Lion of the Blogosphere

Trump against free speech

with 112 comments

Remember that Justice Scalia himself joined the majority opinion of Texas v. Johnson which held that burning the American flag is constitutionally protected free speech. And Trump has said that he wants to fill Scalia’s seat with a like-minded replacement.

An absolutist view of free speech is the only thing protecting HBD bloggers from being censored by the liberals. If Trump weakens free speech, and then he leaves office in four or eight years to be replaced by a Democrat, it could mean the end of HBD blogs. I could be thrown in prison!

This tweet, however, is consistent with my view of Trump as someone who generally has 1950s values (a decade when burning of the American flag was not well appreciated) and supports law and order, but who is not a deep thinker and is not well studied in constitutional law. That’s not to say that Trump isn’t smart, but he has used his intelligence to make money, make his apartment look like the Palace of Versailles, and marry trophy wives rather than concern himself with issues of political philosophy.

They say that they took his Android away from him during the last three weeks of the campaign so that he couldn’t spontaneously tweet without it being reviewed. Maybe they need to go back to that system.

* * *

Otis the Sweaty’s alternative interpretation:

Not sure if this was deliberate, but this tweet is great because it will provoke liberal idiots and BLM types into publicly burning American flags. Hello 10% more of the white vote!

I agree that Trump has a way with arousing the passions of the prole whites, but perhaps he will be better at governing the country if, now that he won, he goes a little more high class.

Also, your comment demonstrates that flag-burning isn’t really subversive. It never causes anyone to join the cause of the flag burners.

* * *

Mike CA says:

Lots of people say they are in favor of free speech until somebody says something they don’t like. Outlawing flag burning is just more political correctness.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

November 29, 2016 at 2:49 pm

Posted in Politics

112 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Not sure if this was deliberate, but this tweet is great because it will provoke liberal idiots and BLM types into publicly burning American flags. Hello 10% more of the white vote!

    Otis the Sweaty

    November 29, 2016 at 2:51 pm

  2. Lots of people say they are in favor of free speech until somebody says something don’t like. Outlawing flag burning is just more political correctness.

    Mike CA

    November 29, 2016 at 2:57 pm

    • If he segues into a Hate Speech vs Free Speech argument this could be a teachable moment for the mush heads in the media. But I doubt that is where he is going with this.

      Lion of the Turambar

      November 29, 2016 at 3:23 pm

    • Burning the flag was illegal in all the states mid-20th century when it was common to black people the n-word. PC and flag burning are different things.

      Andrew E.

      November 29, 2016 at 3:33 pm

    • po·lit·i·cal cor·rect·ness : the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.

      How does banning flag burning fit the definition of political correctness?

      destructure

      November 30, 2016 at 10:23 am

  3. I would beat up a guy burning the flag, but I wouldn’t outlaw the act. Free speech makes America great!

    Yakov

    November 29, 2016 at 3:08 pm

    • In the late 1960s and 70s, construction workers, truckers, bikers, etc. used to slap around longhairs and pinkos who burned flags.

      Lewis Medlock

      November 29, 2016 at 4:33 pm

      • This is patriotism with a common sense approach. I like it. We need to bring this back.

        Yakov

        November 29, 2016 at 4:59 pm

  4. I think Paul Ryan’s just tweeted that we need to also pass a law preventing the burning of Saudi Arabia’s flag. Strange man.

    The Philosopher

    November 29, 2016 at 3:15 pm

    • The flag of Saudi Arabia bears the shahada or Islamic declaration of faith. Because the shahada is considered holy, Saudi Arabia’s flag code is extremely strict and even the slightest violation amounts to desecration not only of the flag but is also blasphemous to Islam. This has led to several incidents of controversy. In 1994, McDonald’s printed carry-out bags bearing the flags of all nations participating in the FIFA World Cup (with a green flag with Saudi Arabia’s coat of arms superimposed, rather than the Saudi flag), while Coca-Cola did the same on cans of soda. Because of Saudi outrage, the companies stopped producing those items.[82] Also during the FIFA World Cup, in 2002, Saudi officials protested against printing the flag on a soccer ball on the belief that kicking the creed with the foot was totally unacceptable.

      Yakov

      November 29, 2016 at 3:37 pm

      • Muslims are always outraged about something or other. Makes me want to burn a few qurans.

        Rosenmops

        November 29, 2016 at 8:31 pm

    • Paul Ryan is such a maggot. This is America not Saudi Arabia.

      destructure

      November 29, 2016 at 4:28 pm

  5. It’s important for Trump to keep up the pressure like this because it will make all of the fruits, nuts and crazies of the Obama campus lefty coalition go absolutely bonkers and show their true colors. And with each passing day core Americans can generally realize that this is no longer their country.

    Camlost

    November 29, 2016 at 3:30 pm

  6. perhaps he will be better at governing the country if, now that he won, he goes a little more high class

    How did that work out for Poppy Bush? Not too well.

    Moreover, going high class won’t do Trump any good because the Left will vomit on him as Literally Hitler no matter what he does.

    I always wondered why Dubya Bush never punched back when liberals attacked him. Didn’t seem to be a winning approach for him, either. I hope Trump smacks the Left every chance he gets, not least because the Left has spent eight years crapping all over America and all over middle and lower class whites.

    Tarl

    November 29, 2016 at 3:38 pm

    • @ Tarl +1000

      Why can’t we up vote comments on this blog?

      Rosenmops

      November 29, 2016 at 8:15 pm

      • – 1000 for the Spinoza commenter!

        JS

        November 29, 2016 at 11:00 pm

  7. Lion,

    I agree with you in principle, but I have no faith in any “Constitutional” protections. Even if the Constitution were intact, the cost to defend your rights on your own would bankrupt you in the process.

    The reality is that the Democrats have spent the last eight years weaponizing the government as a tool against the American people…and now they’ve handed it over to Donald Trump. The state needs to be used to get rid of the threats to the Constitutional order, the biggest threat being the Democrats themselves.

    The surest lesson to ever be taught is being hoisted on your own petard.

    map

    November 29, 2016 at 3:43 pm

    • Exactly. Liberalism cannot be allowed to continue to exist. It must be eradicated completely.

      Otis the Sweaty

      November 29, 2016 at 4:22 pm

      • Exactly. Liberalism cannot be allowed to continue to exist. It must be eradicated completely.

        Two wars at once for you, Otis?

        Which comes first the war against the TruCons/Mormons/Traitors or the liberal/PC/SJW/alt left?
        —————————————-

        DOES THIS LOOK THE FACE OF SOMEONE WHOSE GETTING SOS?? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA!!

        https://i.redditmedia.com/6WaWMmFLCgVlYv6JyyGxPVPsbM8974oX8uc4F17eNjU.jpg?w=804&s=8075d551694d1d7ca5776e05d7d9907f

        Rifleman

        November 29, 2016 at 10:37 pm

      • The houses burned, the rats scattered, and the soil reaped with mountains of salt, so no fruit may be born in the putid land for a thousand years.

        OldTimer

        November 29, 2016 at 11:53 pm

      • The war against the TruCons is over. We won. They have been exterminated.

        Now we move on to phase II: destruction of the immigrant community.

        But the final goal has always been the complete eradication of Liberalism.

        Otis the Sweaty

        November 30, 2016 at 8:48 am

  8. Flag burning is reprehensible, but it is free speech. We should allow it for two reasons:

    1. Weakening free speech in one area weakens it everywhere else. If we start censoring left wing views, the left will use our precedent against us the next time they take power. (And let’s not delude ourselves: There will be a Democratic president after the 2024 election. The parties switch off every eight years or so.)

    2. Flag burning is reprehensible but it doesn’t directly injure people. When a bunch of BLM protestors or California secessionists burn the Flag, I think to myself, “Great! Now fewer reasonable people will listen to them!”

    In contrast, when BLMs or secessionists violently attack Trump supporters, it scares our guys from being involved in the political process. Flag burning doesn’t keep anyone from participating, the way violence does.

    Sid

    November 29, 2016 at 3:49 pm

    • If we start censoring left wing views, the left will use our precedent against us the next time they take power.

      That train left the station a LONG time ago. The Left is ALREADY censoring right-wing views. Also, the bitter fact is they are going to continue to restrict right-wing speech no matter what we do – whether there is a “precedent” or not.

      “Maybe if we act nice, the Left won’t attack us next time they have the power to do so” — you have to be really deluded to think this will work. We have decades of experience that shows they will never leave us alone.

      Tarl

      November 29, 2016 at 9:07 pm

      • “That train left the station a LONG time ago. The Left is ALREADY censoring right-wing views.”

        My blog hasn’t been shut down yet. I haven’t been put in jail. We must support absolute free speech.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        November 30, 2016 at 12:11 am

      • So…. why aren’t you blogging under your real name, hmmmm?

        Tarl

        December 1, 2016 at 12:07 am

      • Doing so would prevent me from ever getting a job again, if I so wanted to.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 1, 2016 at 8:59 am

      • Yeah, Lion probably has a good point.

        map

        November 30, 2016 at 12:40 am

      • There is no point in turning a soft tyranny into a hard tyranny.

        map

        November 30, 2016 at 12:41 am

      • There is no point in tying our hands behind our backs and not using the weapons against the Left that they use against us. Especially because the Left is going to CONTINUE to impose creeping tyranny on us even if we show admirable (or in my view, stupid) restraint.

        Tarl

        December 1, 2016 at 12:09 am

      • We need to call out the left on McCarthyism, and create laws which prevent monopolies like Google and Facebook from censoring unpopular topics and people.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 1, 2016 at 9:00 am

      • “The Left is ALREADY censoring right-wing views. Also, the bitter fact is they are going to continue to restrict right-wing speech no matter what we do – whether there is a “precedent” or not.”

        I agree that the left does censor and attack us, but it’s nowhere near as bad as it could be, and we shouldn’t make things worse. In fact, I think the best thing we could do would be to expand and strengthen free speech, so that when the liberals regain power, they’ll have to work harder to make up for lost ground.

        Sid

        November 30, 2016 at 1:03 am

      • It does not make things worse to fight them with their own weapons.

        Tarl

        December 1, 2016 at 12:11 am

      • The best thing to do is strengthen free speech as much as possible while attacking the left in other ways, like applying antitrust law to google, facebook, twitter, microsoft, apple and other left-wing commercial interests.

        map

        November 30, 2016 at 12:59 pm

      • Yes, use antitrust law, and regulate google/facebook/twitter as the monopolies that they are.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        November 30, 2016 at 1:22 pm

      • When you view our current struggle as a low intensity civil war (on par with the one in 1859) then censoring free speech to destroy your enemies before restoring liberties is not so abominable/dangerous. Lincoln did as much during the war era.

        Once the left wing in this country is destroyed we can restore all liberties (or as much as it can be annihilated – the left will always exist on some level and will probably regroup again in 50-100 years). There is truly no end to history.

        OldTimer

        November 30, 2016 at 5:45 pm

      • “censoring free speech to destroy your enemies before restoring liberties is not so abominable/dangerous”

        The liberals will be much better at doing that then Trump will ever be. The left has already made so much speech taboo. You could lose your job for writing about your belief in HBD on Facebook.

        The only way to fight the left right now is to OPEN UP free speech. The liberals are now the McCarthyites.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        November 30, 2016 at 5:57 pm

      • OldTimer is right. The alternative is the slow destruction of our nation and descent into 3rd world chaos. Anyone who can’t see it is deceiving themselves..

        destructure

        November 30, 2016 at 7:43 pm

  9. Interesting that I’ve never heard of anyone burning a Russian flag. Is it illegal? I dunno, but he wouldn’t get home in one piece after doing it, that’s for sure.

    As far as Saudis go, they have no business putting shahada on the flag. They should change their flag. This is desecration of religion in itself. No secular power can measure up to religious standards and Saudis certainly don’t.

    Yakov

    November 29, 2016 at 4:07 pm

    • Sounds like you’ve never been to Russia.

      But the current flag of Russia doesn’t arouse the same passions as the American flag as the Russian flag is only a few decades old while the American flag has been the national symbol through generations, through world wars and so on. If you go to a far left demonstrations in Russia they’re likely to use Soviet symbols and ignore the current national flag. If you go to a Russian nationalist demonstration they’re also likely to ignore the current flag and use something else, eg. the last Romanov flag

      https://www.rt.com/politics/231359-duma-russia-flag-imperial/

      The Russian version of liberals don’t have much reason to go against the current flag because it’s the flag adopted for the pro-Western liberal Yeltsin era and they’re currently on the defensive against people who prefer other eras.

      In any case, you could always go the way of the European nanny states where you don’t even need to ban flag burning because it’s inconceivable that setting things on fire would be legal. I’ve seen the Finnish police stop demonstrators from burning Israeli flags, American flags, EU flags, Chinese flags and so on and I’m pretty sure we have no legal protections for those flags.

      Jaakko Raipala

      November 29, 2016 at 6:00 pm

      • why would someone in Finland burn a Chinese flag?

        Otis the Sweaty

        November 29, 2016 at 11:17 pm

      • I happened to have been born in Russia, mate.

        Yakov

        November 29, 2016 at 11:23 pm

  10. Indian women usually very good looking. Cucks big fans of Indian women it seems. Good taste!

    The Philosopher

    November 29, 2016 at 4:37 pm

    • “Indian women usually very good looking”

      Huh? I’m missing the joke.

      peterike

      November 29, 2016 at 5:14 pm

  11. Why was it smart to tweet this now, when the OSU atrocity is still fresh in people’s minds? He should be tweeting about the fires in Gatlinburg, which I bet voted for him 99%-1%.

    gothamette

    November 29, 2016 at 4:44 pm

    • He should be tweeting about the fires in Gatlinburg…

      About 8hrs after the above tweet:

      Rifleman

      November 29, 2016 at 10:11 pm

      • Well, I’m glad he tweeted about Gatlinburg, but less glad that he wrote something dumb about the flag.

        I’m tired of all this 3D chess stuff. I remember when every time Bush said something dumb he was a genius executive a reverse triple head fake (Sailer’s words). No, it turned out he was just dumb.

        gothamette

        November 30, 2016 at 1:11 pm

      • Well, I’m glad he tweeted about Gatlinburg, but less glad that he wrote something dumb about the flag.

        Trump protesters take Trump bait.

        “Protesters burned the United States flag outside of Trump International Hotel in New York City Tuesday, following President-elect Donald Trump’s suggestion that flag burners be jailed or lose their citizenship.”

        Isn’t that why he said that — to get his haters burning flags, making themselves look bad?

        I’m tired of all this 3D chess stuff. I remember when every time Bush said something dumb he was a genius executive a reverse triple head fake (Sailer’s words). No, it turned out he was just dumb.

        You are hoping Trump copies GW Bush’s style?

        Rifleman

        November 30, 2016 at 6:15 pm

      • “Bush’s style.”

        Oh God, no. I’m not hoping that. I was referring to the fact that at the beginning of Dubya’s mis-administration, his fervent supporters said that every misstatement and dumb move was in fact a brilliant 3D chess play (or in Sailer’s words, “reverse triple head fake”) to make his opponents look bad. You don’t remember that? How quickly people forget.

        In fact, Bush really was a dumbass.

        I’m not saying Trump’s a dumbass, but I do think he spouts off a lot. That’s a flaw, esp. for a “stone cold killer.” A stone cold killer is supposed to be very calculated.

        Someone did say that this was a clever way of having the press cover the fact that Hillary and the rest of Dem-E supported laws against flag burning. OK.

        Most of the coverage has been exceedingly stupid. The examples they give aren’t of actual flag desecration but of vandalism. It’s perfectly OK to have laws against vandalism, and burning of anything. I can’t burn anything on my roof. The FDNY prohibits it. I can’t even burn my own meatloaf on my roof. Look it up.

        gothamette

        December 1, 2016 at 9:22 am

  12. “They say that they took his Android away from him during the last three weeks of the campaign so that he couldn’t spontaneously tweet without it being reviewed. Maybe they need to go back to that system.”

    No way. As it looks now there’s a good chance, with Trump packing his cabinet with cucks and establishment hacks, that not much of the spirit of Trump’s presidency will follow into his policies/governing. In this case, at least having the President of the United States tweeting like Donald Trump has been will have made his election worth it.

    chairman

    November 29, 2016 at 4:46 pm

    • Android, not iPhone,interesting. I also have an Android, is it significant?

      Yakov

      November 29, 2016 at 4:56 pm

      • Trump can afford an iPhone, but he chooses Android.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        November 29, 2016 at 5:59 pm

      • I can afford an iPhone, but iPhone is supposed to be a status symbol. Trump choses Android, JS, whats the significance of this?

        Yakov

        November 29, 2016 at 6:55 pm

      • I think I saw a Trump tweet awhile ago where he chided Apple for not making smartphones with large screens (back before 2014 when they made the iPhone 6). My guess is that he got a Samsung Galaxy with a massive screen, loved it and has stuck with that since. (Once you’ve settled on one OS, it’s a bit of a hassle to transition to another one.)

        Sid

        November 29, 2016 at 9:45 pm

      • Well Trump, being old, might have trouble seeing a small screen. And he doesn’t have to carry it himself because he has a servant for that stuff.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        November 30, 2016 at 12:13 am

      • Android is prole. Trump is prole. So what’s the prole fuss?

        JS

        November 29, 2016 at 10:55 pm

      • “Well Trump, being old, might have trouble seeing a small screen. And he doesn’t have to carry it himself because he has a servant for that stuff.”

        Too bad he has small hands!

        “Android is prole. Trump is prole. So what’s the prole fuss?”

        I don’t know, Apple is becoming less SWPL every year since Steve Jobs died. Their goods are top-shelf but they lack that specifically Bohemian appeal they did in the 2000s.

        Android is nerdier than Apple, and hence more prole, but the difference isn’t as vast as it was a few years ago.

        Sid

        November 30, 2016 at 1:18 am

    • his cabinet includes Bannon, Kobach and Sessions. So he has thrown a bone to the GOPe with some of the other depts, big deal. It is a small price to pay in exchange for the destruction of the immigrant community.

      Otis the Sweaty

      November 29, 2016 at 5:00 pm

      • Steven Mnuchin, Goldman Sachs, Soros Fund alum, for Treasury. OTOH, Steve Bannon is also ex-Goldman Sachs. Mnuchin was head of Trump’s campaign finance committee, so no surprise.

        gothamette

        November 29, 2016 at 6:44 pm

      • No one has been selected for homeland security yet. Trump is shaping up to be a generic piece of shit republican except with very good views on trade and good to very good view on immigration. Not a real economic populist in any meaningful sense.

        magnavox

        November 29, 2016 at 7:38 pm

      • Mnuchin is bad news. Trump has to pick a loyalist at SoS an Defence to make up for it. Mnuchin is the same Goldman Sachs deregulation + gambling/bonuses + bailout X100 rinse repeat racket.

        Transport, UN ambassador, Education, are fluff jobs nobody cares about. What in the hell does Sec for Transport do anyway?

        At least Mitch McConnell is now onside with this nepotism. May not be long before she get’s the tingles for Trump though. Hahahaha.

        The Philosopher

        November 29, 2016 at 8:10 pm

      • No President will ever deliver on everything he has promised. With Trump, we can expect the change we’ve wanted on immigration, with Sessions as AG and Kobach in DHS. We can also expect Trump to negotiate more protectionist trade deals, if in an ad hoc fashion.

        When it comes to populism on taxes, corruption, Wall Street and corporations… Well, maybe the Democrat who succeeds Trump in 2024 will be a Sandernista?

        Sid

        November 29, 2016 at 9:50 pm

      • Any good developer worth his salt knows you don’t drain a large swamp all at once, but sections at a time.

        Year 1 of the trumpenreich: Deport all illegals, crack down on immigration, restore sane middle east policies
        Year 2 of the trumpenterror: crack down on medicine/trade/other monopolistic anti-american practices
        Year 3 of the trumpenterminator: destroys current neoliberal economic policies of the federal reserve, current Fed chair quits in disgrace as economy is in ruins due to the reset, which was coming, Trump or no Trump
        Year 4 of the trumpenturbo: mass economic stimulus/3 hots and a cot/free market allowed to function outside of government funded infrastructure projects
        Year 5 of the trumpenresurrection: trump reloaded. having narrowly won the 2020 election with a larger share of the popular vote this time he sets to the task of continuing to rebuild the American economy and cracking down on immigration and demographic social engineering. 1/2 of Federal social engineering departments have been defunded by this point. Show trials for Democrats and “journalists” set to begin.
        Year 6 of the trumpenhope: Policies enacted in years 2-3 finally seeing success. Economy back to 2007 levels with annual 10% growth restoring purchasing power to the middle class. Still a long way to go, but optimism and social mobility are high.
        Year 7 of the trumpenresolution: Economy fully stable. Full employment reached. College enrollment levels drop to half of what they were. The future looks bright and the indoctrination mills are empty. Trade schools flourish.
        Year 8 of the trumpenfin: The battlefield lays wasted with the bodies of lolberals and trucucks alike. One man reigns supreme over a resurgent United States. It will take another two decades to restore the country’s former glory, but Donald Jr. And Eric are up to the task.

        OldTimer

        November 30, 2016 at 12:07 am

  13. Isn’t this just a trap? Hillary was the one who wrote the anti flag burning law back in 2005…

    Jefferson

    November 29, 2016 at 5:24 pm

  14. They say that they took his Android away from him during the last three weeks of the campaign so that he couldn’t spontaneously tweet without it being reviewed. Maybe they need to go back to that system.

    If she sees it necessary to take away his Android again Ivanka is prepared to ground him to get him back on message.

    It’s the only way he’ll learn.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    November 29, 2016 at 5:49 pm

    • Who here has the standing to tell Trump what does or doesn’t need to learn?

      Andrew E.

      November 29, 2016 at 6:12 pm

    • I thought Trump was a genius who never went off message and always has a strategy? And his message is that he’s stabbing his supporters in the back by appointing a bunch of supply side ideologues. That’s what republicans do when they want to distract white working class people from the fact that they’re fucking them, they talk about things like flag burning instead. As far as I can tell flag burning has nothing to do with any contemporary news stories.

      magnavox

      November 29, 2016 at 7:41 pm

    • And really the only thing stupider than all the Donald Trump worship is Ivanka worship. That I do not understand at all.

      magnavox

      November 29, 2016 at 7:44 pm

    • Hey, magnavox, you’re disgusting ignorance rears its ugly ass again. “Supply-sider” and Trump advisor Stephen Moore:

      Donald Trump’s economic adviser Stephen Moore told a group of top Republicans last week that they now belong to a fundamentally different political party. Moore surprised some of the Republican lawmakers assembled at their closed-door whip meeting last Tuesday when he told them they should no longer think of themselves as belonging to the conservative party of Ronald Reagan.

      They now belong to Trump’s populist working-class party, he said. A source briefed on the House GOP whip meeting — which Moore attended as a guest of Majority Whip Steve Scalise — said several lawmakers told him they were taken aback by the economist’s comments.

      “For God’s sake, it’s Stephen Moore!” the source said, explaining some of the lawmakers’ reactions to Moore’s statement. “He’s the guy who started Club for Growth. He’s Mr. Supply Side economics. I think it’s going to take them a little time to process what does this all mean,” the source added of the lawmakers. “The vast majority of them were on the wrong side. They didn’t think this was going to happen.”

      ….

      Moore has spent much of his career advocating for huge tax and spending cuts and free trade. He’s been as close to a purist ideological conservative as they come, but he says the experience of traveling around Rust Belt states to support Trump has altered his politics.

      “It turned me more into a populist,” he said, expressing frustration with the way some in the Beltway media dismissed the economic concerns of voters in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan.

      “Having spent the last three or four months on the campaign trail, it opens your eyes to the everyday anxieties and financial stress people are facing,” Moore added. “I’m pro-immigration and pro-trade, but we better make sure as we pursue these policies we’re not creating economic undertow in these areas.”

      http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/11/the-party-of-reagan-is-dead.html

      Andrew E.

      November 29, 2016 at 8:56 pm

      • I am aware of that Stephen Moore comment, i read about it here: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/trumpisms-false-promises/508844/

        The author put it best, personnel, as the cliché goes, is policy. If Trump really wanted to break from Reaganite economics, why did he choose Mike Pence, an orthodox economic conservative, as his running mate and head of his transition team? Why is he taking advice from Stephen Moore?

        Trump is advocating for lower taxes (especially on the wealthy, business, and investment income) and lower regulation. That’s supply side economics, not economic populism. If he were really interested in populism he would go with personnel who have a proven track record for pursuing those policies and have been actually thinking about them for more than a month.

        We’ll see, I certainly hope I’m wrong, but Trump’s not shaping up to be what I hoped.

        Magnavox

        November 30, 2016 at 12:20 am

      • magnavox,

        There is no one with a track record of economic populism.

        map

        November 30, 2016 at 9:51 pm

      • Yes there are plenty of them. They’re called democrats.

        magnavox

        December 1, 2016 at 3:53 pm

    • Who here has the standing to tell Trump what does or doesn’t need to learn?

      Ivanka. Maybe Kellyanne Conway.

      I thought Trump was a genius who never went off message and always has a strategy?

      If you’re too weak minded to figure out how Trump can be an infallible genius who also goes wildly off message then I can only weep at your lack of intelligence and imagination.

      And his message is that he’s stabbing his supporters in the back by appointing a bunch of supply side ideologues. That’s what republicans do when they want to distract white working class people from the fact that they’re fucking them, they talk about things like flag burning instead.

      If that were the standard message Trump wouldn’t have been the first Republican to win Michigan and Pennsylvania since 1988.

      And really the only thing stupider than all the Donald Trump worship is Ivanka worship. That I do not understand at all.

      You’ll worship who Trump tells you too when he seizes dictatorial powers and one of the figures of state power you’ll bow before is Ivanka.

      Trump is advocating for lower taxes (especially on the wealthy, business, and investment income) and lower regulation. That’s supply side economics, not economic populism.

      If you had paid attention to the campaign – which you clearly didn’t – you would be aware he promised to cut taxes and deregulate during the campaign.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      November 30, 2016 at 8:57 pm

  15. If Mohammad was not real, why did the Muslims split between his son in law and his uncle? If you are making stuff up, you’d claim to be his son.

    Lot

    November 29, 2016 at 6:35 pm

    • “If you are making stuff up, you’d claim to be his son.”
      Very good point.

      Dan

      November 29, 2016 at 7:32 pm

  16. OT but I’ve noticed that Trump is already hiring a lot of Asians and Indians to high positions. This is a good strategic move to reach out to high iq minorities. If the GOP can bring a substantial amount into the fold it bodes well for the future.

    B.T.D.T.

    November 29, 2016 at 7:13 pm

  17. From a journalist on the left who’s actually worth reading:

    “You don’t need to treat every Trump tweet as 100% literal. Most of the time Trump is, pardon my French, just “bull-shitting.” He muses, he riffs, he does these extemporaneous stream-of-consciousness rants. His core supporters enjoy this, because they see him as allowing them to take part in his weird adventure game. They’re along for the ride. So if Trump muses about some nutty idea on Twitter, it doesn’t mean that he plans to actually implement this idea in terms of government policy. He could just be trying to get a rise out of people. And it usually works.”

    View story at Medium.com

    Horace Pinker

    November 29, 2016 at 7:18 pm

    • I agree with that.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      November 29, 2016 at 8:25 pm

    • I think his twitter feed is often a genuine reflection of him letting stuff get under his skin. He was obsessed with the Khan family, Alicia Mikado, and now with the fact that he lost the popular vote by such a yuuugee margin. And each time he gets obsessed he would be better off keeping his mouth shut.

      Magnavox

      November 29, 2016 at 9:34 pm

    • Wow! Finally someone on the left gets it. Meanwhile the talking heads in the MSM spend days shrieking over this BS, and so-called serious “journalists” expend countless column inches analyzing, cajoling and complaining about it . So amusing really.

      gda

      November 30, 2016 at 1:03 pm

  18. Lion is clearly trolling to up his blog traffic. I’ll bite. Lion, you are wrong and it is trivial to demonstrate. Recorded history is not even needed.

    There is always a guy in the middle. There has been a single founding guy at the middle of every new religious movement that has ever come to be. There is no reason Christianity should be any different. No religion has ever come about by committee without a guy in the middle. Someone claims to receive revelations and then it sometimes snowballs from there. We’ve seen tons of examples of new religious movements in modern history and that has been true 100% of the time, no exceptions.

    It is the human condition for there to be leaders and followers. It is not the human condition for there to be committees and followers.

    Dan

    November 29, 2016 at 7:45 pm

    • ” There has been a single founding guy at the middle of every new religious movement that has ever come to be.”

      Who founded the religion of global warming?

      If Christianity did have a founder, maybe it was Paul (or Saul).

      But no, most religions did NOT have a founder. Only “abrahamic” religions have that. Asatru, for example, has no founder myth.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      November 29, 2016 at 8:31 pm

      • Even Harold Bloom, who hates hates hates Paul, was completely incapable of making his case that Paul founded Christianity. (He believes it, but when he writes about it, he is so obviously out of his league that it is completely sad).
        Jesus founded Christianity before Adam was created. The hope was that Adam, the first man, would not make the fundamental mistake of just not caring about other people. Well, he did make that mistake. And so Christianity became, instead of the completely wonderful and joyful religion ( free of human suffering and God’s anguished response to that suffering) that it would have been if Adam had not fallen — [Christianity became] the besieged and lied-about religion that it – side by side with its brother religion Judaism – now is. Make of that what you will, but the facts are the facts.

        howitzer daniel

        November 29, 2016 at 10:40 pm

      • Al Gore, duh.

        OldTimer

        November 29, 2016 at 11:50 pm

  19. I’m not big on anti-flag burning laws, but no one is addressing the obvious question —
    since when is burning a flag “speech” anyway? Is burning a house “speech?”

    Maj

    November 29, 2016 at 7:46 pm

    • A flag is speech.

      People have burned effigies of people they don’t like for years. That is obviously speech.

      This was not policy. Chief Advisor Bannon from Breitbart is obviously pro-free-speech.

      I have zero worries that any anti-speech policy will come from Trump. Trumps smart advisors such as Bannon won’t let that happen.

      For better and for worse, Trump’s twitter has zero input from anyone not named Donald Trump. He sent it early in the morning, and his people probably weren’t even up yet.

      Hillary meanwhile sponsored an actual bill in 2005 to criminalize flag burning.

      Dan

      November 30, 2016 at 11:30 am

  20. Wanna know how Wall Street makes so much money?…

    Markowitz risk/return frontier + insider trading.

    Push out the risk i.e. derivatives…more return….legal vehicle of bank gets plastered….bailout….rinse repeat. Its a racket.

    The millitary industrial complex is similar…fund pols who want to start stupid wars….make tonsa money….fund pols who want to start stupid wars……make tonsa money….

    And if there is no threat, get an ally like the House of Saud to fund a small group like Al Qaeda or ISIS and make a pretend enemy in the WAR ON THEATRE TERRORISM.

    The Philosopher

    November 29, 2016 at 8:14 pm

    • Goldman was transformed into a holding co. to get Fed liquidity injections during the crisis. Its a f**king investment bank with no deposits at the Fed. It doesn’t contribute federal deposit insurance. Yet is gets free money from Ben Bernanke who like Friedman, thinks the Great Depression happened cos there wasn’t enough credit cards. Goldman would have been bankrupted years ago without public support and intervention.

      Most of these ‘fighter pilots’ of capitalism are actually civil servants with open ended public guarantees to gamble.

      Read about LTCM’s collapse in 1998 as well. Alan Asperger Greenspan walked around for decades talking about efficient markets and a fucking hedge fund had to be bailed out. Guy probably had a verbal IQ of a hot dog stand operator.

      Wall Street is a f**ing racket without regs because derivatives multiply risk and return, but the public keeps getting the bill and they get the return. The risk taking is intentional. Mnuchin should have his throat slit if he asks for the Volcker rule to be removed.

      The Philosopher

      November 29, 2016 at 8:24 pm

  21. Hold the phone here. . .what is speech?

    Burning a flag seems like an action to me.

    I’m not saying to outlaw it, but it’s this kind of loosey-goosey thinking that somehow made pornography into “free speech.”

    fakeemail

    November 29, 2016 at 8:21 pm

  22. Three reasons for this genius tweet:

    1) Hillary co-sponsored legislation to ban flag burning and throw people in jail for a year over it.

    2) Otis is right — it might provoke a round of flag burning and a (larger) backlash in Trump’s favor.

    3) It forces libs to return to the better angels of their nature on 1st Amendment rights. PC speech codes, alt-right Twitter bans, and talk of “fake news” are all bad for Trump and in one fell swoop he gives thought-leader libs something to think about.

    This dude fights fire with FIRE.

    Jonah

    November 29, 2016 at 8:22 pm

    • Most regulars on this blog understand that proles to Republicans are like NAMs to Democrats, essentially, a dull demographic that needs to be distracted like a baby, in order to keep its tantrum from festering. I sense his transition team is currently a disappointment-a big f/up, and he needs to keep his constituency entertained, while he tries to fix it.

      JS

      November 29, 2016 at 11:12 pm

      • No he needs to run his government in a way that actually guarantees the interests of the proles who elected him. Anti free trade, anti immigration, anti civil rights, anti feminist, anti Semitic, and anti Islam (or pro american, pro white, pro male, and pro christian to put it another way)

        Magnavox

        November 30, 2016 at 2:14 am

      • You can’t be pro-Christian but anti-Semitic. It’s an oxymoron. Jesus was a Jew.

        maga

        November 30, 2016 at 10:57 am

      • If religion made sense, it would just be called science or history.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        November 30, 2016 at 11:41 am

    • It’s actually somewhat likely that there is some kind of strategy here because it doesn’t look like it’s just Trump being thin skinned and flipping out

      Magnavox

      November 30, 2016 at 2:15 am

    • Re #3: Anti-free speech leftists just frame it as being for or against KKK lynchings, or, if there are any women present, “harassing women.” The other tactic is disingenuous selective libertarianism about how the 1st amendment only protects you from the government, etc

      snorlax

      November 30, 2016 at 2:16 am

    • Yeah. Trump really is playing 3d chess as adams says.

      The greatest master persuader in the world.

      The Philosopher

      November 30, 2016 at 4:17 am

  23. OT:

    ‘Star Wars’ Against Hate: ‘Rogue One’ Writers Get Political.

    Two of the writers who worked on “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story” jumped into the political fray on Friday with not-so subtle anti-Donald Trump messages.

    “Please note that the Empire is a white supremacist (human) organization,” screenwriter Chris Weitz tweeted. Gary Whitta, who also worked on the film, followed up by adding, “Opposed by a multi-cultural group led by brave women.”

    Both writers also changed their Twitter profile pictures to the symbol of the Rebel Alliance with a safety pin through it. The safety pin has become an anti-Trump symbol, with people wearing them to show minority groups and immigrants that they are safe with person wearing the pin.

    map

    November 29, 2016 at 10:29 pm

  24. I don’t understand how liberals can be for flag burning but against hate speech.

    It seems inconsistent to me, but I’m sure if you asked one, he would mumble something about punching up.

    ScarletNumber

    November 30, 2016 at 12:04 am

  25. I think your boy Scott Adams calls this something like “Pacing and Leading.” Trump takes the most extreme view on a contentious issue, gets the media outraged (which leads to free press for him), and secretly gets people who agree with him (or are open to him and his arguments) to like him and support him more. Then he walks the stance back, the liberals are forced to give him a little more breathing room, and the compromise doesn’t alienate him from the people who liked his hard-line stance in the first place.

    He is “selling past the close,” at this point, though, since he isn’t on the campaign trail and doesn’t need to be provocative in order to garner free press. He’s the president, so the press (while outright hostile) is going to cover his doings whether the things he says are crazy or reasonable. So yeah, he should dial it down a little. If he governs reasonably enough he might have a shot at two terms.

    Joey Junger

    November 30, 2016 at 1:49 am

  26. Ah, western naivete.

    The left does not believe in free speech, it just pretends to so it doesn’t look like a jackass. They will use whatever means possible to shut you down. A scenario where everyone uses free speech responsibility and respects each others’ right to do so does not exist.

    If you’re for free speech, and your opponent isn’t, you’re at a disadvantage. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with shutting down leftist speech, breaking up their organizations, etc.

    Jason Liu

    November 30, 2016 at 5:26 am

    • Jason — Very well said. I just submitted a similar comment that was ummm… more passionate but made a similar point.

      destructure

      November 30, 2016 at 11:37 am

    • The hard left absolutely does not believe in free speech. Many liberals, however, do believe in it. The left always advocates free speech when they’re not in complete control or when they promote unpopular ideas. But the minute they gain the upper hand, they’ll move to shut down opposing views.

      Lewis Medlock

      November 30, 2016 at 11:49 am

  27. “Trump against free speech”

    What free speech might that be? The MSM that spent the last 18 months colluding with Hillary and smearing Trump in order to rig the election? Big Social trying to censor news they don’t like by labeling it “fake”. Academics who simultaneously push radicalism and censorship on campus? The coalition of feminists, gays, muslims, blacks, illegals, marxists and every other malcontent who scapegoat and demonize heterosexual white males while claiming to be victims?

    I’m amazed you think we have free speech. Because we don’t. The game is rigged and has been for a long time. And you want to support that shit under the rubric of “free speech”? If that’s free speech then fuck free speech. Only a fool plays fair with those who won’t reciprocate. Sometimes you just need to whip their ass.

    destructure

    November 30, 2016 at 10:10 am

    • This is right.

      That’s why the alt. right Memers have been so effective. They truly understand that there is no reasoning or bargaining with the Left (who is in control). What the Left calls free speech is transparent charade.

      Doesn’t matter if they meme nazi stuff; even if they restrained themselves the Left has made clear they’d be called nazis anyway. The time for words is long past; it’s time to fight.

      fakeemail

      December 1, 2016 at 12:30 am

  28. According to Ron Paul, the burning the flag tweet was just a trap to show up the hypocrisy of the mainstream media. Hillary twice tried to pass a law against burning the flag but at that time the mainstream media did not make a big deal about what she said. Trump is just trying to highlight how hypocritical they are and they fell for it.

    DataExplorer

    December 2, 2016 at 10:24 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: