Remember When Japan Was Going To Take Over the World?

February 13th, 2017

Do you remember those fabulous 80s?

Reagan was President, cyberpunk was new, and Jennifer Grey had a nose.

Also, everyone knew that Japan was going to take over the world.

Giant Japanese electronic companies like Sony, Toshiba and Fujitsu were leaders in their markets, Japan had a big export surplus, and Japanese companies were buying up iconic American assets like Rockafeller Center. Experts assured us that Japan was ascendant and that we needed to follow the “Japan Inc.” model of public/private partnerships, as well as the heavy vertical integration of the Japanese zaibatsu conglomerates, if we wanted to compete in the world market.

It turns out that almost all that just about every aspect of that prescription was horribly wrong:

Fast-forward 30 years. When one of Japan, Inc.’s leading corporations makes the news, as often as not it’s the result of an accounting scandal in which corporate profits were grossly overstated for years as a matter of policy–a policy intended to mask the stagnation in the company’s sales, product lines, competitive position and profits.

What happened to the often-copied, much-vaunted Japan, Inc.? Many observers see Japan’s core problem as demographics: as its birth rate has fallen below replacement levels, the population of Japan is aging rapidly. Since young people start households and spend money, economic growth depends largely on the spending of young people rather than the declining spending of older people.

While a decline in the youthful demographic certainly impacts growth, this view overlooks the larger problem: Japan, Inc.–its educational system, government, banking and corporate sector–was optimized for the mode of production that existed in the postwar world from the late 1940s to the late 1980s.

Now that the Digital-Industrial Revolution is remaking the way goods and services are produced and distributed, the system that worked wondrously well in 1960 no longer aligns with the needs of this emerging mode of production.

In the 1980s, Japan’s optimized-for-industrial-exports system reached its zenith, and many US pundits built careers predicting that Japan would soon eclipse the US in every economic and financial metric.

But the excesses of Japan’s banking sector and the rise of new technologies that didn’t lend themselves to gradual improvement and vertically integrated corporations disrupted the predictions of Japan’s global dominance.

Just as Sony ate the lunches of slower, less efficient American companies like RCA, soon the Japanese electronic giants found themselves being beaten by more nimble and disruptive international competitors like Apple and Samsung.

Toshiba is now so broke they may need to spin-off their semiconductor business, despite it being the most central and profitable business in their company, probably because building a new state-of-the-art 300mm wafer fabrication plant for 10nm process technology can now cost up to $14 billion.

Many other Japanese companies have been rocked by accounting scandals:

In the five years since a $1.7bn accounting scandal was uncovered at Olympus, the number of improper accounting cases exposed each year in Japan has nearly doubled. It hit an all-time high of 58 cases in the 2015-16 fiscal year, according to Tokyo Shoko Research, which provides data on corporate failures.

In many cases, the revelations have shone a light on malpractice and subterfuge dating back years — the legacy of management terrified of failure but left fighting decades of economic stagnation, squeezed costs and a shrinking domestic market.

And those demographics don’t make anything easier:

Children accounted for 12.8% of the population, the ministry said. By contrast, the ratio of people aged 65 or older was at a record high, making up 25.6% of the population. Jiji Press said that, of countries with a population of at least 40 million, Japan had the lowest ratio of children to the total population – compared with 19.5% for the United States and 16.4% for China…

The proportion of people aged 65 or over is forecast to reach nearly 40% in 2060, the government has warned.

Japan’s government has been running huge budget deficits since 2009, and debt now stands at about twice the size of the economy.

For a while, the South Korean chaebol looked like they were going to supplant the Japanese zaibatsu as world beaters, but Samsung and LG have started running into some of the same problems.

The lesson here is not “Merica, fark ye!”, it’s that capitalism works. The creative destruction of capitalism is necessary to keep economic progress moving forward. My biggest fear is that in his efforts to save American jobs, President Trump will prop up the GMs and Boeings of the world at the expense of smaller, nimbler competitors looking to supplant them.

For the country’s long-term economic well-being, government should get out of the business of picking winners and losers entirely.

Video of French Forces Fighting the Islamic State

February 11th, 2017

Here’s a video of French Special Forces operating against the Islamic State, including some mopping up operations in Mosul:

A few points of interest:

  • In the first few minutes there’s a glimpse of the tunnel systems that have become common in urban warfare where the defenders have had time to dig in.
  • I’m assuming that boxy weapon the French are shown setting up at 5:27 is a grenade launcher, but I’m not sure I’ve seen that make before. The closest would be the Heckler & Koch GMG, but it doesn’t quite look like it.
  • French drones (6:13) look like funky kit planes, and get launched with a tether assist. Whatever works…
  • LinkSwarm for February 10, 2017

    February 10th, 2017

    Welcome to another Friday LinkSwarm! Here in Texas it’s looking a lot like Spring.

    This LinkSwarm is heavy on border control and jihad issues.

  • The 9th Circuit’s dangerous and unprecedented use of campaign statements to block presidential policy.”

    By accepting the use of preelection statements to impeach and limit executive policy, the 9th Circuit is taking a dangerous step. The states’ argument is in essence that Trump is a bigot, and thus his winning presidential campaign in fact impeaches him from exercising key constitutional and statutory powers, such as administering the immigration laws.

    This would mean that Trump is automatically disbarred, from the moment of his inauguration, of exercising certain presidential powers, not because of his actions as president, but because of who he is — that is, how he won the presidency.

    (Hat tip: Instapundit.)

  • When Judge James Robart stated that “no” terrorists had attacked America from the countries on President Trump’s travel ban, he was engaged in the rhetorical device known as lying his ass off. “At least 60 people born in the seven countries had been convicted — not just arrested, but convicted — of terror-related offenses in the United States since Sept. 11, 2001.” (Hat tip: Ace of Spades HQ.)
  • Trump’s sanctuary city and terrorist-supporting state travel bans are his most popular executive orders. To quote Mark Steyn yet again, “‘divisive’ appears to be elite-speak for ‘remarkably popular.'” (Hat tip: Ace of Spades HQ.)
  • Rotherham sex abuse gang shout ‘Allahu Akbar’ as they are jailed for total of 81 years for sexually abusing girls.”
  • Most Europeans oppose further Muslim immigration. Can’t imagine why…
  • Among them: this Swedish cop:

    Here we go; this is what I’ve handled from Monday-Friday this week: rape, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, rape-assault and rape, extortion, blackmail, assault, violence against police, threats to police, drug crime, drugs, crime, felony, attempted murder, rape again, extortion again and ill-treatment.

    Suspected perpetrators; Ali Mohammed, Mahmod, Mohammed, Mohammed Ali, again, again, again. Christopher… what, is it true? Yes, a Swedish name snuck in on the edges of a drug crime. Mohammed, Mahmod Ali, again and again.

    Countries representing all the crimes this week: Iraq, Iraq, Turkey, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Somalia, Syria again, Somalia, unknown, unknown country, Sweden. Half of the suspects, we can’t be sure because they don’t have any valid papers. Which in itself usually means that they’re lying about their nationality and identity.

  • Scott Adams abandons all support for UC Berkeley in the wake of the Milo riot:

    I’m ending my support of UC Berkeley, where I got my MBA years ago. I have been a big supporter lately, with both my time and money, but that ends today. I wish them well, but I wouldn’t feel safe or welcome on the campus. A Berkeley professor made that clear to me recently. He seems smart, so I’ll take his word for it.

    I’ve decided to side with the Jewish gay immigrant who has an African-American boyfriend, not the hypnotized zombie-boys in black masks who were clubbing people who hold different points of view. I feel that’s reasonable, but I know many will disagree, and possibly try to club me to death if I walk on campus.

    Yesterday I asked my most liberal, Trump-hating friend if he ever figured out why Republicans have most of the Governorships, a majority in Congress, the White House, and soon the Supreme Court. He said, “There are no easy answers.”

    I submit that there are easy answers. But for many Americans, cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias hide those easy answers behind Hitler hallucinations.

  • Just in case you were unclear: President Trump is not Hitler. (Hat tip: Scott Adams, IBID.)
  • #Winning.
  • House Democrats are going on a retreat in Baltimore where they’ll go over an autopsy of the election. Will they learn from their many mistakes? “The Baltimore retreat, which will take place at the scenic Inner Harbor, will focus on the party’s fight for all Americans and feature speeches from top Democrats and various celebrities, including Kareem Abdul Jabbar and Chelsea Handler, as the party looks to get back on track.” Signs point to “No”… (Hat tip: Director Blue.)
  • Both Steve Bannon and Reince Priebus want you to know that they are not bitter enemies fighting for influence in the Trump White House. The truth is that they are “rather chummy.” (Hat tip: Ann Althouse.)
  • President Trump’s chess game:

    In the end it would appear that Trump is playing the kind of game that I was taught to play by my coach. His opponents are never given time to mount an attack. Their queen – the MSM has been removed from the board and their favorite piece – the Celebrities are locked in a war of attrition while Trump gets the rest of his pieces on the board. Remember, these are all Tactics but Strategy flows from Tactics. Sooner or later the Left will find itself in some terrible position and the Strategy to drain the swamp will present itself.

    (Hat tip: Zero Hedge.)

  • “Leftists said if Trump won, that there’d be violent mobs of hate, and intolerant fascists would try to silence those with whom they disagree. And they were right. It just was by a group of people from which they didn’t expect it: themselves.” (Hat tip: Director Blue.)
  • NSA contractor allegedly stole over 500 million documents. The news came out October last year (I guess reporting yet another giant classified data breach was something the media wasn’t too wild about digging into in the election homestretch), but he was just indicted yesterday. (Hat tip: Ace of Spades HQ.)
  • Concision. (Hat tip: Director Blue.)
  • “Well, with Trump, Modi, Brexit, and now France, there are some similar problems in those countries. What you are hearing is people getting fed up with the ruling class. This is not fascism. It has nothing to do with fascism. It has to do with the faux-experts problem and a world with too many experts. If we had a different elite, we may not see the same problem.”
  • Nikki Haley’s first speech at the UN blasts Russia over their continued occupation of Ukraine. (Hat tip: Instapundit.)
  • Secretary of Defense Mattis was a big hit in both Japan and South Korea.
  • Quitaly seems increasingly likely.
  • Is Russia helping the Taliban?
  • “Meet Denmark’s new anti-Islam, anti-immigration, anti-tax party.”
  • Gun sales finally dip. Obviously gun owners don’t feel like NRA-endorsed President Trump is a threat to take their guns, unlike “World’s Greatest Gun Salesman Obama.” It also suggests that those of us in the Vast Right Wing aren’t even remotely worried about that mythical leftwing “resistance” launching an actual civil war. (Hat tip: Ace of Spades.)
  • Whistle-blower reveals that, yes, the NOAA lied about climate data.
  • Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) shares some of that vaunted liberal tolerance that’s been sent his way:

  • American feminists: Rich White Girl Problems. (Hat tip: Instapundit.)
  • Texas Senate passes sanctuary city bill.
  • Tennessee bill: Get off the road, you leftwing lunatic!
  • Can an average engineer earn more in a lifetime than an average NFL player? The study says yes, but I think the engineering pay average ($125,418) is probably a bit on the high side (I suspect California companies were oversampled).
  • Anonymous takes down a ton of child porn sites.
  • Pizza parties for abortion quotas.
  • Infosys sued for descriminating against Americans. (Hat tip: Director Blue.)
  • Twitter lost $457 million last year:

    Twitter had decided, in an election year, to surrender control of its platform to a crew of feminist social justice warriors (SJWs) designated the “Trust and Safety Council.” This secretive group of Soviet-style commissars included the notorious anti-male hatemonger Anita Sarkeesian, and soon Twitter began purging conservative accounts…. Jack Dorsey had made his company part of the Democrat Party’s campaign team and four months later, when Twitter banned popular commentator Milo Yiannopoulos, the partisan nature of “Trust and Safety” became transparent. Banning conservatives from Twitter was Dorsey’s contribution-in-kind to the Democrats.

  • And that’s the 10th consecutive quarter of declining revenue for Twitter.
  • Twitter suspends a cartoon, presumably for offending SJW types.

  • FYI: He He Silly Comics are still on Gab. I really should activate my account there…
  • Marvel to knock it off with the Social Justice Warrior bullshit that’s been costing them sales.
  • This lawsuit goes to 11.
  • So Blizzard is worried that the user experience on consoles isn’t shitty enough.
  • “I didn’t say I had mice in my cellar, I said I had moose.”
  • Right to Work Signed Into Law in Missouri

    February 9th, 2017

    Missouri joins the right to work parade:

    Republican Gov. Eric Greitens signed legislation on Monday making Missouri the latest “right-to-work” state, as the growing movement sets its sights next on New Hampshire – hoping to break into one of the labor unions’ last remaining strongholds.

    Legislation advancing in the New Hampshire capital, if approved, would make the state the first in the Northeast to go “right-to-work.” The measure, which bars unions from forcing employees to join or pay dues, is set for a vote in the state’s House next week – after having passed the Senate.

    The push is the latest sign of labor unions’ diminishing clout, and how Republican gains at the state level are having a broad impact on policy, amid support for such legislation from the Trump White House.

    Right to work laws help in two ways: They make states more economically competitive compared to their closed shop brethren, and they deprive the Democratic Party of political contributions forcibly extracted from union members via compulsory dues.

    Missouri joins Kentucky, which passed right to work legislation earlier this year, as well as West Virginia (2016), Wisconsin (2015), Michigan and Indiana (both 2012) as states that have recently passed right to work laws.

    That brings the total of right to work states up to 28.

    New Frontiers in Poor Life Choices

    February 8th, 2017

    A good bit of education used to be dedicated to helping people avoid poor life choices. “Gallant studies hard to pass tests, while Goofus knocks over liquor stores to feed his meth habit.” But some people go above and beyond the call of duty to make the worst lifestyle choices possible.

    Meet Matthew Stager.

    U.S. Marshals need help tracking down a convicted sex offender recently released from a Virginia prison after he failed to show up at a transitional center in Texas.

    News outlets report authorities say 44-year-old Matthew Ezekiel Stager was released Thursday from the Federal Correctional Complex in Petersburg.

    He was supposed to check into the transitional center that day but never did.

    Marshals say it’s possible Stager is in the Hampton Roads area or has recently traveled through the region.

    Authorities say Stager has known connection to multiple states and has a history of drug abuse and mental health concerns.

    You don’t say.

    Marshals describe Stager as a white or Hispanic man, about 145 pounds, 5 feet 8 inches tall with blond or strawberry hair. He has tattoos on his face, head and neck.

    Anyone with information can contact the U.S. Marshals at 1-877-926-8332.

    So if you see this freak, Uncle Sam will likely make it worth your time…

    Update: As per commenter Roadgeek below, he’s been captured. And another tidbit: “He is known to go by the aliases Moon Black and Jesse Crew.”

    Brexit and the Perpetual Liberal Trump Tantrum

    February 8th, 2017

    I was going back through some posts in the middle of last year and came across this link on the Brexit aftermath.

    Tell me this bit doesn’t apply equally well to American liberals throwing tantrums over Trump as UK leftists having fits over Brexit:

    Part of the seething fury felt by some of my co-workers lies in that feeling of being hoodwinked, of not being as smart, as omniscient as they, hitherto, imagined. Their self-esteem is bruised. Nobody likes to find out that the world they thought existed turns out to have been built on miopia and wishful thinking.

    Is there any better example of myopia than our political elites enraged at the idea that those mere voters in flyover country they show so much obvious disdain for have rejected their worldview?

    Adventures in Branding Failure

    February 7th, 2017

    Via Twitchy comes this news of a browser extension from American Bridge (one of David Brock’s liberal super-PACs) that changes “Trump” to “Steve Bannon.”

    Evidently love now Steve Bannons hate.

    This has to be one of the more remarkable branding failures of recent memory. Liberals have spent the last year engaged in nonstop demonization of Donald Trump, evidently believing that if they just called him SuperExtraMegaHitler with a side order of cheese fries enough, voters would come to see him with the gut-level personal distaste they did and he would never be elected.

    This little prank from one of Brock’s groups confirms that tactic not only failed, but keeps failing. Instead of continuing their futile attempts to demonize President Trump, some liberal elites have obviously decided that it’s more productive to demonize Bannon as “the new Karl Rove.” The problem with this approach is that while everyone knows who Trump is, I doubt 90+% of the electorate knows who Bannon is.

    Jimmy Kimmel should set up one of those man-in-the-street-quiz segments where people are asked: “Who is Steve Bannon? A. An aide to President Trump, or B. The guy who turns into The Incredible Hulk?” I’m betting most people pick B.

    The other problem with this approach: the “demonize Karl Rove as the evil mastermind tactic” didn’t work either, as it failed to prevent Bush43 from being elected to a second term.

    Trump is Serious About Securing America’s Borders

    February 6th, 2017

    President Trump’s first two weeks have been extremely busy, including making good on his campaign promises to secure America’s borders in the form of three Executive Orders:

  • Executive Order 13767, Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements, which states:

    It is the policy of the executive branch to:

    (a) secure the southern border of the United States through the immediate construction of a physical wall on the southern border, monitored and supported by adequate personnel so as to prevent illegal immigration, drug and human trafficking, and acts of terrorism;

    (b) detain individuals apprehended on suspicion of violating Federal or State law, including Federal immigration law, pending further proceedings regarding those violations;

    (c) expedite determinations of apprehended individuals’ claims of eligibility to remain in the United States;

    (d) remove promptly those individuals whose legal claims to remain in the United States have been lawfully rejected, after any appropriate civil or criminal sanctions have been imposed; and

    (e) cooperate fully with States and local law enforcement in enacting Federal-State partnerships to enforce Federal immigration priorities, as well as State monitoring and detention programs that are consistent with Federal law and do not undermine Federal immigration priorities.

  • Executive Order 13768: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States, which states:

    It is the policy of the executive branch to:

    (a) Ensure the faithful execution of the immigration laws of the United States, including the INA, against all removable aliens, consistent with Article II, Section 3 of the United States Constitution and section 3331 of title 5, United States Code;

    (b) Make use of all available systems and resources to ensure the efficient and faithful execution of the immigration laws of the United States;

    (c) Ensure that jurisdictions that fail to comply with applicable Federal law do not receive Federal funds, except as mandated by law;

    (d) Ensure that aliens ordered removed from the United States are promptly removed; and

    (e) Support victims, and the families of victims, of crimes committed by removable aliens.

    Pursuant to which, Executive Order 13768 further states:

    Enforcement Priorities. In executing faithfully the immigration laws of the United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) shall prioritize for removal those aliens described by the Congress in sections 212(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 235, and 237(a)(2) and (4) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 1225, and 1227(a)(2) and (4)), as well as removable aliens who:

    (a) Have been convicted of any criminal offense;

    (b) Have been charged with any criminal offense, where such charge has not been resolved;

    (c) Have committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense;

    (d) Have engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter or application before a governmental agency;

    (e) Have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits;

    (f) Are subject to a final order of removal, but who have not complied with their legal obligation to depart the United States; or

    (g) In the judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to public safety or national security.

  • Executive Order 13769: Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States, which states:

    It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from foreign nationals who intend to commit terrorist attacks in the United States; and to prevent the admission of foreign nationals who intend to exploit United States immigration laws for malevolent purposes.

    Sec. 3. Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern.

    (a) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall immediately conduct a review to determine the information needed from any country to adjudicate any visa, admission, or other benefit under the INA (adjudications) in order to determine that the individual seeking the benefit is who the individual claims to be and is not a security or public-safety threat.

    (b) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit to the President a report on the results of the review described in subsection (a) of this section, including the Secretary of Homeland Security’s determination of the information needed for adjudications and a list of countries that do not provide adequate information, within 30 days of the date of this order. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a copy of the report to the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence.

    (c) To temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies during the review period described in subsection (a) of this section, to ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening of foreign nationals, and to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas).

    (d) Immediately upon receipt of the report described in subsection (b) of this section regarding the information needed for adjudications, the Secretary of State shall request all foreign governments that do not supply such information to start providing such information regarding their nationals within 60 days of notification.

    (e) After the 60-day period described in subsection (d) of this section expires, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the President a list of countries recommended for inclusion on a Presidential proclamation that would prohibit the entry of foreign nationals (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas) from countries that do not provide the information requested pursuant to subsection (d) of this section until compliance occurs.

    (f) At any point after submitting the list described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Homeland Security may submit to the President the names of any additional countries recommended for similar treatment.

    (g) Notwithstanding a suspension pursuant to subsection (c) of this section or pursuant to a Presidential proclamation described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may, on a case-by-case basis, and when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are otherwise blocked.

    (h) The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall submit to the President a joint report on the progress in implementing this order within 30 days of the date of this order, a second report within 60 days of the date of this order, a third report within 90 days of the date of this order, and a fourth report within 120 days of the date of this order.

  • Much has been written abut these executive orders, a great deal of which is wrong:

  • First, it was not the Trump Administration who selected the seven nations covered by Executive Order 13769, it was the Obama Administration, which in February of 2016 added Libya, Somalia, and Yemen to “Iran, Iraq, Sudan and Syria as countries subject to restrictions for Visa Waiver Program travel for certain individuals.”
  • Because they were chosen by the Obama Administration, the decision of which countries to include had nothing to do with Trump’s business interests.
  • It’s not a “Muslim ban”:

    What did Trump do? Did he implement his promised Muslim ban? No, far from it. He backed down dramatically from his campaign promises and instead signed an executive order dominated mainly by moderate refugee restrictions and temporary provisions aimed directly at limiting immigration from jihadist conflict zones.

    Let’s analyze the key provisions, separate the fact from the hysteria, and introduce just a bit of historical perspective.

    First, the order temporarily halts refugee admissions for 120 days to improve the vetting process, then caps refugee admissions at 50,000 per year. Outrageous, right? Not so fast. Before 2016, when Obama dramatically ramped up refugee admissions, Trump’s 50,000 stands roughly in between a typical year of refugee admissions in George W. Bush’s two terms and a typical year in Obama’s two terms.

  • Despite what various liberal protestors would have you believe, President Trump’s Executive Orders are firmly within the bounds of existing federal immigration laws:

    Federal immigration law also includes Section 1182(f), which states: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate” (emphasis added).

    Section 1182(f) plainly and sweepingly authorizes the president to issue temporary bans on the entry of classes of aliens for national-security purposes. This is precisely what President Trump has done. In fact, in doing so, he expressly cites Section 1182(f), and his executive order tracks the language of the statute (finding the entry of aliens from these countries at this time “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States”).

  • The mainstream media would like you to believe that Trump’s orders limiting immigration are widely unpopular. That’s not the case:

    Politically, the open borders rhetoric helps Trump. Even in California, three-quarters of the population, according to a recent UC Berkeley survey, oppose sanctuary cities. Overall, more Americans favor less immigration than more. Most, according to a recent Pew Research Center study, also want tougher border controls and increased deportations. They also want newcomers to come legally and adopt the prevailing cultural norms, including English.

  • You know how all your liberal Facebook friends say that “no Muslim refugees” have been involved in terrorism in the United States? That’s false. At least 20 have. Among these lovely individuals was Ramadan Alwan. “He pleaded guilty to conspiring to kill U.S. nationals abroad; conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction (explosives) against U.S. nationals abroad.” He also “boasted about attacks on American troops in Iraq.”
  • All of which makes it amazing that unlimited Muslim immigration seems to be the hill liberals want to die on.

    Even more ridiculous and blinkered is the suggestion that there may be something unconstitutional about refusing entry to refugees or discriminating among them on religious or other bases (a reaction that was shared at first by some Republicans, including Mike Pence, when Trump’s plan was announced in December 2015). There are plenty of moral and political arguments on these points, but foreigners have no right under our Constitution to demand entry to the United States or to challenge any reason we might have to refuse them entry, even blatant religious discrimination. Under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, Congress’s powers in this area are plenary, and the president’s powers are as broad as the Congress chooses to give him. If liberals are baffled as to why even the invocation of the historically problematic “America First” slogan by Trump is popular with almost two-thirds of the American public, they should look no further than people arguing that foreigners should be treated by the law as if they were American citizens with all the rights and protections we give Americans.

    Liberals are likewise on both unwise and unpopular ground in sneering at the idea that there might be an increased risk of radical Islamist terrorism resulting from large numbers of Muslims entering the country as refugees or asylees. There have been many such cases in Europe, ranging from terrorists (as in the Brussels attack) posing as refugees to the infiltration of radicals and the radicalization of new entrants. The 9/11 plotters, several of whom overstayed their visas in the U.S. after immigrating from the Middle East to Germany, are part of that picture as well. Here in the U.S., we have had a number of terror attacks carried out by foreign-born Muslims or their children. The Tsarnaev brothers who carried out the Boston Marathon bombing were children of asylees; the Times Square bomber was a Pakistani immigrant; the underwear bomber was from Nigeria; the San Bernardino shooter was the son of Pakistani immigrants; the Chattanooga shooter was from Kuwait; the Fort Hood shooter was the son of Palestinian immigrants. All of this takes place against the backdrop of a global movement of radical Islamist terrorism that kills tens of thousands of people a year in terrorist attacks and injures or kidnaps tens of thousands more.

  • President Trump is also working to limit immigrants who need welfare.
  • John Hindraker thinks that President Trump’s orders are only a good first step.
  • Back in the dim, long ago fairy tale days of 2006, plenty of Democrats voted to build the border fence, including Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Chuck Schumer.
  • Evidence suggests that Hilary Clinton received 800,000 votes from illegal aliens. Not the three million Trump claimed, but clearly more than the “zero” Democrats falsely claim.
  • Austin is now ground zero for cutting both state and federal fund for refusing to cooperate in enforcing immigration laws. Expect more detail on this at a future date.
  • “The House chairman who oversees Justice Department spending is telling so-called ‘sanctuary cities’ that funding for police, jails and housing will end under President Trump’s new executive orders tightening immigration control. ‘It’s real easy, their money disappears. There’s no fight, their money is gone,’ said Texas Rep. John Culberson, chairman of the appropriations subcommittee that funds Justice.” (Hat tip: Director Blue.)
  • At least one sign that the sanctuary city crackdown is working: Miami-Dade County Mayor Carlos Gimenez has ordered his jail to start cooperating with the INS to deport illegal aliens.
  • Of course, people working to defy the law and keep illegal aliens from being deported are freaking out over Trump.
  • Current state of legal play on Executive Order 13769:

    It’s unfortunate that Judge [James] Robart’s decision, like the one handed down last weekend in the Eastern District of New York, includes nearly no legal reasoning or explanation, such that we could judge why he found the order unconstitutional or illegal. Federal district judges often issue very summary orders when they are asked to rule on an emergency basis on a request for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction, so expecting a scholarly opinion is unrealistic. But with the order halting a nationwide Executive Branch policy in its tracks and sure to be used as a political club, it should not have been too much to ask the court to provide some clue to its reasoning for just saying “this is illegal.”

    Fourth, this is a TRO: it applies only until the court can hold a more complete hearing, which it scheduled for Monday.

  • Byron York also says that the Trump Justice Department demolished Judge Robart’s case.
  • Other border control actions are going to require congressional approval (including much wider use of E-Verify) and whatever tax changes “make Mexico pay for the wall” (there are ways).

    Could Trump’s orders have gone farther? Sure! But it’s a tremendous start for somehow who many in the Republican primaries thought was a secret fan of illegal alien amnesty.

    Is Twitter Throttling Trump Supporters?

    February 5th, 2017

    Scott Adams pointed out this video that suggests Twitter is using deep analytics to hide the posts of some users from the “power users” among their followers:

    They basically cut them off. Say you’ve got a hundred followers and 10 of them are able to get you a shit ton of retweets 10 of them are able to spread your message far and wide maybe they have a large follower base. Maybe they’re just somebody who a lot of people pay attention to they make it so those 10 people can’t see what you say. Maybe they make it so the tweet is unavailable…it’s using analytical data, using the user information effectively to fuck with and silence people in a way that is not that obvious. You’re not banning them, you’re not shadowbanning them, you’re merely cutting off the power users in their follower base to make it so whatever the tweet out does not spread.

    Mike Keen says that Twitter carries out another form of throttling this on tweets from President Trump. After Trump’s initial Tweet, the first few moments afterwords may show top tweets from Trump supporters, but soon those disappear and all the reply tweets to Trump are negative reactions from leftists. “Every single Tweet by President Trump has top comments that are 100% negative. Positive replies are simply not seen. Twitter is absolutely censoring Pro-Trump replies and Trump supporters from voicing their support of the President.”

    Says Keen:

    Over the past few days, I have continued to reply directly to the President, voicing my support of his policies and ideas. However, I have found that while initially, for about the first minute or so, I get a flood of reactions and notifications. Favorites, retweets, etc, and then they abruptly stop, because my tweets are being manually removed from the main conversation thread.

    Anyone having experience with this? Is this real or just paranoia? “Did Instapundit not retweet this because it wasn’t interesting, or because he just can’t see my Tweets?”

    Bill Burr Has No Sympathy for Hillary Clinton

    February 4th, 2017

    It’s not like I set out to make Bill Burr Video Saturday, but he just keeps popping up. (And keep in mind, Burr says he leans left and obviously isn’t a Trump fan.) Here he is on why he has no sympathy for Hillary.