaps one for each Congressional district with a Director and admin support.

            2. I am not talking about little tin foot soldiers like you. You’ll do whatever you are told by talk radio and Fox News. I am talking about the idea-makers that wind your spring.

              1. Fuck you, cosmotarian. The only thing you’re pissed about is that he’s more libertarian than any of the pathetic choices you and your shit party put forward. “Libertarians” like you are foul-weather friends…you only pretend to care about this country when it’s suffering and you’re bitter and vindictive towards it when it’s doing well.

                You’re like the creepy loser “friend” of a popular girl who tries to drive down her self-esteem in the hopes that some day she’ll maybe give you a crack at her instead of dating cooler guys…but she won’t, because deep down inside a little voice tells her that you’re a rapey opportunist around whom she shouldn’t leave her drinks unattended.

                And now you’re bitter because she’s moved on with yet another who is richer, smarter, and more decent than you…who isn’t afraid to tell her just what a loser you were and how she was right not to trust you. And here’s the nastiest little secret…he’s completely right when he does that.

      2. Actually Chippy, I sold my soul for rock & roll.

    3. What else would you expect from a mexifornian communist?

    4. No, liberals. Orange Man Very Liberal. The Democrats are the socialists, the Republicans like Trump are the less extreme Democrats.

      We’re in trouble.

  2. Many universities assign way too many assignments to students so it becomes so difficult for them to complete the assignment on time. But fortunately, there are so many assignment writing service providers around the world which offer un matchable writing assistance to students of all ages.
    cheap assignment writing service

    1. I earned $7000 last month by working online just for 7 to 9 hours on my laptop and this was so easy that i myself could not believe before working on this Site. If You too want to earn such a This amount of money then come and Check it. …….. Read More

      1. Yeah? Well, I earned $8000 by doing absolutely nothing.

  3. So the federal government wants to build a big beautiful fence in back yards to keep the neighbors from running all over their property and now there is “private property” kick-back? WTF!?!?

    Come build that fence around my yard – I’m sick of it being treated as everyone’s pet litter box… Usually only the upper-middle class can afford fenced in yards.

    I doubt this is even an issue – kind of like the “windmills will kill all the birds” journalism.. Its crap and most people aren’t stupid enough to eat it. (Although windmill lobbying is crap too.)

    1. Nice analogy. Except in this case the federal government is going to seize your property from you to build this “fence”. Plus they’ll seize enough property to provide for a right-of-way inside the fence for operational purposes. In a lot of cases this fence will cut you off from your supply of fresh water for irrigation.

      But yeah, except for those things, it’s exactly the same.

      1. Kind of surprising it wasn’t always that way. It would be a good idea for the federal government to own a buffer strip, or at least hold an easement on it, along the borders for conducting border security operations. Local hardships like water access could be dealt with using easements.

      2. RBG will certainly support this property seizure. …

        Unless she has one first.

    2. Fuck windmills.

    3. To be fair, those giant windmills they use for electrical generation do kill birds on a regular basis. 😉

      1. And how many in comparison to what billion exist? 0.0000001%? Windmills are a complete waste (be them subsidized) but using a rare insignificant figure like 1 in-a 1,000,000 birds just has illegitimate excuse written all over it just like this border land deal.

  4. I think conservative intellectuals need to realize that limited government, free-market principles are very unpopular once you actually try to put them into practice. See the current attempt to recall Governor Dunleavy. For most Republicans, they were voting for the bigotry and they were happy to have a candidate who was open about his racism.

    1. I’d rather some of the libertarian puritans would admit the state if current global markets and reality instead of proclaiming absolute principles. Absolutists are retarded whether they are communism will work next time to no regulations or government ever. At some point intellectuals need to step away from their theory that only works when everyone thinks and acts the same into a world of reality that involves compromise and acknowledgement of current circumstances.

      1. But…but…MY NATURAL RIGHTS!

    2. And I think progressives, and their water bearers, should realize that reflexively claiming racism on the part of everyone don’t like completely delegitimizes any position they may take, and is much more indicative of their own perspective and insecurity

  5. Anyone who pulled the lever for Trump and didn’t think he was going to be as much of an authoritarian as his predecessors were fooling themselves. He advertised himself as much. The only thing unique to his presidency is his distaste for military entanglements and his having any interest at all in deregulation.

    On net for libertarians he’s probably a win over his 2016 opponent and likely his credible 2020 opponents. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t complain. Economic protectionism and property grabs are Democrat staples and Republicans are eating it up right now.

    1. One of the few government areas of actions libertarians should support is the use of force to protect private property. In regards to china the loss of private property and IP is estimated to be 100-200 billion a year for u.s. companies. How is allowance of that theft better than trying to reign it in. At some point you’re going to have to live in reality and not a fetishized theoretic version of global markets.

      On top.of that there seems to be a lack of acknowledged discussions of areas trump as theoretically helped with free trade in mexico, canada, and now japan. He also has ongoing discussions with Britain and others. Instead one side sees and screams free trade while only seeing china and yet ignoring the non free practices of china.

      1. I’m not defending everything that mainland China does… But…

        Sometimes we need to have the humility to acknowledge that we cannot control others… We can only control ourselves!
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_China
        GDP per capita
        Increase $10,153 (nominal; 2019 est.)
        USA GDP per capita : 59,531.66 USD (2017)
        We are about 6 times as wealthy as they are!!! HOW MUCH MORE per-capita wealth do YOU want to have, compared to the Chinese, before you are willing to be a wee tad less greedy, nationalistic, and selfish? Maybe we should FIGHT a little less, and COOPERATE a wee tad more? And NOT try always to tell others what to do and not do? Be a little less Trump-ish, in other words? I think more cooperation and less competition would be in order here! Trump is flushing the world economy down the crapper, if there’s no stop to the trade wars!

        Spank China!!! They must be PUNISHED!!!

        HOW MUCH are we willing to pay to spank them? Put the whole world’s economy into the crapper? Escalate to nuclear WW III? Enough already!

        1. You don’t get to steal because you fucked up.

          We want every penny that we’ve worked for. Every thing that belongs legitimately to us.

          If that means the communist Chinese all die in a communism fueled hell of their own creation, too fucking bad. The dispossessed people of Taiwan, Hong Kong, and all the Chinese refugees around the globe who’ve fled Red China stand ready to take their country back.

          Maybe they can even find an Imperial heir who’s willing to help consign more leftist idiocy to the putrid septic tank it belongs in.

        2. How much rope do you want to buy in order to hang yourself? The practice of engaging nonreciprocal “free trade” is for saps.

      2. Intellectual property is not property. You cannot steal it. Stealing property is bad because it deprives the original owner of the physical object which they owned. “Stealing” intellectual property is a “crime” invented out of whole cloth by people who want to arbitrarily define any given action or expression as only allowable by a favored subset of people. It is, at a conceptual level, absolutely anathema to the first amendment.

        >100-200 billion a year
        No one has “lost money” from IP “theft”. No money was taken from them. All you have is the “””victim””” claiming, apropos nothing, that if the alleged infringement wasn’t taking place they would have made X money but instead they only made Y. Can you imagine how insane our world if that sort of logic applied to literally anything else? Wanted it to rain today but instead it was dry? Thieves must have stolen the water droplets.

        1. I agree, to a large extent… But don’t take a long-long book I just wrote, and sell it as if you have written it! Don’t sell your stuff under my brand name! There is a middle road to be had… But I do agree, our IP laws go WAY too far…

          I am waiting for China to start demanding IP payments from the rest of the world for gunpowder, since China invented it!!! That would “square up” the excessive stances of the USA (certainly) and (maybe I think?) other “western” nations, with respect to IP!

        2. …All you have is the “””victim””” claiming, apropos nothing, that if the alleged infringement wasn’t taking place they would have made X money but instead they only made Y. Can you imagine how insane our world if that sort of logic applied to literally anything else?…

          So, if a surgeon is severely injured by another, such that she can no longer earn an income, why, there is no claim on that other person regarding the loss of future income?
          How generous of you! With her money.

        3. So someone can spend money doing research and development for a new product and someone else steals it through corporate espionage and the first party isn’t harmed? That is bullshit on all levels. Intellectual property is still property. But then again I suppose you worship at the feet of Edison and his ilk that stole and bullied from actual inventors and scientist , made millions of it while the actual creators often died in poverty.

          1. That’s a weird comment about Edison. It was Westinghouse that ended up with all the Rights to Tesla’s significant inventions. And Edison clearly was an actual inventor and scientist.

            This odd modern revisionism that somehow ignores history to proclaim that Edison was a fraud is bizarre. There are literally hundreds of books and thousands of articles from the time period that enumerate Edison’s process and inventions. Both Tesla and Edison were genius inventors.

            1. He electrocuted an elephant.
              Fuck Edison

            2. Westinghouse couldn’t get investors due to Telsa’s royalty contract with him. The scheme to deliver AC power was never going to get off the ground until Tesla decided tear up his contract. He cared more about the concept of AC power than his royalties because he believed it was the better technology.

        4. Speaking of retards… no information is not free. Especially as marginal costs in growing certain intellectual sectors increases. Stop being fucking dumb. Competition is a good thing. If you dont allow people profits and rewards for increasingly complex technologies you are going to stop getting new breakthroughs. See drug research in America versus almost everywhere else.

          1. Bad example. Marketing of patented drugs in the US has been a physical and mental health catastrophe.

        5. “Intellectual property is not property. You cannot steal it. ”

          Information in patents is published under an agreement – a contract – between the inventor and the government. Without that contract the info would have been kept secret, not published. Thus the government is bound to enforce its own contracts and prosecute those who have stolen the rights under those contracts.

          If you want to argue that the government should not grant patents, that is a separate issue. You would not appreciate the world where everyone practices in secret; industrial spying would be rampant, with many more conflicts and much tighter secrecy agreements with employees.

    2. “On net for libertarians he’s probably a win over his 2016 opponent and likely his credible 2020 opponents. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t complain. ”

      Very much this. He was better than hillary. From the way it looks, he will be better than whatever garbage the dems come up with.

      A lot of people cant come to terms with the lesser of two evils earning criticism for bad/stupid ideas even though his opponent would have been worse. Though his die hard fans (personality cultists?) dont really seem to be thinkers that can hold two separate ideas in their head at once so I guess it’s not surprising.

      1. Very much this. He was better than hillary. From the way it looks, he will be better than whatever garbage the dems come up with.

        Which is a pretty damning indictment of how far around the bend the Dems have gone. Most of the party now is catering to a very specific population of IdPol-obsessed PoCs, whipped into a frenzy by self-loathing white liberals who think they can successfully pull off Operation Get Behind the Darkies, without any subsequent blowback to themselves.

        Very few of the Dems are really focused on economics anymore, and the ones who are, are idiots like AOC who want to implement a top-down, command-and-control model based on what was practiced in World War II.

  6. In fact, private property rights used to be foundational to the conservative movement. What Trump was advertising here was that he didn’t care. And that Republicans cared a hell of a lot less than they claimed to.

    Lots of things were “foundational” to the conservative movement. As with so many things, Trump hasn’t changed who these people are, he simply revealed what they’ve been all along. Grifters and con men and political opportunists and lying shitweasels.

    Also the Stupid Party. Trump is an albatross the GOP willingly tied about their own neck. Trump is sui generis and he shall have no heirs. Trump himself will make sure of that. We all know ex-President Trump is not going to assume some elder statesman role, he’ll be twittering every day on what a bunch of stupid, failed, pathetic losers everybody is and the media’s going to be eating that shit up with a spoon because at least half of his tweets will be aimed at top Republicans.

    I for one will not be shedding any tears for these fuckers when they figure out Trump has torn their party down and built nothing but a house of cards on its foundation.

    1. All too true!

      Sad to say, entire armies of True Trumpistas are all too willing to sneeringly dismiss ALL concerns about The Trumptatorship with a sarcastic utterance of “Orange Man Bad”.

      1. When you go back and read your rambling diatribes you will realize why you get summarized as orange man bad. Self inspection first before pointing fingers at others.

    2. This. esp re the the GOP post-Trump. Trump has spent his entire life understanding how to engineer perceptions for the purpose of furthering his own celebrity. Get elected and that turns into a cult of personality. But while political parties (and their handmaidens of the media/academia/bureaucracy) use all the same modern techniques of social engineering, they are very poorly equipped (here in the US) to deal with a cult of personality when that time ends.

      Doesn’t mean they (DeRps) don’t keep trying. They’ve spent more than a century (prob since Teddy Roosevelt) trying to substitute charismatic authority for the more boring types of authority. And maybe that’s what all the modern social engineering techniques lead to. Which likely means D’s will create an alternative cult of personality in order to bury the R’s current cult of personality. And they’ll succeed – in 2020 or 2024. Hard to see a way out of this mess. DeRps certainly aren’t the way out.

      1. Correct. The Donkeys ultimate cult of personality was, of course, Obama, the empty suit that the media filled with hope and change nonsense. They have no candidate with personality in 2020 so Trump will win. After that, who knows?

        I wonder when we will next get an issue focused election.

    3. So? The GOP establishment is nothing to be proud of, and nothing to aspire to. It should be torn down.

  7. Indeed, it’s tragic to witness a once-great political party embrace alt-right white nationalism. As a Koch / Reason left-libertarian, I prefer the neoconservative GOP of the early 2000s. Granted, I wasn’t old enough to vote then. But I know for a fact the neocon GOP never did anything as destructive or depraved as Orange Hitler’s draconian war on immigration.

    #LibertariansForABetterGOP
    #PutTheNeoconsBackInCharge
    #ImmigrationAboveAll

    1. Once-great my pale hairy ass. The GOP has been a festering sewer of hate going back at least to the Nixon era.

      1. Liz?

      2. Bob Dole, Jerry Ford, GHW Bush, Mitt Romney were all very respectable, mostly honest men. Even W was not as corrupt as you seem to think. Compared to Clinton, Hillary, and Obama they were saints. Carter, Mondale, and Dukakis were respectable- where are their heirs?

  8. You’re telling me Republicans had no actual values save racism and lust for power? No….

    1. You cant even manage to read a left leaning editorial from the L.A. times and instead make up your own summary of the story? Impressive.

      1. If lefty fucking ignoramuses couldn’t post lies here, they’d quit posting entirely.

    2. Hey cunt, you just described yourself, and every other filthy progtarded democrat.

  9. Doesn’t the constitution provide for eminent domain for public purposes? So, not Kelo. [Not making any judgement on whether or not to build a Wall.] One solution I heard was that border land owners could choose if they wanted the Wall on their property or not. If not, the Wall would be built along whatever contiguous properties that did want the Wall. T.S. if your property then got stranded on the Mexican side because you didn’t want the Wall. You’d still be part of the U.S. of course but responsible yourself for keeping it so.

    1. In the spirit of spit-balling alternative ideas, you might be interested in the below…

      The walls are not a cost-effective measure at ALL… They are political show-pieces. If we wanted cost-effective, we’d do this:
      http://www.businessinsider.com/fiber-optic-sensing-technology-vs-border-wall-2019-2
      A simple technology could secure the US-Mexico border for a fraction of the cost of a wall — but no one’s talking about it

      But Trump is obsessed about what LOOKS intimidating… Walls (old tech thousands of years old) and barbed wire (dating from the late 1800s). He wants his (and I quote) “Big, beautiful wall”. And the psychology (hate the other tribe or troop) dates back to apes and monkeys. To hell with effective; it is all a political show. And since we are racists, we do NOT bother with the political theater with respect the Cannucks.
      Once again, if we’d want effective, we’d go fiber-optic sensors. Leaves the wildlife alone as well…. But NOOOO, Trump and the troglodytes want highly visible political theater!

      1. The drafting of cannon fodder stopped (along with Dixiecrat revival of Comstock laws against birth control), thanks to the 1972 Libertarian campaign spoiler votes. If mixed-economy fascisti were able to send press-gangs after kids, a Canadian border wall would be Job One.

      2. SQRLY is right. Electronic sensors and drones could be quite effective. Drones that shoot indelible ink at invaders could help with the roundup.

      3. Let me explain this to you: The fundamental issue here is that a lot of people in our government have to pretend they want border enforcement, (Because the voters want it.) but for ideology or following the money, are determined not to get it.

        Walls are not expected to stop humans without some degree of sensing, and humans positioned to show up when somebody crosses them. The wall is just there to slow the people down enough that they’re still there when you arrive to stop them.

        You can solve that trade-off in a lot of ways, from optical sensors and frequent guard posts, to infrequently patrolled impressive physical barriers.

        But, when you’ve got the potential of the system being run by people who don’t want it to work, there’s an added issue: How conspicuous would sabotaging the system be?

        The more it relies on electronics, and the less it relies on physical barriers, the easier it is to just shut it off with nobody noticing. Thus the push for an actual wall: We don’t TRUST the government, and bulldozing a wall is kind of hard to miss.

  10. Soooo, This is your sample writing for the LA Times, Matt?
    Hope you get the job!

    1. Me too. ENB could probably use a promotion and it would be a favor to subscribers.

      1. Shika is next in line.

        1. Yeah, they’re really all holding out for that creampuff gig of writing for some ‘prestigious’ national progtard rag. Each presenting a progtard friendly version of libertarianism that won’t trigger their idiot readership.

          Anyone who would vote for Hillary Clinton over Trump is pretty much against this country. So that means most of the staff at Reason.

  11. “Does Matt Welch Choose Authoritarian Socialism over Donald Trump?”

    I’ve listed the tenets of the New Green Deal below. I’ll also include a link below that, which lists which Democratic candidates stand where on the Green New Deal. Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren are all proudly listed at the “co-sponsor” level of support for the Green New Deal. Joe Biden has since come out in support. We’re in a single member district system. Do a search on the term “Duverger’s Law”. Regardless of how you feel about it, the choice in 2020 is between Donald Trump and someone who actively supports authoritarian socialism as outlined in the Green New Deal below.

    The Green New Deal

    1) “Guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States.”

    2) “Providing all people of the United States with – (i) high-quality health care; (ii) affordable, safe, and adequate housing; (iii) economic security; and (iv) access to clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and nature.”

    3) “Providing resources, training, and high-quality education, including higher education, to all people of the United States.”

    4) “Meeting 100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources.”

    5) “Repairing and upgrading the infrastructure in the United States, including . . . by eliminating pollution and greenhouse gas emissions as much as technologically feasible.”

    6) “Building or upgrading to energy-efficient, distributed, and ‘smart’ power grids, and working to ensure affordable access to electricity.”

    7) “Upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximal energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability, including through electrification.”

    8) “Overhauling transportation systems in the United States to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector as much as is technologically feasible, including through investment in – (i) zero-emission vehicle infrastructure and manufacturing; (ii) clean, affordable, and accessible public transportation; and (iii) high-speed rail.”

    9) “Spurring massive growth in clean manufacturing in the United States and removing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing and industry as much as is technologically feasible.”

    10) “Working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers in the United States to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector as much as is technologically feasible.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal#Green_New_Deal_Resolution

    The Green New Deal implements these changes over a period of ten years. It’s a Ten Year Plan! Biden’s plan does the same things–but it take place over a longer period of time.

    Anyone who won’t vote for Donald Trump–not even if the alternative is authoritarian socialism–has no business calling himself or herself a libertarian capitalist.

    Meanwhile, there isn’t anything principled about throwing libertarian capitalism under the bus–just because you don’t like Donald Trump. Being principled is about being willing to stand by the things you believe in–even when it’s hard. Being principled is not about throwing your principles under the bus because standing by your principles means you might have to vote for someone you don’t like.

    1. Here’s the link to where the candidates stand on the Green New Deal.

      https://www.axios.com/2020-presidential-candidates-green-new-deal-22faff60-3fee-45f3-8636-09e437c82431.html

      Follow the link on Trump’s position, and you’ll get to where the White House released this statement:

      “President Trump “has vowed that America would never be socialist, and this administration will fight this central planning disaster,” adding that the plan was a “roadmap to destroy the American Economy.””

      —-The Hill

    2. The fundamental, non-negotiable principle of Koch / Reason libertarianism is open borders. As long as Democrats are the pro-immigration party, libertarians must vote for them, regardless of any arguably anti-libertarian aspects of the Green New Deal.

      #VoteDemocratToHelpCharlesKoch

    3. Note to foreign readers: this Republican sockpuppet is here to try to stop libertarian vote share from growing at the current rate of 82% per year. These libertarian voters switch from both senile cleptocracy parties and currently exceed the vote count difference in over a dozen states casting 127 electoral votes. Spoiler votes are how laws, parties and the Constitution change in America. Bush Republicans used faith-based prohibitionist asset forfeiture to wreck the economy in 2008, and what they intend to repeat if elected.

      1. Funny, when I was eviscerating George W. Bush for the AUMF, the Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, the Iraq War, the Torture Memo, and TARP, I was a Democrat sock-puppet. Isn’t it funny how that works?

        Meanwhile, some Democrat who openly advocates for the Green New Deal is the alternative to Donald Trump in 2020–and that’s regardless of any bad names your or anyone else want to call me. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the reason you didn’t address that fact is because you’re ignorant. Maybe I can help us both out:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law

        Now when you tell knowledgeable people about your libertarianism, maybe you can avoid embarrassing the rest of us. I get so tired of cleaning up after other people.

        1. That’s not fair or accurate, Hank.

          1. Well okay that ended up in the wrong place but yes, hello Ken, I was just white-knighting for you.

      2. “Bush Republicans used faith-based prohibitionist asset forfeiture to wreck the economy in 2008”

        You obviously have no understanding of economics or recent history. Best you stick to ranking about the 1932 election and stolen party planks.

        You are a deranged babbling idiot Hank. Of course you don’t begin to have guts to actually debate me. Or the coherence.

    4. To answer your question Matt does pick socialism now because Orange man tweets mean things

      1. It appears so. Cocktail party invites over principles, every time.

    5. Is that the original resolution, or the “rewrite” that was issued after the first one was posted and got subsequently mocked to the heavens for how exceptionally stupid it was?

      1. I don’t know any more about various version other than what you can find at the link I posted with it.

        I do know that the list above is consistent with the ideals of everyone I’ve seen who advocated for it.

        What’s a progressive to disagree with in that list?

    6. “Anyone who won’t vote for Donald Trump–not even if the alternative is authoritarian socialism–has no business calling himself or herself a libertarian capitalist.”

      Nope. Vote for whomever you want but you are not voting for a libertarian capitalist.
      You could vote your conscience and vote for a libertarian candidate. You could vote for the Giant Meteor or Snoop Dogg. You could not vote at all.
      This is the game Republicans and Democrats have been playing us with for years. Vote for whichever pile of cow droppings is the more palatable.

      1. “Nope. Vote for whomever you want but you are not voting for a libertarian capitalist.”

        You’re missing the point entirely.

        If the Democrats nominated Lenin, the question wouldn’t be whether Donald Trump is a libertarian capitalist. The question would be whether libertarian capitalists should vote for Donald Trump against him–and the answer would be “yes”.

        And the Democrats are campaigning on a platform of authoritarian socialism.

        When Hugo Chavez was running for office, the outcome of his policies was both obvious and predictable. The outcome of this program is also obvious and predictable–and for the same reasons. If there’s any doubt about whether electing Liz Warren, for instance, will translate into the same sort of misery they suffered in Venezuela, it’s mostly based on doubts about whether she’ll actually do what she says she’s going to do. I see no reason to doubt her word. If she doesn’t want me to vote against her because she’s advocating authoritarian socialism, then she shouldn’t advocate authoritarian socialism.

        The last time I voted for a Republican was George W. Bush in 2000. I voted for him because he was talking about privatizing social security and replacing welfare with private charity–the kind of thing that anti-socialist libertarian capitalists have been dreaming of since at least the Johnson administration and his Great Society. From a libertarian capitalist perspective, what a mistake voting for him turned out to be!

        I’ve been basically a principled non-voter ever since. They only use our participation in elections to legitimize the horrible shit they want to do to us–and I won’t carry water for them on principle. However, my libertarian capitalist principles may require me to weigh in against candidates that are openly advocating authoritarian socialism. We rarely get what we want from elections. We get what we want by shopping at Amazon. The best part about elections is that we get to kick out what we don’t want.

        I do not want authoritarian socialism, so the Democrats need to lose in 2020. And it’s not enough that they lose–they need to lose specifically because they advocated for authoritarian socialism. Once that’s accomplished, I can go back to effectuating social change by persuading my fellow Americans through rational argument. Until then, the authoritarian socialists must lose, and if that means telling people to vote for Donald Trump, then so be it.

        1. It really doesn’t matter. In another decade or so libertarianism will be a forgotten chapter in history to be studied only by academic wonks. There won’t be anything left to go back to. Even small government conservatism is destroyed now.

          I am not afraid of Warren, Sanders nor Trump. My personal choice is to stay with the ship.

          My only regret is that Hunter S Thompson is not around to write about this. Then again even he could not have imagined a parody weirder than the current reality.

          1. Just for the record, I maintain that libertarianism is ultimately about individuals being free to make choices for themselves, which is what we’re really talking about when we talk about rights.

            The negative consequences of violating people’s rights have remained consistent across all cultures and throughout all of history, which is to suggest that escaping those negative consequences will always remain a futile endeavor.

            This is true in regards to violating individuals’ right to make choices for themselves within markets, and it remains true in regards to individuals making choices for themselves in all other contexts.

            We may call it something else in the future, but libertarianism, by any other name, would still remain central to every issue.

    7. “4) “Meeting 100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources.”

      If we put our entire industrial effort into this it might get done in 30 years, but electricity would cost 5x what it does now, and we would all still be using 30-yr old appliances or washing clothes by hand.

      1. If we really want to save the planet, we need to stop getting distracted by silly things like facts and logic.

        And how’d you get all the way to 4)? I can hardly make it past 1) and 2):

        1) “Guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States.”

        2) “Providing all people of the United States with – (i) high-quality health care; (ii) affordable, safe, and adequate housing; (iii) economic security; and (iv) access to clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and nature.”

        The people of Venezuela are enjoying the benefits of those policies in the form of power outages, malnutrition, and spiking infant mortality among other things.

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/childhood-disrupted-venezuela-is-in-danger-of-losing-a-generation/2019/05/26/748f0b3c-6136-11e9-bf24-db4b9fb62aa2_story.html

        Somehow, the Washington Post doesn’t seem to connect the conditions in Venezuela to the same policies that are reflected in the Green New Deal. I suspect it’s a total failure to understand basic economics. They think the problem with Cuba and Venezuela isn’t the system–the problem is that people like Castro and Maduro are the wrong people to have in charge.

        If Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren were in charge of the same system, it would work just fine–because Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren care about people.

        They need to lose to Trump, and they need to lose badly.

        1. The law and politics is about whose side the bread is buttered on.

          But we know that Ken. I say this as someone who enjoys your posts here.

        2. “And how’d you get all the way to 4)? I can hardly make it past 1) and 2):”

          Heartily agree, but some folks actually believe it would be possible to go 100% renewable. Just wanted to put a stake through the heart of that concept.

  12. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $30h – $72h…how? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new… after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

    Heres what I’ve been doing… ,,,

    CLICK HERE►► ONLINE WORK

  13. Based on this comment section, Reason’s pandering to insane leftists is working perfectly. Enjoy courting socialists who will never support your free market policies. Libertarians are so stupid. You can’t conflate using eminent domain for stupid things like protecting frogs to protecting the border of the country.

  14. So Comey and Hillary blatantly mishandle classified information no problem they didn’t mean it or something

    Flynn Papadopolis forget a date from years ago and felony convictions ensue

    That’s the rule of law? But Trump!

    1. Having guys like this on the other side has made it relatively easy for America’s liberal-libertarian mainstream to win the culture war.

      Get ready for more swallowing, clingers. Your betters are not nearly through with you. Only your replacement will stop your obsequious surrender to all of this damned progress.

      1. The one trick pony does it again. Yawn

      2. Get ready for more swallowing, clingers. Your betters are not nearly through with you.

        Will you be repeating this to yourself when you get caught up in another mass shooting, hicklib?

      3. How boring. Arty is too stupid to figure out what happens when anyone gets really tired of his bullshit. He is going to meet a horrific end some day.

    2. The rule of law is just about done. They don’t know it yet, but the assholes who keep skating on everything aren’t going to like it when more people wake up to that and the gloves come off. Conservatives and libertarians are st starting to wake up and realize that the time to practice the NAP is over with, and that it is time to okay just as dirty and hit back very, very hard

      Progtards and elitists don’t like it when their opponents don’t have their hands tied behind their backs.

  15. Anyone claiming that Republicans claim to be the party of small government is too stupid to have an opinion. That hasn’t been a thing this century.

    1. Have you discussed this with John Boehner?

      Can you find John Boehner?

      Does anyone know where he is?

      Buelller?

      Buelller?

      1. He went from being anti drug to becoming a lobbyist for commercial pot. Because principles, and consistency.

    2. Poor Lefty Warren does not know the difference between Republicans and RINOs.

  16. Re: Evil Trump vs. Evil Socialists

    Nobody seeks public office unless:
    1. They think they know better than most people.
    2. They like to tell other people what to do.
    3. They wish to exercise government power to impose their agenda.

    What else?

    1. 4. They want to rollback all the bullshit Socialist policies that have been forced on Americans.
      5. They want to save the USA from going over that Socialist tipping point that was coming if Hillary had been elected. Now we see that was absolutely correct as every Democrat running for President is an insane Socialist carrying a Hammer and Sickle.

      1. So where do you stand on crony capitalism?

        1. Lessen government power a d you’ll see a reduction in crony capitalism. Money swarms to the easiest investment vehicle. In many cases it is government corruption. Nothing on the left reduces government. Trump has at least reduced the regulatory body.

          1. He also imposed tariffs. The most crony tax scheme ever. That pretty much wipes out any of those, mostly environmental regulations left over from Obama that were gotten rid of.

            Can you just imagine being a lobbyist working for the Steel workers union, the pork industry, the UAW, the chip makers and tech industry now?

            Lobbyist : “so what is my budget Bob”

            CEO: “ budget? You don’t have a budget.” “ just tell me what you need and I don’t want to know where it went”

            1. There were no tariffs before Jan 20, 2017, of course.

              Trump’s offer to end most trade restrictions at the G-7 Summit was rejected by our trading partners. But Trump is the bad guy here? Haha. That’s a good one.

              US Markets imploding!

            2. “Muh dogma!”

          2. The reduction in the corporate tax rate is the most significant financial development in 40+ tears. It removes the largest incentive to place companies overseas. This alone is reason to vote for Trump.

        2. There is no such thing as crony capitalism. There is only cronyism. Which is an intrinsic part of socialism.

          1. Cronyism is part of human nature. We want the system that is most resistant to exploitation by the bad tendencies of human nature, I.e. one that pits ‘interest against interest’, as ours does.

    2. Libertarians run for office to force the looters to make a choice: stop having cops shoot our kids over plant leaves or lose to the other crooked parasite subsidized by the Nixon Anti-Libertarian Law. That’s the law that funnels tax money to pay media whores to ignore the LP. None of us want the company of a roomful of disgusting robbers. We use leveraged LP spoiler votes to cause the till-tappers to change their platforms and cruel laws.

      1. Ironically the attempted coup on Trump has a lot of similarities to Watergate except yhe perps are successful in covering it up,

        Because the didn’t “mean” to break the law

      2. Hank, you love seeing children murdered. You gleefully talk about unlimited abortions all the time. So really, fuck you and your phony concern for ‘the Children’.

        And please, come at me bro. Like you would ever have the guts.

  17. In more placid times, news that the president of the United States was encouraging aides to break the law by seizing swaths of private property along the southwestern border to build a wall might have caused more than a day’s ripple.

    Interesting hat this link goes to a LA Times link that links the WaPo behind a paywall. Who pays WaPo to read their propaganda? Not me.

    Circle jerk of lies from the MSM Propagandists.

  18. The Democratic Party seeks to use the force of law to make electrical generation and transmission as illegal as the GOP seeks to make birth control and enjoyable plant leaves. It’s what’s in their PLATFORMS!. THAT is the choice voters faced in 2016 while the media blocked them from finding out about the LP and shrieked about global warming and foreign rapists. Somebody explain platforms to Matt.

  19. Just was reading some Babylon Bee a hoot
    Are we entirely sure this article was not meant for the Bee?

  20. Welch probably wrote this farrago while sitting in a urban redevelopment Starbucks sipping a Pompous Chai Latte Cinnamon Swirl.

    1. Pompous Chai Latte Cinnamon Swirl

      Good name for a wedgie.

  21. The majority of Republicans accept the fact that Trump is the best chance to keep a Democrat out of the White House. It is not they like him, just that he is the best of two bad choices. I voted for Johnson in the last election, but as much as I dislike him, he is significantly better than any of the Democratic choices.

  22. Trump is a president who cares so much about about his country… the only problem is he only cares so much about his own country if you know what i mean
    تجهیزات VoIP

  23. I don’t even care about the money at this point. The government is spending so much it just does not matter. I do not even care that the wall is a stupid ineffective idea when what we need is reform of legal immigration.

    Draw the line right here. A nice bright clear beautiful line.

    Stealing private property is beyond anything I can just ignore.

    1. Nobody gives a fuck what you can or can’t ignore, echo.
      Your opinions are worthless

  24. OT or semi-OT Post:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/02/heres-a-list-of-recession-signals-that-are-flashing-red.html

    Here’s a list of recession signals that are flashing red
    PUBLISHED MON, SEP 2 2019 8:30 AM EDT

    Largely to be thanked is Trump’s trade wars on EVERYONE, especially China! Hissy fits can be VERY expensive!

    1. Good. With how expensive real estate has gotten in the homeland, a nice recession should help curb that back. Even better if it destroys real estate values in California and forces Chinese speculators and tech goons to unload their properties at pennies on the dollar.

      Maybe the average family won’t have to choose between paying half their income on a mortgage or live in some third-world style shithole for at least a few years before the market ramps back up again.

      1. Wow, those are somethings to think about!!!

        Hopefully we won’t have another case of “too big to fail” and the taxpayers bailing out the fat-cats again…

      2. Atlanta Georgia, Columbus Ohio, Memphis Tennessee, Greenville South Carolina…
        Those third world shitholes?

        You can get a nice suburban three bedroom house in those places for what it costs for a small two bedroom apartment in San Francisco and there are no hoards of homeless people on the streets.

        Why anybody would want to live in San Francisco is beyond me. Now there is a third world shithole.

        The housing bubble there has nothing to do with China. The governments won’t let people build affordable housing or do anything else.

        1. Atlanta Georgia, Columbus Ohio, Memphis Tennessee, Greenville South Carolina…
          Those third world shitholes?

          Yeah, I’m sure if everyone mass-migrated there, it would have no effect on real estate prices at all.

          1. Actually those places are all welcoming to people relocating there and try hard to attract new business. Another one which is having a sort of boom and revitalization is Dayton, Ohio.

            We have plenty of room to build new housing here in flyover country. We even have paved roads, schools and super K Mart now.

            Hey if someone chooses to pay half their income for a little one bedroom to live in California and put up with all of those stupid rules and regulations I don’t care. Not my problem.

            1. Actually those places are all welcoming to people relocating there and try hard to attract new business.

              That’s great, but it doesn’t really address the impact that a mass-migration would have on real estate prices in those areas. Or the infrastructure (costs and development) needed to support it.

              If you want to see the end-game of encouraging as many people as possible to move to a relatively wide-open area, just look at Denver’s real-estate market. 400,000 people moving just to the metro area in the last eight years, and it now costs at least $400,000 to purchase a home in a half-way decent school district (I realize this doesn’t affect mostly childless libertarians, but it’s a consideration for those with families). Shit, even a home on the high plains area around Bennett and Strasburg is going for $300K–these are working-class communities, not white-collar hubs.

              The point is that “growth is always good” is an autistic way of measuring the overall health of a community.

              1. There will always be local issues. Nobody is talking about mass migration, how do you do that? Round people up and herd them to Tennessee? I think we once did the opposite of that there.

                Point is “we” don’t need to do anything about it. If the people of California want to encourage to state to deregulate and build more houses then it is up to them. In the meantime there are plenty of other places to live with jobs and everything.

                Encouraging recession is suicidal madness. That can’t be serious. It is one thing people are always worried about and there is uncertainty in markets now. The trade war is not helping.

                1. Encouraging recession is suicidal madness.

                  Considering the left side of the spectrum has been talking one up in recent weeks, I’m not sure where exactly your beef is here. Hell, they’ve been predicting one even before Trump took office, and some, like Bill Maher, are quite open about the fact that they want one to happen precisely because they know that all this IdPol retardation isn’t going to be what helps them beat Trump, it will be economic concerns.

                  If they get the recession they want within the next year, their chances of winning 2020 go up exponentially. They don’t give a shit about who it actually effects, nor do they honestly give a crap about the “trade war,” either, except in how they can use it as a cat’s paw.

                  1. That should scare the shit out of all of us no matter who is saying it.

                2. There will always be local issues.

                  Yeah, that’s the point–there’s an actual cost to all that growth, and it doesn’t matter if it’s in a heavily regulated one like Silicon Valley/Bay Area, or a relatively light one like Denver’s Front Range. Cost of housing, transportation infrastructure, quality of schools, fire/police services, overall cost of living–these are legitimate issues that the “all growth is amazing!” school of thought is incapable of addressing, because it follows the Underpants Gnomes approach to economics.

        2. “You can get a nice suburban three bedroom house in those places for what it costs for a small two bedroom apartment in San Francisco and there are no hoards of homeless people on the streets.”

          We see someone is unfamiliar with Atlanta.

  25. Trump loves uses of eminiment domain that we’d call abuse, but clearly taking land for a linear feature such as a wall, to be operated by government for governmental purposes, is not an abuse of eminent domain.

    1. ANY “eminent domain” taking is an abuse if no fair price is paid for it! The article here says Trump was encouraging aides to break the law. I don’t know the details, but Trump has just about ZERO respect for the truth, or the law… Ripping off those abused by “eminent domain” would fit right in!

      1. The media has far less respect for the truth than Trump. So you’re a fool if you believe anything they have to say without hard evidence.

    2. A wall on the border is the archetypal case of eminent domain. It doesn’t merely perfectly fulfill the conditions for eminent domain, but it demonstrates the justification for eminent domain.

      You know why you have “muh property rights” on the US side of that border? Because the US government protects your property rights, enforcing your property rights and rule of law on our side of that border.

      Moreover, the government will only continue to protect those rights if it protects Americans from foreign invasion that changes the US polity from one protecting your rights to one violating them.

      Without the border, Americans don’t have the peace, freedom, and prosperity that so many in Latin America and around the world will uproot their lives for a chance at.

      Marxists want the goods without the markets that produce them.
      Open Borders “Libertarians” want the rights without the borders that secure them.

      1. ALL of the bad things that COULD happen because we get invaded by horrible ferriners… Your entire list above… Could ALSO be said of socialists native-born to the USA! Shall we pass laws such that native-born socialists aren’t allowed to have babies any more?

        Bare assertions of this-that-and-the-other, bad things may happen… However large or small the dangers may be in reality… MUST be balanced against the COSTS of the counter-measures!!! We stand in danger of turning large swatches of the USA into prison zones at the borders!!! I might be busted at any moment, for inadvertently “aiding and abetting” an illegal sub-human, w/o asking him or her for “papers please”, before helping them in the smallest ways!

        1. “Shall we pass laws such that native-born socialists aren’t allowed to have babies any more?”

          Not necessary. Legal abortion has kept the socialists from overwhelming the country, and will continue to do so.

        2. Thought Trump already backed off of the birthright issue.

          1. I do believe that you are correct. Trump floating these kinds of “trial balloons” does scare me… He wants to milk his favorite scapegoats for every last drop that he can get!

            1. Many countries used to have lex solis, but most have abolished it; it’s an anachronism that simply doesn’t work in the modern world. The US version of lex solis is even more absurd, giving citizenship to the children of people in the country illegally.

              1. It must end. Another reason the progressives must be cast out.

        3. “ALL of the bad things that COULD happen because we get invaded by horrible ferriners”

          It’s not merely what *could* happen, but what is *likely* to happen. The data on the preference of foreigners for bigger government and less liberty is clear.

          That our neighbors *might* do the same is not an argument for volunteering to let foreigners do it to us instead.

          Build a big, beautiful wall, deport illegal aliens, and tell foreigners that the line to come into the US starts *outside* the country, and we don’t need massive facilities to hold them. Letting them in and letting them stay is a choice.

          We can choose otherwise.

          But if it actually did take refugee camps on the border to preserve liberty for ourselves and our posterity, then that’s what I’d do.

          We fought wars to preserve our liberty. Tent cities are not too high a price to pay. And it’s not a price we have to pay regardless.

          1. “We fought wars to preserve our liberty. Tent cities are not too high a price to pay. And it’s not a price we have to pay regardless.”

            That is priceless. Thank you for posting it here.

            1. You’re welcome.

              Some people are grownups and realize that there are trade offs in life.

              I set my light on a hill to brighten the world.

              1. Well would you mind shutting the light off for a while? It is shining right into my tent and I am trying to get some sleep.

          2. “The data on the preference of foreigners for bigger government and less liberty is clear.”

            Only if you’re a Breitbart fan…

            “https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Freedom_in_the_World
            In 2012, the freest countries were New Zealand (8.7), the Netherlands (8.5), and Hong Kong (8.3). Least free were Zimbabwe (3.4), Burma (3.7), and Pakistan (4.5).[3] The components on which the index is based can be divided into economic freedoms and other personal freedoms. Highest ranking in economic freedoms were Hong Kong (9.0) and Singapore (8.8). Highest ranking in personal freedoms were the Netherlands (9.5) and Uruguay (9.4).[3]”

            USA has been falling in recent years… 10th, 12th, 15th, depending on whose list…

            Also, are you calling the “R” party a party of freedom? Why? If you were Hispanic, knowing that many-many “R” voters hate you, would you vote “R”? “R” party fearing and loathing “people from shithole nations” herds these voters right into the “D” camp! You’re into self-fulfilling prophecies, aren’t you?

            1. “https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Freedom_in_the_World In 2012, the freest countries were New Zealand (8.7), the Netherlands (8.5), and Hong Kong (8.3).

              I suggest you read the fine print on how they define “freedom”.

              If you were Hispanic, knowing that many-many “R” voters hate you, would you vote “R”? “R” party fearing and loathing “people from shithole nations” herds these voters right into the “D” camp!

              I’m a gay immigrant. I don’t want the US to turn into the kind of shithole I emigrated from; nor do I want many of my former compatriots to come here and do to the US what they did to my former country. Nor do I have any tolerance for a party that lets legal immigrants live in legal limbo for decades while handing out citizenship to illegals like candy on Halloween. Even Cesar Chavez understood that illegal immigration is bad for Hispanics.

              If you think that your racist demagoguery is going to succeed with immigrants, think again. We recognize you and the Democrats for what you are.

              1. Well thanks for IDing yourself as gay… Even though “NOYB2” doesn’t ID you personally, I’m sure you’re aware of there still being anti-gay people in the USA. Hopefully the threadshitters here won’t dump on you for being gay, and temp you to have to change your handle… I have seen other posters ID as gay, and NOT get flamed on here, so you’ll probably be OK…

                Yes, I have met a few immigrants and spouses of immigrants who feel like you do. Jump through endless hoops and wait up to 20 years, to do it legally, and then (in the past sometimes) get bypassed by those who came here illegally. I understand the frustration.

                If I worked for 20 years to get a license to scratch my own asshole, under some idiotic regime… And the system FINALLY gets more sane, and scratch-my-own-asshole licenses and permits and degrees and credentials are (hoo-ray!!!) done away with… Should I hoot and holler, that new folks have less troubles now than I did? “You young punks should go get your ass-scratching license like I had to!” In horse-drawn buggy days, city streets were constantly strewn in horse poop! Should the old geezers have forbidden the youngsters from using automobiles? So that the youngsters, too, should suffer slogging through horse poop? HOW do we make progress with these kinds of attitudes?

            2. That freedom in Hong Kong is looking great this week, ain’t it?

              You want to trot out some racist rankings from the SPLC too? Rankings don’t mean anything if you don’t agree with the standards the values were calculate on.

              To be specific on freedom, name a country with the equivalent of the first and second amendments.

              If you want actual data on people’s view, go read Pew on immigrant preference for big government relative to US citizens.

              PEW Research on Hispanic Americans, breakdowns by immigration and foreign birth
              https://goo.gl/hxSJHi
              Hispanics Want Bigger Government Providing More Services over 3 to 1

              The trend is the same across immigrants generally.
              Import Not Americans, Become Not America.

  26. “People rightly remember the “rapists” accusation in the president’s campaign kickoff,”

    While Reason forgets the Rape Tree articles of ENB.

    “Trump telling NBC’s Chuck Todd that the U.S. citizen children of illegal immigrants — of which there are an estimated 4 million — “have to go.”

    The “have to go” to Chuck Todd referred to “Dreamers”, illegal aliens all.
    https://youtu.be/EBxFVgRBqqc

    ” Vowing to deport legal Syrian refugees. ”

    Heavens! You mean Americans don’t have the responsibility to take in everyone from every shithole country in the world?

    “Ending birthright citizenship, Constitution be damned”

    The 14th did *not* grant birthright citizenship to babies of foreigners.

    Native Americans, though born in the US, were also subjects of Native American tribal governments and *not* automatic citizens by birth until THE INDIAN CITIZENSHIP ACT OF 1924.

    In fact, there was even an exemption for *some* Native Americans built in the Act, where they would *not* be citizens if that damaged their tribal property rights. The Act would have thereby been straightforwardly unconstitutional.

    There was no legislative change similarly granting birthright citizenship to babies born in the US to citizens of all other polities in the world.

    There is neither a constitutional provision nor a law mandating birthright citizenship for illegals.

    1. “ All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

      ARE citizens. Note it does not say “will be” in the future. No one born after 1868 is a citizen, in theory.

  27. It’s weird how Reason cares about border property rights NOW, when someone’s trying to protect them, but is vehemently AGAINST property rights when….what’s the phrase? subhuman brown people–no, that’s what SQRLSY thinks they are–peaceful migrants are looking to trespass.

    1. It’s actually pretty simple…

      If you are a private landowner… House, ranch, farm, etc., owner… Close to the border… Government Almighty needs to PAY YOU FAIR AND SQUARE for taking your property! And not have Trump’s aides breaking laws in order to steal your property! That’s a pretty good read of the above article’s general sense!

      If we are talking “we need to build a giant wall to protect the GOOD native-born Americans from the invading hordes of ferriners”… Whether the invading hordes are on MY personal property, or not, or whether I deliberately invited them to come and visit me, or not, or whether they are on “publicly owned” BLM lands… SOME voters have decided that this whole issue needs to be solved with draconian laws, and all expenses be damned! My choice of freely interacting with “illegal sub-humans” on MY personal property, for labor or social interchanges… Be damned!!!

      This heavy-handed collectivist decision-making here is NO more needed, than for me to “ask democracy” (ask the voters) what I should eat for breakfast tomorrow, what my religion should be, or who I should marry! Let individuals decide!

      1. That was outlawed by the 13th Amendment.

      2. Government Almighty needs to PAY YOU FAIR AND SQUARE for taking your property!

        And government will. It’s nearly worthless desert land to begin with.

        If we are talking “we need to build a giant wall to protect the GOOD native-born Americans from the invading hordes of ferriners”

        Indeed. You may be too ignorant of the world beyond US borders, but as a “ferriner” myself who knows and has lived among lots of other “ferriners”, let me assure you: you don’t want 99% of those people in the US.

        1. True, but a lot of the folks here that want open borders have commenced themselves of all kinds of bullshit.

    2. If anyone irrespective of citizenship, trespasses on your private property, or builds a wall with an access road through it that is an issue. If someone is walking or riding on a public road that is not trespassing.

      But trespassing or laws about that are not the real issue here. Nobody is being charged with trespassing. Eminent domain is wrong, it is the government seizure of legally owned private property and should be opposed by anyone concerned about individual rights and liberty.

      1. Now do income and payroll taxes

        1. Muh anarchy!

          They want the rights guaranteed by government, while opposing the government taking the actions which secure them those rights.

          They only “own” that private property because US jurisdictions enforce property rights within their borders.

        2. Fear not echo, the trump cucks will be on your side of this issue when a democrat proposes something similar in the future. They just can’t see further than 3 inches in front of their face. Plus orange man told them it was all good so they fall into line.

          Small minded people will be the downfall of this country one way or another.

          1. Nothing to fear. Good things happen all the time and people will amaze you.

            In 1966 someone had the good sense to preserve this recording and film of Muddy Waters and his band performing Got My Mojo Working and then someone else put in on you tube so we could all watch the king of Chicago Blues at his best.

            My music link for tonight that nobody else cares about.

            Muddy Waters -Got my Mojo Working
            https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3iFjNFRnaqg

            1. The other one is a don Rickles riff which is also good.

          2. Your argument must have fallen off your comment.

  28. donald trump one of the presidents who has the authority as he pleases even though all the economy is in his own hands I hope that he can quickly become self-aware and become an economic sector for the better

    https://hantu4d.com

  29. so, trump is bad for not wanting China to rip us off anymore. we get it, except that Trump’s RIGHT. China HAS been scamming us while the politicians supposed to be looking out for OUR best interests have only been looking out for their own. for DECADES, our alleged ‘leadership’ in the District of Corruption has helped the communist chinese take our jobs, manufacturing, intellectual property and money.
    $Trump2020

    1. And raising taxes on American consumers helps fix that problem how?

      1. And raising taxes on American consumers helps fix that problem how?

        Taxes on American consumers wouldn’t fix that problem. Neither would tariffs on all imports. But tariffs specifically on China do, as they encourage people to import and buy from countries other than China.

        (To the degree that American consumers pay anything more than they did before the tariffs, it decreases consumption and reduces the debt, which is good in and of itself.)

        1. Tony isn’t smart enough to understand anything you just said.

        2. “But tariffs specifically on China do, as they encourage people to import and buy from countries other than China.”

          And the first thing Trump does after American-owned companies jump through many-many hoops to avoid tariffs on China… And move operations to Vietnam… Is to lust after adding more tariffs to Vietnam!!! Face it, Trump is a protectionist!!! Every nation on the planet is his “trade enemy”!

          https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3022152/donald-trumps-real-threat-vietnam-tariffs-sends-ripples

          Donald Trump’s ‘real threat’ of Vietnam tariffs sends ripples of anxiety through Southeast Asian nation

  30. Thank you, Mr. Welch, for the link to the WaPo story. One of the reasons Republicans are slow to get worked up about these breathlessly reported stories is a basic skepticism about the accuracy of the story. For example, although the WaPo story talks about Trump’s alleged offier to “pardon” people to break the law, it’s only in the seventh or eighth paragraph that the White House statement that Trump was joking. Which sounds right, even though Trump does say stupid stuff pretty regularly. The other consideration is that Republicans (well, except maybe Mitch Romney) would prefer to use internal channels to communicate their concerns or disapproval, for reasons that are obvious. Finally, it’s entirely possible that those in the room with the President do understand the legal limitations but will let Trump rant or say whatever. I’ve always suspected that Trump, Inc. is a sole entrepreneur masquerading as a corporation, but it would hardly be the first such company. People leave the room after the boss speaks with an understanding of what the boss wants, but also understand that you can’t do it the way he wants. It’s not the best way to run a business, much less a country, but the way the WaPo currently operates — its Democracy Dies in Darkness slogan attached to its masthead like a pirate’s flag — is not the best way to run a paper either.

    1. WaPo should be sued into oblivion.

  31. I’m dismayed at the number of “libertarians” who support Trump. He’s about as un-libertarian as they come. The orange man is, indeed, bad, and using a stupid slogan to mock those who know that, doesn’t change the fact. It just reduces discourse to the idiotic tweet-based bullshit that he has spewed since Day One.

    1. Your argument for Orange Man is More Unlibertarian than Obama must have fallen off.

      1. That’s not comprehensible English…..try again.

        1. Not a native English speaker?

  32. I can’t find any fault with the basic theme of the article. And I agree that many Republicans have become major apologists for our immature, insecure president, which is particularly discouraging. I’m continually amazed that the Republican leadership has seemingly abandoned many cornerstone party principals like property rights, limited government, and fiscal responsibility in embarrassing worship of this clown.

    1. They abandoned those principles decades ago. Trump just doesn’t care that Republicans aren’t supposed to say so out loud.

  33. “Republicans Choose Trumpism Over Property Rights and the Rule of Law”

    I’ll believe Welch and Reason believe in “the rule of law” when they support enforcing immigration law.

  34. I­­ a­­m m­­a­­k­­i­­n­­g 200­­ t­­o ­300 Dollars ­­p­­e­­r ­­h­­o­­u­­r­­ with­ ­­o­­n­­l­­i­­n­­e­­ w­­o­­r­­k ­­f­­r­­o­­m ­­h­­o­­m­­e­­. if you interested…Go to this link, fill out a basic online form. And follow the instructions as Home Profit System.
    HERE………….. w­­­w­­­w­­­.­­­t­­­i­­­p­­­s­­­.­­­c­­­a­­­s­­­h­­­61­­­.­­­c­­­o­­­m

  35. Memo to reason: Trump will be running against socialists, who want to take all of our private property; and globalists, who want a one world government controlled by banksters, warmongers and pedophiles.

  36. At the time, Starr’s examination had achieved the status of the heavenly campaign among Republicans. According to the research of Best Assignment Writing Service UK Moderate erudite people routinely announced that “the standard of law” required ensuring Starr’s boundlessly wide order as well as impeaching.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.