Reason Roundup

U.S. Troops Were Harmed by Iranian Attack. (We Still Shouldn't Go to War With Iran.)

Plus: encryption battles, the Nordic equality myth, and more...

|

U.S. troops were injured in Iranian missile attack. The Pentagon is now reporting that 11 members of the American military were harmed when Iran retaliated for the killing of Qassem Soleimani. They suffered concussions and were sent to hospitals in Kuwait and Germany to be screened for traumatic brain injury.

It was initially reported that the strike—on two Iraqi military bases that house U.S. troops—did not harm any Americans, though four Iraqi soldiers were wounded.

"No Americans were harmed in last night's attack by the Iranian regime," said President Donald Trump on January 8, the morning after the attack."We suffered no casualties—all our soldiers are safe and only minimal damage was sustained at our military bases."

That turns out to have been false.

"While no U.S. service members were killed in the Jan. 8 Iranian attack on Al Asad Air base, several were treated for concussion symptoms from the blast and are still being assessed," said Navy Capt. Bill Urban of U.S. Central Command in a January 16 statement. "As a standard procedure, all personnel in the vicinity of a blast are screened for traumatic brain injury, and if deemed appropriate, are transported to a higher level of care."

Unlike the Trump administration's claims about foiling an "imminent attack" (which grows more and more dubious by the day), there's nothing so far to suggest a deliberate discrepancy between Trump's initial assessment of harm and the Pentagon's new report. Alas, some people are taking it as a cue to call for war.


FREE MINDS


FREE MARKETS 

"Minding the Nordic Inequality Gap." The Nordic countries are widely seen as feminist utopias. People are perpetually ranking Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland as the best place for women and/or for gender equality, and a new survey from U.S. News & World Report finds this unchanged. But perception and reality differ. "Although Nordic nations lead the rest of the world in qualitative, perception-based metrics, the reality in many of these labor markets is that men often dominate management and STEM professions while women find themselves isolated to support roles," writes Andrew Soergel.

"Sweden is a very gendered labor market," Anneli Häyrén of Sweden's Centre for Gender Research at Uppsala University told U.S. News.


QUICK HITS

NEXT: Trump's Confrontation With Iran Shows Americans Have Learned Not To Rush Into 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. The Women’s March has lost its luster.

    Handmaid’s Tale won’t be renewed for another season?

    1. Hello.

      Reason should cut it out with the ‘imminent attack’ in quotes shitck.

      That guy was a perpetual walking ‘imminent attack’ with a track record.

      I really wish Reason would stop writing from the perspective of looking to find ‘lies’ and just offer some nuanced and reasoned perspectives.

      Tired of this high school antics bull shit.

      I had to painfully read Greenhut’s sophomoric piece and I gotta say….not impressed with Reason on the Iran story. They’re swinging and missing.

      1. Just because he helped fund and organize dozens of attacks a year for 2 decades doesnt mean he was out of retirees and going to his retirement party.

        1. Out of ideas*

      2. They killed the guy to stop an imminent attack.

        He has not ordered any attacks since he was killed.

        That’s a win–particularly since he was ordering attacks right up until we turned him into a cloud of greasy red gas.

      3. Trump didn’t have to use “imminent attack” as a justification, but he did. He can’t help himself from lying. And here you are, mad that a reporter is being mean to your daddy by reporting the truth.

        1. Kill yourself, you tiresome, sophist, lying fuck.

      4. That turns out to have been false.

        No, it was premature. The injuries were reported later. But ENB can’t get the TDS twist out of her panties.

  2. Missouri lawmakers go after librarians.

    The should worry more about the meth labs in Missouri.

    1. Eh, library/laboratory. What’s the difference?

  3. “U.S. Troops Were Harmed by Iranian Attack. (We Still Shouldn’t Go to War With Iran.)”

    Indeed, if we can be suckered into doing something that isn’t in our best interests so easily, we’re doomed.

    The question shouldn’t have been whether the North Vietnamese attacked us in the Gulf of Tonkin. The question should have been whether fighting the Vietnam War was in our best interests.

    War with Iran is simply not in the best interests of the United States–like going to war in Lebanon, Rwanda, and Somalia was not in the best interests of the United States.

    In fact, keeping our troops in Lebanon and Somalia wasn’t in the best interests of the United States either, and this is a great time to ask ourselves whether it’s in the best interests of the United States to remain in Iraq.

    1. And also ask ourselves what the Iranians are really planning next.

      Oh, to be sure, while the missile attack was not just for show, we can finally dismiss the silly notion that they ‘meant to miss’ and recognize that their conventional weaponry isn’t their most effective form of weaponry. They know that just as well. So if they are still intent on actually extracting their pound of flesh they are no doubt working on those alternative approaches. And the more people we have in close proximity the more options and opportunities they have.

      1. They could have used cruise missiles and drones, which would have a much better chance of inflicting casualties, but they did not. That makes it look like it was just for show.

        1. Reports are that they hit their targets very accurately. But our people had moved.

        2. Hi Jeff.

          Now fuck off, adults are talking.

          1. Why does he come here? He is completely discredited and despised. Possibly even more than Hihn.

  4. I’d do push-ups with Tulsi.

    1. “On” or “with”?

      1. On or underneath.

        1. I hear ya. I would bivouac the shit out of Tulsi.

          1. I would too, and I would let ENB watch.

  5. Apple already “works with U.S. law enforcement.” What the debate is about is should they eviscerate security for *everybody* to make the lives of law enforcement marginally easier in a few limited cases

    You know what they say: Once you take the Danegeld you’re never rid of the Dane.

  6. Democrats caught in their impeachment lie

    Under the rules McConnell has proposed, senators will hear the case from the impeachment managers and the White House. If the senators want to see or hear more, say, from Bolton, Mulvaney, or Hunter Biden, they can vote to do so once the other cases have been made. In other words, while McConnell is not guaranteeing witness testimony in advance, his rules do not preclude the calling of witnesses should a majority of senators desire the testimony. This procedure, used in the Clinton impeachment, allowed senators to get answers without allowing House managers to turn the whole thing into an even more ridiculous partisan circus than it already was.

    Haha. Poor unreason staff.

    1. I said it a few days ago but I’ll say it again here: Trump is going to get a bipartisan exoneration. Every single republican senator and from 1 to 3 democrats will vote to acquit. Joe Manchin for one is an absolute, 100%, drop-dead lock for acquittal.

      If any of you Obama Mommas around here think I’m wrong, I’m begging you to go ahead and bookmark this thread right now and save it into your browser favorites. I eagerly look forward to laughing at your stupid monkey asses like I almost always do.

      1. Ha-haaaa, no challenges. That means they all already know that I’m right. Boom.

        1. +100

  7. “the reality in many of these labor markets is that men often dominate management and STEM professions while women find themselves isolated to support roles,”

    This happens frequently in egalitarian cultures… These women are not “isolated in support roles,” they are choosing traditionally gendered careers. They have equal choice, and these are the positions they choose.

    1. your tight grasp of logic and reality is sexist

      1. Logic and reality are in themselves sexist.

    2. If you have a result that goes against your ideological expectations i.e. that a statistically significant number of women do choose traditionally female roles, ignore it and ifer they were coerced in some way.

      1. “infer”

      2. So you must acknowledge that co2 driven climate change is real?

        1. Just the opposite, if you knew anything about the subject. ALL models are very wrong; by more than 2x the standard error. Thus, junk.

  8. Oath above party: As the curtain rises on impeachment, senators are now sworn to seek impartiality

    Haha. Democrats dont like to be sworn in because then perjury charges definitely apply to their lies.

    1. Qualified immunity; no one has ever shown before that lying during an impeachment of Donald Trump during his first term is wrong.

    2. Mitch McConnell openly declared he would not be impartial. Your selective outrage is noted, though.

      https://www.npr.org/2019/12/17/788924966/mcconnell-i-m-not-impartial-about-impeachment

      1. So. Democrats wanted to impeach Trump since he beat Hillary. Not impartial at all.

      2. npr.org

        What’s next? A quote from Salon or the Daily Kos?

      3. DOL…There are no impartial Senators. None.

  9. So slight concussions is worthwhile news but Virginia banning 2A protestors from protesting at the statehouse or the iranian people protesting openly against iran isnt.

    Local news I guess.

    1. All of that. The state capitol building and many of the monuments in Richmond are ringed with new fencing. (I guess Democrats can see the utility of a wall.) The Governor has declared a state of emergency in the capitol, designated the capitol as a shelter, and consequently banned the carry of weapons by anyone. Lawmakers and police exempted. It is very questionable whether the Governor is allowed to do that under Virginia law. Reason finds this unworthy of being discussed.

      The Iranians are continuing to shoot protesters who are angry about the airliner shootdown. Crickets. Reason is only pointing out injured US personnel as a gotcha! because Trump claimed none were hurt by the missile attack, and are certainly not claiming the US respond in any way, or seek compensation for injuries and damages.

      It’s a joke, but true, that the only reason to visit Reason anymore are the comments.

      1. but muh Nordic (in)equality

      2. It is very questionable whether the Governor is allowed to do that under Virginia law. Reason finds this unworthy of being discussed.

        Apparently there was a law passed back in 2014 that explicitly prohibits it, even under a state of emergency.

        Northam’s trying to head this off and will implicitly allow Antifa to stir up shit because he knows he’s got a Yellow Vest-type revolt on his hands. Apparently the West Virginia legislature even jokingly passed a resolution the other day telling the non-blue VA counties they could join up with West Virginia if they desired.

        1. I’m in favor of just giving NoVA back to DC, make it the 51st state, (cut Puerto Rico loose), make Jefferson the 52nd, and call it a day.

          That is really funny about the WV resolution.

          1. except to the extent necessary to ensure public safety in any place or facility designated or used by the Governor

            “Ha! Gotcha!” /Northam

            1. But I see Necron already noted this.

            2. AS AN EMERGENCY SHELTER

              Come on, Rich. Don’t mislead the folks who won’t click the link.

              1. I’m sure the governor will be inside crying in his own puddle of piss calling it an emergency shelter.

      3. Seems the governor has a FYTW carve out in that law, “except to the extent necessary to ensure public safety in any place or facility designated or used by the Governor, any political subdivision of the Commonwealth, or any other governmental entity as an emergency shelter or for the purpose of sheltering persons;

    2. And since Reason doesn’t hire journalists…

      “Some of these symptoms may appear right away, while others may not be noticed for days or months after the injury, or until the person starts resuming their everyday life and more demands are placed upon them.”

      https://www.brainline.org/article/facts-about-concussion-and-brain-injury

      Concussions are not clear diagnoses, often taking days for symptoms to manifest.

      1. 75 years ago, the Battered Bastards of Bastogne (101st Airborne) and 10th Armored Division CCB endured weeks of artillery shelling by German forces at Bastogne in Belgium.

        Don’t remember any soldiers being taken off the line for concussions. Boy have times and medical tech for the military changed.

        1. That Bastogne was surrounded may have had something to do with it. Rather than your insinuation that today’s servicemen are wimps compared to Muh Greatest Generation.

          I’d expect some of those soldiers in the Bulge to be evacuated to the rear when possible, if they were suffering acute neurological symptoms and couldn’t go on anymore. If they could go on, that doesn’t mean they didn’t suffer a TBI that would manifest later.

    3. Pretty hard to turn the VA situation into an “Orange Man Bad” article so you can see why they’re avoiding it.

      1. Well, that and all this gun control was supposed to be accepted by Virginians.

        Turns out some Virginians are willing to fight for their 2nd Amendment and Virginian State Constitutional rights to bear arms.

    4. ‘Slight concussion’?

      Not sure we got there.

      ‘Checking people for concussion because they might have been too close to a blast’

      That’s about it.

      Just the usual suspects trying to turn SOP into ‘Trump lied!!!!111nty!!’ again.

    5. Unfortunately I have a theory why they aren’t covering it YET. The MSM is in the process of turning this into a white supremacists rally, so Reason is waiting for that, so they can have “White Supremacist” in the title, with a “to be sure” nod that some involved are 2A supporters in the 3rd paragraph.

      1. Good call.
        They have two stories about gun control up this afternoon.
        But the progressively inclined editorial stance still won’t bring up Virginia

        1. “Reason is waiting so they can have “White Supremacist” in the title, with a “to be sure” nod about 2A supporters”

          It’s sad how predictable they’ve become.

  10. A Memphis police officer will receive $3,600 a month for the rest of his life, even though he had a sexual relationship with a woman he was investigating in a murder case…

    If only public pension agreements would be tied to a morals clause.

    1. So he had sex with the woman, and then gets paid for the rest of his life? I can see why people choose the profession.

      1. That’s a bit backwards isn’t it? I believe the proper etiquette is that the woman gets paid first by the john, not the john getting paid afterwards.

    2. Way more important story than the VA governor declaring martial law to disarm his constituents

      1. See my comment above.

  11. Trump’s trade war brings more bad news for U.S. wine makers.

    More like whine makers. Am I right, people?

    1. It brings potential pain to wine importers. Maybe distributors too, if they can’t hedge against tariffs cutting demand for foreign wine.

      But how in the hell does it harm domestic wine makers? They aren’t tariffed. Their products are much cheaper than equivalent foreign goods, and that blurb cited above claims these makers won’t be able to find a distributor? A distributor desperate to find 25-50 dollar wine that’s now 50-100 dollar foreign wine? That’s insane.

      1. A few of the factories import grapes. About it.

        1. Importing grapes From Europe? Seems silly, but I think I remember someone like Chapoutier doing that. I don’t believe wine grapes or pressed juice are on the new Tariff Schedule though. Just wine.

          The article doesn’t match the headline.

          1. Grapes and their flavor really change a lot based on the region they are from, soil content, and light profile. Some wine makers are very picky about these items.

            1. All the EU has to do is lower trade restrictions.

              They wont do that, so it’s all Orange Man’s fault.

  12. @TulsiGabbard challenged to a push-up contest at a Manchester Town Hall. She wins.

    No one wants a president who’s doing calisthenics when she should be tweeting.

    1. Her vs Biden would be the best DNC debate yet.

      1. Army Combat Fitness Test for all candidates.

        1. How about a few rounds of “Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader”?

          1. Be fair. At least there is a possibility that some could pass the ACFT.

    1. +100

      Remember Pelosi was not necessarily in favor of Impeachment but her hands were tied by certain members of the Democrat Party. She played the game and acted strong as long as she could.

      She is going to laugh as Biden, Obama, Hillary, and other Democrats involved get taken down by this Ukraine corruption investigation.

      Plus, she might retire when the House goes GOP majority again. Delusional Legacy and all that.

  13. A new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention “confirms that black markets, not ‘vaping,'” caused an outbreak of illnesses last year…

    Reaffirming that the solution is a blanket ban.

    1. Just remember to ban black markets.

      1. Black Markets Matter!

    2. You can resume skydiving without a parachute.

  14. New trade deal between India and the Trump administration is shaping up:

    “Officials in India and the U.S. are preparing a limited bilateral trade agreement that could be unveiled during a visit by President Trump to New Delhi in the coming weeks, current and former government officials in both countries said.

    The pact, described by a former U.S. government official as a “mini-deal,” could ease some of the U.S.’s longstanding concerns with India’s trade and economic practices, while in return restoring India’s preferential trade status, allowing the nation to ship billions of dollars of duty-free products to the U.S.

    . . . .

    Last year, the U.S. removed India from its Generalized System of Preferences, which had enabled India to avoid tariffs on certain exports to the U.S. in the interest of promoting trade ties. The move was intended to pressure New Delhi to open the country’s markets to U.S. medical devices and dairy products.”

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-india-draft-trade-pact-for-unveiling-in-possible-trump-visit-11579266484?

    From my libertarian capitalist perspective, Trump is highly vulnerable on the issue of international trade, and I might be tempted not to support him on the basis if it weren’t for two things:

    1) He keeps delivering trade deals: Japan, China, USMCA, and now India, too?

    2) The competition in the form of Biden, Sanders, and Warren is far worse on international trade. Trump opposed our trade policies because he thought they were lopsided against us. Biden, Sanders, and Warren oppose international trade because they’re hostile to market capitalism.

    1. I made the point elsewhere he seems to be less against ‘free trade’ as it’s often framed and depicted, and more against what he terms ‘bad deals’.

      Now whether he addresses those bad terms is another matter but one can’t conclude he’s anti-trade if he’s, you know, signing deals.

      In each of these deals Trump does one thing I observe (and could be wrong). He leverages American power against countries like China. I think that’s refreshing because I think there is some truth to the fact China benefitted from America’s extreme open for business stance as the most transparent economy on the planet. They then proceeded to flout every deal and break endless WTO rules.

      It was time to call their bluff once and for all.

      I think they conflate this like they do with anti-illegal immigration with being anti-immigrant.

      Reason does both. Continuously.

      1. He is for realistic free trade. His actions have been retaliatory. Reacting to other countries actions. Free trade doesnt mean ignoring bad actors.

        1. His actions weren’t retaliatory.

          They were aggressive. Trump was the aggressor.

          He campaigned on a promise to start a trade war, and he launched the trade war.

          I still oppose what he did, and I’m not about to pretend that slapping tariffs on Chinese imports doesn’t hurt American consumers, but there is still a difference in terms of objectives between someone like Trump, who wants trade policy to favor American workers rather than Chinese workers, and someone like Sanders, who opposes international trade because he opposes market capitalism, and someone like Warren, who may oppose trade with China on the basis of their treatment of factory workers and the people of Hong Kong, Tibet, and Xinjiang.

          1. Oh, so we are ignoring the decades of IP Theft and corporate espionage. Okay then. No reason to have this discussion.

            1. Those were standard practice and problems inherent within the system. Yes, there are plenty of good reasons to maintain our trade relationship–even if another country is abusing the system.

              Because China was abusing the system was no reason to shoot ourselves in the foot and hurt our own economy and the hurt the standard of living of working Americans. Think the gun debate. Yes, people sometimes use guns to shoot up schools, but that’s not a good reason to confiscated 400 million guns from 100 million law abiding Americans.

              Regardless, Trump initiated the trade war. China did not unilaterally raise tariffs on American exports to China. Trump did unilaterally raise tariffs on Chinese exports to the U.S. If you support what he did, then just support it. Don’t go around insisting that other people believe a bunch of bullshit about how Trump didn’t initiate the trade war.

              Not only did Trump initiate the trade war, he also promised to initiate the trade war and he’s going to brag about initiating the trade war.

              “When a country (USA) is losing many billions of dollars on trade with virtually every country it does business with, trade wars are good, and easy to win”

              —-President Trump

              https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/02/trump-trade-wars-are-good-and-easy-to-win.html

              1. “Those were standard practice and problems inherent within the system.”

                I actually knew you would go with that argument. But remember, what you said in your comment: “His actions weren’t retaliatory.”

                So which is it? You can’t play both games Ken. You’re being dishonest. Just because China has been a bad actor for 20 years doesn’t mean any action against them is not retaliatory. That is just silly.

                “Because China was abusing the system was no reason to shoot ourselves in the foot and hurt our own economy and the hurt the standard of living of working Americans.” Umm… no inflationary signal. Unemployment, record stock growth, etc etc. What hurt are you referring to? This is Boehm like argumentation. All actions are bad, screw the data. The fact is many of the industry partners in China simply did a market shift to new suppliers. Others took out the costs from their profits (a slight negative but not really a market destroying move). Sometimes you have to look at the actual data and not the baseline theory of free markets. If you go this route you have to consider the negative effects of all the bad Chinese actions which for some reason your analysis and likewise Boehm’s always ignores.

                You’re simply being dishonest here.

                1. “His actions weren’t retaliatory.”

                  Trump was not responding to tariff increases.

                  My English is not hard to understand unless you don’t want to understand it.

                  Yes, I criticize Trump for initiating a trade war. I prefer Trump to the Democrat because even though he initiated a trade war that hurt the U.S. economy, he is not anti-international trade per se–and he is head and shoulders above the Democrats on the issue of market capitalism including international trade.

                  Because I support Trump in spite of his mistakes and our disagreements is no reason to pretend that I don’t disagree with him or that he hasn’t made any mistakes. My criticism of his policies is as clear-eyed as my support of his policies. I’m certainly not about to pretend that Trump didn’t launch this trade war on purpose–because he did.

                  The trade war was about slapping tariffs on imports from China. Trump initiated that. He was not responding to tariffs that China slapped on American imports from the U.S. He initiated this trade war on purpose, and he’s glad he did it. If you are, too, then do that and defend it. Don’t expect other people to share your delusions.

              2. Ken, you are ignoring what unreason and the MSM ignore.

                All the pre-Trump trade restrictions that bog down trade. Domestic taxes, labor rules and costs, and regulations. International restrictions, rules, tariffs, taxes, and costs.

                While you might call it a “new” trade war, the USA has been in a trade war since 1776. Trump is just one of the few Presidents to get foreign nations to lower trade restrictions a bit via an American First policy.

                I am still waiting for Boehm and the hacks at unreason to admit that tariffs can get foreign nations to lower trade restrictions. They don’t like the precedent it now sets. Plus, Trump fulfilled another campaign promise.

                1. The trade war is about escalating tariffs, and Trump is the one who initiated that.

                  Pointing to various justifications for Trump initiating a trade war does not mean that Trump didn’t start the trade war.

                  1. WWII in the Pacific was about firebombing civilians, and America hit Tokyo first.
                    Pointing to various naval base bombings and island invasions does not mean Japan started the war.

                    1. The trade war is about tariffs, and Trump initiated the trade war by slapping tariffs on imports from China.

                      That’s what happened.

                      When I say I’m against the trade war, it means I was against Trump’s initiation of the trade war by slapping tariffs on imports from China.

                      That’s what we’re talking about.

                      If you support what Trump did in initiating the trade war, then why are you trying to claim he didn’t initiate it. There would not have been a trade war if Trump hadn’t initiated it by slapping tariffs on Chinese imports.

                    2. “Trade War”: Conflict between two or more nations regarding trade tariffs on each other.

                      —-Business Dictionary

                      http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/trade-war.html

                    3. Ken….you assume the trade war started with POTUS Trump. Is that really a valid assumption? One can credibly argue the Chinese have been at war with their regulatory, legal, trade barriers to US goods and services, in addition to government-sponsored IP theft for decades now. Viewed this way, POTUS Trump took long overdue retaliation.

          2. I mean, this was even an issue under Obama. But apparently it doesn’t count… because… well… you explain.

            https://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/25/us-china-agree-to-not-conduct-cybertheft-of-intellectual-property-white-house.html

            1. Pinky Swear!

          3. I mean it is perfectly fine that China produces counterfeit goods, that is totally not a negative market reaction. FREE MARKETS!!!

            https://www.inc.com/associated-press/counterfeiters-cost-600-billion-a-year.html

            Sorry Ken, but you’re being completely dishonest here.

            1. Imagine all that revenue for American IP patent holders when China pays them for licensing.

          4. I mean from Trump’s own words:
            “We are taking this action today as a result of the Section 301 process that the USTR has been leading for more than 12 months. After a thorough study, the USTR concluded that China is engaged in numerous unfair policies and practices relating to United States technology and intellectual property – such as forcing United States companies to transfer technology to Chinese counterparts.”

            https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/17/trump-puts-new-tariffs-on-china-as-trade-war-escalates.html

            But sure… not retaliatory. You go with that.

            1. Yeah, the problem I have with Ken’s argument is he seems to ‘start’ at POTUS Trump’s election and ignore all the history beforehand. And I generally agree with Ken, and look forward to his take on a lot of issues.

              Here, I think maybe Ken is not considering a large enough context.

        2. ” realistic free trade”

          Indeed. Free trade is an ideal. While we can espouse the notion that all taxes are theft. The reality is we tolerate that theft.

          Thus, in the real world, every form of organized state has taxation, be it actual dunning or a financial and regulatory environment. All of these will affect trade. To declare that some forms of taxation are verboten, while living in the presence of others, is simply unrealistic and will actually tend towards perpetuating and accentuating particular sorts of market distortions.

          If peoples are free to form entities with defined borders, and those borders are then used for the purposes of any sorts of taxation, then they should likewise be amenable to all forms of taxation, and choose them according to their desires and designs.

          1. There wasn’t anything unrealistic about our trade relationship with China before Trump was elected in 2016.

            We took the bad with the good, and our economy flourished in no small part because of our trade with China–for 15 years after China joined the WTO.

            What was unrealistic about that?

            1. Trump offered Free Trade to our trading partners at the G-7 Summit.

              They rejected the offer.

              Our economy flourished even under increased tariffs from 2018.

            2. “There wasn’t anything unrealistic…”

              Nor was it free.

              1. +1000

              2. What difference does that make, so long as it was freer? More freer trade is better than less freer trade–even if we never get to perfect free trade.

                Let’s not fall prey to the perfect solutions fallacy. Because a solution isn’t perfect doesn’t mean it isn’t the best one available, and adopting policies that are worse is not preferable to policies that are better and never can be–even if the perfect solution isn’t available.

      2. Those are great points.

      3. I’m not convinced he is particularly coherent on trade. But I still hope it works out well and it’s starting to look less awful that I thought it might.

        1. Trump offered Free Trade and our trading partners rejected the offer. Trump felt that they had unreasonable trade restrictions on US imports into their respective nations.

          Trump used the leverage that he had- tariffs and a US economy on the Obama Administration and Democrat leash.

          IT WORKED! All major trading partners have caved and agreed to lower trade restrictions a bit. We’ll see if trump can make more inroads now he will be reelected for 4 more years.

          1. The IS started selling rice to China for the first time ever in December.

    2. 1) He keeps delivering trade deals: Japan, China, USMCA, and now India, too?

      Ken, I’d be curious to hear your assessment of the benefits of the USMCA over NAFTA.

      And I’ll add, the Phase 1 China deal is hardly much of a deal at this point. I’m hoping that Phase 2 brings us some reduction in tariffs.

      1. Nobody can know USMCA vs NAFTA until it has been in place. You have to see how markets react to new rules prior to making judgements. The mistake people make with these agreements is they attempt to analyze them as if all behavior remains static, it doesn’t.

        1. Would you say the same thing about a minimum wage hike in the US, or does “wait and see” only apply to a minimum wage hike in Mexico?

          1. Wage hikes have a known social effect on business. So no. You’re comparing a single analysis that is fairly easy to measure effects of with many data sets to look at as compared to a highly complex trade agreement with many moving parts, shifting markets, and complimentary and non complimentary regulations.

            1. Leo cannot believe Trump is still in office to still push for USCMA to pass and it did. Poor Clinton’s NAFTA being lost to history.

              Just think how mad Leo will be in Trump’s second term as President.

        2. Nobody can know USMCA vs NAFTA until it has been in place.

          “”But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it”

          1. Yeah, shockingly the economy is complex. You keep comparing simple pared down markets to broad market behaviors.

            1. Then why claim victory on the trade deal if we have no idea how it will impact our economy? Your statements on this are nonsensical. If we can’t know how markets will react then we therefore can’t judge it good or bad. If we have no way of knowing that, then why in the world would we advocate for its passage?

              And the comparison to Obamacare and your Pelosi-like statement is pretty apt. Obamacare used some simplistic understanding of human behavior to say that government knows how markets respond to their meddling. Trump is meddling in markets again, and presumably thinks he knows how markets will respond. Predictably, he’ll be as wrong as Obama was, because as you said markets are complex. If something was complex enough that I couldn’t understand it, I probably wouldn’t mettle in it.

              1. You mean “meddle” not “mettle”
                Either way, Trump is interfering no more than the status quo ante tariffs was meddling.
                But you’ve got dogma and blind faith on your side, so keep it up

                1. Democrats have metal for brains, so Leo acting like passing ObamaCare is like USCMA is ridiculous.

                2. Trump is interfering no more than the status quo ante tariffs was meddling.

                  Trump negotiated increasing the minimum wage for automotive components to $16/hr. Trump negotiated increasing the requirement for sourcing automotive components from 62.5% to 75%. The UAW couldn’t have asked for more with a straight face.

                  Next you’re going to say it’s not Trump’s fault he negotiated that deal, Congress passed it!

                  1. No, I just don’t mind production restrictions on foreign countries to bring them closer to restrictions on US labor

                  2. Who’s deal is it then Leo Trump’s? Congress’? Some combination with Trump pushing for the USCMA?

                    I would like you to tell us so we can throw back in your face when you blame Trump for USCMA but dont give him the credit for USCMA when it works better than NAFTA.

              2. When did I claim victory? I’ve ways said we wont know for a decade.

            2. Leo is trying to be his usual coy self about the USCMA and comparing it to Obamacare. We all know what is in USCMA. What we dont is how the market will react (as you said JesseAz) to the new rules and lower restrictions.

              It was easy to predict the harm ObamaCare would do to the healthcare and health insurance markets.

              Boehm and unreason could compare and contrast NAFTA vs USCMA within a few days. They wont. They certainly wont because they lost to Trump…again.

              1. What we dont is how the market will react (as you said JesseAz) to the new rules and lower restrictions.

                Name the lower restrictions. They’re higher.

                If you don’t know how the market will react, then why pass it in the first place? That’s some Stalinist 5-year plan thinking right there.

                1. Yeah, Trump is Stalin and the USCMA is Stalin’s 5 year plan.

                  Everyone with any sense knew exactly what most of Stalin’s 5 year plan would do. Create more industry and industrial workers.

                  USMCA Issue-Specific Fact Sheets
                  The USMCA maintains NAFTA’s existing zero-tariff treatment, significantly expands U.S. access to Canada’s dairy market, and includes a number of other important upgrades. According to independent analysis by the U.S. International Trade Commission, full implementation of the USMCA would increase U.S. agricultural exports to the world by $2.2billion.

                  That is from the Ag fact sheet as one example. Feel free to compare and contrast NAFTA vs USCMA and get back to us. You, Boehm, and alphabet troll can buddy up to split up tasks.

      2. Ken, I’d be curious to hear your assessment of the benefits of the USMCA over NAFTA.”

        I don’t believe the USMCA is a better deal than NAFTA.

        I think Trump is better on trade than Biden, Sanders, Warren, or any other Democrat likely to win the nomination, and I think the USMCA is a better deal than having no deal at all.

        Again, it seems as though for some people here, there is no qualified support for something Trump is doing. If you support Trump on something reluctantly, well, that’s total support for Trump. Likewise, it seems as though for other people here, there is no qualified criticism of something Trump is doing either. If I’m criticizing something Trump did or is doing, then I’m against Trump–regardless of whether I’d vote for him over any given Democrat in the upcoming election.

        I assure, my views on trade would be the same regardless of whether Trump had never been elected President.

        “the Phase 1 China deal is hardly much of a deal at this point. I’m hoping that Phase 2 brings us some reduction in tariffs.”

        Here’s a great example.

        Trump’s Phase One deal cancels a huge tariff that would have gone into effect on December 15th if China hadn’t come to terms on the deal. On that basis alone, it would be incorrect to say that the Phase One deal did not reduce tariffs. The fact is that if it hadn’t been for the Phase One deal, tariffs would be higher than they are right now.

        In addition to that, the Phase One deal cut the 15% tariff in half that Trump had slapped on about $160 billion in Chinese exports to the U.S.

        That being said, if the Phase One deal were all there was to show for the trade war, I would be opposed to the trade war. If my newfound opposition to the trade war because of the Phase One Deal is interesting news to you, it shouldn’t be–since I’ve been opposed to the trade war since before it was launched. I’ve been arguing that Trump made a mistake in launching the trade war from the very beginning.

        In fact, since the very beginning, I’ve argued that even if he won the trade war–even IF IF IF he won–gambling with our economy like that with a trade war is foolish. I argued that it was foolish to gamble with our economy on a trade war even if he won, just like someone betting their life savings on a single hand of blackjack was foolish–even if he won. I’ve also pointed out that because the Phase Two agreement won’t be negotiated until after the next presidential election, we better hope Trump is reelected if we want to see the rest of those tariffs go away. Because there is no good reason to believe that Biden, Sanders, or Warren wants them to go away.

        You know, the alternative to Trump winning reelection isn’t a libertarian capitalist savior.

        There’s this thing called the perfect solution fallacy. Let’s make that the logical fallacy of the day. Trump isn’t the solution to all of our problems, and he’s the source of some of them. Despite Trump’s flaws, however, he’s the best solution available–and that includes the issue of international trade.

        1. You know, the alternative to Trump winning reelection isn’t a libertarian capitalist savior.

          But Obama didn’t start a trade war of this magnitude at all. So you can say that you think the Democrats are worse than Trump on trade, but Obama certainly wasn’t. Why should I believe that Biden, as a relatively moderate example, would be worse?

          And USMCA is more regulatory than even NAFTA. Yet you claim it as a feather in Trump’s trade hat. We would have been better off with an empty chair on that one. Were any of the Democrats pushing a NAFTA rewrite ahead of Trump in the 2016 campaign?

          Trump is driving this trade craziness, and maybe the current crop of Democrats would endorse it, but let’s not forget who started it.

          1. “But Obama didn’t start a trade war of this magnitude at all.”

            And Obama isn’t running in 2020 either.

            The Democrat front-runners who are running in 2020 are openly advocating socialism, and they’re worse than Trump on trade.

            They’re far worse than Trump on a host of issues, and I see no reason to pretend otherwise.

            1. But Biden is running. He’s not advocating socialism any more than Obama was. In fact, he looks pretty similar to Obama on fiscal issues as far as I can tell.

              Has he called for anything worse than Trump’s trade policy? I honestly might have missed it if he did.

              1. Joe Biden campaign

                Biden wants to end the gun trade.
                Biden wants to open borders just to open borders.
                Biden wants to increase union impacts on business.
                Biden wants to restore ObamaCare to its hayday.
                Biden wants “clean energy solutions”.

                “First and foremost, we must enforce existing trade laws and invest in the competitiveness of our workers and communities here at home, so that they compete on a level playing field. Then, we need to write the rules of the road for international trade through a modern, inclusive process—rules that protect our workers, safeguard the environment, uphold labor standards and middle-class wages, foster innovation, and take on big global challenges like corporate concentration, corruption, and climate change. If we don’t, other countries will write the rules for us.”

                Stop lying leo. All Democrats running for Prez (and not running) are worse than Trump on every Trump strategy.

              2. “But Biden is running. He’s not advocating socialism any more than Obama was.”

                Obama renegotiated both the Colombia free trade agreement and the South Korean free trade agreement to include provisions that were sought by the UAW, and Biden is even a bigger union guy than Obama was.

                I do not see a good reason to assume that Biden is significantly better than Trump on international trade, and I see good reason to think he’s significantly worse than Trump on other capitalist issues, especially in regards to the Green New Deal, which is a deal breaker as far as I’m concerned.

              3. “He’s not advocating socialism any more than Obama was”

                No, Obama only approved things like Obamacare. Which was in no way socialist.

                Seriously Leo, WTF? Are you really this obtuse?

                1. Obamacare is fascist, which is a bit different than socialist. The gov hasn’t taken over the hospitals……yet.

  15. Jay-Z is fighting for better treatment for Mississippi prisoners.

    Shut up and Instagram your yacht.

    1. What do you think his fighting entails? Twitter virtue signaling.

    2. Isn’t he in Africa somewhere with Bouncy?

  16. “Sweden is a very gendered labor market,” Anneli Häyrén of Sweden’s Centre for Gender Research at Uppsala University told U.S. News.

    Like I’m going to trust that a woman knows what she’s talking about without a man to confirm what she’s saying.

    1. “It’s also perfectly cromulent.”

    2. So when the governments require women on boards, they get put on boards and ignored.
      Who could see that coming?

  17. U.S. troops were injured in Iranian missile attack.

    So, ENB, you had all the information the same time as the president? No? Then fuck off with your sanctimonious hackdom.

    Why don’t you, as Jon Stewart suggested, get a hobby…like journalism.

    1. She’d go back to hooking…if she could.

  18. Michael Bloomberg, in his own words.

    All these candidates run their mouth. Why is Bloomy the only one getting the Mother Jones treatment?

    1. Because Bloomberg’s an ex-Republican and a billionaire, and even his blatant gun-grabbing and overall nannyism doesn’t change the fact that he isn’t a true-believing communist.

      1. He, in fact, IS a true believing communist. He just hides it somewhat better than the other democrats.

        1. I wouldn’t say that. He’s basically Dr. Cocteau from Demolition Man.

          1. Best
            Movie
            Ever

            So many happyhappyjoyjoy moments

      2. “Because Bloomberg’s an ex-Republican and a billionaire”

        He owns a mansion and a yacht!

  19. What the debate is about is should they eviscerate security for *everybody* to make the lives of law enforcement marginally easier in a few limited cases…

    The drug war already settled this debate.

  20. http://www.nasdaq.com/videos/solid-u.s.-retail-sales-confirm-consumer-strength

    Solid retain sales confirm consumer strength. Funny how reason never seems to talk about the economy anymore except for the occasional TRADE WAR!! article. And even then they are just going through the motions.

    1. I work in the financial sector, and it’s amazing to see how many people have moved everything to cash and bonds on the sidelines while the markets have roared ahead. Most of them are terrified of Trump and think he’s going to tank the market somehow. I’m not a trump supporter, but he has been nice to my 401K.

      1. I shifted out of foreign stocks and bonds as I saw them dragging down my portfolio of US stocks and bonds. Got me 30%+ returns in 2019.

        I also did well in 2017 and 2018 by betting on Trump would be good for the economy.

        Election year will be too up and down for the portfolio that I currently have, so a shift is in the works.

      2. conchfritters, I did two rebalances last year. The first to move to 30% bonds (August), the second to 40% (December). The reason? I bought my first three years of retirement withdrawals (starting at 3.65% of portfolio) with all the gains. Here we are in mid-January 2020 and I am already down to 38% bonds because of strong market gains. When I get down to 25% bonds again, I’ll rebalance to 40%, and buy more years of retirement withdrawals (sort of like a modified liability matching strategy).

        I am not terrified of POTUS Trump at all. I am cashing in my profits periodically. Why be terrified of a 22%+ gain, and a real return of 18%+. Are you kidding me? For the financially astute, this is the time to make a killing. If the market tanks, I have plenty of dry powder at the ready in my total bond index funds.

  21. A bill to decriminalize prostitution has been introduced in Vermont.

    CRAFTED BY HORNY MEN WHOSE LONG-SUFFERING WIVES AREN’T PUTTING OUT.

    (That took some turns as I was typing it but put your sympathies where you like.)

    1. This whole “decriminalize” half measure is pretty evil. Not as evil as the status quo, but evil nonetheless.

      Other than the threat of arrest, it solves none of the problems of the sex trade. If any of these idiots is actually worried about “human trafficking”, they should change that to full legalization. A world with legal brothels is a world without sex traffickers (the kind you think of, not the kind they use in the statistics).

      1. Context, Cyto, context.

        When referring to illegal drugs, yes, “decriminalizing” is just removing the threat of arrest while “legalizing” is fully removing laws against it. But in the context of prostitution, for various historical reasons, “legalizing” is making some narrow exceptions but still treating most prostitution as illegal (like in Nevada), while “decriminalizing” is fully removing laws against it.

        Looking up the actual Vermont bill, it repeals all laws against prostitution between consenting adults, while retaining prohibitions on prostitution of minors and coercion.

        1. So….
          Can you have a brothel in Vermont under the new law? Can it process Visa charges, have health insurance, worker’s comp?

          Or are we still stuck with call girls who can’t open a bank account, can’t advertise, can’t have normal workplace protections?

          That’s the difference I’m hoping to avoid…. Customers, workers, managers, business owners, landlords, banks, etc. all able to work together without fear of government interference.

          We already know that they won’t be able to because of federal laws recently put in place. And because of Obama era assaults on legal business that he found distasteful via the banking system….

          So color me still quite skeptical.

          OTOH, actually a pretty bold step too.

          1. Ah yes, Operation Choke Point.

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point

            Just another reminder of what pieces of shit Obama and Biden are.

            1. This operation, disclosed in an August 2013 Wall Street Journal story,[2] was officially ended in August 2017,[3] and the FDIC settled multiple lawsuits by promising to Congress additional training for its examiners and to cease issuing “informal” and “unwritten suggestions” to banks.

  22. 11 Americans Were Hurt in Iranian Strike, Military Says, Contradicting Trump

    I was laughing last night because unreason and the other Propagandists were trying to use the word “casualty” but they didnt know what it meant.

    1. Like, it means injured sufficiently to prevent casual sex, or what?

      1. sex w/a concussion is not unheard of.

        1. Sex resulting in a concussion can be an interesting 24 hours.

  23. Although Nordic nations lead the rest of the world in qualitative, perception-based metrics, the reality in many of these labor markets is that men often dominate management and STEM professions while women find themselves isolated to support roles…

    So women are dominating the support roles? Don’t we have an even more marginalized group we need to let break in there?

    1. Is it more important to dominate “the rest of the world in qualitative, performance-based metrics”? Or is it more important than jobs be equally divided by gender?

      1. Either one; just never allow people to do what they choose for themselves – – – –

  24. http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/amp30533255/navy-ufo-videos-national-security/

    Navy says release of better UFO video would “gravely damage national security”. So, is it that the Aliens would be pissed if he told the world about them or that whatever was on that video is some unbelievable bad ass technology coming out of the Skunk works?

    1. Or that it’s a disinformation op to get the PRC to shit its pants.

      The maneuvers this tic-tac is supposed to be able to do is right out of Star Trek. If it’s an actual physical thing and not a sensor ghost. Hundreds of gs acceleration, reactionless drive: stuff that makes SpaceXs BFR look like a Song Dynasty fireworks rocket.

      1. I don’t know what to think of it. It is hard to believe that it was a sensor ghost. The pilots didn’t think it was. I find it hard to believe that they would not realize it was a ghost. And the film is of something they claim to have saw with their own eyes. They were not just seeing it through the sensor.

        I think there are only two possible explanation; the pilots had some kind of hallucination or someone has some out of this world technology.

        1. Atmospheric phenomena can do some really weird stuff. I doubt any pilot has seen everything there is to see.

    2. Another possibility is that the “thing” has a boring explanation, but they don’t want anyone to know just how good the camera is.

      Regardless, it’s not aliens. It’s never aliens. If they’ve got the tech to get to our planet then they’ve got the tech to do whatever they want. If there are aliens in our solar system then, like God, they’ve obviously decided to hide from us and we’re never going to see them.

      1. Agree on the aliens. I think the truest explanation of what our contact with a star-crossing entity would be like, was the Strugatsky Brothers’ in Roadside Picnic.

        A picnic. Picture a forest, a country road, a meadow. Cars drive off the country road into the meadow, a group of young people get out carrying bottles, baskets of food, transistor radios, and cameras. They light fires, pitch tents, turn on the music. In the morning they leave.

        The animals, birds, and insects that watched in horror through the long night creep out from their hiding places. And what do they see? Old spark plugs and old filters strewn around… Rags, burnt-out bulbs, and a monkey wrench left behind… And of course, the usual mess—apple cores, candy wrappers, charred remains of the campfire, cans, bottles, somebody’s handkerchief, somebody’s penknife, torn newspapers, coins, faded flowers picked in another meadow…

        Utterly incomprehensible and probably instantly lethal.

        1. Obviously not a 21st century picnic. Millennials do not even know what a spark plug is, let alone how to change one.

      2. This. They don’t want to reveal capability – in terms of detection, acuity, or tracking.

      3. “If they’ve got the tech to get to our planet then they’ve got the tech to do whatever they want.”

        And also the intelligence to never come back!

      4. Any aliens who got to Earth would have vastly superior tech. They would have to seeing as they crossed parts of the Universe and we have barely sent any of our probe tech outside our Solar System. Radio waves have gone further but dont have to support life forms.

    3. The concept of Aliens visiting us in star faring ships is probably one of the dumbest, most egotistical and narcissistic notions humans have had since the last one. Still it’s a fun thought.

      1. Pretty egotistical to think there is no possibility that in the billion billion Solar Systems out there, that Earth creatures are the only perfect luck to happen and Earth as we know it will be gone in under 3 billion years.

        I would give you current intelligent life forms forms but never been life forms of some kind? Of course, humans believe there is some afterlife.

        1. Did you not read my comment? I specifically referred to the notion of Aliens traveling in Star faring vessels to visit our planet. Not in some kind of intelligent life as we know it, some kind of bacteria or even another type of life form beyond our understanding.

          1. I read it. I think its wrong to assume long distance travel is nearly impossible. I think its egotistical because humans are relatively stupid in what we know compared to what we dont know.

            I think it could be unlikely to have life forms traveling in star ships or some other sort of travel but not dumb.

            As for the lower life forms traveling with water or ice, I think its very likely. If you find the extraplanetary sources of Earth’s water to be compelling, then I can see all life on Earth being from off Earth. In other words, we are all Aliens.

            1. I didnt mean to come off harsh as I really like weird theories sometimes.

              What if some far off human relatives dropped our stupid and criminal asses off here and our history was lost to time. Earth being the Australia of the Universe.

          2. Not in some kind of intelligent life as we know it, some kind of bacteria or even another type of life form beyond our understanding.

            Progs.

  25. “We suffered no casualties—all our soldiers are safe and only minimal damage was sustained at our military bases.”

    That turns out to have been false.

    This is a teaching moment about the difference between casualty and fatality.

    1. And if they admit it shouldn’t change the US response to the attack, what difference does it make?

      1. No… you only say what difference, at this point, does it make when there actually are US personnel KIA as a result of inept leadership.

        When a small show of military force produces the desired result, you shout “War Crime!” Alternatively you could scream NAZI and then rant about WWIII. Either is acceptable.

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

        You fucked up the quote.

    2. Who knows if they were actually concussed or not at this point. It used to be concussion protocol to assess any troop who was within a certain proximity of an explosion and to try to keep them in a dark, quiet room for a certain amount of time if the medic was concerned. Maybe they would get a Purple Heart for their injury or maybe not, depending on the assessment of a medical officer. It could just be that these 11 troops were evaced to Kuwait for assessment, and that it will eventually turn out that they were not injured.

      1. Imagine being stuck in a base in Iraq and saying he might have a concussion gets you a few days chilling in a nice German hospital and if you are lucky maybe a medal. You think maybe people had an incentive to feel a headache coming on?

        1. Not to mention the prospect of early medical retirement or service-related disability goodies.

          Dangerous world out there for our servicemen and women. I’m glad we still have people brave enough and selfless enough to volunteer to go out into it.

          1. +1000

            Wouldnt be the first or last time that happened.

          2. All it takes is one itchy trigger. One more widow one less white nigger.

  26. Flipping the Texas House: Inside Democrats’ effort to turn a red state blue

    Haha. The Texas legislature is currently controlled by the GOP:
    State Senate- 19 GOP to 12 Democrat
    State House- 83 GOP to 67 Democrat

    And this is after any “Blue Wave” in 2016 and 2018.

    Plus, its always funny when Lefties discuss flipping states Red to Blue. It’s not impossible and has been done before. SO HAS FLIPPING BLUE STATES TO RED. Hahaha.

    There are not enough of these Lefties to keep all the current states Blue and flip Red states to Blue.

    1. California and New York are exporting progressives at record rates. Their goals are not that implausible.

      1. There are still millions of non-Democrat voters in California and New York.

        At some point, those Blue states can flip back Red just like Red states can flip Blue.

        Main point is that Lefties are wrong about a flip of Georgia and/or Texas happening any time soon. Census 2020 is gonna make Lefties cry. Georgia and Texas are both likely picking up House Districts and their GOP controlled Legislatures get to gerrymander just like Democrats get to gerrymander. This will lock Blue cities in Red states into enclaves that give them a tiny percentage of the House Districts available.

        1. Holy crap, the Georgia thing is embarrassing. Not just those recent congressional shenanigans, but the repeated attempts to act like Georgia is in play in presidential races.

          In 2000 there were some pretty sketchy “non calls” of races early in the night – when polls were still open. Georgia was one of them. They kept saying it was too close to call all night – and that is super bad for Bush. It turned out that Georgia was 60/40. Not even a little bit close. So why the inability to call it? (At the same time they called Florida for Gore before the polls even closed in the panhandle…. and we all know how that turned out.)

          1. Georgia has a mix of new voting machines and hand ballots and some other stuff going on so the MSM was trying to spin the populous counties Fulton, Gwinnett, Cobb, and Dekalb as if they would change Georgia Red to Blue.

            I have also posted where Georgia has hundreds of thousands of older Republicans who were not getting out to vote on non-Presidential voting cycles. Almost every Democrat who was going to vote Democrat did and they still lost.

    2. The goal isn’t implausible at all. I expect plenty of redistricting fights in 2020-21. It’s not going to happen this election, or 2022, but 2024 and later? Maybe.

      Lots and lots of out of state and new Americans in Texas over the last couple of years, and they brought their predominantly leftist politics with them.

      1. Lots and lots of out of state and new Americans in Texas over the last couple of years, and they brought their predominantly leftist politics with them.

        Not necessarily. Apparently Cruz kept his Senate seat because of conservative-leaning voters who migrated to the state over the last 10 years. The Dems are counting primarily on Central American migrants to turn the state, not transplants. That’s why they’re limping out so bad about Abbott saying the state won’t take refugees this year.

      2. I was recommending the Netflix documentary series “Cheer” the other day.

        In that series which takes place at a Texas junior college, they show the students who are from all over the country taking a “Texas Government” class (apparently required by the state). The (female) teacher explains Texas culture to the students. She asks them what is important in Texas. First up…. “The second amendment”. The teacher confirms Texas gun culture and says she is a big 2nd amendment proponent and is usually carrying everywhere.

        Christian views on marriage, etc….. basically a 90 second conservative political rundown.

        Talk about running counter to the national narrative!

        This seemed to be included as balance to the (also very conservative, very christian) coach, who talks about acceptance of her very obviously gay male team members and her willingness to fight others for that acceptance (with what to my ears sounded like an implied threat of violence on her part if anyone dare harm one of her kids).

        1. I grew up in GA but have now lived in Texas 20 years, 24 if you count college. One time my kid asked my husband I which was more important, Texas or America. I answered America. He answered Texas. His family has been here since it was a country. Now, about 10 years later, I might also answer Texas. Also, Texas History was a required college class 23 years ago but I don’t believe it is today. My daughter is in college and it was not listed as a requirement for her major.

          1. Texas is a very unique state as having been the only independent Republic of the current US States. I suspect as the Democrat Party moves more radical Left into Communism and wants to take away guns and such, even Texas Democrats wont fit into that new strategy.

            Same here in Georgia. The old Democrats have more in common with the GOP now than Democrats now. Especially as RINOs will spend like Democrats.

    3. i favor reducing the surplus supply of progtards at every opportunity.

  27. Social security disability benefits: What Trump’s proposed cuts could mean for recipients

    I don’t think unreeason covered this. No wonder. trump clearly trying to drain the swamp and cut money from one of the federal Big 3 wastes of taxpayer money.

  28. Pension Strikes In France, Reform In The UK, And The Third-Rail-Ness Of Social Security Reform

    Greece then UK and France? That EU Socialist pyramid scheme is crumbling.

  29. Watch Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D–Hawaii) win a pushup contest:

    Fake news.

    She clearly did not “win a pushup contest” in that clip. In fact, she was falling behind the dude who was also clearly in great shape.

    It was, however, another demonstration that she’s a very likeable candidate and would be awesome if she had more policies that align with our views.

    She should definitely figure out a way to goad Biden into repeating that pushup challenge he issued to Trump with her. That would be epic.

    1. Thongs, bikinis, or french cut?

      1. I think Biden would look best in a French cut.

        1. I think you owe the rest of the commentariat damages for putting that picture in our minds!

  30. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/01/democrats-should-be-worried-about-latino-vote/604882/

    Hispanics might be thinking for themselves. This has the Atlantic and Democrats everywhere worried. There could be no larger nightmare for the Left than brown people not thinking what enlightened white people tell them to think.

    1. I can’t wait for the reason articles about how Hispanic immigrants are stupid for not supporting illegal immigration

      1. The fact is everyone of all races hates woke, white people. It is one of the few things that brings us all together.

      2. Hilarity is listening to first-generation legal immigrants at work bitch about illegals.

    2. I got a strange look from a caucasian progressive in San Diego the other week when I tell her that “Mexican” isn’t a race.

      At first, she thought I was joking.

      I don’t think it had ever occurred to her that “Mexican” was a nationality and a culture–and there are Mexicans of all different races. I think it’s because she’s never really been to Mexico, and her maids, her nanny, and her gardeners all look similar.

      She’s lived in San Diego for 30 years.

      Hispanic means they speak Spanish and are influenced by Spanish culture. Why would that mean they agree on anything? Americans speak English. We don’t necessarily agree on anything because of that.

      P.S. Tijuana is among the most culturally conservative parts of Mexico. When the caravan that Trump first called out made it to Tijuana, the mayor of Tijuana greeted them wearing a red hat that read “Make Tijuana Great Again”. Yeah, being Hispanic is whatever Hispanics want it to be, and they don’t all want the same thing.

      1. I got a strange look from a caucasian progressive in San Diego the other week when I tell her that “Mexican” isn’t a race.

        “Why do they call it ‘La Raza’, then? *** rolls eyes ***”

        1. Because social justice groups within the Hispanic community have tried to forge a racial identity as a means to political power doesn’t make it so. And, it should be noted, whatever it is those social justice groups mean by “La Raza”, if it doesn’t include Hispanics from Cuba and Puerto Rico, as well as Peruvians and Mexicans, then whatever it is they mean by “La Raza”, it isn’t a “race” that crosses national boundaries.

          Meanwhile, I lived in Mexico for an extended period of time, and I met Mexican nationals of all races. There were Mexicans who were as blue eyed and pale as any Americans, Mexicans of African ancestry. I met Mexicans whose ancestry was German and Mexicans whose ancestry was Lebanese. The fact is that “Mexican” is a nationality, rather than a race, no matter what some social justice warriors mean when they use the term “La Raza”.

          P.S. They wouldn’t be the first social justice warrior group based on racial identity that was completely full of shit.

          1. I met Japanese Mexicans.

            There were Mennonite and Amish Mexicans. They were always trying to sell cheese. Cheese isn’t as big of a thing in Mexico, even less so in southern Mexico. Southern Mexico isn’t especially suitable for cows. So beef is like a luxury things, much less dairy and cheese. They have steak restaurants, but they’re like the swankiest places in town, and they’re called “Argentinian” restaurants.

  31. “Although Nordic nations lead the rest of the world in qualitative, perception-based metrics, the reality in many of these labor markets is that men often dominate management and STEM professions while women find themselves isolated to support roles.”

    I learned in college that since the general population is about 50% female, that means literally all professions should be 50% female — firefighters, nuclear physicists, heavy metal guitarists, you name it. It’s disappointing to see supposedly progressive nations falling short of this goal.

    #TheFutureIsFemale
    #LibertariansForQuotas

  32. Several days ago, Trump’s campaign manager Brad Parscale posted statistics from last week’s rally held in Toledo, OH, which showed that 43% of attendees identified as either Democratic or Independent. I called that figure “stunning” in a recent post.

    But the same statistic from Trump’s Tuesday night rally in Wisconsin can only be described as staggering. 57.8% of registrants identified as either Democratic or Independent.

    http://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2020/01/16/766723/

    That is interesting.

    1. If that is actually true…. holy smoke!

      I had a recent observation that causes similar suspicions.

      Last night during rush hour I was driving down Federal Highway past Oakland Park in Ft. Lauderdale. This is heavy proggy country. This is the Wilton Manners area – the trendy gay area. Definitely the antithesis of MAGA country. The entire 3 county area is solid (D), but this is one of the more concentrated (D) areas in a tapestry of (D) areas.

      At the intersection of two major roads – Federal and Oakland Park, there was a man dancing and waving a huge Trump flag. He was shirtless, wearing a hula skirt and some other pink silliness.

      This, on January 16th.

      I can assure you that there were no Romney campaign workers doing signwaving campaigns in this area during the entire 2012 cycle. Even in 2016, nobody was wearing a MAGA hat to the Whole Foods in the area. Not even to the Target.

      Now we have a half-naked hula dude with a giant Trump flag. And there are lots of Trump yard signs and Trump flags on houses. Not an overwhelming number, but probably close to the number of Hillary yard signs there were in August of 2016.

      In 2008 you couldn’t find a Bush yard sign or bumper sticker in my area.

      The water cooler conversation is still of the “Trump is so terrible” variety…. but when people suspect that you might be open to hearing that they support Trump, that flips pretty quickly.

      The Democrats who are living in their bubble of motivated reasoning might be in for a very rude surprise when they learn that their idea of what is happening in the world isn’t at all accurate.

      1. Along those lines, I recently saw a house with a giant Trump flag flying in its front yard in Chevy Chase Maryland. That is as rich and as Democratic as it gets short of Hollywood or the upper east side of Manhattan. Maybe the guy was a political of some sort. But in my years of living in DC, I have never seen such a thing for a Republican President before. It has always been a see of Democratic yard signs.

      2. Would be hilarious if a bunch of gay people ended up voting for Trump just because it would be considered kitschy and contrarian to do so.

        1. It hasn’t been that long since he was a gay community favorite.

          ( I didn’t understand it then. So don’t ask me to explain any evolution that has happened in the interim)

      3. I suspect that those people have actually looked at their 401k balances recently.

      4. I dont remember everyone saying that they would vote for Reagan. It was a surprise landslide.

        Not saying that Trump will get that kind of a landslide but clearly there Americans voting and not admitting it to Lefties around them or being obvious about it.

        1. The only states I could see Trump flipping are Minnesota, New Hampshire, and *maybe* Delaware if it’s Warren over Biden. Arizona, Florida, and North Carolina are going to be toss-ups. I think he’ll solidify his upper Midwest hold.

          Everywhere else is locked in pretty hard. Virginia, Nevada, Colorado, and New Mexico in particular are long-term blue states now. Missouri, West Virginia, and Tennessee are long-term red.

  33. “Minding the Nordic Inequality Gap.” The Nordic countries are widely seen as feminist utopias”

    The whiny white liberal women who call themselves feminists would love nothing more than to have a country of whites with strict immigration laws. That way the rape culture myth remains a myth and not a reality like in the UK.

  34. “Jay-Z is fighting for better treatment for Mississippi prisoners.”

    As a Koch / Reason libertarian, I want all prisoners nationwide to retain the right to vote from behind bars.

    #FelonsAreNaturalLibertarians

  35. Trump Called His Generals a ‘Bunch of Dopes and Babies’ in a Fit of Rage, Book Claims

    Daily Dose of What Lefties Think:
    The book states that the meeting took place six months into Trump’s presidency after his generals became concerned about “gaping holes” in Trump’s knowledge of America’s key alliances. The idea was to bring Trump to the Pentagon’s Situation Room, where military leaders, so the plan went, would give him a crash course on who America’s allies were, why they were worth keeping on side, and where on earth they were located.

    However, the meeting seems to have descended into chaos almost immediately. Tillerson, then-Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, and National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn reportedly took turns trying to explain their points to Trump. But Trump is said to have first appeared bored out of his mind before he got increasingly angry.

    The account states Trump repeatedly interrupted the lesson after apparently being triggered by a word or phrase uttered by the military leaders. One example given is that he heard the word “base” during the lesson, which sparked him into launching a tirade about how “crazy” and “stupid” it was that the U.S. paid to build and maintain bases overseas.

    This is why Trump was elected. He either knew what he wanted to do or shut these bureaucratic morons down. These fucking clowns thought the USA and Iran were allies.

    As we see, Trump has run circles around these narcissistic bureaucrats for years. Lefties hate that Technocrats are not running things in the Trump Administration.

    1. Anyone who has been in the military knows what spoiled tantrum throwing babies generals often are. There are few less sympathetic victims of an ass chewing than Pentagon brass.

      1. Considering how often junior enlisted like to slag on the upper brass, I can’t imagine the idea of the commander-in-chief dunking on them is going to bother them all that much. The most common complaint is that there are already too many of them, and whenever manning cuts come down, these turds are always protected.

        The only ones it will sincerely disturb will be in the O-6 Mafia and above, along with a few SNCOs.

    2. I love how they think this makes Trump look bad so much. He’s an idiot but quite simply it’s refreshing to have someone whose asking these very elementary questions. Fuck these people they deserve him and quite frankly he might actually be better and smarter than them in many ways. And that is not in anyway an endorsement or compliment.

      1. He’s an idiot

        He is?

        So, what you’re saying is that you’re more successful than a guy who’s made and lost billions–and made them again, who, on his first serious foray into politics won the presidency and implemented policies that led to rampant real economic growth, greater freedom, and a restored American place in the world?

        If this is idiocy, then long live the idiots.

        But maybe, just maybe, we shouldn’t accept even the shreds of leftist propaganda. No one who becomes president is an idiot. Not yet at least.

        1. +1000

          People who dont like Trump personally or his style or whatever throw out terms like stupid, idiot, lunatic….

          It cracks me up when people stand by that kind of hyperbole as an honest critic of someone like Trump just to virtue signal that they wont vote for Trump.

  36. Does this mean that Obama, whom the GAO found illegally defied Congress in ordering the Defense Department to send five Guantanomo prisoners to Qatar in defiance of duly-enacted legislation prohibited Obama from expending any funds on such action, should have been removed from office as well? If you can find me a Democratic House member or Senator who denounced Obama for that move, I’ll concede that he is sincerely interested in presidential lawfulness and the separation of powers.

    1. Obama released five high value terrorists free in direct violation of the law and Reason went to the mat defending him. Trump allegedly delay military aid, which claims not to even support, for six days and reason is gravely concerned about Trump violating the law.

      I can’t understand how anyone could be so desperate for attention and a paycheck that they are willing to whore themselves the way the Reason staff does.

      1. Orange Man Bad.

        Chocolate Man Good.

        It really is that simple for these simpletons.

    2. Yes, that’s what it means. Every president abuses his constitutional powers and will continue to do so as long as Congress and the voters let him (or her maybe someday)get away with it. Red and Blue will fight tooth and nail to make sure it isn’t their guy who is the first to be removed from office.

      1. Everyone speeds too. That doesn’t mean going 60 in a 55 zone is the same as doing 120 through a school zone.

  37. Antifa Group Plans To March Alongside Pro-Gun Protesters In Virginia

    Guess which group got the required permits to march?

    I though Massachusetts would be the state where Civil War 2.0 began but maybe it will be Virginia and likely NoVa. IIRC, Lincoln was scared shitless about DC because its a very hard city to protect, plus easy to cut off from surrounding areas.

    1. The plan is to do the same thing as they did in Chancellorsville; show up and start a riot and then blame the resulting violence on the other side.

      Since the media are basically mouth pieces for Antifa, that will be the story and the narrative.

      1. What John wrote. The whole point of the confrontation, from the point of view of the Left, is trigger violence and blame it on the far Right. This will foster additional repressive laws, and put pressure on Trump to disavow what will be made out to be an Alt-Right movement, discouraging Trump’s base.

        IOW, just like any other wedge issue, only this time with blood. I really hope Lobby Day comes off without a scratch. I fear it may be historic. Hopefully the theme music will be better than CSN&Y.

        1. I think the majority of people were really caught unaware by the events in Charlottesville. So the media had a head start that was difficult to overcome.

          This one is getting a lot more attention, and also preparation. There will be eyes and cameras everywhere. Any attempts to spin the truth will be met with immediate challenge. We’ve learned, especially from the Covington Kids episode.

          And if the Governor and his ilk are caught out trying to orchestrate something the reckoning will be profound. I live in TN but work a lot in VA. There are plenty of people who lean away from the Democrats, socially and conservatively, but who also don’t want to believe the worst about those people.

          Any serious eye openers and all bets are off. Which is why I think this goes off mostly without a hitch, and with little if any major media attention (that Reason is ignoring it tells you the message has already gone out.)

  38. OMG!!!! ECONOMIC DISASTER!!!!!

    Charles Koch is in danger of falling out of the top 10 richest people on the planet!

    This is absolutely devastating. Reason.com needs to publish at least 5 articles today denouncing Drumpf’s high-tariff / low-immigration policies.

    #DrumpfRecession

  39. Usa must kick the iranian ass …Iran attack Us military base … nothing can apologyse this comportement
    https://tendancecarrelageshonfleur.fr/

  40. Chrome was eating resources and causing problems on a little netbook I have, so I decided to give Firefox a try again. I like!

    But I didn’t install the adblocker extensions yet. I thought I’d give reason another chance with the ads.

    Holy crap… this site is a pain in the rear with the ads! All kinds of tracking pixels from facebook and stuff. A long comments page keeps moving while I try to read it because loading and rendering gets delayed by ads, trackers, etc. Then bottom popover ads move up and block what I’m reading or typing.

    Jeez, guys… “unobtrusive” should be the watchword.

    1. 13 seconds to render that page after the post ….. almost entirely due to various advertising scripts that were holding things up.

      90% rendered in a couple of seconds… then 10-11 seconds of back and forth with various scripts and ad servers, with repositioning of comments every half second or so.

      This is on an underpowered little netbook, so maybe not the typical use case. But it should be plenty for simple web browsing.

      1. That one was 16 seconds until the final reposition of the text. Yikes. I’m downloading adblock. Sorry guys.

        1. After adblock, 6 seconds. 2 for reason and 4 for all the ad scripts that still run.

          But only 1 repositioning of the text after the initial render that time, instead of a half dozen or more.

          1. The auto loading videos and uncloseable banner ads are awful.

            1. Yeah, that stupid bottom banner from GoogleAds is bad on a laptop. But it is a killer on a cell phone. when you are posting, your keyboard takes up half the screen…. then that popup comes up and eats 1/3 of the rest. The menus at the top eat up 10-20%…. so you don’t have much left for your content.

              This situation has led to many an unproofed comment being posted.

              1. I use duckduckgo as my browser and it seems to block all the ads.
                Still get the pop up video, which causes an occasional accidental flag

                1. 2 seconds.
                  But lol, got redirected to a page that says “you’re posting too quickly. Slow down”

                2. Same here. Love no ads. Doesn’t help Unreason at all.

    2. I had to get rid of Chrome and go back to firefox. I could never keep it from being infected with malware and it ate resources like crazy.

      1. I have been pretty loyal to Chrome since we started building applications using microsoft toolkits. We built reporting applications that drew huge grids of data. (well, huge in web page terms… maybe hundreds of rows)

        IE was really slow rendering the page. We spent all kinds of time looking in to SQL optimizations, middleware roadblocks… couldn’t find anything. So I built a simple HTML app that just downloaded the URL… nothing else. Instant.

        OK, so now we know where the problem is.

        Google had just come out with Chrome and claimed it was fast. I was skeptical – we were running microsoft based apps on a microsoft server with a microsoft browser. It should run best in IE, right?

        Nope.

        Chrome took render times from 15 seconds or more (up to 2 minutes for a really big grid) to pretty much instantaneous. So I was hooked.

        But like everything…. apparently bloat creeps in. Dang.

        Firefox seems pretty good again though.

        1. How is Brave? Or Opera? I tried Opera mini on my old device and liked it, albeit it shut down everything, so doing anything besides mere reading was a PITA.

          I ought to give it another try. Chrome for mobile is disappointing.

          1. Brave is great, mobile and desktop.

            1. That has been my experience as well.

              1. Although I’m mainly duck-duck-go for mobile.

      2. Not only does Brave protect you from that shit, it also pays you.

        If you choose to see ads, they give you a portion of the proceeds. The site owner gets a third, you get a third, and they keep a third.

        At least that’s the way I understand it.

        As of right now, the Brave browser has paid me more than $40 U.S. since I started using it. They may not sound like a whole lot, but a subscription to Reason is $15 a year. I’d like to see journalism go back to being based on a subscription model, so that sites like Reason go back to competing for subscribers rather than depending so much on big donors, which may account for the difference between the opinions of their editorials and their subscribers, and Brave is one way to solve that problem.

    3. Go to the Brave browser. The original CEO of Firefox. brave is very nice, and have fixed most of their scripting issues.

      When you choose to watch ads you can designate where that ad revenue goes to.

  41. Still no discussion of the gun control legislation in Virginia, or the upcoming Lobby Day, or the executive order issues by Northam, or the petition filed by GOA and VCDL, or….

    What the fuck, Reason?

    1. They will file a “it is hard to know what this is all about” and “both sides are really behaving badly here” story sometime during the NFL games on Sunday when they know their traffic will be at its lowest or maybe around 9 pm EST tonight.

      That is what they did with the Rotherham story and what I imagine they will do with this. Reason doesn’t like covering stories that make leftists uncomfortable.

  42. men often dominate management and STEM professions while women find themselves isolated to support roles

    Let’s try that again:

    men often find themselves isolated to management and STEM professions while women dominate support roles

    Someone hates himself.

  43. concerning the injured troops
    you hurt?
    no but I have a splitting headache.
    thats an adrenalin dump you’ll be fine.
    two days latter.
    I still have a headache.
    Oh shit get him to the hospital.

    there are lies and there are false stories neither of which this is since it was developing and maybe a miss diagnoses.

    use common sense Reason

    1. “use common sense Reason”

      You new here?

    2. The results of the attack were downplayed by US propaganda. That is certain.

      The soldiers who had symptoms were transported days later to tertiary or secondary facilities.

      Undergoing artillery missile attack is known to cause both physical and psychological damage. The best that can be done is to diagnose and give supportive treatment.

      Post concussive syndrome and axonal shear injury are in a spectrum which can result in long term disability.

      “All good” Yes. All good Mr. Trump.

      So get them home. The war is over.

  44. >>>when Iran retaliated

    cute. retaliated.

  45. U.S. Troops Were Harmed by Iranian Attack. (We Still Shouldn’t Go to War With Iran.)

    Sweetie, we’re not going to war with Iran.

    1. No, it is totally going to be World War Three. Don’t you watch the news??


  46. Although Nordic nations lead the rest of the world in qualitative, perception-based metrics, the reality in many of these labor markets is that men often dominate management and STEM professions while women find themselves isolated to support roles.

    I remember reading more than one article about women choosing not to work at all given the incredibly generous welfare you receive for giving birth.

    Revealed preferences, anyone?

  47. Don’t want your troops injured or killed?

    Don’t invade someone else’s country!

    Simple.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.