Open Thread

What’s on your mind?

Comments

[Kazinski]

This is why it is difficult to trust the science:

The USA’s House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has released a scathing report about a study produced by six anti-alcohol academics which was intended to influence the Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2025-30 (which were also published this week). The US Dietary Guidelines have traditionally included recommendations on safe drinking limits and have become a battleground for the neo-temperance lobby. An attempt to halve them (from 2 drinks a day for men to 1 drink a day) failed in 2020.

In preparation for the 2025-30 edition, Congress authorised the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) to carry out a review of the evidence on alcohol and health. However, the Biden administration also commissioned the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Prevention of Underage Drinking (ICCPUD) to carry out essentially the same review.

These two organisaions were always likely to come to different conclusions. NASEM is “a large group of doctors, medical professionals, and scientists with specialized expertise to evaluate data” whereas the ICCPUD panel consisted of six activist-academics who claim that there is no safe level of alcohol consumption. "

So in short the Congress tasked a National Academies of Science panel of experts for a report, which which concluded that “compared with never consuming alcohol, moderate alcohol consumption is associated with lower all-cause mortality”.

But the Biden Administration tasked 6 activist academics to try to shut the party down.

That's what fascism looks like. Bastards.

https://snowdon.substack.com/p/anti-alcohol-academics-smoked-out

[Drewski]

You just lap up propaganda, huh? ICCPUD was created by Republicans in Congress under Bush Jr. and renewed under Trump, who appointed their current Assistant Secretary. Trump appointed an anti-drinking activist because he is an anti-drinking activist who often brags that he has never even had a drink. Biden tasked them to contribute to the review because the law required him to.

Their strategic mission includes "the mission outlined in the Make America Healthy Again Commission Report and the Make Our Children Healthy Again Strategy to deliver better health outcomes." If it looks like fascism to you, look inward.

[Michael P]

ICCPUD isn't the same thing as a specific panel, you dunce.

[Kazinski]

But what was its mission?

Hint: "Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Prevention of Underage Drinking"

Biden stocked it with foreigners promoting dangerous foreign ideolgies:
"After reviewing the internal documents and communications
from HHS, the Committee is deeply concerned the AIH study group had a pre-determined goal—to publish a biased study that concluded under a “Canadian model” that no amount of alcohol
consumption is safe by recruiting scientists who would develop the research that supported that conclusion."

3 of the 6 members of the ICCPUD were Canadians.

https://oversight.house.gov/report/a-study-fraught-with-bias-how-the-biden-administrations-alcohol-intake-and-health-study-tried-to-undermine-the-2025-2030-dietary-guidelines-for-americans/

Congress tasked the National Academies of Science to provide the recommendation on dietary guidelines for all of us, not a panel tasked with dealing with drinking by minors trying to tell the rest of us what to do.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Switzerland has a drinking age of 16. Yes, sophomores in high school.

And while they have some of the same problems we do with high school students, they don’t have any worse problems than we do. And they don’t have the problems we do of young people in their early 20s going to hog wild because it’s now legal to drink.

Whenever I hear reference to underage drinking, I cannot help but state that we could have addressed the AIDS issue of the 80s by enforcing our sodomy laws. Those who advocate enforcing the 21-year-old drinking age I was inevitably state, correctly, that it wouldn’t have worked, and they are right, but nana willing to go the next step further and admit that the current prohibition isn’t working.

[A Japanese Student]

For scientists, trusting science requires not blindly accepting results. The principle of "trust, but verify" always applies. But if you do not have the necessary knowledge to verify, then trusting science is, on average, a smarter decision than not doing so.

[Dr. Ed 2]

A century ago, that approach didn’t work out all that well for your people.

I don’t have to know anything about the underlying science to recognize errors in basic statistical methods.

I don’t have to understand, say, why the rapid oxidation of volatile hydrocarbon distillates occur to drop a lit match into a can of gasoline and observe that I get the same results that you say you did. I don’t have to have an electronic sniffer to observe that clouds of dense black smoke are consistent with the compounds you say they are. But the smoke is green, I know somethings off….

[TwelveInchPianist]

"But if you do not have the necessary knowledge to verify, then trusting science is, on average, a smarter decision than not doing so."

That depends on how much you trust the institutions that produce the science.

[Brett Bellmore]

Here, you had two competing groups of 'scientists' who disagreed with each other. "Trusting the science" is, under these circumstances, not a clear command. And it's not a reliable command once politics gets involved.

Maybe you should read the oversight committee report. It's extensively documented.

[Commenter_XY]

It might be fine to trust the science, AJS, but I surely do not trust the scientists, post-pandemic.

[DDHarriman]

My favorite were the proclamations that the world needs to shutdown over COVID unless you were protesting for black trannies. Then it's just too important to stay inside, according to The Science.

[Armchair]

1. "But if you do not have the necessary knowledge to verify"
Many, if not most people honestly don't.

2. "then trusting science "
People don't trust "science". People trust other people. "Science" doesn't say anything. People do. People say they're using "science"...but may be misleading about it.

When that happens...when it happens consistently....trust is lost in the people who claim to be using "science".

[Kazinski]

Well of course you have to trust the science.

Malted Barley has an enzyme that will turn starches in grain to maltose sugar, which is a disaccharide, at temperatures around 145-165f. Then a fungus will turn the maltose into ethyl alcohol.

In Japan the use Koji, another fungus which will convert the starches in rice to a sugar, which is then fermented.

But both processes were used long before modern science had any idea what was happening so you also have to trust folk knowledge. Ale wives knew how to make beer before scientists even knew there was such anything as yeast.

[Malika la Maize]

Yeah but beer improved on kinds and quality with greater scientific understanding of the brewing process.

[jb]

LOL, this is what fascism looks like? They did a study you don't like alongside another study you do like?

[Malika la Maize]

I think he was joking as he’s said here he likes some Bourbon now and then.

[Kazinski]

Not completely. Congress designated an NAS group, who.are not chosen by the President, to.provide the recommendations to "Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2025-30" based on the best science. The Biden Administration tried to substitute another group to.provide the guidelines, based not on the best science, but their advocacy which is why they were chosen.

[not guilty]

I have recently run across an interesting commentary on the strange silence of many Christian churches in the United States regarding the Trump administration's adventures in Venezuela. Medium.com is quite an interesting website regarding matters of faith. Most of their content is available to subscribers only, which is why this is my first time to link that blog.

Some excerpts:

In the hours after one of the most blatant and disheartening acts of imperial capitalism and colonialism the world had seen in decades — at least since the last time the U.S. did this — Christian leaders were conspicuously silent.

Of American denominations, only the Episcopal Church put out a half-hearted statement somewhat condemning the military action — though not the capitalist extraction Trump explicitly announced.

The usually progressive United Church of Christ and the United Methodist Church (progressive at least in their D.C. offices) were conspicuously silent.

Even the Pope — who has been warning against military intervention in Venezuela for several months — is missing in action. As of this morning, the Holy Father has yet to say anything publicly.

They are — presumably — waiting to make a measured public statement as to not anger our impetuous manchild-in-chief.

* * *

Christianity evolved not from the actual ministry and teachings of Jesus, but from people who didn’t even know him — primarily Paul.

Paul’s interpretation of Jesus’s ministry de-emphasized the coming of God’s kingdom here on earth and its moral requirements, and emphasized the apocalyptic nature of Jesus’s teachings.

Hoping to avoid Jesus’s fate — a horrifically violent public execution — Paul and other early Christians did everything they could to make Jesus’s message non-threatening to the Romans.

As Jesus found out, the Romans were quick to suppress anything that could potentially challenge their imperial rule. This lesson was not lost on Paul. In the decades after Jesus’s death, Paul and other early Christian communities looked to defang the biting, anti-imperial parts of Jesus’s original message.

https://medium.com/@andrewspringer/the-silence-that-says-everything-about-christianity-2809e6ff2d9c [Footnoes omitted.]
Not that that saved Paul himself from martyrdom. Tradition (not scripture) holds that Paul was beheaded on orders of the Emperor Nero about 64-67 C.E.

The article notes the impetus for the corrupt bargain between the Christian Church and the Emperor Constantine in the Fourth Century, where Christianity was recognized as the state religion and the Roman Catholic Church was born:

This was the bargain: Christians got safety, wealth, and political power. In exchange, they started supporting [Constantine} personally, and stopped being dangerous to empire. They stopped asking uncomfortable questions about wealth extraction and military violence. They made peace with the very systems Jesus died resisting.

By the time Christianity became Rome’s official religion, Jesus’s actual message — his challenge to economic exploitation, his solidarity with the dispossessed, his indictment of the temple authorities who collaborated with Rome — had been buried under layers of meaningless theology that left power structures untouched.

The religion OF Jesus died. The religion ABOUT Jesus thrived.

{Italics and capitalization in original.] The writer explains how the United States carries on this unholy alliance between the Christian Church and the corrupt U.S. government:

This is the religion that came to America. Not the Jewish prophet who stood with the marginalized and condemned imperial violence, but the imperial faith that learned in the fourth century how to baptize domination in holy water.

American Christianity inherited Constantine’s bargain. It learned to bless westward expansion as “Manifest Destiny.” It provided theological cover for slavery. It sanctified capitalism as God’s economic order. It wrapped the flag around the cross until you couldn’t tell them apart.

And when empire goes to war, it does what it was designed to do: it stays silent or it blesses.

As Robert Penn Warren's character Governor Willie Stark said to his protege Jack Burden in All the King's Men (1946), "Man is conceived in sin and born in corruption and he passeth from the stink of the didie to the stench of the shroud. There is always something."

Or as the Mahatma Gandhi said, "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

[Kazinski]

Well Jesus did say: "My kingdom is not of this world".

Which leaves it wide open for Trump.

[Michael P]

Except for the subscription, what sets that apart from countless other lame critiques that advocate for a particular socioreligious position (or outright heresy) that the major denominations reject? Surely the author has an elbow or two to accompany this opinion, and his elbow(s) might be less distinctively similar to Lenin's.

[Dr. Ed 2]

All I can say is that NG does not understand Christianity.

For starters, Jesus did not die fighting the Romans.
And the UCC loudly destroyed itself fighting America.

And the Bible does warn about an antichrist….

[not guilty]

All I can say is that NG does not understand Christianity.

For starters, Jesus did not die fighting the Romans.

Dr. Ed 2, I grew up as a fundamentalist. And from your ignorant comment, it appears that I understand Christianity far better than you do.

Jesus pissed off the Jewish Chief Priests, who were in league with the Romans. According to scripture, the Sanhedrin tried Jesus, (who didn't fit their political agenda,) but they lacked the authority to sentence him to death, so they sent him to the Roman governor Pontius Pilate. Matthew 27:1-2 (RSV). Pilate found Jesus not guilty, Luke 23:4, 13-24 (RSV), but nevertheless sentenced him to death. Matthew 27:26 (RSV). According to John 19:12 (RSV), this was because the Jews had threatened Pilate's position vis-a-vis Caesar in order to persuade him: "Upon this Pilate sought to release him, but the Jews cried out, "If you release this man, you are not Caesar's friend; every one who makes himself a king sets himself against Caesar."

[DDHarriman]

So the Jews killed him. Don't be an antisemite okay? According to modern "Jews", those ancient and different Jews didn't kill him.

[Malika la Maize]

Him was a Jew, ya goof.

[Kazinski]

I don't understand Christianity at all, but I do know that there are zero mentions of Venezuela in the bible.

So anybody is claiming there is a Christian position on Trump:s Venezuelan incursion are.providing their own opinion, not Jesus's.

[Commenter_XY]

Must be hard for you NG, living in the Bible Belt of TN.

[not guilty]

U was reared by and among fundamentalist Christians. I understand the mindset. I was proof texting scripture long before I became a lawyer.

But as the Apostle Paul wrote to the church at Corinth, "When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became a man, I gave up childish ways." I Corinthians 13:11 (RSV).

[not guilty]

That U should be I.

[Commenter_XY]

Are you seeing your reflection, dimly by a mirror?

What prompted the post? What happened?

[not guilty]

What prompted the post? I made my comment above because I found the article from Medium.com to be interesting, and I wanted to share it here. For the church to be intertwined with the government does grave harm to both institutions -- just as the Emperor Constantine and the Catholic Church proved in the first millenium C.E.

If you are asking what prompted my break with Christian fundamentalism, I was taught from a very young age to regard the Bible as divinely inspired by God and inerrant. My study of the scriptures led me to question that dogma, in that the Bible contains such inconsistencies and errors that it impossible for an intellectually honest person to regard it as inerrant. Moreover, I found the leaders of the cult I was reared in to have much more in common with the Pharisees whom Jesus chastised than with Jesus himself and his teachings.

I revere Jesus (whom I do believe to be divine) and respect his teachings, but my karma ran over my dogma.

[Commenter_XY]

My study of the scriptures led me to question that dogma, in that the Bible contains such inconsistencies and errors that it impossible for an intellectually honest person to regard it as inerrant.

I understand this. For instance, in Torah (Parashat Balak), we read about Balaam, and his talking donkey. Clearly, donkeys do not talk (but asses sure do, heh). Rashi and Rambam discussed this from very different perspectives, roughly ~1,000 years ago.

What to do? I focus more on deeds (mitzvot) than creeds (stated beliefs). Just live out your Christian ideals as best you can.

[DDHarriman]

Do you understand "medium.com" is not some authoritative site with an editor? Right?

Literally anyone can publish there. If you'd like I'll set up an account there and ask Sarcast0 to share his journal of my greatest hits and publish them as proof.

[DDHarriman]

Garbage person, inside and out,

[Commenter_XY]

Remember....we are all created in His image, and are therefore holy.

[DDHarriman]

I wish my religiosity was as solid as yours. Seeing what these monsters are capable of and what they do day and day out and the beliefs they espouse make it hard to believe they are even human.

[TwelveInchPianist]

If Trump moves on Greenland and the situation gets resolved by impeachment or the threat of impeachment, the new norm will by that the check on a President's military adventurism is impeachment.

[Commenter_XY]

Impeachment has always been the ultimate check.

Greenland somehow joining the US is overblown; there will be more US military in Greenland's future, patrolling arctic sea routes.

[Brett Bellmore]

What, you don't think that a President being impeached over starting a war without Congressional approval would change Presidential behavior going forward?

I mean, Nixon nearly being impeached changed Presidential behavior: Presidents stopped recording, didn't they?

[Malika la Maize]

That depends, do they draw a lesson about adventurism in general or one about attacking longtime NATO allies?

[Dr. Ed 2]

Now is the time that tries our souls.

We can follow Trump and perhaps bring another century of freedom too much of the world, or we can follow Soros and finish the holocaust. It’s pretty much one of the other.

There are some very real reason reasons why Trump wants Greenland most notably he wants the marine rights of the waters off Greenland. He doesn’t want them going to the Russians or the Chinese and he’s right.

Trump is correct. He did the right thing in Venezuela. He hopefully will do the right thing in Iran and in Greenland.

[Malika la Maize]

“the time that tries our souls.”

Paine was not writing about conquering others when he wrote that. Quite the opposite.

[SRG2]

Per the FT article I linked to yesterday or the day before, Russian and Chinese vessels are not hanging around Greenland, Trump's claims to the contrary.

Anyone who thinks that the US should seize Greenland is a Putin useful idiot, as well as an immoral cunt. Trump himself should not merely be impeached if he does so. He should be killed by Danish troops as a legitimate act of war.

[Commenter_XY]

The end is in sight for Mahmoud Abbas, currently in his 21st year of a 4 year elected term. The world will be a better place without him in it.

[Armchair]

A question for the commentariat.

1) Is obstruction of a federal law enforcement operation a crime?
2) If an organization was engaged in coordinated obstruction of law enforcement operations across state, how might law enforcement respond?

[apedad]

That's two questions.

[Malika la Maize]

And neither are questions really it’s Armchair usual shtick to set up some point he wants to make.

[Armchair]

Questions are scary for you, aren't they?

[Malika la Maize]

No, your consistent shtick of appearing to be making them when you really want to make some preordained point is laughable to me.

[Armchair]

And yet...you still avoid the questions.

[Sarcastr0]

You don't actually have questions.

Avoiding your idiosyncratic style of asserting right-wing claims doesn't make you the Winner of the Internet, though it's clear you're simple enough to think it does.

[Armchair]

Commenter_XY answered the questions easily.

Yet...you did not.

[Sarcastr0]

Fellow terrible person and MAGA apparatchik agrees with your assertions of the MAGA narrative.

Amazing work, Armchair. Truly, you're a winner of Internet arguing.

[Malika la Maize]

Because they’re not questions.

[Armchair]

Sure they are. Right there with the question mark and everything. Let's try again. Just one for you, to make it easier.

"Is obstruction of a federal law enforcement operation a crime?"

[Malika la Maize]

It’s like a leftist posting:

I have a general question. Should unarmed mothers be shot in the face by LEOs?

[Commenter_XY]

1. Yes
2. Perhaps designate the organization as a domestic terror group. Surveil, and then detain members. If the detainee is an illegal alien, deport them to Eswatini.

[not guilty]

A question for the commentariat.

1) Is obstruction of a federal law enforcement operation a crime?
2) If an organization was engaged in coordinated obstruction of law enforcement operations across state, how might law enforcement respond?

These rhetorical questions are far too broad to have much meaning.

There are circumstances under which obstruction of a federal law enforcement operation is a crime. To determine whether that is so in a particular instance requires consideration of the particular facts and circumstances to determine whether any specific federal criminal statute(s) have been violated.

In order to prosecute for an alleged violation of federal criminal law, "The legislative authority of the Union must first make an act a crime, affix a punishment to it, and declare the Court that shall have jurisdiction of the offense." United States v. Hudson, 11 U.S. 32, 34 (1812).

[Armchair]

It's too broad a question to ask whether obstruction of federal law enforcement is a crime? For you? You love citing all the relevant possible laws.

[DDHarriman]

3.). If an organization is funded by foreign dark money and is engaged in coordinated obstruction is that not an act of terrorism? It can't be war as these foreign billionaires and NGOs aren't a nation.

[SRG2]

1. That depends on whether the operation is itself constitutional or otherwise lawful. For example, if a Federal agency is acting ultra vires, I don't see that obstructing it is a crime. Of course, the cultists here, being authoritarian types, would have trouble accepting the idea thar any Federal agency following orders from Trump or his OKW is acting ultra vires of course.

2. A variety of responses are possible, from FBI investigations to issuing pardons,

Now answer my question.
1. When a citizen acts to obstruct a Federal law enforcement operation, why is it not terrorism?

[Malika la Maize]

President Trump said that neither the Republican Party nor the MAGA movement had room for people with antisemitic views, his most direct public statement yet in a debate pulsing through his movement over the inclusion of supporters who spread hate.

“I think we don’t need them,” he said on Wednesday during an interview with The New York Times, when asked whether such people had a place in his coalition. “I think we don’t like them.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/11/us/politics/trump-maga-republicans-antisemitism.html

Harriman (and Mikie Q) Hit Hardest?

[apedad]

Guys, I've told you to look at the exact opposite of what Trump says for the truth.

For example, Trump loves Charlie Kirk - who was a big ol' antisemitic.

"Kirk blamed 'Jewish dollars' for funding 'Cultural Marxist ideas.' According to Jewish Currents, 'Cultural Marxism' is an antisemitic trope that purports that Jewish people are attempting to 'undermine traditional American values.'”

(I can hear DD Harriman applauding in the background.)

[Malika la Maize]

Foreign cosmopolitan billionaires!

[Brett Bellmore]

I'm picturing this Bond film, where they're discussing the latest bad guy's scheme to poison water supplies, and somebody objects: "Look, he's a Jewish banker who spends a lot of time petting a cat! He can't be evil, that would be so stereotypical!"

In the end Bond has to leave him alone, stopping the scheme would be antisemitic.

[Moderation4ever]

What I find most interesting is the nature of the far left and far right. Far left antisemitism seems to originate in opposition to the State of Israel. Far right antisemitism seems to attack Jews more directly. Neither is acceptable. Criticism of Israeli policies is acceptable but Israel has a right to exist and exist peacefully. Too many far left antisemites don't accept this idea. Too many far right antisemites are simple caught up in conspiracy scandals seeing Jews at the core of too much they fear. Don't know if this is correct just the way it appears to me.

[Commenter_XY]

Who cares about 'right' or 'left'; it is anti-semitism either way. And it is wrong. It has no place in this country.

Just yesterday, the largest synagogue in MS was torched. Do I care if the perp was 'right' or 'left'? No, I do not. I just don't want my synagogue to be burned down by disgusting antisemites.

[Sarcastr0]

Understanding the enemy is actually a good idea.

But antisemitism isn't always your enemy is it? You cozy up to Lex regularly around here.

You chose condoning antisemitism from the right some time ago.

[Commenter_XY]

You're the one who peddles blood libels about Israel, asshole.

[OpinionsVary]

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115879509461234235

Trump recently claimed to be the Acting President of Venezuela - or at least posted a meme to that effect. This claim is likely meant to be interpreted symbolically rather than a literal claim to the office but with Trump you can never be too sure. So, in the case where Trump does want to make himself President of Venezuela, would that legal?

If we look at world examples, it's not that uncommon for a head of state to serve for multiple countries at once. Kings are the big example here (King of the United Kingdom, King of Canada, King of Australia etc). But there are also examples like the President of France also being the co-head of state of Andorra.

But of course this is America, not France, so what is the American law like?

The Emolument clause is one possible bar.

>No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Acting President of Venezuela is presumably an office under the foreign state of Venezuela. Of course that could be solved by getting permission from Congress and the Blackman et al crew has this entire thing about the Presidency not being an ''office of Profit or Trust" too.

Anything else?

[Brett Bellmore]

I suppose, just for the sake of argument, that if you took the office, rather than being given it, the emolument clause wouldn't kick in. The point of the clause being to prevent our officers from being bought off by other countries; If you forcibly took it, you wouldn't feel indebted.

[Commenter_XY]

Wait, I thought SecState Rubio was running VEN! I figure btwn SecState, NatSec Advisor, what is one more title: Viceroy of Venezuela.

[Voize of Reazon]

Why would you look to US law to answer this question?

Article 41 of the Venezuelan Constitution of 1999 provides that "Only Venezuelans by birth who have no other nationality shall be permitted to hold the [office] of President of the Republic".

[Malika la Maize]

In the nationwide survey, 61% of respondents said that the U.S. should be a moral leader, but only 39% say it actually is one. That latter figure is sharply down from 60% in 2017 in a similar survey of American attitudes.

Providing a bigger picture of Americans' foreign policy perspectives, the NPR/Ipsos poll suggests that 46% of Americans want U.S. policy to focus on "enriching America and Americans," while 32% prioritize promoting democracy and human rights in other countries — with the democracy viewpoint dropping from 42% in 2017…

The survey also suggests partisan splits on major foreign policy issues, particularly when it comes to the priorities of America's foreign policy. Sixty-seven percent of Republicans — and 45% of independents — think American foreign policy should focus on enriching America and its citizens, while only 29% of Democrats polled believe so.

Instead, the majority (52%) of Democrats say the U.S. should prioritize promoting democracy and human rights in other countries, while that appetite is much lower among the Republicans (16% polled).

https://www.npr.org/2026/01/09/nx-s1-5671094/npr-ipsos-us-opinion-poll-foreign-affairs

[Brett Bellmore]

"Sixty-seven percent of Republicans — and 45% of independents — think American foreign policy should focus on enriching America and its citizens, while only 29% of Democrats polled believe so."

Once again demonstrating why, when I decided to give up on the Libertarian party, I aligned myself with the Republicans.

I've remarked on this before: Government inherently does all sorts of things we'd ordinarily recognize as wrongs if done by anybody but government: It extracts wealth from people by threats of violence, it extorts obedience by threats of violence, basically everything inherently governmental rests on a foundation of violence, and we are NOT given a choice about whether to participate.

The only possible justification for this sort of evil is that it is unavoidably necessary to avert greater evil. That it's actually being done for the benefit of the people subjected to it.

To tax people, to subject them to mandatory commands backed by threats, for the benefit of OTHER people, not themselves, is just unadulterated evil.

So it's unavoidable that the purpose of everything government does has to center on benefiting the people subjected to this: Its own citizens. Any benefit to others has to be incidental.

The left isn't comfortable with the idea that you can't justify robbing Peter to pay Paul. They've bought into universal utilitarianism, where if the harm to Peter is hypothesized to be less than the benefit to Paul, robbing Peter to pay Paul is obligatory, not forbidden.

So this survey has actually identified one of the fundamental divides between two irreconcilable views of government. And I know which side I'm on.

[Malika la Maize]

Does the LP push against that idea?

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, generally the LP pushes against the government doing more than is absolutely unavoidable, since government is the institutionalized violation of the non-aggression principle. But this is especially the case for foreign policy, both military and aid.

Here's a brief summation.

[Malika la Maize]

That’s what I mean, you don’t have to leave the LP over this because it’s not antithetical to thinking the federal government should only act on Americans enrichment.

[Brett Bellmore]

I didn't mean to give the impression that this is why I left the LP. I left the LP because campaign 'reforms' had rendered 3rd parties non-viable in the US.

I joined the LP back in the late 70's, not long after it was founded. We always knew at that time that we'd have to grow really fast, because once the incumbent parties decided we were a threat, they'd mobilize the government against us.

Long story short, we didn't grow fast enough, they woke to the threat before we were big enough to defend ourselves, and they erected all sorts of defenses against third parties that made that approach to influencing government in a libertarian direction futile.

This is just what dictated where I went after leaving the LP.

[apedad]

Brett would have been a Loyalist in 1776.

That whole Revolution thing would have been too hard.

Brett's Motto: I choose to . . . Appease!

[Brett Bellmore]

It's important to recognize when something isn't working, and try something different. Don't let the means become the end.

The LP was never anything but a means to an end, when the laws changed to render it a futile means, I gave up on it.

[apedad]

"Sixty-seven percent of Republicans . . . think American foreign policy should focus on enriching America and its citizens . . . . "

Since Republicans are also mainly Christian ([a]mong Republicans, 74% identify as Christian*), doesn't this make them hypocrytes?

* https://catholicvote.org/pew-democrats-far-less-religious-than-republicans-with-major-racial-divides/

[Malika la Maize]

I had a similar thought, a Christian nation that is only out to enrich itself?

[Commenter_XY]

What is wrong with making money (enriching yourself)? That isn't contrary to Christian belief.

[Malika la Maize]

It’s a focus quite outranked by others in the NT.

[Brett Bellmore]

Not really. This is about what GOVERNMENT should be doing, not about what individuals should be doing. Just because you favor charity, including international charity, doesn't mean you feel it appropriate to coerce others into supporting your efforts.

Bob is entitled to be charitable to Paul. He's not entitled to rob Peter to fund that charity.

[Sarcastr0]

In a republic, the government is a vessel of the people.

The dodge that charitable works (feeding the poor, sheltering the needy, etc.) should only be personal isn't in the Bible, has been tried, and doesn't work in practice.

Libertarian Jesus has an artificially limited message.

[Brett Bellmore]

"In a republic, the government is a vessel of the people."

Pfft. Government is an evolved form of protection racket that is subject to backsliding any time you stop treating it with the utmost caution.

Anything that can be done without government SHOULD be done without government, because government is about the morally worst way of doing anything, and is only justifiable when no other way is feasible of doing something that is absolutely necessary to do.

[Sarcastr0]

Yeah I remember when Jesus said all that.

And, again, we tried no social safety net, and leaving it to charity. It created Dickensian England.

Though of course you remain not very libertarian, considering how enthusiastic you are about Trump's MAGA initiatives. When the government is restricting speech, owning the libs (sometimes shooting them), and being cruel to immigrants, you're all in.

[Malika la Maize]

If that’s true then your fellow travelers who go on about this being a Christian nation shouldn’t pull our government into that.

[Commenter_XY]

America does not have a stellar record transplanting Jeffersonian democracy to other countries, so it is understandable why prioritizing promotion of democracy has dropped (by one-quarter). Fail enough times, even dummies stop trying.

And DC is full of useless bureaucrats dummies.

[Moderation4ever]

The problem is you cannot really transplant democracy. There has to be basic commitment in the population before you start. For those that study American democracy, you do not start at the Declaration of Independence but rather start at the Magna Carta.

[Commenter_XY]

Agreed = There has to be basic commitment in the population before you start.

[Brett Bellmore]

Democracy is only metastable, you have to almost be a democracy before you can create one.

[Malika la Maize]

A journey of a hundred miles begins with a first step. The question is should we be encouraging steps in the right direction?

[Brett Bellmore]

Minneapolis Radicals Begin Distributing Devices to Disable ICE Vehicles

"Attempt at your own risk."; At least they're demonstrating a little awareness that this is actually a crime.

I wonder at what point in this gradual escalation of anti-government activities the insurrection act kicks in?

[Malika la Maize]

“a local politician revealed.”

[Commenter_XY]

It is a really bad idea for 'John Q Public' to vandalize LEO vehicles. That will get you arrested, or something much, much worse (i.e. Freddie Gray treatment).

[Brett Bellmore]

It's a standard goal of terrorists, to try to provoke a government reaction that will delegitimize the government.

The problem here is that it's not going to generally delegitimize government, the effect is going to be selective, driving up polarization.

I really do think we are on the ramp up to a civil war, and some of these efforts are meant to further that.

[Commenter_XY]

Of course they are = I really do think we are on the ramp up to a civil war, and some of these efforts are meant to further that.

The Neville Singhams and Klaus Schwabs and Alex Soros of the world are dedicated to America's destruction, and fund those efforts.

You know, if I were an uber-lib, I would think long and hard about a Civil War. Just remember, redneck hillbillies have most of the guns in America. The uber-libs will bring signs and pastries and boom boxes; those redneck hillbillies will bring bullets and body-bags to bury the dead uber-libs after the fight is over. It would be a nasty, brutal, and relatively short fight.

It is a fight I absolutely do not want to see.

[Brett Bellmore]

Actually, in the last decade the left has started arming, too. I don't think in the event of a civil war that would be a big difference.

The real distinction is that the right is anchored in the rural areas, while the left is anchored in the cities, and cities are VERY vulnerable places in civil wars, because they are highly reliant on fragile infrastructure to remain viable.

But if you want less government generally, civil war is a terrible way to accomplish it. The left may be thinking that anything that makes government more powerful favors them, because they can just take that government over, they're really good at subversion.

[Armchair]

Here's a different question.

At what point can the organization begin to be investigated and detained as RICO?

[not guilty]

"At what point can the organization begin to be investigated and detained as RICO?"

Parse the relevant statutes, which are codified at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968.

Like all criminal statutes, the racketeering statutes are construed strictly, and RICO prosecutions are disfavored and difficult to prove.

[Armchair]

"Parse the relevant statutes, which are codified at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968."

So yes.

Immigration and Nationality Act, section 274

[Moderation4ever]

The only organization I have read in the article is ICE. Are you suggesting treating ICE under RICO?

[Brett Bellmore]

Right, right, the left accomplishes everything without organizations.

Look, just because you don't incorporate in Delaware and publish an organizational chart doesn't mean you're not an organization. There is a long history of organizational structures designed to obscure lines of command and make it difficult to locate leaders. And revolutionary movements usually resort to them.

[Sarcastr0]

I knew Brett would get to Antifa in no time.

[Brett Bellmore]

Antifa is hardly the only cell structured left wing organization out there, Sarcastr0. I'm just saying that, no matter how convenient you'd find it if we pretended that there were no organizations behind criminal left-wing initiatives, we're not going to cooperate with the pretense.

[Sarcastr0]

No evidence, just fan fiction.
That's Brett's Antifa!

His political thriller - now with civil war! - continues to be lame and overdramatic.

[Brett Bellmore]

I already said that we're not going to comply with your demand to pretend there are no organizations involved. Repeating the demand isn't going to change that.

[Sarcastr0]

Brett's proof there's an organization is Brett posting there's an organization over and over again.

He just really wants a good villain for his novel, and the legions of sabotaging leftist he imagines in every organization in the world don't quite have the same verve as Antifa.

[Bunny495]

As a fairly recent Tesla owner I went through the libtards keying Teslas or wrorse. Problem was it was easy to ID the perps due to Tesla's sentry mode. Take that however you want.

[Brett Bellmore]

In this case, they're using 3d printed disposable gadgets that screw on to tire valves in place of the cap, to deflate the tires. Locking valve stem caps are likely to become popular if this catches on.

[Armchair]

See, that sounds like obstruction of justice. Organized obstruction of justice, plus another crime...

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, yes, if you're talking about the 'protesters' emptying the tires of government cars.

No, if you're talking about government agencies adopting the use of tire valve stem locks to make emptying their tires harder.

[Malika la Maize]

Was your Tesla keyed?

[Commenter_XY]

The numbers are in: we have ~300K fewer useless federal bureaucrats in 2026 than we did in 2025. They're RIF'ed, or they left on their own. I would note the statist geniuses here said over and over like banshees that it could not be done. Guess what, the world as we know it did not end. What do you say now, chumps?

I say keep hacking away...there are only 35 more months to slay the DC Administrative Beast.

[Malika la Maize]

Interestingly it seems many of the top cut agencies were the VA and the respective Armed Forces.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/01/10/federal-cuts-trump-agencies-data/

[Armchair]

Speaking of the VA. See the below post.

But in short...

"The VA is also investing an additional $800 million in infrastructure improvements to ensure facilities deliver safe and effective patient care. These funds are drawn from savings achieved through various VA reform efforts, like pruning its DC workforce by nearly 30,000 employees last summer.."

[Sarcastr0]

Keep the responsibilities the same, but fire the contracts officers and financial managers that do the job well!

That's not shrinking government.

It is just immiseration of an outgroup, on the backs of the government having any ability in doing the jobs Congress laid out for it to do well.

Everyone loses.

Except for psychos who are just here for the immiseration of an outrgoup.

[Armchair]

Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins is touting significant reforms in serving America's veterans, arguing the Trump administration is reversing Biden-era trends by increasing visits while reducing backlogs and wait times

Backlog of vets waiting for benefits down more than 49%
The improvements have come quickly in many areas that were suffering prior to Collins taking over the department.

The backlog of veterans waiting for VA benefits has decreased more than 49% (and up to 57% in later reports) since January 20, 2025, following a 24% increase during the Biden Administration.

To improve convenience and timeliness of care, the VA has opened 20 new health care clinics nationwide, expanding services for veterans across the country. Since January 20, 2025, the department has provided more than 1.4 million appointments outside normal operating hours, including early-morning, evening, and weekend slots, offering veterans greater flexibility.

The VA is also investing an additional $800 million in infrastructure improvements to ensure facilities deliver safe and effective patient care. These funds are drawn from savings achieved through various VA reform efforts, like pruning its DC workforce by nearly 30,000 employees last summer.

https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/va-goes-biden-backlog-trump-turbo-claims-cleared-and-clinics-opened

[Malika la Maize]

Just The News!

[Armchair]

Do you contradict anything there?

See, you were just bitching about the VA cutting bureaucrats in DC. But you failed to realize what was done with those funds. They were used to help vets everywhere across the country. Reducing wait times, increasing infrastructure.

Your previous Washington Post piece failed to mention that. If you only read one "side"...you don't have all the facts.

[Sarcastr0]

It's a bare assertion by a member of this Admin posted by an outlet that has credibility problems to begin with, and certainly didn't bother to check anything that was said.

So really, it's more that nothing here establishes anything. Except that you'll believe whatever the admin says without bothering to check it.

You probably think Mussolini made the trains run on time as well.

[Sarcastr0]

Actual veterans' opinions don't seem as enthusiastic.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Veterans/comments/1pnvcqw/va_to_reorganize_community_care_contracts/

The proof of the numbers will be in the people being served saying they are better served, not in this lying admin lying.

[Armchair]

Oh, a random reddit post....Let's trust the random anecdote over the official polling...

"Veteran trust in VA has increased 25% since 2016, reaches all-time high"
https://news.va.gov/press-room/veteran-trust-va-increased-25-since-2016-high/

[Sarcastr0]

It's the veterans' replies I'm interested in.

You posted another post from this administration, I see.

LOL.

[Armchair]

I post actual data and polls.

You trust a single commenter on reddit instead.

Sometimes...you're a joke.

[Sarcastr0]

You post the government saying they did a poll and they turn up winners.

In previous administrations that'd be enough.

This admin lies, actually.

Here's the historical chart:
https://department.va.gov/veterans-experience/trust/veteran-trust-in-va/

Maybe not the amazing achievement you thought, eh?

No one does gullible like you, Armchair!

[Malika la Maize]

Armchair posts a piece by a source so discredited Fox dismissed him which relies on essentially a press release by a Congresscritter and then talks about reading one side. Lol

[Malika la Maize]

Have you ever thought about leaving the U.S., and starting over somewhere else? Maybe living the hygge lifestyle in Denmark, or soaking up the sun in Costa Rica? According to Gallup – a surprising number of women are considering it. In a poll released in November, 40% of women between the ages of 18 and 44 said they'd move to another country permanently if they had the chance. That's four times higher than it was a decade ago – and this sentiment among women is unique to the U.S.

https://www.npr.org/2026/01/07/nx-s1-5665105/enough-is-enough-is-it-time-to-leave-america

[Armchair]

Sure. Then let's see what happens when they need to try to support themselves and get a job.

Then they realize...oh, time to go back to the US.

[Commenter_XY]

A country without AWFLs is a better country; certainly more tranquil, with less nagging, hectoring and self-righteous lecturing.

Can we give the AWFLs who want to leave 1K and a plane ticket?

[Malika la Maize]

No wonder so many women want to leave.

[Commenter_XY]

Do you need a plane ticket? 😛

[Bunny495]

No one would ever confuse me as a supporter of AWFLs. Thing is there more BFLs (Broke Female Libtards) who have the same feeling. Recent details about Renee Good are that she and her wife moved to Canada and soon returned to America where Renee's mother wound up paying her rent and bills with Renee's only stable source of income being VA survivor benefits (Dependency and Indemnity Compensation) to support her son. Interestingly while recent polls show 53% of AWFLs support the dems 58% of the BFLs support the dems. What do you guys have to say about my made-up words.

[Mr. Bumble]

@ Qualika:
"...said they'd move to another country permanently if they had the chance."
What constitutes a chance?

[Malika la Maize]

Amazon has decided to end its long running delivery relationship with the United States Postal Service, marking a major shift in how the retail giant moves packages across the country. The partnership, which dates back roughly three decades, played a key role in helping Amazon scale its fast delivery model while providing USPS with billions of dollars in annual shipping revenue. According to recent reports, the decision comes as USPS continues to face mounting financial strain, including a reported $9.5 billion loss in its most recent fiscal year.

For years, USPS served as a critical delivery backbone for Amazon, especially in rural and remote areas where private carriers often struggle to operate profitably. The Postal Service’s unmatched national reach allowed Amazon to deliver packages to nearly every address in the country. As Amazon’s shipping volume exploded, the relationship became one of the most significant public private logistics partnerships in the United States.

However, changes in contract negotiations and USPS efforts to restructure its package delivery pricing appear to have pushed Amazon toward a different strategy. Instead of renewing the existing agreement, Amazon is shifting more deliveries to its rapidly expanding in house logistics network, signaling a decisive break from a partnership that helped define modern ecommerce delivery.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/amazon-ends-usps-partnership-after-9-5-billion-loss-affecting-100-000-workers/ar-AA1TPps3

[Brett Bellmore]

Utilizing the postal service this way was something they did when they were growing fast, so that they could concentrate on other areas. I don't think it was ever intended to be permanent, they were always going to move delivery back in eventually, so they'd have better control over it.

[Moderation4ever]

I hope people will understand the importance of the USPS in the rise of Amazon. It is often pointed out that the idea of "I made it on my own" is a fallacy. That is not not to say that people don't advance because of their own hard work, but rather that it is their work and vision supported by the work of other people and the government that make them a success. The USPS was critical in the start of Amazon and or all the criticism of the Covid19 response it likely helped boost Amazon sales.

[Brett Bellmore]

The problem with this notion is that the USPS was just as important to the rise of all the competing companies that... didn't rise. It's like crediting the marathon winner's win to the atmosphere, not their efforts.

And Amazon never was fully reliant on the USPS. They used every delivery service out there, UPS, Fedex, DHL, you name it. The USPS was just part of the mix.

Admittedly it was convenient to them that one of the services out there had a subsidized distribution network in low population areas. I'm just saying it was never essential.

[Sarcastr0]

This is the kind of tangle you gotta get into when you insist the government is useless in wealth creation.

[Armchair]

That's a bit misleading.

Amazon used USPS services for the "last mile" shipping, as they were the cheapest option. Amazon would ship the packages themselves to a central facility, then drop them off at the local post office/distribution center. And USPS would be the cheapest option to send the packages to the doors, as they were going there anyway. Amazon could've used UPS or Fed-Ex. It would just have been slightly more expensive.

Amazon used lots of different companies in its business model. From the aircraft from Boeing to gasoline purchased from Mobil to packaging purchased from other businesses. USPS simply fit into that model.

[Sarcastr0]

Sure sounds like USPS served as a critical delivery backbone for Amazon.

[Brett Bellmore]

Sure, if you ignore that they weren't the only people doing delivery, they were just one of several delivery methods being used.

[Bunny495]

Maybe a little OT but I have noticed a significant drop in the amount of junk mail I am getting. For a long time I had a trash can set up in my screened in porch and the locked mailbox in the covered parking for the sole purpose of disposing 90%+ mail which was junk. I am not sure why since I never requested it but both my main and backup credit cards have a $US30K+ limit and my Amazon CC is $US17K yet I still got multiple CC offers in the mail all unsolicited. Same for all the nice people who want to sell me an extended warranty even thought my Tesla still has over 8 years on the factory warranty. My understanding is the cost of junk mail postage was far less than what I pay to send the few letters I mail. Anyone else notice this.