Lion of the Blogosphere

Who knew the president wasn’t allowed to talk to the Taiwanese president

We have a large amount of trade with them, we’ve sold them billions of dollars of weapons over the past decades, who knew that there’s some weird rule that the POTUS is never allowed to have a phone conversation with the POTROC?

Besides, we SHOULD be talking with them. If they want to remain independent from China and not be taken over, then that’s their right that we should support.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

December 3, 2016 at 8:09 am

Posted in Politics

171 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I agree with this statement. “China should not decide who the President of the USA may talk to.”

    Regards and goodwill blogging.

    scatterwisdom

    December 3, 2016 at 8:27 am

    • Here’s an article from behind WSJ’s wall.

      It’s by the likely dept Sec of State John Bolton from almost a year ago.

      Basically Terry Brandstad of Iowa is likely to be the China Ambassador and Dana Roarbacher Sec State with Bolton as the China hardliner.

      Brandstad has known Li of China for over 30 years.

      It’s a Trump negotiation maneuver.

      Of course the clueless Trump haters don’t get it.

      http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-u-s-can-play-a-taiwan-card-1453053872?platform=hootsuite

      The U.S. Can Play a ‘Taiwan Card’

      If China won’t back down in East Asia, Washington has options that would compel Beijing’s attention.

      Jan. 17, 2016

      Taiwan’s elections have returned the Democratic Progressive Party to power. Rolling over the incumbent Kuomintang (KMT) nationalists, the DPP won both the presidency and a legislative majority, giving it controls of both elective branches for the first time.

      President-elect Tsai Ing-wen didn’t center her campaign on attacking the KMT policy of closer relations with China, focusing instead on Taiwan’s lagging economy, but neither did she reject the bedrock DPP platform of independence from China. Her rhetoric, including her victory statement on Saturday, has been cautious. But her party’s base knows what it wants. Inevitably, therefore, East Asia warning flags are up.

      Of course, the U.S. will also have presidential elections in 2016, and most of the Republican candidates are determined to replace the vacuum that exists where America’s China policy should be. This may involve modifying or even jettisoning the ambiguous “one China” mantra, along with even more far-reaching initiatives to counter Beijing’s rapidly accelerating political and military aggressiveness in the South and East China seas.

      Repeatedly met with passivity from Washington and impotence from the region, Beijing has declared much of the South China Sea a Chinese province, designated a provincial capital, and is creating not merely “facts on the ground” but the ground itself, in the form of artificial islands on which it is constructing air and naval bases.

      Predictably, China’s partisans in the West contend that Beijing’s current economic troubles mean Xi Jinping won’t move first to provoke trouble with Ms. Tsai’s administration in Taipei. But Beijing’s ongoing reckoning with economic reality doesn’t necessarily mean it will be less assertive internationally. Authoritarian governments confronted with domestic problems have historically sought to distract their citizens by rallying nationalistic support against foreign adversaries. Who better to blame for China’s economic crash than the U.S. and pesky Taiwan?

      How Ms. Tsai would react to Mr. Xi’s provocations remains unknown. Of course China would prefer for Taiwan to fall into its lap like a ripe fruit, with its economic infrastructure and productivity intact, rather than to risk hostilities over the island. But in the period to come Beijing must consider not merely a less pliant Taiwanese government, but also America’s next president.

      Beijing knows that the weak, inattentive President Barack Obama will be in office for only one more year. Whereas even Bill Clinton ordered U.S. carrier battle groups to Taiwan’s aid in the 1996 cross-Strait crisis, few Americans today believe that Mr. Obama would do the same.

      How could Beijing’s leadership not draw the same conclusion? Washington’s current unwillingness to stand firm against Chinese belligerence in Asian waters only encourages Beijing to act before Jan. 20, 2017, perhaps especially before Ms. Tsai is inaugurated in four months. For now observers can only monitor East Asia’s geopolitical space, involving not just Taiwan but also the South and East China seas, until America’s inauguration day, praying that the Asian situation is not hopeless by then.

      For a new U.S. president willing to act boldly, there are opportunities to halt and then reverse China’s seemingly inexorable march toward hegemony in East Asia. Playing the “China card” in the Nixon Administration made sense at the time, but the reflexive, near-addictive adherence to pro-China policies since has become unwise and increasingly risky as Beijing’s isolation and backwardness have diminished.

      An alternative now would be to play the “Taiwan card” against China. America should insist that China reverse its territorial acquisitiveness, including abandoning its South China Sea bases and undoing the ecological damage its construction has caused. China is free to continue asserting its territorial claims diplomatically, but until they are peacefully resolved with its near neighbors, they and the U.S. are likewise free to ignore such claims in their entirety.

      If Beijing isn’t willing to back down, America has a diplomatic ladder of escalation that would compel Beijing’s attention. The new U.S. administration could start with receiving Taiwanese diplomats officially at the State Department; upgrading the status of U.S. representation in Taipei from a private “institute” to an official diplomatic mission; inviting Taiwan’s president to travel officially to America; allowing the most senior U.S. officials to visit Taiwan to transact government business; and ultimately restoring full diplomatic recognition.

      Beijing’s leaders would be appalled by this approach, as the U.S. is appalled by their maritime territorial aggression. China must understand that creating so-called provinces risks causing itself to lose control, perhaps forever, of another so-called province. Even were China to act more responsibly in nearby waters, of course, Taiwan’s fate would still be for its people to decide.

      Too many foreigners continue echoing Beijing’s view that Taiwan is a problem only resolvable by uniting the island and the mainland as “one China.” But Taiwan’s freedom isn’t a problem. It is an inspiration. Let Beijing contemplate that fact on the ground.

      Mr. Bolton, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, is the author of “Surrender Is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad” (Simon & Schuster, 2007).

      Rifleman

      December 4, 2016 at 7:08 am

      • Duterte Harry had a phone call w/Trump. He said that Trump praised his anti-drug efforts. But that’s his side of the conversation. I read somewhere he’ll be coming to the US for a visit but I can’t find the URL anymore.

        We must crush the drug cartels, by any means necessary.

        gothamette

        December 4, 2016 at 5:32 pm

      • Duterte Harry had a phone call w/Trump.

        He also sent a Christmas message to some people….

        Rifleman

        December 5, 2016 at 9:34 am

  2. I admit I follow politics and history closely and I never heard about this. We have a defensive alliance with Taiwan yet our President can’t directly communicate with theirs? Wtf!

    XVO

    December 3, 2016 at 8:30 am

    • Wow, I didn’t even know that we have a defensive alliance w/Taiwan. Checked it out – yer right. That makes the whole thing doubly insane. It’s fun to watch Leftism, Inc. implode.

      I don’t think the US has a formal defensive alliance w/Israel.

      gothamette

      December 3, 2016 at 3:02 pm

      • Take that anti-semites!

        OldTimer

        December 3, 2016 at 4:12 pm

    • I don’t think the US has a formal defensive alliance w/Israel.

      We don’t. Nor are American troops stationed in Israel.

      But Taiwan is barely mentioned by “isolationists” despite how much more potentially dangerous our alliance with Taiwan is for us compared to our relationship with Israel.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 3, 2016 at 6:56 pm

      • So on the one hand we have virtually every Islamic terrorist ever citing US support for Israel as one of the primary reasons for committing terrorist acts and on the other a pledge to defend Taiwan that we can bail out of the moment it no longer serves our interest.

        magnavox

        December 4, 2016 at 8:03 am

      • The Islamic terrorists would find another reason to hate us if Israel didn’t exist.

        And we’re a bunch of wussy betas if we let a few suicide bombers dissuade us, the word’s greatest superpower, from doing the right thing by Israel.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 4, 2016 at 9:16 am

      • So on the one hand we have virtually every Islamic terrorist ever citing US support for Israel as one of the primary reasons for committing terrorist acts

        So you believe Islamic terrorists are morally right to kill Americans if Muslim terrorists aren’t allowed to dictate who we are allied with.

        Your “logic” about Israel applied equally to other nations means we would have to obey ISIS, Al Qaeda, the Islamic Brotherhood, or whatever Muslim terrorist group, if they ask us to break off American relations with Greece (centuries of conflict with Turks), Russia (represses Chechen Muslims), and India (ongoing territorial dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir).

        Muslims have no right to decide who we may ally with.

        on the other a pledge to defend Taiwan that we can bail out of the moment it no longer serves our interest.

        Very stupid and reckless of you to dismiss the consequences of abandoning a defensive pact. If we don’t honor the agreement with Taiwan other nations we have military treaties with may no longer trust us to defend them.

        And why do we need to “bailout” of Israel (aside from pleasing Muslim terrorists which you think is an American strategic interest) when we have no troops stationed there and have no treaty to honor (unlike Taiwan, South Korea, Western Europe, and most other allies) with Israel if they come under attack?

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 4, 2016 at 11:07 am

      • Is it the right thing to spend money and political capital supporting a country that has a higher median standard of living than we do? I’m inclined to say that just makes us suckers.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_HDI

        And I would rather be a wuss than stupid which is what we were when we attacked Iraq and Afghanistan.

        And the US has completely failed almost every major military objective for sixty years. So I certainly hope Taiwan is not depending on US military support to mean anything. We got our asses kicked by the Chinese during the Korean war and given the general decline of the US and rise of china since then it seems unlikely that we would do any better this time around.

        magnavox

        December 4, 2016 at 1:00 pm

      • Your “logic” about Israel applied equally to other nations means we would have to obey ISIS, Al Qaeda, the Islamic Brotherhood, or whatever Muslim terrorist

        You don’t have to do everything they say but if they’re making a credible case about causation that has to enter your calculus.

        Very stupid and reckless of you to dismiss the consequences of abandoning a defensive pact

        I think you overstate your case but it certainly would not be as insignificant as I made it out to be.

        And why do we need to “bailout” of Israel (aside from pleasing Muslim terrorists which you think is an American strategic interest)

        The bailout would be to cut off aid and stop expending political capital to defend them internationally. What terrorists really want would be to undo America’s intervention in the Yom Kippur war, where the US saved Israel from almost certain annihilation (or at least it’s perceived that way).. But a cutoff of foreign aid and sanctions would be second best.

        magnavox

        December 4, 2016 at 1:08 pm

      • Mag is a loser, but I agree that the foreign aid to Israel should stop. US should also stop supporting Israel at the UN. In fact, the reason the UN Security Council attempts to pass so many anti Israel resolutions is because they know that the US will bail the UN out by vetoing it.

        Mag is also correct that the number 1 reason the US is so unpopular in the Arab/Islamic world is because of Israel, but history has also shown that it really doesn’t matter what the Arab street thinks. Arab and Islamic countries will always seek good relations with the US simply because it is in their interests to do so. Israel or no. 9-11 would never have happened if we weren’t flooding the country with Muslims.

        As for Israel’s strategic importance, I believe it may have had some the Cold War but it doesn’t really have any anymore. But the US support for Israel has always been because most Americans and virtually the entirety of the American political class believes that Israel *should* exist. It was never about strategic calculations.

        As for putting economic sanctions on Israel, I’m not really sure what grounds that would be done under. It really wouldn’t damage Israel very badly though.

        Paleocons talk about cutting off aid to Israel is really just a facade. They are stupid and think that doing so would cause the Arabs to overrun it.

        The end of US aid to Israel is inevitable, and once it stops, the Paleocons will change their tune to demanding the US stop supplying weapons to Israel. When the US eventually does stop doing so, as that is also inevitable, Israel will still be fine and the Paleocons will drop their “anti interventionism” and just demand that the US attack Israel.

        Otis the Sweaty

        December 4, 2016 at 3:57 pm

      • We shouldn’t stop supporting a friendly country because we are chicken of some Muslims. President-elect Trump has the correct answer, don’t let any more Muslims into the country.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 4, 2016 at 7:44 pm

      • And I would rather be a wuss than stupid which is what we were when we attacked Iraq and Afghanistan.

        According to you it would have been “smart” foreign policy to *not* attack Afghanistan after 911.

        And the US has completely failed almost every major military objective for sixty years.

        Defeating the Soviet Union was a foreign policy failure?

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 4, 2016 at 5:27 pm

      • We took over Iraq, it was a success.

        Just because Bush had no clue what to do with the peace doesn’t mean the war wasn’t a success.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 4, 2016 at 7:46 pm

      • You don’t have to do everything they say but if they’re making a credible case about causation that has to enter your calculus.

        What is their case, what is credible about it, and why should we help Islam even if it is credible?

        And why aren’t you calling for us to break off relations with other countries with border disputes with Muslims such as Greece, Russia, and India?

        The bailout would be to cut off aid and stop expending political capital to defend them internationally.

        70% of our $3 billion in aid to Israel goes to American arms manufacturers. Why shouldn’t we keep this military pork flowing into our defense industry? And defending them diplomatically costs us very little; the Israelis do the military fighting while all they need from us is to have our ambassadors at international forums veto anti-Israel sanctions.

        The American-Israel alliance costs America very little compared to other allies we’ve gone to the mat for.

        What terrorists really want would be to undo America’s intervention in the Yom Kippur war, where the US saved Israel from almost certain annihilation (or at least it’s perceived that way).. But a cutoff of foreign aid and sanctions would be second best.

        Our intervention served American interests because Israel was a NATO-allied proxy state in our Cold War strategy to keep the Middle East from falling under Soviet influence.

        Why should we apologize to ISIS for backing a NATO ally against a Soviet supported Arab Coalition four decades ago?

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenhower_Doctrine

        The Eisenhower Administration also saw the Middle East as being influential for future foreign policy not only regarding the United States, but also its allies. The region contains a large percentage of the world’s oil supply, and it was perceived that if it were to fall to communism, the United States and its allies would suffer immense economic consequences. Eisenhower’s protests against longtime allies — the United Kingdom and France — during the Suez Canal Crisis meant that the U.S. was the lone Western power in the Middle East and placed U.S. oil security in jeopardy as the USSR filled the power vacuum. The Eisenhower Doctrine was a backflip against the previous policy, however — the U.S. now had the burden of military action in the Middle East to itself.

        The military action provisions of the Doctrine were applied in the Lebanon Crisis the following year, when the United States intervened in response to a request by that country’s then President Camille Chamoun.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 4, 2016 at 5:45 pm

      • The end of US aid to Israel is inevitable, and once it stops, the Paleocons will change their tune to demanding the US stop supplying weapons to Israel. When the US eventually does stop doing so, as that is also inevitable, Israel will still be fine and the Paleocons will drop their “anti interventionism” and just demand that the US attack Israel.

        On one hand, if our $3 billion subsidy ended I see how greatly amusing it would be to watch Paleoconservatives twist themselves into a logical mess trying to invent something new in the Israel relationship to complain about once they see Israel doesn’t collapse.

        On the other, I’m also tempted to say we should double the subsidy just to prove to Paleoconservatives they have no political leverage over anything with Trump set to be the most pro-Israel American President of all time.

        I only disagree with Otis about protecting Israel diplomatically from sanctions – our representatives at international forums have only a few important votes to cast a year. Blocking the occasional anti-Israel resolution at the UN, or whatever the forum is, costs us nothing. If the Arab street complains they can go fuck themselves, the West owes Islam nothing.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 4, 2016 at 10:09 pm

      • We took over Iraq, it was a success.

        The first Iraq War was a very justifiable conflict for resources.

        The second could have worked if we had installed a compliant Iraqi general in the mold of Mubarak to replace Saddam as dictator.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 4, 2016 at 10:33 pm

      • But the US support for Israel has always been because most Americans and virtually the entirety of the American political class believes that Israel *should* exist. It was never about strategic calculations.

        Israel also has deep religious significance to Christians as the birthplace of their religion.

        And it’s not just an Evangelical affection, the Crusaders fought Muslims for control of Jerusalem for centuries with the strong endorsement of numerous Popes:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Jerusalem

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 4, 2016 at 10:39 pm

      • I think Paleocons already know they have no power. No need to rub it in.

        I think the US should seek good relations with Israel, I just don’t believe that the US should continue being Israel’s benefactor. Israel is a nuclear power with an advanced arms industry, there is no reason for the US to be as heavily involved over there as it is.

        US policy should be to stop selling weapons to Israel until all of its border disputes are resolved. Let’s keep ourselves out of the muck. Any problems between Israel and the Arabs need to be resolved between the 2 parties.

        Otis the Sweaty

        December 5, 2016 at 3:52 am

      • The U.S. is not heavily involved in Israel, not like we are in Korea.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 5, 2016 at 7:34 am

      • TUJ: I don’t consider the cold war a military victory since the US military failed in almost every major role it took.

        We should be spending less on weapons and take Israel’s military aid and spend it on something else, but if we were inclined we could spend it on weapons for the us instead and be better off than if we kept spending it on weapons for Israel.

        Criticism of Israel is a relatively acceptable way to criticize Jewish influence over the US. We would be much better off as a country if people could speak openly and honestly about the issue and people would have less of a reason to overstate the significance of Israel.

        I’m not sure how antagonizing all the resource rich middle Eastern countries and pushing them into the soviet sphere in order to protect a country that even it’s supporters brag about being barren and reosurcelesss makes any strategic sense whatsoever.

        Magnavox

        December 5, 2016 at 4:46 am

      • This is a huge mistake to think by being wussy betas and abandoning Israel because it’s not convenient will somehow buy his other friendships in the Middle East where they respect Alphas. That’s why our allies in the Middle East, the non-Muslim-Brotherhood Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia liked Bush a lot more than Obama whom they hate, even though Obama is more anti-Israel.

        They will get along a lot better with Trump who will recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, making him the most pro-Israel President in U.S. history.

        And who wants to be friends with a nation that abandons her friends as soon as it’s inconvenient to be friends?

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 5, 2016 at 7:53 am

      • Lion: the military in iraq completely failed to establish order and maintain a monopoly on force considered to be legitimate in the county. They basically defeated Iraq’s conventional army but were defeated by the various guerilla forces and general lawlessness.

        Magnavox

        December 5, 2016 at 4:49 am

      • Since when was turning a bunch of barbarians into a Western-style democracy ever considered a necessary victory condition for winning a war?

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 5, 2016 at 7:55 am

      • Otis: there is a huge movement under way to treat Israel the same way the world treated apartheid era South Africa

        Magnavox

        December 5, 2016 at 4:51 am

      • Israel also has deep religious significance to Christians as the birthplace of their religion.

        Christians have been manipulated. Why not care about the Christians displaced in 1948 by Israel and by the ongoing genocide of Christians in the middle East as we speak. And of course you have American Jewry demanding refugee programs for soviet jews but blocking any attempt to save middle eastern christian who are facing conditions many times more dire than even those falsely claimed for jews in the late soviet union. Utterly utterly disgusting.

        Magnavox

        December 5, 2016 at 4:58 am

      • “Christians have been manipulated”

        Yes because Jesus never existed and the religion was probably founded in Rome by Jews who wanted a religion that was more like other Roman mystery cults.

        I haven’t heard about “American Jewry” blocking Christian refugees. If Obama is doing it, wakeup call, Obama isn’t Jewish.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 5, 2016 at 7:56 am

      • ” In fact, the reason the UN Security Council attempts to pass so many anti Israel resolutions is because they know that the US will bail the UN out by vetoing it. ”

        Wrong. It’s because the SC has 10 rotating members, one or two of which is always an Arab country, and up until now they were insane on the subject of Israel. Maybe now things are different but that’s the way it was.

        The US has to support Israel in the UN. Not doing so is giving into a lynch mob.

        gothamette

        December 5, 2016 at 8:49 am

      • 1. The BDS movement is a joke. Even if every Jew and Evangelical Christian disappeared tomorrow, the US still would not put sanctions on Israel simply because the American people do not care about the Palestinians. Paleocons and Leftists wackos like to say it is because Americans don’t know because of Jewish control of the media, but the truth is that Americans do know and don’t care. There is no Jewish control of the media in Russia, China, Japan, India, etc. and all those places also do not care about the Palestinians. People DID care about Apartheid South Africa so it is an apples to oranges comparison.

        2. The sanctions aren’t what brought down Apartheid SA. They didn’t really hurt SA that badly. Apartheid collapsed from within.

        3. Arab Christians have always been Jews number 1 enemy, now they are being destroyed. That is ultimately how every enemy of the Jewish people ends up. Best you learn from their example.

        4. US support for Israel was always mainly about values plus Americas general philo semitism, but Israel did help the US strategically during the Cold War. Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Iran under the Shah were always going to be pro American no matter what and Israel was a good counterweight to the Arab nationalists states of Egypt, Syria and Iraq. Nasser’s Egypt and Baath Syria/Iraq would never have directly aligned with the US even because those states were rivals of Saudi Arabia. Israel’s victories in the 1956, 1967 and 1973 wars greatly increased US power in the region because it decisively showed the nationalist Arab states that only the US could protect them from Israel.

        5. Something I’ve noticed is that people who like Israel insist that Israel is/was a strategic asset and people who dislike Israel claim the opposite. The truth is that Israel has been both an asset and a burden. The US should end military aid, weapons sales and diplomatic support but it really won’t make a difference: Israel will still kick the Muslim’s ass and the Muslims will still blame the US. As Eisenhower discovered back in the 50s, the Arab Islamic world sees anything short of allying with them against Israel as support for Israel.

        6. I thought that you were TruCon scum, it turns out you are merely PaleoCon scum. My apologies. I don’t like PaleoCons, but you aren’t as low a form of human life as TruCons are.

        Goth: “Wrong. It’s because the SC has 10 rotating members, one or two of which is always an Arab country, and up until now they were insane on the subject of Israel. Maybe now things are different but that’s the way it was.”

        Those resolutions wouldn’t be proposed if they didn’t know that the US would bail them out with a veto. The US should just abstain and tell the UK, French, Russians and Chinese: okay, now you enforce it. The anti Israel stuff at the UN would cease immediately.

        Otis the Sweaty

        December 5, 2016 at 12:15 pm

      • The Christian stuff is propaganda from Jew haters, and Arab Christians are often among the Jew haters, as they practice a more primitive form of Christianity and haven’t evolved into the Jew-loving Christians of the United States. But in no country in the Middle East are Arab Christians better off than in Israel.

        http://observer.com/2015/03/its-hard-to-be-a-christian-arab-in-israel-but-not-because-of-jews/

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 5, 2016 at 12:35 pm

      • Arab Christians were amongst those displaced upon Israel’s creation. The PFLP was created by an Arab Christian. Arab Christians are way more anti semitic than Arab Muslims.

        Saying that Arab Christians are better off in Israel is like saying that South African blacks were better off under apartheid: it’s both true and irrelevant. People want to be ruled by their own and Palestinian Christians wanted to live in Palestine, not Israel.

        Otis the Sweaty

        December 5, 2016 at 1:04 pm

      • The US should end military aid, weapons sales and diplomatic support but it really won’t make a difference: Israel will still kick the Muslim’s ass and the Muslims will still blame the US.

        Good points but so long as we maintain a defensive treaty with Taiwan, have troops protecting South Korea, and remain a member of NATO we should maintain diplomatic and indirect military links with Israel since we have fewer resources invested in Israel compared to our other major allies. There is nothing the Muslims can do about our relationship with Israel if we cutoff Muslim immigration and profile existing Muslim communities.

        I don’t agree the UN wouldn’t pose some problems to Israel. The Arabs could always bribe the Europeans and Chinese with oil contracts in exchange for harsh sanctions. Even if its a surmountable problem for Israel there’s no reason to make their position more precarious than it is.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 5, 2016 at 5:39 pm

      • Christians have been manipulated.

        Who manipulated the Crusaders to wage war for control of Jerusalem?

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Jerusalem

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 5, 2016 at 5:41 pm

    • It reminds me of when Trump learned the hard way that pro life abortion is murder people don’t think that women who procure abortions should face any punishment whatsoever.

      magnavox

      December 4, 2016 at 1:15 pm

      • Yes, to the extent the pro-life movement thinks the women to procure abortions shouldn’t face any punishment by law (assuming abortion is illegal), they are disgusting hypocritical fools and they’re wrong.

        Andrew E.

        December 4, 2016 at 9:19 pm

  3. The US should take advantage from the pro-US government currently in Taiwan. Tsai Ing-Wen might be a lesbian and pro-gay rights, but more than that she needs the US in order to not end up in jail in case of unification with the motherland. Trump could leverage this in order to further US interests in the region and to keep China on edge before meeting with them in Beijing to renegociate some of those trade deals.

    HBDfan

    December 3, 2016 at 8:38 am

    • Reunification is highly unlikely. Hostility between the mainland and Taiwan have been winding down for decades. The status quo will hold for the foreseeable future.

      Jason Liu

      December 3, 2016 at 4:27 pm

    • A childless woman is the ultimate representative of degeneracy. Taiwan’s TFR is 1.1, below the Communist regime with their one child policy. Such a society is sick, not worthy defending.

      Hepp

      December 4, 2016 at 12:52 am

      • All of the Asian countries have low birthrates, they are not sick societies. Perhaps, if I knew Chinese, Taiwan might be a better place to live than the United States.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 4, 2016 at 9:08 am

      • Yes, we should double the number of people in Asian nations over the next ten years so we can have 4 billion instead of 2 billion people burdening the natural resources there. Reproduction uber alles!

        I take your point though. TFR = 1.1 is highly correlated with feminism and modernity. The good news is that it is self correcting.

        OldTimer

        December 4, 2016 at 1:39 pm

      • If a non-human population collapsed 50% in one generation, we’d consider that an ecological disaster. We should think the same for human societies. Asian societies have some of the highest suicide rates of the world, and are some of the least happy. They have chosen vapid materialism over what is meaningful in life.

        Hepp

        December 4, 2016 at 2:12 pm

      • Just let evolution do it’s thing

        Yakov

        December 4, 2016 at 3:35 pm

      • Why have the goalposts changed? Why does it now take two kids to be happy?

        Also, I disagree that we would consider a species halving to be an ecological collapse. Maybe if it is the last 1000 silver rhinos then yes, but 1 billion people with 70% living in poverty by Western standards and already a strain on their natural habitat. Don’t think so.

        Also can we please stop with this materialism canard? It’s not materialism to want a house, a car, three meals per day, the occasional night out, booze, fuck even an iPhone or some sort of smartphone, maybe an air conditioner. Are these things humans can never live without? Sure, but are you really going to claim the quality of life was higher during the Middle Ages or the early 20th century? Yes people may have been spiritually more content, but then maybe we should roll back all of modern science, it just causes people emotional discomfort as opposed to believing G-d made the world 5000 years ago.

        Safe spaces are for pussy liberals not hard nosed realists.

        OldTimer

        December 4, 2016 at 11:22 pm

      • Agree w/Old Timer. Japan is doing quite well with a sub replacement level birth rate. Whenever they want to raise it, they will. Japan has two eugenics laws. Japan is not the country that it’s portrayed to be. Otis would love it: it’s fascistic, efficient, and run by a government-gangster-crony-capitalism cartel.

        Japanese are also strong Buddhists. This is not the Japan we see portrayed in the US media, but the US media is made up of idiots.

        gothamette

        December 5, 2016 at 8:52 am

      • “doing quite well” – these are the naughtiest “weasel words” I’ve seen today. As for OldTimer:

        Why have the goalposts changed? Why does it now take two kids to be happy?

        You must be new here.

        Samson J.

        December 5, 2016 at 5:06 pm

  4. I consider myself extremely literate in US foreign policy and I had no idea.

    Jonathan

    December 3, 2016 at 8:46 am

  5. He can talk to her if he wants, but it isn’t the right move. Tsai is the closest thing East Asia has to an SJW leader. And I’m not talking from a Chinese nationalist point of view. Forget the separatism issue.

    Tsai pushes Han guilt over colonizing Taiwan, openly disparages masculinity, and tries to push LGBT degeneracy on Taiwan. She’s despicable. A white campus feminist in Asian skin. If Trump wants to talk trade/currency then just do that directly. Why empower the SJW?

    I take the Russian viewpoint on this. Countries around the world should form an alliance against the postmodern, equality-and-diversity West. China’s government and many of its citizens are against these values, and should be courted by Trump instead of being fashioned into the next geopolitical boogeyman over a hypothetical conflict in the South China Sea that will probably never happen.

    Jason Liu

    December 3, 2016 at 8:57 am

    • I agree that China is a good force against modernity. In principle , I would support good relations with China but the fact that the Left and elites are losing their shit over this tells me that maybe we should have bad relations with China.

      I find Chinese nationalism pretty annoying. The US supports Taiwan and Japan and always will. If the Chinese have a problem with that, they can go to Hell.

      Otis the Sweaty

      December 3, 2016 at 1:47 pm

      • Why? Chinese nationalism isn’t that different from Japanese nationalism. Both are models for the world.

        The left is losing it because of Trump, not China. If Obama had done this they’d be calling him a champion of democracy.

        Jason Liu

        December 3, 2016 at 3:54 pm

      • Japan isn’t colonizing us and doesn’t try to tell us who we can and can’t talk to. If China wants to colonize Africa that’s fine, but I’m sick of them colonizing white countries.

        Otis the Sweaty

        December 3, 2016 at 8:39 pm

    • “A white campus feminist in Asian skin”

      She’s a banana. Yellow on the outside, white on the inside. I had no idea Taiwan had become degenerate. Anschluss it is then. Back to the loving, cisgendered arms of the motherland for decadent Taiwan.

      prolier than thou

      December 3, 2016 at 2:46 pm

      • You make me laff, prolier.

        gothamette

        December 3, 2016 at 3:04 pm

      • Banana? Usually these people take the Western ideas and adapt them to their own needs–the Japanese were the first masters at this.

        I think the Taiwanese like having democracy and not being ruled by the PRC.

        SFG

        December 3, 2016 at 8:22 pm

    • “He can talk to her if he wants, but it isn’t the right move.”

      The point isn’t that the leader of Taiwan is an SJW, but that PEOTUS and later POTUS can talk to whomever he wishes, and the Chinese can FOAD.

      Capish?

      gothamette

      December 3, 2016 at 3:04 pm

      • Read: “He can talk to her if he wants”

        Beijing knows nothing will come of this. The one protesting the most isn’t China. It’s the American media.

        Jason Liu

        December 3, 2016 at 4:11 pm

      • It’s actually ‘Capisce’ or ‘capisci’, Italian for ‘understand’. I like to think I am honoring my occult Italian heritage as a hemi-Ashkenazi–check out the genetic studies. 😉

        SFG

        December 4, 2016 at 4:13 pm

      • Ne sono consevapole, Io non parlavo italiano, parlavo “Newyorkese.”

        Kapish?

        gothamette

        December 4, 2016 at 7:55 pm

    • If this is empowering the SJWs why are they so angry and upset about it?

      Jay Fink

      December 3, 2016 at 5:09 pm

    • “Tsai is the closest thing East Asia has to an SJW leader. ”

      Yeah but who cares? I’m not concerned with transexual bathroom access in Taiwan. We have trade and defense issues, plus the value of leverage that Taiwan gives us over China.

      Mike Street Station

      December 4, 2016 at 1:14 pm

    • Interesting, I googled this, looks like 100K just took to the streets in Taiwan now to protest gay marriage

      https://www.rt.com/in-motion/369169-same-sex-marriage-taiwan/

      My worst nightmare of the Trump presidency is that American patriots once again start dying for the “values” that make them so pessimistic about their own society.

      Hepp

      December 4, 2016 at 7:05 pm

      • It’s an internal Taiwanese issue, the U.S. shouldn’t be for or against it, and we should support whichever side wins.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 4, 2016 at 8:04 pm

      • “It’s an internal Taiwanese issue, the U.S. shouldn’t be for or against it, and we should support whichever side wins.”

        Sure, because we’ve seen that liberalism is no way an expansionist ideology. The truth is that once a country becomes SJW, it becomes a global menace. Sweden funded the ANC and destroyed South Africa, Merkel is trying to inundate Eastern Europe with refugees. We don’t need East Asians to follow whites and similarly destroy themselves.

        Hepp

        December 4, 2016 at 8:31 pm

  6. Muh protocol.

    IHTG

    December 3, 2016 at 9:19 am

  7. Update: It seems like Tsai called Trump, not the other way around. She was only calling to congratulate him (belatedly) on winning the election, which is a formality tons of leaders have done.

    In the proper context, this probably isn’t as big a deal as the media is making it seem.

    Jason Liu

    December 3, 2016 at 9:20 am

  8. I had no idea about this either and I am also a news junky.

    Now the MSM’s hair is on fire because Trump didn’t ask permission from the
    cheese eating surrender monkeys at the State Department. Screw them.
    Who cares if it pisses off the commies in China.

    Why is China calling the shots on who we talk to anyway????
    Cause they’ll unleash the Norks on us if we don’t suck up to them? Really.
    We’ll unleash Mad Dog Mattis in return and see who wins that pissing contest.

    What will the Chinese do, stop selling cheap crap to Wal-Mart?
    Sell all their T-bills at once, so we can buy them back at a huge discount?

    The sooner Donald drains this swamp of these cucks and globalists the better.
    That’s why we hired him.

    Every day under President-elect Trump life gets better and better.

    Watch this crap from CNN:
    CNN pundit slams Trump’s Taiwan policy misstep: ‘The United States is not his toy’

    Nedd Ludd

    December 3, 2016 at 9:22 am

    • Relax. These guys are oafs.

      gothamette

      December 3, 2016 at 3:05 pm

    • Technically, I think China’s nukes only reach the West Coast. So y’all can watch the hipsters in San Francisco get nuked. 😉

      SFG

      December 3, 2016 at 8:23 pm

      • Yes, and the anchor baby Chinese who now colonize the west coast.

        OldTimer

        December 4, 2016 at 2:46 am

  9. Who knew the US president wasn’t allowed to talk to the Taiwanese president? I did. Of course, the US president still hasn’t talked to the Taiwanese president. Trump hasn’t been sworn in yet.

    Not talking to Taiwan was another one of Jimmy Carter’s asinine policies. I guess he thought the Soviets and Chicomms were too much to handle at once. So he opted for stalemate over Taiwan. Basically, the Chicomms believe there should be no other Chinese but them. Therefore, they demand no one recognizes Taiwan as a legitimate state… or else. The UN doesn’t even recognize Taiwan because PRC wouldn’t like it. In the meantime, they bide their time and gather strength until the day they can take Taiwan… a la the Sudetenland. The irony of course is that Taiwan wasn’t even historically populated by Chinese but Austronesian aboriginals.

    China is very clever about flying under the radar until overwhelming victory is assured… per Sun Tzu. China has created this revisionist history taught in the schools in which they were colonized and humiliated by the west. It’s a canard designed to instill racial grudge in the population and justify aggressive expansionism. They’ve repeatedly tried to flip other countries to their sphere of influence by fomenting communist revolutions throughout post-war Asia i.e. Korea, Vietnam, etc. They backed off when they realized the US wouldn’t give them easy victories.

    China also invades and conquers small strategic pieces of “disputed” territory whenever the world is distracted. They took control of Tibet in 1950. And they invaded an Indian territory when the US was distracted by the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. The thing is, it’s not just Cold War shenanigans. They still do it. More recently they’ve taken advantage of Americas middle eastern distractions to snatch strategic islands from Vietnam and the Phillipines. That’s part of why has Duterte so pissed off. They invaded Scarborough Shoals and that gutless puke Obama neglected to back the Phillipines per the Mutual Defense Treaty.

    Trump is right to pivot from Eastern Europe and the middle east to Asia. If Putin is wise he’ll accept Trump’s overtures and play straight rather than exploiting them. I suspect we’ll start to see Putin normalize relations with Europe and the US while trying not to antagonize China.

    https://www.amazon.com/Hundred-Year-Marathon-Strategy-Replace-Superpower/dp/1250081343

    destructure

    December 3, 2016 at 10:25 am

    • The “pivot to Asia” was actually initiated by Hillary during her tenure at the State Dept. and by the Obama administration. It’s a general US foreign policy thing, not a Trump initiative.

      Tom

      December 3, 2016 at 2:17 pm

    • Very good analysis in my view. China is no friend of the West. Time to play some hardball with them.

      The lioncub

      December 3, 2016 at 2:41 pm

    • The isolationist Chinese are not very aggressive and will never be the next Golden Horde or even the Japanese of WWII.

      The world’s population is very much Alpha-phone, when you insert China into the scene.

      JS

      December 3, 2016 at 7:43 pm

      • Actually, Chinese tend to be much more aggressive than Japanese. And while Asians tend to have lower violent crime rates that shouldn’t be taken as an indication of how aggressive or dangerous a state is. For example, 3rd world countries tend to have higher violent crime rates and pose a danger to individuals but lack the organization to pose a national threat.

        destructure

        December 5, 2016 at 10:07 am

  10. This pearl clutching is hilarious.

    The NYT is fine with a Cuban detente but a private citizens must never be allowed to have a 10 minute phone call with a friendly democracy.

    ‘OOOO The red Chinese won’t like it’ Too bad, they don’t get to veto who an American can talk to. This relationship was long over due for a reset.

    Lion of the Turambar

    December 3, 2016 at 10:40 am

    • You hit the nail on the head. What do PROC and Cuba have in in common with the MSM? They are dirty, filthy Communists.

      Two in the Bush

      December 3, 2016 at 2:18 pm

      • HBD states that East Asians are docile in comparison to Whites and blacks. It’s quite ironic that their societies are repressive.

        JS

        December 3, 2016 at 7:50 pm

      • JS — HBD doesn’t “state” anything of the kind. It observes differences in behavior. Asians tend to have lower violent crime rates due to higher impulse control or self regulation. But Asians are quite capable of committing extreme violence when sanctioned by an authority such as the state. One would actually expect those with higher impulse control to have more orderly and repressive societies. So there’s no irony at all.

        destructure

        December 5, 2016 at 10:07 am

    • I enjoy the phrase “pearl clutching.”

      gothamette

      December 4, 2016 at 5:36 pm

  11. Do you think Trump is manufacturing this controversy?

    It’s clear the more Americans hear about it, the more they will love Trump and despise the DC foreign policy establishment.

    owentt

    December 3, 2016 at 10:42 am

  12. Can’t wait for him to tweet that He had just got a call from David Duke congratulating him on his victory. Heads would explode. If they’re concerned with Taiwan due to Chinese relations, what gives with our courting of the expat from the Himalayan mountain?

    K.l. Asher

    December 3, 2016 at 10:43 am

  13. I believe the official US policy on RoC is that it doesn’t exist, so there isn’t a recognized President of Taiwan to talk to. Officially he’s not much more than the Emperor Norton I who used to run around San Francisco.

    massivefocusedinaction

    December 3, 2016 at 11:28 am

  14. I believe the point the Left was trying to make, in an extremely garbled way, is that Trump is not supposed to *recognize* Taiwan. Of course Trump speaking to their President isn’t an official recognition and we de facto already recognize them as an independent nation with defense treaties, trade, weapons sales, and diplomatic exchanges.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    December 3, 2016 at 11:51 am

    • I do get that point, but even that point is horseshit, by left wing standards.

      I sometimes wonder whether there will be a rebellion in the ranks against Leftism, Inc., the way there was a rebellion on our side against Conservatism, Inc.

      They are making utter fools of themselves. Dinnergate, Carrier, now this. At some point someone with sense on the Dem/Left side is going to give up in disgust and say they’ve had enough.

      gothamette

      December 3, 2016 at 3:08 pm

      • No it won’t happen. The left’s strategy has been to promote chaos as a means to winning. The second someone stands up as an adult in the room, they’ve already ceased being left and have made the transition to be a Trumpgmatist (Trump Pragmatist).

        As a side note, these portmanteaus never get old, just like every scandal now has “gate” attached to it.

        Is this Chinagate or Taiwangate?

        Can’t wait for the wall related scandals. We can call them bordergate.

        OldTimer

        December 3, 2016 at 4:25 pm

      • If we kill the drug cartel members we can call it exterminategate.

        gothamette

        December 4, 2016 at 5:34 pm

    • They are making utter fools of themselves. Dinnergate, Carrier, now this.

      Dinnergate is my favorite. At least until they top that, which shouldn’t be long.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 3, 2016 at 6:18 pm

  15. I was bewildered when the Yahoo app on my phone popped up an alert with a news story about how Trump talked to the Taiwanese president and it’s going to cause an outrage. Talk about fake news.

    Hermes

    December 3, 2016 at 12:05 pm

  16. More fake news from CNN:

    “It is perhaps the first major sign of the unpredictability that Trump has vowed to bring to long-held US relations with the rest of the world.”

    Oh, really, CNN? Can you point us to the Trump quotation in which he said “I promise to bring unpredictability to long-held US relations with the rest of the world?”

    Hermes

    December 3, 2016 at 12:09 pm

  17. Is this some quirk of the one China policy?

    OldTimer

    December 3, 2016 at 12:58 pm

  18. CNN is on a crusade against Trump.

    If Trump donated money to the vets or homeless, they would say it wasn’t enough money.

    Can’t wait for ‘real news’ to be replaced by ‘fake news’.

    The Philosopher

    December 3, 2016 at 1:47 pm

  19. “Who knew the president wasn’t allowed to talk to the Taiwanese president”

    Hillary Clinton knows this.

    mikeca

    December 3, 2016 at 2:05 pm

    • Hillary also knows how to and is willing to sell state secrets.

      Andrew E.

      December 3, 2016 at 5:21 pm

    • Lol! Cuckiest comment of the week.

      Peterike

      December 3, 2016 at 5:58 pm

    • How much money did the Clinton Foundation take from Saudi Arabia, mikeca?

      Qatar?

      Isis much?

      gothamette

      December 3, 2016 at 10:55 pm

      • How much money does Trump make from Saudi Arbia, Qatar, or Russia? How much money does Trump owe to Saudi Arbia, Qatar, or Russia?

        Oh, we have no idea, because Trump refuses to release any information about his business. The Clinton released all the donor info for their charitable foundation (from which they received no benefit) while Trump keeps all the information on his financial deals secret even though the money goes directly into his pocket.

        mikeca

        December 4, 2016 at 9:22 pm

      • HRC didn’t release the transcripts of her speeches. Nor her health records.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 5, 2016 at 1:00 am

      • “(from which they received no benefit)”

        Except power and access to power. Thats’ no small thing.

        The ability to order people around as if they are pawns on a chessboard is quite an aphrodisiac. “We came, we saw, he died.”

        I do agree that Trump will have to sever ties w/his businesses before taking office, although even that won’t please you.

        gothamette

        December 5, 2016 at 8:44 am

  20. I hope Trump will focus on domestic priorities like immigration instead of getting bogged down internationally.

    How many Americans want to go to war with China to defend Taiwan? How many Americans know the difference between Taiwan and Thailand?

    Tom

    December 3, 2016 at 2:26 pm

    • Just because the average American is a stupid prole doesn’t mean that Asia isn’t important.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      December 3, 2016 at 3:00 pm

      • How many proles do you think we should be willing to sacrifice for Taiwan? We lost almost 60,000 in Vietnam and hundreds of thousands wounded. That seems almost unfathomable today, and it would be a colossal waste.

        Tom

        December 3, 2016 at 5:24 pm

      • We don’t need troops on the ground, but we do not show China we mean business. If we continue to appease them and let them walk all over us they WILL eventually reach our shores. They already have with the anchor babies being born here and the stealing of our corporate manufacturing secrets. The Mandarins are interested in world domination and they have been slowly biding their time and building their power. They won’t strike until they’ve attained absolute power and can crush us. We must not allow them to reach this level.

        OldTimer

        December 4, 2016 at 2:51 am

      • We already do have troops on the ground there in Asia. Tens of thousands of them in Korea, Japan, etc. Defending places like Taiwan will involve troops. How many troops do you think we should be willing to sacrifice to defend Taiwan et al?

        Anchor babies and corporate manufacturing secrets involve domestic policy, not military or foreign policy. We don’t need to sacrifice troops overseas to stop anchor babies and corporate leakage.

        Tom

        December 4, 2016 at 12:10 pm

    • Most Americans don’t seem to realize that the next large scale war will come from tensions over ideological and moral differences, with land and money being the vector, and not the cause.

      The modern world has an added layer of complexity on top of historical squabbles over territory and power. If the west continues down its path of leftist/social justice agitation, it will eventually embroil itself in a conflict with one or more non-western powers.

      Jason Liu

      December 3, 2016 at 4:25 pm

      • Hell, it already almost happened with Russia. If Hillary came to power we would be fighting World War III for the sake of Pussy Riot’s ability to take a shit in an orthodox church and for trannies to have gay parades in St Petersburg square.

        OldTimer

        December 4, 2016 at 2:53 am

      • “If Hillary came to power we would be fighting World War III for the sake of Pussy Riot’s ability to take a shit in an orthodox church and for trannies to have gay parades in St Petersburg square.”

        Thread winner!

        Mike Street Station

        December 4, 2016 at 1:22 pm

    • How many Americans know the difference between Taiwan and Thailand?

      Given how rarely they mention Taiwan, with whom we have a long-standing defensive treaty, “isolationists” had no idea Taiwan existed either.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 3, 2016 at 7:03 pm

  21. Commenter on DailyKos speaking in defense of Sanctuary Cities:

    “I think all those that voted for Trump in rural areas might not have spent much time in a large city. There are a lot of immigrants. Often dating back 150+ years. I’ve lived in DC. Spent a ton of time in Chicago and New Orleans. Even to this day you know parts of the town are Irish or Polish. And yes African American or Hispanic. Know what, I found that to be pretty darn cool.”

    Can’t make this stuff up folks.

    Even after this election, libs still think that Trump voters are just a bunch of country bumpkins despite the clear fact that the overwhelming majority of Trump voters are from suburbs and cities and the fact that Trump won the white college vote decisively.

    Otis the Sweaty

    December 3, 2016 at 2:34 pm

    • Midwesterners are bumpkins from a New Yorker viewpoint. However, I would rather live next to a Midwesterner, than any of our proles from nearby Staten Island, Long Island, NJ or even closer, Brooklyn!

      JS

      December 3, 2016 at 10:47 pm

      • Otis,

        What are your Kos buddies saying about Standing Rock? Are they giddy with joy about the victory?

        gothamette

        December 4, 2016 at 9:09 pm

      • Yes, but I don’t get it. Isn’t it a victory against Obama?

        Otis the Sweaty

        December 5, 2016 at 3:21 pm

      • Not many Manhattanites voted for Trump. Proles in the outer boroughs, especially Staten Island were fervent supporters of the orange man.

        JS

        December 5, 2016 at 4:43 pm

  22. Different commenter from the same DKos thread:

    “Then we get to the ‘immigrants are stealing our taxes myth.’ I don’t think humans are naturally generous. We are not naturally going to give away our food to a stranger if it means that we or out children will go hungry. There is always so quid pro quo. We let kids and young adults rob us blind because there is a benefit to having a educated and cultured next generation.

    We see this with Germany which is not accepting immigrants simply out of kindness. They know they are currently the powerhouse of Europe and they need labor to continue to do so. This is the same in Texas, which has a per capita GPD higher than Germany and the US on average. Texas need workers, Texas needs educated workers. Immigrants come in, do an honest day work. We educate the kids, given the one with ability scholarships to college, and we end up with cities like Houston as the number two city in terms of engineering capacity. All without having to be overly depending on thing like H1B visas. In fact one report says we are half as dependent on such visas as California, which, like all other states, do not provide an opportunity for a free higher education to undocumented students.

    Trump election has shown us that there is a reserve of white people who normally aren’t productive. In this election they did drag themselves away from their beer and American football to vote. It may be that if Trump did cut welfare some of these white people would also have to do an honest days work for minimum wage. Maybe Trump would not have to staff his golf courses with immigrants, some of which are surely undocumented. Maybe some of these Trump voters would even become semi skilled and the Trump family could make their products in the US.”

    Otis the Sweaty

    December 3, 2016 at 2:48 pm

    • The people making these comments… they don’t get to go back. They get to die on American soil (and not from old age) for their insolent blood curdling rhetoric. We are now beyond the point of “peaceful” resolution.

      These are Stalin’s useful idiots. We may as well put them out of their misery in a humane way rather than having them die in some third world gulag slowly (you know they will recreated Venezuela wherever they go).

      OldTimer

      December 3, 2016 at 4:33 pm

  23. The fact that Trump doesn’t know about or follow these weird rules is one of the things I love about him. He is a true outsider.

    Jay Fink

    December 3, 2016 at 5:11 pm

    • Who says he (or at least his people) didn’t know? I figured he was just trolling China. Messing with them for strategic reasons. That’s classic Trump. People will say, “What? That’s reckless and irresponsible!” Really? Reckless and irresponsible for someone who hasn’t even taken office yet to receive a phone call congratulating him on his victory? Pffft. China, MSM and liberals are all making fools of themselves.

      destructure

      December 4, 2016 at 3:41 am

      • The Taiwan lady prez called him, not the other way around. What was he to do, hang up on her?

        It’s bizarre that the left is losing its shit over a pol who they normally would support, a Hillary type globalista, LGBT friendly, etc.

        Who knew that Taiwan had a single-never married cat lady as its prez? The things I learn on this blog!

        gothamette

        December 4, 2016 at 9:07 pm

      • Actually, news is that it was a pre-arranged phone call and Trump knew what he was doing.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 5, 2016 at 1:00 am

      • OK, I’ll dispense with this notion that Trump didn’t know what he was doing. Trump knew exactly what he was doing.

        (I’ve been replaying my “Greatest Hits of the Campaign mashup.)

        gothamette

        December 5, 2016 at 8:41 am

  24. When will Lion take on Sarah Palin’s moronic “muh free trade” comments?

    Peterike

    December 3, 2016 at 6:00 pm

    • Palin is technically correct that the Carrier deal is crony capitalism. But it is crony capitalism in the service of saving good American jobs. That is the good kind of crony capitalism.

      Obama’s crony capitalism is all about rewarding donors and facilitating “muh free trade”. Fuck that shit.

      Otis the Sweaty

      December 3, 2016 at 8:45 pm

  25. Steve Sailer has intelligent comments about this: http://www.unz.com/isteve/trump-china-and-taiwan/

    Sounds to me like this is a bit of a dumb move on Trump’s part. To the extent that NYT is trying to use it to stir up a controversy and make Trump look bad, that is incredibly irresponsible: they’re playing around with diplomatic controversies between two nuclear powers.

    Greg Pandatshang

    December 3, 2016 at 6:18 pm

  26. Even if Trump did something Hillary or Obama did or would have done, liberals would be pointing fingers at Trump and start fuming on FB. I’ve noticed liberals who were against NAFTA are now supportive of TPP because Trump is against it. Clinton and Obama don’t want to legalize gay marriage at the federal level and want to leave it up to the states, Trump feels the same way, yet Trump is seen as a homophobe for holding the same view of gay marriage. The media is making everything Trump does into a “crisis” while their ratings shoot up as liberals and conservatives yell at each other. “Fake News” is the new “Homophobe!” Or “Racists!” label used to unfairly silence others on the other side of the political spectrum.

    Bobo

    December 3, 2016 at 10:30 pm

    • They can only cry wolf so much before people ignore them. Most people already do.

      destructure

      December 4, 2016 at 3:33 am

  27. Lion,

    Warning: you have to talk about Standing Rock. Because this is yet another Obama screw up tar baby that will land in Trump’s lap.

    The NY Times:

    “The project was delayed in September when the Obama administration temporarily blocked it from crossing under the Missouri River. And this month, President Obama called on both sides to show restraint and revealed that the Army Corps of Engineers was considering an alternative route for the project.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/24/us/dakota-pipeline-sophia-wilansky.html

    Naturally the most seriously injured of the non-native demonstrators was a Jew from the Bronx. Would have to be. God said so.

    gothamette

    December 3, 2016 at 10:59 pm

    • Wow, this really is an Obama disaster:

      http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/11/us/tribes-protest-oil-pipeline-north-dakota.html?_r=0

      “It has been a month since the United States government made an unprecedented intervention in this high-plains battle over the environment, energy development and tribal rights by temporarily blocking the 1,170-mile Dakota Access pipeline from crossing under the Missouri River.”

      US Government = Obama.

      This is all his fault. What a prick.

      gothamette

      December 3, 2016 at 11:31 pm

    • Naturally the most seriously injured of the non-native demonstrators was a Jew from the Bronx.

      Remember the Kent State deaths?

      All Jews. Odd.

      Rifleman

      December 4, 2016 at 6:59 am

      • The Jews are outliers for good and for bad. It’s genetic. My grandfather left Brooklyn to fight Franco, I’m back in Brooklyn, am an admirer of Pinochet and ready to take up arms for caudillo Trump. This is how the Jews are.

        Yakov

        December 4, 2016 at 11:05 am

      • Yakov, respectfully. The issue is too many of the outliers lean left. Why should they receive different treatment from Muslims? Most Muslims aren’t suicide bombers either and are mostly tax paying citizens.

        OldTimer

        December 4, 2016 at 1:51 pm

      • Because American Jews are dying off and won’t exist in 100 years. Muslims are still flooding into the country.

        Otis the Sweaty

        December 4, 2016 at 3:59 pm

      • OldTimer: last time Hitler tried it he got his country split in half for 50 years. Beware. 😉

        Seriously, you have a point. I think the guys at Breitbart may be the main thing keeping us from an American pogrom sometimes. I guess one of the big differences is we are not currently at war with Israel, and there really aren’t random Jews blowing Americans up every so often. The Jewish problems are mostly left-wing politics, which only right-wing Americans think are a bad thing, whereas everyone can agree random stabbings are bad.

        SFG

        December 4, 2016 at 4:16 pm

      • That was odd.

        The Army Corps of Engineers has caved on Standing Rock. Big victory for the forces of left wing anarchy, but good that it gets fixed up before Trump takes over.

        gothamette

        December 4, 2016 at 5:33 pm

      • Mate, there is a fundamental difference between Jews and Muslims. Jews don’t aspire to impose Halacha on a host nation, Muslims do want to impose Sharia. Jewish religion is directed inward, Islam outward. There are many left-wing Gentiles and the absence of the Jews wouldn’t make much of a difference most of the time. Right now Europe isn’t being destroyed by Jews. I beleive this point has been made by Lion and othetd on numerous occasions.

        This having been said, it’s up to the host nations to want Jews or not. Does a nation want to let in a minority group that will likely become that nation’s elite and dominate it? Do the benefits that the Jews bring outweigh the problems? I, as a Jew, looking at things objectively can see why many would want to get rid of us. Why does a country like Lithuania or Romania for example, need Jews today? The Jews are so far superior to the natives that they would be running and owning everything. It’s not anybody’s fault and doesn’t make anybody bad, it’s just how things are. For example, I think Germany should’ve never let Jews in after the war. History has proven that these two nations don’t get alone, why recreate the problem situation? Jews have their own country today and there is no reason for any country to host them if they are problematic to that particular country. The superiority of the Jews has been a major reason for antisemitism through the ages. This is my common sense understanding.

        Yakov

        December 4, 2016 at 6:39 pm

      • “Jews have their own country today”

        But it’s a doomed country once its enemies have nuclear weapons.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 4, 2016 at 7:48 pm

      • “Jews don’t aspire to impose Halacha on a host nation, Muslims do want to impose Sharia. ”

        Right, but the conservative reactionaries do have a point when they say that left-wing Jews want to impose leftist dogma on the US. Where they go crazy is thinking that “the Jews” want this.

        Yes, I said it and I’m not backing down from it. It’s true.

        gothamette

        December 4, 2016 at 8:00 pm

      • Thanks to Jews like Matt Drudge, Trump is now President-elect.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 4, 2016 at 8:03 pm

      • I think Stephen Miller had more to do with it, but the real reason is the devastation of neoliberal policies, and Hillary Clinton’s utter tone deaf ineptitude.

        BTW Haim saban is merrily ripping apart the Democratic party on behalf of his one issue, Israel. Keith Ellison is what the Dems need – young, black and very smart, but because he said a few stupid things about Israel when he was a kid, he’s out.

        Loving this.

        gothamette

        December 4, 2016 at 9:02 pm

      • The question realy is the total Jewish impact on the country positive or negative?

        Lion, the Jews have been doomed for thousands of years in this as well as the next world. You are in bad company, mate. Very bad company.

        Yakov

        December 4, 2016 at 8:41 pm

      • 1. Muslims do not want enforce Sharia law on us. Muslims don’t even want Sharia on themselves.

        2. Sharia law would be preferable to the Leftist dystopia we are currently stuck with. Hopefully Trump can find a 3rd way.

        Otis the Sweaty

        December 4, 2016 at 9:41 pm

      • OldTimer: last time Hitler tried it he got his country split in half for 50 years.

        Hitler also didn’t allow a pro-Zionist German with a Jewish-convert daughter take control of the Nazi party as America’s imbecile antisemites just did in November. 😉

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 4, 2016 at 10:12 pm

      • The issue is too many of the outliers lean left. Why should they receive different treatment from Muslims?

        The Jews aren’t outliers within the establishment.

        As for the ideology they support, all of what liberal Jews support was more or less created by gentile liberal thinkers. Communism is just a welding together of the historicism of Feuerbach and Hegel, English industrial theory, and the radical socialism of other German and French theorists such as Engels and Joseph Dietzgen’s work on dialectical materialism.

        If you don’t like Jewish liberalism, then gentiles like OldTimer have no one but themselves to blame for making secular Jews assimilate into Leftism in order to be accepted by the gentile establishment.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 4, 2016 at 10:23 pm

      • This having been said, it’s up to the host nations to want Jews or not.

        This discussion is irrelevant speculation since American antisemites led by Donavan’s bottom, Lady “Heil Trump” Spencer, are the most idiotic in history.

        They have no power or say over politics and they’ve just lost control of American nationalism to the most pro-Israel presidential candidate of all time.

        In terms of feasibility, it’s unlikely they could get a viable antisemitic movement going given Jewish intermarriage rates with white gentiles. 5% of all white Americans are at least a quarter Jewish, which means another 15-20% of all white gentiles with no Jewish ancestry have a close relative in their family with Jewish ancestry (as Trump does with his half-Ashkenazi grandchildren).

        Hitler himself had to make exceptions for German Jews who were intermarried with ethnic Germans (about 30% of all German Jews at the time he rose to power) and Mischlings. If Hitler found it difficult to persecute intermarried Jews how are the morons who make up American online antisemitism going to succeed where Hitler?

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 4, 2016 at 10:31 pm

      • “The superiority of the Jews has been a major reason for antisemitism through the ages. This is my common sense understanding.”

        Israel as a country only ranks high 20s in GDP rankings, slightly below Arabic speaking UAE, slightly above Southern Euro nations of Italy and Spain. It gets more foreign aid than these entities combined.

        JS

        December 5, 2016 at 1:18 am

      • If 20% of White gentiles in America have a Jewish relative, and Jews only make up 2% of the US population, then that’s poor math computing.

        JS

        December 5, 2016 at 1:21 am

      • On this blog, we previously estimated that 5% of white Americans are Jewish enough to make Aliyah to Israel. The 2% figure is misleading.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 5, 2016 at 7:32 am

      • If 20% of White gentiles in America have a Jewish relative, and Jews only make up 2% of the US population, then that’s poor math computing.

        Because you’re stupid, and probably on drugs, here is a simplified breakdown that even you should be able to understand:

        1) Less than 2% of all Americans of any racial background are Jewish.

        2) Jews who are fully Jewish are 3% of all white Americans.

        3) Jews who are fully Jewish, or half-Jewish, or a quarter-Jewish are 5% of all white Americans.

        4) Therefore 15% to 20% of all white Americans who are not Jewish at all have a direct family member with significant Jewish ancestry.

        Still confused?

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 5, 2016 at 5:46 pm

  28. Correct me if I’m wrong, I always believed the big deal between Taiwan and China is that the Taiwanese government believes they are the true government of mainland China and are just in exile or something, if that be true or close to it, what a colossal FY to the Chinese!

    It would be awesome if Trump had a state dinner with the Dalai Lama and the President of Taiwan, he could serve Japanese food.

    2 Minutes Alpha

    December 4, 2016 at 12:12 am

  29. I mean we do a lot of weird things for diplomacy, like denying the Armenian genocide for Turkey.

    But that’s a lot different than denying the existence of Taiwan lol. We have been openly involved with them for decades..

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_arms_sales_to_Taiwan

    Kaz

    December 4, 2016 at 2:55 am

  30. Liberals will complain when manufacturing returns to the US. They will protest to no end the pollution the factories produce and blame Trump. They will also protest the loss of jobs in Mexico and CHHina. But when jobs are shipped overseas, they complain about slave labor and loss of decent US jobs. They want their iphones made in the US in rural areas with superb wages and the most comfortable working conditions but they want cheap products. In essence, they don’t know what they want

    Bobo

    December 4, 2016 at 3:59 am

    • They are women.

      OldTimer

      December 4, 2016 at 1:52 pm

  31. I’ve just read that when Franco died Castro ordrered a week’s mourning in Cuba. What the heck?! So am I now supposed to be disgusted at the hypocrisy of liberals for supporting a supporter of Fascism, or am I supposed to now support Castro for being a supporter of Nationalism? What would you think if you were me, Lion? I don’t have time to keep keeping-up with all this new shit.

    prolier than thou

    December 4, 2016 at 3:59 am

    • franco was a great man.

      james n.s.w

      December 4, 2016 at 12:37 pm

      • The only reason Franco won is because of the hypocritical neutrality of the Democratic nations, which imposed an arms embargo on both sides thus equating Franco’d rebellion with a democratically elected government, while ignoring German and Italian aid and troops. Had the Republic been allowed to acquire arms like any legitimate government should’ve been, we would’ve not remembered Franco today.

        Yakov

        December 4, 2016 at 6:47 pm

      • Actually, Franco was not a great man. He was bright and talented, and acted with bravery against the forces of progressive violence and evil, but God gave him many many gifts and he simply did not act in the appreciative way a Christian should act when given as many gifts as Franco had been given (hint: if you love God your appreciation has no bounds!). In the Christian world view, the only great men are saints (like Saint John of Bosco, Saint Elizabeth of the Trinity, Saint John Vianney (that is his actual first and last name – usually saints don’t get to be called by their first and last name), and Saint Cecilia) (the Jewish world view is not that different – the only great people in the Jewish world are good parents and rabbis who are, in addition to being good parents, really good rabbis – and, one supposes, a small number of people without kids who listened to the Lord as best as they could). Franco had many chances to say the right thing on controversial issues, and he often did not. Probably, all in all, a better guy than most commenters on the top one or two thousand USA websites of today. But …. On the other hand, most of those commenters had to face adversities that Franco did not. So, if the question is – great guy or not? – it is complicated. Had I been born in Spain, I would have expected any son of mine to do better. In any event, inasmuch as the main competition to which we are born is to reach the end of our life with as little hate in our heart as is possible, maybe he did not do as badly as most of the kids he grew up with, back in the day. Long time ago, far away, it is easy to pretend we can never know. The Book of Proverbs instructs us otherwise.

        howitzer daniel

        December 4, 2016 at 7:29 pm

      • Franco crushed a communist insurgency which fed on atrocities and subsequently kept his country out of WW2. He was a traditionalist but not much of a merchant, so economic development thereafter was spotty. He maintained the church and at the end handed over the country to his king. Juan Carlos I unfortunately turned out to be a major shitlib so now Spain is run by vindictive leftists a la mode American Empire Eurotrash after all. Oh well, perhaps Franco’s failing was that he should have been crueler and more thorough. Still a job well done.

        Glengarry

        December 5, 2016 at 5:40 am

  32. OT: Interesting article about climate change politics.
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/my-unhappy-life-as-a-climate-heretic-1480723518

    The scientist hadn’t questioned climate change or even human contributions. He merely questioned a graph in the IPCC’s 2007 report, purporting to show that disaster costs were rising due to global temperature increases. After an investigation, it was discovered that the graph was based on incorrect data. The person responsible admitted it. The UN admitted it. And subsequent reports now take the opposite view. But the scientist was still blackballed and smeared. And warmers still repeat the false claim because it’s hard to claim global warming is bad if there’s no “bad”.

    destructure

    December 4, 2016 at 5:28 am

    • lets trust the wsj.

      james n.s.w

      December 4, 2016 at 12:39 pm

      • Better the the NYT. Then again, anything is better than that rag.

        Vincent

        December 4, 2016 at 2:23 pm

      • why trust either? this doesnt have to be a choice between two crap-pieces.

        james n.s.w

        December 4, 2016 at 6:56 pm

      • Anagram of sjw. This is not s coinicdnece.

        Bobo

        December 4, 2016 at 9:32 pm

    • I can’t get past the paywall but it sounds an awful lot like he’s claiming that the scientific community acted just as it should in all the ways that are objectively verifiable but were completely biased and irrational in an area that is impossible to judge from the outside.

      magnavox

      December 4, 2016 at 2:30 pm

  33. Just an interesting story regarding Taiwan and my employer.

    Back in 2003, when I was a lowly web developer (on H1B at that!! LOL) for my company, we were integrating our website’s account management systems with company’s account management systems (like MSN passport, Google Accounts). When a new user wanting to sign up for our website had to select nationality from a drop-down, we had an entry of Taiwan among list of countries. Someone forwarded a screen capture of that page to our company’s chinese distributors who sent a complaint email to our website. We forwarded the email to corporate and legal and within a couple of days, we were told to remove that entry from the database. Taiwan has since been missing country lists from all our websites. 🙂

    wt

    December 4, 2016 at 12:20 pm

  34. OT but disappointing result in the Austrian election. I’m wondering if a lot of lazy left wing Millanials didn’t vote for Brexit and Trump because they expected their side to coast to victory, whereas now they know how easy it is for them to lose and how much is at stake they are actually turning up and voting.

    If that is the case then it’s bad news for the other European elections next year, as there could well indeed be a ‘progressive majority’ there, they just weren’t turning up before.

    prolier than thou

    December 4, 2016 at 3:26 pm

    • I think you’re going to have a harder time pushing anything seriously right-wing in Germany and Austria, for reasons that are obvious.

      SFG

      December 4, 2016 at 4:17 pm

    • France will be ok. Fillon will win and he is pretty badass.

      Two in the Bush

      December 4, 2016 at 4:37 pm

    • I’m not sure what happened with Austria’s election of a Green President.

      The EU’s popularity rose across most of Western Europe after Brexit, presumably because some voters who were flirting with nationalist parties got cold feet when they saw the disintegration of the European Union become feasible. Maybe it was this post-Brexit trend that pushed the Greens over the top.

      But it’s small comfort for the Western Left – the powers of the Austrian Presidency are restricted to mostly ceremonial roles.

      Much more important is the breaking news from Italy that both exit polls and projections of actual votes show Italy has voted “No” to economic reforms. Renzi’s government will now probably call an early general election which anti-euro parties are expected to win.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 4, 2016 at 6:12 pm

    • Renzi has announced his resignation as Prime Minister of Italy. This clears the path for an anti-euro coalition government made up of the 5-Star Movement, Salvini’s Northern League, what’s left of Berlusconi’s mainstream right Forza Italia, and perhaps a few smaller conservative parties.

      https://pragmaticallydistributed.wordpress.com/2016/11/28/deutsche-bank-faces-its-acid-test-italia/

      Should the referendum be defeated, Italian financial markets – anticipating the election of a rightwing government on a promise to take Italy out of the eurozone – will be thrown into turmoil after referendum results are announced.

      It is at this point where the weakness or strength of Deutsche Bank will be revealed: Shockwaves originating from Italy’s markets will cascade through the rest of Europe’s markets. When these waves finally crash against Deutsche Bank, how well or poorly that bank reacts to the turbulence will suggest its true health. If the bank’s defenses have indeed been reinforced over past months then it will weather the storm. However, any buckling on its part will suggest it is still veering towards the edge of collapse.

      And with the EU having foolishly linked the economies of Northern and Southern Europe together with the criminal scheme known as the euro, it will not be long before the consequences of Italy’s vote test the German banking system: Whatever the consequences of a ‘No’ will mean for Deutsche Bank should be evident sometime in the weeks before Christmas.

      https://pragmaticallydistributed.wordpress.com/2016/11/21/european-nationalism-in-the-wake-of-trump/

      Italy – The domino most likely to fall in the near future. Before America’s November election the unpopular Leftist government of Prime Minister Renzi had staked its future on winning a referendum on economic reforms early in December. With populist victories in Britain and the United States, Renzi’s referendum, which was already lagging behind in polls, now looks certain to be punished by voters in an anti-establishment backlash. A referendum loss will lead to the collapse of his leftist government and early elections that are expected to be won by a coalition of anti-euro nationalist and center right parties.

      In its already weakened position the euro will enter a new crisis when an incoming Italian government prepares for Italy’s exit from the currency union.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      December 4, 2016 at 6:45 pm

    • This is pure speculation. But Hofer wants out of the EU. And I think the prospect of leaving the EU scared the Austrians. They’re unhappy with the government and Hofer’s party is polling well ahead of everyone else. Expected to win big in 2018. But there’s still a lot of uncertainty around UK leaving the EU. As a small, landlocked country they’re totally dependent on the EU. They can’t risk it. When other countries leave and there’s less uncertainty they’ll leave, too.

      On the plus side, Renzi’s referendum got crushed in Italy. This was a big win because Italy is the 4th largest economy in Europe. This was a much bigger deal than Austria and creates tremendous pressure on the banks and EU. Every bit of uncertainty shakes confidence in the EU and moves other countries closer to leaving. All it would take is one big crisis and the whole thing could fall apart. Austria can’t do that but Italy can.

      destructure

      December 4, 2016 at 7:00 pm

      • The fake news mainstream media ran with the headline of ‘first far right candidate since HITLER’ and I suppose if you are the tiny country of actual Hitler, it’s kind of hard to put that out of your mind.

        A video went viral with an elderly Austrian woman who was a Holocaust survivor whose whole family died at Auschwitz, being like “OMG, help, it’s HAAAPPPPEEENING — you must STOP THE NEW HOLOCAUST by voting against Norbert Hofer” — It got 3 million views, which is a huge amount for a race that gets 4 million votes.

        Given that the Freedom Party was actually started by Austrian Nazis after WWII, the Hitler reference probably was more effective than usual.

        As an Austrian by ancestry, I have to admit that it may not be in Austria’s interests to give fodder for the meme, Hitler =Austria=Hitler, which would have been the global narrative if Hofer had won.

        In any case, Austria has done a lot already to clamp down on illegal migration, and thus take the wind out of the sails of the far right.

        It might be better for optics if another country leads the way on migration in Europe, just saying.

        Dan

        December 5, 2016 at 12:23 pm


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: