If They Ban TikTok, Is Apple Next?
Banning companies for doing business with China is a bad path to start down.

The censors who abound in Congress will likely vote to ban TikTok or force a change in ownership. It will likely soon be law. I think the Supreme Court will ultimately rule it unconstitutional, because it would violate the First Amendment rights of over 100 million Americans who use TikTok to express themselves.
In addition, I believe the Court will rule that the forced sale violates the Fifth Amendment. Under the Constitution, the government cannot take your property without accusing and convicting you of a crime—in short, without due process. Since Americans are part of TikTok's ownership, they will eventually get their day in court.
The Court could also conclude that naming and forcing the sale of a specific company amounts to a bill of attainder, legislation that targets a single entity.
These are three significant constitutional arguments against Congress' forced sale/ban legislation. In fact, three different federal courts have already invalidated legislative and executive attempts to ban TikTok.
If the damage to one company weren't enough, there is a very real danger this ham-fisted assault on TikTok may actually give the government the power to force the sale of other companies.
Take, for example, Apple. As The New York Times reported in 2021, "In response to a 2017 Chinese law, Apple agreed to move its Chinese customers' data to China and onto computers owned and run by a Chinese state-owned company."
Sound familiar? The legislators who want to censor and/or ban TikTok point to this same law to argue that TikTok could (someday) be commanded to turn over American users' data to the Chinese government.
Note that more careful speakers don't allege that this has happened, but rather that it might. The banners of TikTok don't want to be troubled by anything inconvenient like proving in a court of law that this is occurring. No, the allegation is enough for them to believe they have the right to force the sale of or ban TikTok.
But back to Apple. It's not theoretical that it might turn over data to the Chinese Communist government. It already has (albeit, Chinese users' information). Nevertheless, it could be argued that Apple, by their actions, could fall under the TikTok ban language that forces the sale of an entity: under the influence of a foreign adversary.
(Now, of course, I think such legislation is absurdly wrong and would never want it applied to Apple, but I worry the language is vague enough to apply to many entities.)
As The New York Times explains: "Chinese government workers physically control and operate the data center. Apple agreed to store the digital keys that unlock its Chinese customers' information in those data centers. And Apple abandoned the encryption technology it uses in other data centers after China wouldn't allow it."
This sounds exactly like what the TikTok censors describe in their bill, except so far as we know, only Americans who live in China might be affected by Apple's adherence to China's law. TikTok actually has spent a billion dollars agreeing to house all American data with Oracle in Texas.
Are there other companies that might be affected by the TikTok ban? Commentary by Kash Patel in The Washington Times argues that Temu, an online marketplace operated by a Chinese company, is even worse than TikTok and should be banned. He makes the argument that Temu, in contrast with TikTok, "does not employ any data security personnel in the United States."
And what of the global publishing enterprise Springer Nature? It has admitted that it censors its scientific articles at the request of the Chinese Communist government. Will the TikTok bill force its sale as well?
Before Congress rushes to begin banning and punishing every international company that does business in China, perhaps they should pause, take a breath, and ponder the ramifications of rapid, legislative isolationism with regard to China.
The impulse to populism is giving birth to the abandonment of international trade. I fear, in the hysteria of the moment, that ending trade between China and the U.S. will not only cost American consumers dearly but ultimately lead to more tension and perhaps even war.
No one in Congress has more strongly condemned the historical famines and genocides of Communist China. I wrote a book, The Case Against Socialism, describing the horrors and inevitability of state-sponsored violence in the pursuit of complete socialism. I just recently wrote another book called Deception, condemning Communist China for covering up the Wuhan lab origins of COVID-19.
And yet, even with those searing critiques, I believe the isolationism of the China hysterics is a mistake and will not end well if Congress insists on going down this path.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Oh c'mon Rand, masks aren't mere talismans!
MAGA Paul no longer interests me.
Yeah, with all his MAGA 'cloth masks aren't effective' rhetoric when the evidence showed that cloth masks were... shit... zero percent effective, never mind.
Your citation fell off!
Vaccines are evil too, right? WHICH are MOIST evil, vaccines, masks, or sneeze guards at the salad bar? Twat does "the Science" tell "Team R" about ALL of this shit? Are YOU ready to volunteer for a double-blinded science study, to be personally subjected to (unknown) REAL boogers or FAKE boogers at an unguarded (against booger-beam flying sneezed-snot) salad bar, in the name of Science?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/united-states-rates-of-covid-19-deaths-by-vaccination-status?country=~All+ages
Just LOOK at the (interactive) graph right at the top of this link!!!! COVID deaths among the unvaccinated VASTLY outnumbered, and still outnumber, the deaths among the vaccinated!!! WHY do You Perfectly Lust SOOOO Much for death, disease, and suffering?!?!
What is MAGA Paul?
The real question is "what is wrong with making America great?".
Is that like MAGA Claus?
NAZI Schiff is the only one who can tug on Shrike's heartstings.
TikTok doesn't do business in China, they are a Chinese company with ties to the Chinese government
I don't think those are mutually exclusive.
The bill effects only one of those items. Not both.
In a fascist state all companies have ties to the government.
So not too different from most companies in the United States?
We’re getting there, comrade.
I would never use TikTok myself, and I would never suggest or encourage anyone else to use it.
duplicate post apparently
First they came for TikTok and I said nothing because I'm not a 14-year-old girl.
That's not fair, it appeals to pedophiles too.
B Mor IncluSiv
I think it is time to stop listening to hysterical ninnies. Tik Tok is solely a national security issue, and in court the anti-rights gang want everything done at the state level. They cannot push national security to the state level.
What?
Yeah, I'm with Zeb.
That didn't make much sense. Can you clarify?
You know how ridiculous it is when atheists tell Christians what they think? This is a statist telling federalists what they think.
You think you're a Federalist? That's funny. Your just another statist who wants a federal ban anything you think is a sin.
Are you fucking high? When did Jesse ever say he wanted to ban anything, or claimed to be religious? You’re just a psychotic little anti-theist triggered because someone pointed out you guys are the vegans of philosophy.
It’s just mindless projection.
Judging by the number of theocratic fascist on this site arguing that Libertarians need to trust Republicans to be the better option odds were good that I was right. You people infest the internet. It's always a good bet that someone who wants a law passed that limits individual liberty that they will be one of you.
Besides, I suspect Rand Paul to be a more reliable source than some random fuckwit.
I'm not religious and I don't much care for corporatism, so, would you explain it to me?
Explanation: "Corporatism" means ANY gathering of people who "dis" MY way, and MY Sacred Tribes's way, of "thinking" and stinking! So then of COURSE any and all brainless Sacred-Tribe-Worshitting assholes WILL be firmly and spermy opposed to "Corporatism"!
The intelligent, well-informed, and benevolent members of tribes have ALWAYS been feared and resented by those who are made to look relatively worse (often FAR worse), as compared to the advanced ones. Especially when the advanced ones denigrate tribalism. The advanced ones DARE to openly mock “MY Tribe’s lies leading to violence against your tribe GOOD! Your tribe’s lies leading to violence against MY Tribe BAD! VERY bad!” And then that’s when the Jesus-killers, Mahatma Gandhi-killers, Martin Luther King Jr.-killers, etc., unsheath their long knives!
“Do-gooder derogation” (look it up) is a socio-biologically programmed instinct. SOME of us are ethically advanced enough to overcome it, using benevolence and free will! For details, see http://www.churchofsqrls.com/Do_Gooders_Bad/ and http://www.churchofsqrls.com/Jesus_Validated/ .
Then they crucified Jesus, 'cause Jesus made them look bad! ALSO because Jesus made them look bad FOR THEIR STUPID, HIDE-BOUND TRIBALISM! "The parable of the Good Samaritan" was VERY pointed, because the Samaritans were of the WRONG tribe, in the eyes of "Good Jews" of the day.
Instead of KILLING Jesus, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., etc., we’d be better off VOTING for these kinds of people! But we will NOT, ’cause they Hurt Our Precious Baby Feelings, by giving tribalism and do-gooder derogation the disrespect that they (we self-righteous tribalists) SOOO thoroughly deserve!
Explain what? No really, not being a shit. This thread has a lot of insults and name calling in it. I'm not sure what you want explained. If you want a good review of the bill try Ben Shapiro, just put the play speed on slow because that man talks faster than the Micro Machines guy.
Why not just read the law? Scared of 13 pages?
Ben Shapiro of the Israel, er.. Daily Wire, who is an actual lawyer and his wife is an actual doctor, thinks the TicTok bill is an actual real bad idea.
So a Jewish lawyer with a lot of experience in reading and reviewing legislation also thinks it's a bad law and that it can be used on any company that does any business with China.
So, are you a Jewish lawyer who deals with a lot of legislation or are you just another internet fuckwit?
"Judging by the number of theocratic fascist"
Pretty sure the only theocrats here are Woktians like you.
Yeah, because anyone who disagrees with you must be all the bad things because your gawd told you that you were always right.
Hey retard. I dont give two shits about this ban. But I see your pee wee herman routine is active to deflect from someone noticing. Lol.
Well Fuckwit, you are arguing the law wont do what one of the guys who actually read and voted against the legislation says it will do. That sounds pretty supportive of this idiotic pile of government overreach. Also you claim to have read the bill. That seems you are at least interested in the bill and If you support more federal government power over the states you aren't a Federalist.
Difficulty. I read it. Took about 10 minutes. Lol.
I can read Don Quiote in the original Spanish, doesn't mean I comprehend all of the nuance because English is my first language.
So you can read 13 pages of federal legislative legalese in 10 minutes. Doesn't mean you can comprehend it. Since both Ben Shapiro and Rand Paul, two fellows who frequently disagree with each other, both agree that this is a bad law that gives the federal government power to regulate ANY business doing trade with China I tend to trust that it's a bad law that does exactly what they say it will do.
“Also you claim to have read the bill.”
I linked to it here, it’s thirteen pages double-spaced, and just seven words a line. It’d take fourteen minutes to read if you’re dyslexic.
You’re acting like it’s the dictionary.
It's funny how many people who have actual reputations on the line disagree with you. Or him to be technical. You may just be shit stirring.
Ben Shapiro agrees with Rand Paul. I don't follow Shapiro much, he's another religious fanatic, but my son sifts through the shit for the nuggets of worthwhile stuff from him and his fellow fanatics. Ben Shapiro is an actual lawyer who actually deals with fighting against bad laws. Are you a lawyer or just a fuckwit who thinks they can understand federal legalese?
Like what?
How much of this problem is for to the fact that we and our government allow private companies to surreptitiously collect vast amounts of data on us? I suspect China could purchase 90% of the data in question from data brokers without Tik Tok. The larger problem ofTik Tok is the influence of Chinese and other foreign propaganda and devious influencers on Tik Tok, but that, too is a potential or actual problem on other platforms.
Suspect? Could?
The Chinese have already been doing it. How do I know? The tech companies WANT to sell your data. I've no doubt they sent salesmen to China to market the data to the leadership. Think about all that lovely money for data about people who think they are customers and not products.
surreptitiously?
Yes and yes.
Chinese companies can indeed simply purchase data from the US companies that are vacuuming up just as much if not more data from their users. The US government is already doing that, and no doubt other foreign governments are doing the same thing.
I have yet to really hear what particular data people are worried about China having. What data does one input into TikTok to create an account, because last I checked one can sign up to most internet services with a fake name and a burner email with zero problems.
As usual this isn't about data gathering, foreign powers or any of the other bullshit they spread.
Tic Tok is filled with sinning folks and them sinners needs to be stopped or Gawd Almighty will punish us for not stoppin' it.
More theocratic fascism. Nothing new here.
Yeah, that data is out there. Doesn't seem like anything new to worry about. I'd be more worried about China trying to turn us into idiots. But we're doing a fine job of that domestically too.
Congress passing a law is a "process". The question is, is it "due process".
They regularly pass laws that make things or actions illegal.
I’m confused. One of the primary clauses in the TikTok bill is it has to be foreign owned. Apple is not that. So…. just throwing shit at the wall?
How many pages in that bill, I assume you've read the whole thing to make such a definite statement. So, how many pages and on what page does it specifically mention that only foreign owned companies can be targeted?
Answer his fucking argument, shithead, instead of demanding he google you a page count (13 pages)
I mean if he just read the first 4 pages he would get it. But it uses words he probably doesn't understand.
Most bills are hundreds of pages and between Rand Paul and some random fuckwit on the internet I tend to think Rand Paul has a better idea of what the bill says. But you at least can answer a question or two so now I have to think whose opinions on a given piece of legislation should I trust. Rand Paul or some random fuckwit I don't know.
You guess which one I am mor likley to trust.
This one appears to be 13.
Which is slightly more than a dozen. An order of magnitude, or more, less than 'hundreds'.
A unit we use for buying donuts or eggs, retail, as opposed to F-35's.
If you're invested in the topic, you may trust your own reading.
Yes, 13 pages. I asked that question because 99% of the time it shuts people down because they don't read the bills. So I hit the 1% when the bill isn't an unbelievable number of pages written in doublespeak with plenty of spending earmarks and the guy actually read the bill. Oops.
Still, I trust Rand Paul more than I trust some random fuckwit on the internet who choses to ignore the way the legislature has always worked. Star off with something small, like an income tax on some of the wealthiest Americans that takes less than 10% and in 100 years you're taxing well over 30% of a school kids part time job.
Sure 13 simple pages of jingoistic garbage to get that camels nose into the tent of regulating the internet. In 10 years that camel will be in the tent with all manner of bullshit regulations on all aspects of the internet. That's how legislatures work, boil the frog by stating with cold water.
How do you go full retard when it is linked just below?
I don't pretend to understand federal legalese. I've tried reading these bills and I am not an English major with the training to diagram the sentances to find all of the nuanced double speak.
I accept that people experienced with this kind of legalese know more than I do about the topic. I can do a lot of things, but legal documents aren't my speciality. Lawyers do that. Are you a lawyer or just another internet fuckwit?
I’ve read it. Yes. What was wrong dumdum? I know CNN and Jacobin are giving you a preferred narrative, but the bill isn’t that long and the active requirements summarize in under half a page.
It would take you less time to go investigate yourself than defending your ignorance.
Ok, then I will accept you know something about it.
Aside from the constitutional issues, how exactly is a ban going to work?
Short of a firewall of the sort that the PRC uses to keep its subjects in the dark, how do you ban the something on the net?
I am not standing up for Tik-tok which strikes me as the most inane use of technology to date, and I'm not disagreeing that the whole thing is a massive data grab and brainwashing scheme rolled into one. I'm just asking, how does a ban actually work?
Probably will involve a lot of government surveillance on American citizens. Nothing new there.
It would be easy on iPhone, since Apple doesn't permit any third party apps without their permission. They just remove it.
For Android, probably have to have the major telecoms block TikTok's servers
The impulse to populism is giving birth to the abandonment of international trade.
This.
Good. Localism lifts all boats.
Localism lifts all boats.
An evidence-free proposition.
Meanwhile, https://news.mit.edu/2012/confirming-ricardo-0620
"countries specialize in the products they make well, may be on the money"
LMAO... China? The specialty in well made products? Yeah; That's not going to sell around here.
China uses slave labor to make the cheep crap Americans want. They specialize in crap, but it's still a speciality. Also they undercut our own manufacturers of cheep crap.
A few years ago we paid for a one year membership for the Blaze. Louder with Crowder was in that network and my son liked his stuff. We got a mug with the deal. Guess where the mug was made....
Only a shill would pretend that you can't do both. Go fuck yourself, DOL, Jeff, Shrike or whoever is puppeting this sock.
Do you write emails to your mother with those fingers?
You're not wrong. We'd have to go back to paying for long distance by the minute and overseas calls costing a small fortune plus get rid of the internet to get back to a point where we could bring back our manufacturing base back here. It's just too easy and too cheep to manufacture cheep crap overseas now.
Herbert Hoover strove to ban international trade--and national trade in beer, wine, The Demon Rum... everything. When his Moratorium on Brains was bait to help Germany and France hobble competing dope producer Germany into signing the Convention to Limit Everything Including Narcotics 13JUL1931, German industry financed the Christian Hitler party. A year and a half later the Fuhrer controlled that nation. Smart move, huh?
Hitler was Catholic just like Biden. FYI.
Funny thing, the Vatican equally supports both agendas. They helped old Scramble Brains out with his Jew and Gay problem and they are helplng... well... new Scramble Brains out with his gay problem. I don't know if they are helping with his Jew problem. Hard to say.
In both cases, FYI, 'Scramble Brains' is Biden. And has been for 82 years.
Old Scramble Brains is a nickname friends of mine used when discussing Hitler and his NAZIs. It was during the 50th anniversary of WWII and the History Channel was the "All Hitler All the Time" channel. Well, at least the History Channel was doing history instead of UFOs and fucking Swamp People.
Hitler was Catholic just like Biden.
Catholic just like Biden, is a statement that I think most Catholics would agree with.
The pope seems to be rolling with Biden's view of Catholicism. At least that's what Catholics I know say about the Pope.
The current pope is a commie fuckstick. Not sure if other Catholics agree with me on that though.
Yeah, they do. My son is LARPing as a Catholic because he gets free food from the Newman Center on campus. He said the head honcho there, I don't recall how big his silly hat is so I can't say his rank, tries hard to not call the pope that, but he doesn't stop others from saying it.
We wouldn't be so suspicious if we weren't using (Stone Age) algorithms to fan the flames of the Arab spring and re elect Obama.
On the one hand, China is definitely manipulating public opinion by manipulating what people are viewing. On the other hand, they aren't American and hate Americans? Nothing saying the 1st only applies to US citizens. Allowing the influencing of public opinion is kinda the whole point of protecting speech. Democrats' whole platform is hating Americans and subverting American interests and there are no 1A conflicts there either.
Note to foreign readers: Trumpanzistas use Deep L to render Goebbels' "They Hate Germany" screed into broken English, and are proud of the result.
Trump warns US socialists, “America” [Na]tional “will never be a so[zi]alist country.”
More leftard self-projection.
It’s really all the leftards have left.
Go take your meds, Hank... and don't forget the Geritol.
ChIna is just learning from us. Our government was manipulating the news media and sites like Facebook long before China decided it needed to get into the information warfare game.
I think people would be a lot more tolerant of TikTok if you just carpet nuked China. I mean, I'm just saying... if you're looking for alternatives.
I feel like you're not taking this seriously
It's TikTok. That anyone even uses it - especially knowing full darn well what it is - shows us humans aren't serious creatures.
Fuck, shit, cunt, pussy...
How it is I'm agreeing with you!
If they are so freaked out about China just send the nuke subs off shore and start WWIII. Get it over with.
While I often disagree with Sen. Paul, he's not normally this stupid. The ban on TikTok isn't because it does business with China. It's because it's owned by a Chinese company that is beholden to the Chinese Communist Party, and despite its claims to keep US data in the US, we know that 1) Chinese bosses have access to it, and 2) its algorithms are doing the bidding of the CCP (playing up dissension in the US, hiding the evil that China is doing, and more). If TikTok is sold to American owners, it can continue operating. This is a matter of national security.
Shooting kids over plant leaves and carpet-bombing primitives in Cambodia are "matters of national security" to Republican National Socialists. Trump was Nixon 2.0.
Trump and Republicans are against [Na]tional So[zi]alism. FYI.
I thought he was supposed to be Hitler, now he’s Nixon. You sure use a lot of words to say OrangeManBad, you senile old retard.
You know Hank,
Trump never removed his opponent from a ballot. You guys did.
Trump never used the FBI and CIA to spy on his opponent. You guys did.
Trump never censored speech. You guys did.
Trump never charged his opponent with novel crimes. You guys did.
There are Nazis here all right and your fascist old ass is one of them.
Nixon was so bad no one can top him. Ever. Even Biden isnt worse than Nixon. We could randomly select a patient in a mental health facility that is normally on high doses of Thorazine to be president and he wouldn't be worse than Nixon.
Feel free to hate on Trump. He's got stuff to be hated for. Just hate him for shit he actually did and not the stuff being made up about what he did.
How is it being stupid? He's read the actual bill and knows how the legislature works from an inside perspective. He's also a Libertarian and not a Repubican with all their baggage. He can offer a better Libertarian view of it than anyone else. Maybe the people who want it passed aren't going to be happy with just Tic Tok and he knows it.
When the Income Tax first came out it was less than 10% on incomes that for the time were fairly well off folks. Most people never even had to file a rerturn. Now it's well over 10% on incomes all the way down to my kid's first job at fucking WalMart. Camel's nose in tent often leads to the whole camel in the tent.
Dr. Paul is, in fact, a Republican.
He might be the most libertarian senator we have available, and I like him a lot most of the time, but he still wears the (R).
He votes consistently like a Libertarian. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's very likely that it's a duck.
So the way around that might be to ban the activity, not the company.
Or demand transparency in a broader sense of all similar companies about how the data is used.
Or to just publish what we know about how TikTok is using the data.
Or parents could actually parent their children instead of blaming the latest thing bad parents blame for why their kids go wrong.
Just a crazy idea I know.
But if anything is protected by the 1st, it would be the activity. Freedom of speech/press isn't limited to US citizens or even humans. It's just something congress can't touch. So if they want to do this (which I think is a bad idea) they need to find some other angle.
It occurs to me that by "activity" you may mean the data collection. Though if people are freely handing over the data, I don't know what you can do about that either.
Ultimately, if people are that readily manipulated by the Chinese, then no amount of legislation is really going to stop it.
We now know (thanks to Fortune) that TikTok gave employees fake American bosses while actually sending data to China. And yet Paul still won't change his tune.
“I literally worked on a project that gave U.S. data to China. They were completely complicit in that. There were Americans that were working in upper management that were completely complicit in this.” -some TikTok executive.
Sell TikTok to American owners. China was forced to sell Grindr to American buyers. Nobody really noticed. I doubt American teens will either.
Girls will when it fills up with Comstock ads and invitations to book-burnings.
Oh, so you think it's going to be sold to radical gender-theory professors.
Maybe you haven't been living under a rock since 1992 after all.
But Rand ...
China doesn't use the US Constitution as their Supreme Law of the Land so how can our Supreme Court make rulings on Constitutional violations in China?
We don't either but at least we pretend to sometimes and there is actually no Constitutional Violation in "regulating commerce with foreign nations" and "to make Treaties". Seems you're twisting the law into knots here.
Maybe it's not a good idea to ban TikTok but this excuse that TikTok (China) has 1st Amendment Rights is far too much of stretch for me and frankly maybe it's the very reason TikTok should be regulated to be locally owned so it does have 1st Amendment Rights.
If this were truly a national security issue, we would just charge all the tiktok users with treason.
On the other hand, how bad can it be if the great unifier, 'he who would never ignore the constitution', uses it?
Rand, Rand, Rand, you don't understand. Constitutional arguments don't matter because China. See? I knew you'd get it.
Ackshully, it's because Jesus--as interpreted by Billy Sunday, Billy Graham and Herbert W Armstrong.
What the fuck does that even mean?
Also Billy Sunday died 90 years ago, before the PRC even existed. You're the only guy here who was even alive then... and he never went to China.
Randal Paul's girl-bullying looter party is the problem. Women avoid the Grabbers Of Pussy, their Xitter, Troof and Faux. Selling to Elon's tanking empire is a toss in the toilet.
The left is all about looting (especially the rich). FYI.
Your BS propaganda is nothing but leftard self-projection.
Is Hank still coked up, on psychedelic's, or just got late-stage Biden Disease?
By my calculations going off his website, Hank's got almost eight years on old Joe.
TikTok is a CCP psyops tool used to influence America's stupidest generation - GenZ.
This has nothing to do with Apple.
I wonder if libtards understand.
What's interesting is the government thinks banning TikTok is even possible. If there is a kid in America who doesn't know how to use VPN, there won't be 12 hours after this happens (if it happens).
As for Temu, if we stop subsidizing their shipping costs at US taxpayer expense they won't be a problem for very long. That could be accomplished by either targeting them directly or removing China's status as a "developing nation" - which seems appropriate at this point, but it's something Trump. for all his bluster and tariffs and declaring war on China, never did or even suggested.
According to both Rand Paul and Ben Shapiro it's a bad bill that will allow the federal government to do exactly what they are saying. Both of those guys, who frequently disagree, agree on this.
I think I'm going to believe Rand Paul on this and not random internet fuckwits.
You're absolutely right about Temu as well. We can beat China with free markets like we beat the Soviets. Of course that means we'd have to go back to the free markets of the 80's that Reagan gave us. That sounds too scary for a lot of people. They'd prefer to hand UNLIMITED POWER!!! to the federal government because that is easier I guess.
Test
Where? When? I haven't studied! Why am I naked!
Oh, just a bad dream.
Some of the commentary on here is ridiculous. Thanks for the op-ed. After some struggle, I have realized that international relations are actually anarchy. We need to realize that and act accordingly but consistent with our libertarian principles.