Enough Freaking Out Over Trump’s DACA Proposal

January 29th, 2018

There’s a lot of freaking out over President Donald Trump’s DACA proposal by Republicans who like to freak out over everything Trump says.

You would think, having been through previous freakouts over previous Trump statements, his Republican critics would have learned something by now. Obviously that’s not the case.

His plan would couple the amnesty for Dreamers with a $25 billion request for wall funding, limiting family sponsorship of migration to spouses and minor children, eliminating the Diversity Visa Lottery that gives away immigration passes based on chance, and a number of policy changes to stop abuse of the asylum system and speed deportations of illegal immigrants.

Note that it “would take the immigrants 10 to 12 years to earn citizenship.”

The biggest problem with the proposal is the lack of universal implementation of E-Verify, which would be a cornerstone of any real border enforcement solution. But otherwise there are a number of solid policy ideas for fixing a broken immigration and border control system.

Critics harping on President Trump increasing the number of “dreamers” legalized from 800,000 to 1.8 million are missing the bigger picture. As Rush Limbaugh observes: “I think it was offered knowing that the Democrats would reject this.”

Trump can say, “Hey, I offered it. I’m trying to meet ’em halfway. We’re trying to do something for the kids, and once again it’s the Democrats who say they’re not interested! It’s the Democrats who are walking away.

“It’s the Democrats who cannot accept this seemingly generous offer from the president of the United States.” Chuck Schumer has already rejected it, you just heard Pelosi reject it, and Dick Durbin has rejected it. How many of you were thinking that the Democrats would glom onto this and sign up for it instantly because this would translate to Trump losing? You have to notice that they’re rejecting this. Now, you might say, “Yeah, because they don’t want 1.8! They want 3.6 million. They want 15 million!”

Well, they’re never gonna get that. They’re falling… I think they’re falling into this trap again, and Durbin is being made a fool of… I better stop. I actually should shut up here. I may be giving away too much of the game here to these dingbats. You know, they listen here when they want to. The Democrats have already started smearing Trump’s proposal as white supremacist policy? We’re talking about the DREAMer kids!

Now, part of Trump’s offer does require meritocracy, and that’s what the Democrats can’t stand. That’s another thing. Donald Trump is saying, “We want the best people coming into our country. We want people who love America. We want people who can support themselves. We want people who are gonna become American. We want people are gonna grow our economy.” And what are the Democrats saying? “The hell with that! That’s white supremacy! We need the invigoration that our country gets from immigration.”

They want their permanent underclass. They want the current illegal crop to be granted amnesty. They want nothing more than a never-ending group of people in total dependency, and they are rejecting this. They’ve just been offered a deal that grants amnesty to the children — that’s their number one constituency group, 1.6 or 1.8 million of ’em — and they’re turning it down. They cannot accept it. This is a reasonable offer that the Democrats have to refuse because their prime constituency group is not seen by them as benefiting.

(Hat tip: Ace of Spades HQ.)

Remember how many observers (especially the #NeverTrump variety) opined that President Trump was mishandling the shutdown and undercutting his Republican allies? How did that work out?

It should be obvious to most observers by now that President Trump argues, debate and negotiates in a way unlike any other President. After some initial stumbles, his unorthodox style has produced obvious results.

President Trump has three big advantages going into any negotiations over DACA:

  1. The rule of law: Obama’s DACA was illegal in the first place, given how it ignored existing immigration law.
  2. Republican majorities in the House and Senate: Even if Republican squishes wanted to cave, ala the Gang of Eight, they would still have to convince Republican colleagues to go along with them. (For those who posit that several Republican leaders are just itching to go Full Amnesty, I point out that 2016 happened. For some amnesty was a cynical ploy for more votes, or to avoid getting called racists in the MSM. Neither of those magic spells work anymore. For a Republican in 2018, going full amnesty is tantamount to political suicide.)
  3. A ticking clock: The DACA reprieve runs out in March, and then deportations start. Democrats can make a deal, or they can watch “dreamers” get deported and get nothing in return, except for the chance to keep pounding them as cynics who spurned his generous offer and don’t really care about “Dreamers” if they can’t harvest them for votes.

There are many scenarios in which Trump wins this fight and gets most-to-all of what he wants on border control, very few where Democrats can even earn a tie, and zero for what Democrats really want (full amnesty, open borders and unlimited “undocumented Democrats” boosting their electoral chances well into the future).

So relax. Trump has this.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Border Control, Democrats | 1 Comment »

It’s Another “Trump Can’t Win” Compilation

January 28th, 2018

It’s been one of those days, when even lazy blogging material is hard to come by, so here’s another “Donald Trump Can’t Win” supercut:

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Elections, video | 3 Comments »

Jordan Peterson Interview Take Two

January 27th, 2018

I didn’t think I was going to do a second post on that Jordan B. Peterson/Cathy Newman interview, but it remains a hot topic:

Newman questioned Peterson on why he refused to go along with the trendy leftist cause du jour: using pronouns chosen by individuals rather than pronouns that describe their biology. “Why should your freedom of speech trump a trans person’s right not to be offended?” Newman asked. Peterson, ever the gentleman, answered the question without guffawing: “Because in order to be able to think, you have to risk being offensive. I mean, look at the conversation we’re having right now. You’re certainly willing to risk offending me in the pursuit of truth. Why should you have the right to do that? It’s been rather uncomfortable.”

Newman misdirected: “Well, I’m very glad I’ve put you on the spot.” But Peterson pursued: “Well, you get my point. You’re doing what you should do, which is digging a bit to see what the hell is going on. And that is what you should do. But you’re exercising your freedom of speech to certainly risk offending me, and that’s fine. More power to you, as far as I’m concerned.”

Newman had no answer. Point to Peterson.

But despite Peterson’s obvious logic, the Left refuses to concede this particular point. Any statement — any statement — must be gauged not only on the basis of its truth-value, according to the Left, but on the basis of whether such truth is likely to offend — or, at least, whether such truth is likely to offend groups the Left perceives as victimized. According to the Left, any and all truth must take a back seat to “your truth,” so long as you claim minority status in any way.

Scott Adams says Newman is suffering from cognitive dissonance

Those more familiar with Social Justice Warrior tactics saw that Newman is just exhibiting two classic SJW traits: They always lie, and they always double down.

Here’s a video that picks up Newman’s tell that she’s about to lie about what Peterson said: “You’re saying…”

Ultimately, does it matter whether Social justice Warriors are lying by intent, or because their viewpoint is so warped that they can no longer perceive the world clearly?

(Hat tip: Bayou Renaissance Man.)

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Social Justice Warriors, video | No Comments »

LinkSwarm for January 26, 2018

January 26th, 2018

President Donald Trump is pitching America at Davos (and evidently doing well). Meanwhile, a lot of this week’s news has focused on the still-developing FBI scandal, which will probably wait until the next Clinton Corruption update.

  • Trump vs. the mainstream media:

    The country’s top news organizations have targeted Trump with an unprecedented barrage of negative stories, with some no longer making much attempt to hide their contempt. Some stories are legitimate, some are not, and others are generated by the president’s own falsehoods and exaggerations. But the mainstream media, subconsciously at first, has lurched into the opposition camp and is appealing to an anti-Trump base of viewers and readers, failing to grasp how deeply it is distrusted by a wide swath of the country.

    (Hat tip: Chuck Glasser at Instapundit.)

  • Liberals on shutdown fight: “Our leaders betrayed us!” Stephen Green: “Welcome to our world.”
  • Why Schumer’s shutdown gambit failed: “Seeing the media commit itself to plainly stating the facts and resisting its usual role as the Democrats’ built-in spin machine was genuinely refreshing.” More:

    Democrats love to pretend that the media doesn’t routinely shield them from inconvenient truths. But the freak-out that ensured the second that shield was removed exposed just how badly they rely on positive press coverage to accomplish their political goals.

  • West Virginia Democratic Senator Joe Manchin (who recently filed for re-election): “We do need a wall.”
  • “NFL Ratings Plunge As 23 Million Fewer Viewers Watch Divisional Playoffs.” How’s that anthem protest working out for you? (Hat tip: Ace of Spades HQ.)
  • “5 Great Floor Finds at SHOT Show 2018.” Including this mainly so Dwight sees the bit on the 1400 round full-auto BB gun, which I know scratches an itch of his… (Hat tip: Say Uncle.)
  • Minnesota Public Radio releases statement that no, actually, Garrison Keillor is a complete perv. (Hat tip: The Other McCain.)
  • The lights are going out in Europe:

  • Andrew Sullivan commits heresy by noting the obvious: sex is not a social construct.

    For today’s progressives, humans are the sole species on this planet where gender differentiation has no clear basis in nature, science, evolution, or biology. This is where they are as hostile to Darwin as any creationist.

    And this is stupid. The alternative explanation — that these core natural differences between men and women have been supplemented by centuries of conscious oppression — is staring us in the face. The fascinating conundrum is where one ends and the other begins. How much of this difference is natural and how much is social? That is the question. And the answer is a tricky one. Is the fact that the vast majority of construction workers are male and the huge majority of nurses are female a function of sexism or nature? Is male sexual aggression and horniness a function of patriarchy or testosterone? Is the fact that women now outnumber men among college graduates a function of reverse sexism or nature?

  • You might want to scratch Vang Vieng, Laos off your tourist destination list. (Hat tip: Ace of Spades HQ.)
  • “I love you…you love me…very, very slow-ow-ly…”

    • Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
    Posted in Border Control, Democrats, Elections, Guns, Media Watch | 4 Comments »

    Feminist of Hearing

    January 25th, 2018

    Conor Friedersdorf examines a terrible malady: those who suffer from Social justice Warrior of the ears, a more extreme example of “liberal of hearing.” This example features British journalist Cathy Newman interviewing Jordan B. Peterson, a University of Toronto clinical psychologist. “First, a person says something. Then, another person restates what they purportedly said so as to make it seem as if their view is as offensive, hostile, or absurd.”

    Peterson begins the interview by explaining why he tells young men to grow up and take responsibility for getting their lives together and becoming good partners. He notes he isn’t talking exclusively to men, and that he has lots of female fans.

    “What’s in it for the women, though?” Newman asks.

    “Well, what sort of partner do you want?” Peterson says. “Do you want an overgrown child? Or do you want someone to contend with who is going to help you?”

    “So you’re saying,” Newman retorts, “that women have some sort of duty to help fix the crisis of masculinity.” But that’s not what he said. He posited a vested interest, not a duty.

    “Women deeply want men who are competent and powerful,” Peterson goes on to assert. “And I don’t mean power in that they can exert tyrannical control over others. That’s not power. That’s just corruption. Power is competence. And why in the world would you not want a competent partner? Well, I know why, actually, you can’t dominate a competent partner. So if you want domination—”

    The interviewer interrupts, “So you’re saying women want to dominate, is that what you’re saying?”

    The next section of the interview concerns the pay gap between men and women, and whether it is rooted in gender itself or other nondiscriminatory factors:

    Newman: … that 9 percent pay gap, that’s a gap between median hourly earnings between men and women. That exists.

    Peterson: Yes. But there’s multiple reasons for that. One of them is gender, but that’s not the only reason. If you’re a social scientist worth your salt, you never do a univariate analysis. You say women in aggregate are paid less than men. Okay. Well then we break its down by age; we break it down by occupation; we break it down by interest; we break it down by personality.

    Newman: But you’re saying, basically, it doesn’t matter if women aren’t getting to the top, because that’s what is skewing that gender pay gap, isn’t it? You’re saying that’s just a fact of life, women aren’t necessarily going to get to the top.

    Peterson: No, I’m not saying it doesn’t matter, either. I’m saying there are multiple reasons for it.

    Newman: Yeah, but why should women put up with those reasons?

    Peterson: I’m not saying that they should put up with it! I’m saying that the claim that the wage gap between men and women is only due to sex is wrong. And it is wrong. There’s no doubt about that. The multivariate analysis have been done. So let me give you an example––

    The interviewer seemed eager to impute to Peterson a belief that a large, extant wage gap between men and women is a “fact of life” that women should just “put up with,” though all those assertions are contrary to his real positions on the matter.

    Throughout this next section, the interviewer repeatedly tries to oversimplify Peterson’s view, as if he believes one factor he discusses is all-important, and then she seems to assume that because Peterson believes that given factor helps to explain a pay gap between men and women, he doesn’t support any actions that would bring about a more equal outcome.

    This is what Social Justice Warriors in general, and radical feminists in particular, do. They start with the assumption that they’re good, and anyone who objects to their Social Justice Warrior positions is obviously evil, and thus must be made to repent of their heresy or else be destroyed. Any attempt at a more nuanced position that strays from Social Justice Warrior dogma is just a dodge by the evil person meant to obscure their fundamental sexist/racist/Islamophobic/etc. beliefs and avoid repenting of their unwillingness to “check their privilege.” Forget investigating their stated position; that’s just a smokescreen for their evil. They must confess their sins.

    Here’s the video of the interview.

    Some Twitter reactions:

    And now here’s the Newman/Peterson interview in meme form:

    Tags: , , , , , , ,
    Posted in Social Justice Warriors, video | 1 Comment »

    FBI Amazing Coincidence Theater

    January 24th, 2018

    I could save this for the next Clinton Corruption update, since it’s all one big pro-Clinton/anti-Trump conspiracy, but let’s break down these two amazing FBI coincidences separately.

    First we learn that five months of FBI agent Peter Strzok’s text messages to and from his mistress Lisa Page have gone missing:

    The FBI “failed to preserve” five months worth of text messages exchanged between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the two FBI employees who made pro-Clinton and anti-Trump comments while working on the Clinton email and the Russia collusion investigations.

    The disclosure was made Friday in a letter sent by the Justice Department to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC).

    Snip.

    “That texts are missing for the period between Dec. 14, 2016 and May 17, 2017.”

    Wow, what an amazing coincidence! Just after Strzok had referred to “a secret society” in the wake of Trump’s unexpected win, just when when the Russian Conspiracy Fantasy was in it’s first bloom! What are the odds? Especially since May 17 was the date when the special council was first convened. (By the way, Strzok and Page exchanged more than 50,000 text messages during and after the election. How did they find time to get any FBI work done?)

    But keep in mind, those messages may be “missing” but they’re probably not “gone”:

    Speaking of amazing coincidences, Daniel Richman, a law professor who helped former FBI director James Comey leak classified information to the media, is now claiming that he’s acting as Comey’s lawyer, and thus protected by client-attorney privilege, something neither Richman nor Comey claimed until this week!

    A friend of former FBI director James Comey who leaked sensitive FBI memos to The New York Times in the wake of Comey’s firing in 2017 now claims to be Comey’s personal attorney. Daniel Richman, a law professor at Columbia University, told The Federalist via phone on Tuesday afternoon that he was now personally representing Comey.

    The revelation comes in the wake of news that Comey was interviewed by the special counsel’s office last year. According to The New York Times, the line of questioning from the office of special counsel Robert Mueller focused on memos that Comey wrote and later leaked after he was fired from his job by President Donald Trump. A review of FBI policies governing the handling of sensitive government documents suggests Comey violated FBI policy by leaking the memos, which were produced on government time, using government equipment, and directly related to his official government responsibilities, according to Comey’s own testimony before Congress.

    Context:

    More and more, FBI agents involved in anti-Trump activities are expecting us to buy explanations from them that an FBI field agent would never buy from a potential suspect.

    It stinks, and they know it stinks.

    Tags: , , , , , , , ,
    Posted in Crime, Democrats, Obama Scandals | 1 Comment »

    Democrats Fold Like a Cheap Folding Table at a Buffalo Bills Playoff Game*

    January 23rd, 2018

    Well, that shutdown didn’t last long:

    Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer waved the white flag Monday, paving the way for an end to the three-day government shutdown many have named after the New York Democrat — and prompting liberal fury and conservatives’ mockery.

    Democratic lawmakers initially refused Friday to support a continuing resolution to fund the government — unless the measure included amnesty for an estimated 800,000 individuals who qualified under the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program to remain in the U.S. with the parents who brought them here illegally.

    But that changed on Monday as Schumer conceded, saying he would allow a vote without the DACA amnesty provision included. Republican leaders agreed, in return, to hold a Senate vote on an amnesty bill in February.

    What did they get for abandoning their “deeply held principles” that illegal alien amnesty was more important than keeping the federal government running?

    A few more reactions from Twitter:

    For Democrats to cave so fast the internal polling most be even worse than we think. Did no one on the Democratic Party’s leadership team think to themselves “Hey, maybe caring more about the fate of some illegal aliens over those of the American people may not be a winning electoral strategy”?

    Let’s let Willy explain just what Sen. Schumer earned from his little shutdown stunt:

    (*Seriously, I have no idea how that whole Bills Mafia Folding Table thing came about and would like some Bills fan to explain it to me. SooperMexican, perhaps?)

    Tags: , , , , ,
    Posted in Border Control, Democrats | No Comments »

    Trump Ad Hits Democrats Over Illegal Aliens

    January 22nd, 2018

    Donald Trump’s Presidential campaign just put out an ad hitting Democrats over crimes committed by illegal aliens:

    A few thoughts:

  • Has any President ever launched a reelection ad three years before his term is up?
  • Or used it to hit members of the opposing party over a then-contentious issue?
  • Either polling or Trump’s gut tells him that this is a deeply unpopular issue for Democrats, and I think he’s right. In the current shutdown fight, Democrats have chosen illegal aliens over American citizens, and they need to pay the political price for it.
  • Rick Perry used this issue effectively in his 2010 gubernatorial reelection campaign against Democrat Bill White. In that ad, a Houston police officer talked about how her husband (another police officer) had been killed by a multi-arrested illegal alien while White, Houston’s mayor at the time, was touting Houston as a “sanctuary city.”

    • My suspicion is that Democrats will get clobbered in this fight. We’ll see…

    Tags: , , , , ,
    Posted in Border Control, Democrats, video | No Comments »

    Shoe0nHead Makes a Drinking Game of Feminist Videos, Dies

    January 21st, 2018

    OK, she didn’t literally die, but she did say she was going to several times. And I can see than teenage feminist rap video killing the unwary…

    Don’t try this at home!

    Tags: , , , ,
    Posted in Social Justice Warriors, video | No Comments »

    Turkey Invades Syria To Crush Kurdish Forces

    January 20th, 2018

    Turkey just launched a major military operation in the Afrin region of northern Syria in order to crush U.S.-backed Kurdish forces in the region:

    Turkish war planes have launched air strikes on Kurdish militants in northern Syria, in a move likely to cause tensions with the US.

    It’s not just warplanes. There are reports of Turkish Leopard tanks crossing the border.

    Turkey wants to oust the Kurds, which it calls terrorists, from Afrin region which lies across its southern border.

    Some Kurdish groups are allies of the US against the Islamic State group.

    Russia has moved its troops away from Afrin, saying it is concerned but will not interfere. Syria denounced Turkey’s “aggression” and “brutal attack”.

    Turkey had been shelling the area for two days, ahead of its declaration of a military operation on Saturday.

    Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu says Turkey has notified all actors involved – including the Syrian government – about the offensive. Syria denied this was the case.

    According to Livemap, Afrin is a very active theater right now:

    The yellow area is Kurd-held territory in Syria, while the blue dots are Turkish military activity.

    How much, if any, of the area is held by the directly U.S.-backed, Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces is unclear. (“Unclear” being the watchword for much of the Syrian civil war.)

    I can’t imagine that this will improve already-bad relations between the United States and Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s scumbag Islamist government in Ankara. Maybe, as with our erstwhile “ally” Pakistan, it’s time to cut ties with Turkey (and start moving to get them expelled from NATO), as they’ve been more of a hindrance than help ever since Erdogan took power.

    Tags: , , , , , , , ,
    Posted in Foreign Policy, Military | No Comments »

    « Older Entries
    Newer Entries »