Posted at 02:47 PM | Permalink
We need one around our jobs, not along our border:
Back in 2010, at the height of the rancorous debate over Arizona’s illegal-immigrant law, SB 1070, I wrote over on the homepage that the simple solution to the whole problem of illegal immigration is E-Verify. I argued that proponents of SB 1070, or for that matter, a border fence, were barking up the wrong tree. Illegal immigration does not happen because of insufficient police power or a poorly defended border. Just think about it: Those factors lower the barriers to entry but they are not the reason that illegal immigrants come here.
The reason illegal immigrants come here is that they know they can get jobs here. The rational solution is to make sure that they can’t get jobs here. Arizona adopted exactly the right policy – three years before SB 1070 – when it adopted mandatory E-Verify for all employers. Kill the incentive to illegal immigration, and you end the crisis. Then it becomes possible to secure the border without any need to replicate the Great Wall of China (which, by the way, didn’t work because the Ming forgot to eliminate the incentive to invade).
Well, today’s WSJ reports that since Arizona started E-Verify in 2008, the population of illegal immigrants has dropped an amazing 40 percent. Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants simply left.
Posted at 12:53 PM | Permalink
The most important takeaway, though, is this: The politics of resentment won Tuesday night. It hasn’t had a showing like this in the United States maybe since the 1890s.
Donald Trump and Sanders have a remarkably similar and remarkably simple message, and it’s this: You’re being screwed. They agree that international trade is screwing you, that health care companies are screwing you and that Wall Street is screwing you.
Sanders says he’s going to throw bankers in jail, raise everybody’s taxes — and provide universal health care.
Trump says he’ll deport every illegal immigrant, keep Muslims out of the country until “we can find out what the hell is going on,” force Mexico to build a wall, levy a 45 percent tariff on China — and provide universal health care.
Simple, straightforward and catchy — that’s the key. And none of it is your fault. Everything bad that’s happening, everything that makes you nervous and worried and uncertain about the future, is the result of a great wrong that is being done to you.
Sanders says it’s being done by malefactors of great wealth. Trump says it’s being done by morons and idiots who run Washington and are getting their hats handed to them by canny malefactors in Beijing and Mexico City.
Posted at 12:39 PM | Permalink
It’s not what some people think:
No aristocracy is more dangerous than one that advances under the banner of “democracy.” The most dangerous elite is one that claims not to exist, but masks itself as the pure agent of “the people,” in the language of both Robespierre and Lenin. In the United States, the political and intellectual descendants of Jefferson’s rationalistic and secular aristocracy, such as the statists Hilary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, having long ago abandoned Jefferson’s suspicion of federal power, have persuaded themselves and many among us that people can be empowered by giving ever more power to centralized agencies and to federal judges with their advanced moral sensibilities.
On this “liberal” or “socialist” view, the failures of the federal establishment must be redressed by giving ever more power to that establishment — and thus by further weakening, in the name of an abstract “social justice,” the informal “establishment” of civil society: strong (that is, authoritative) families, religious morality, and local institutions attuned to an established way of life.
As University of Virginia political scientist James Ceaser has shown in a brilliantly synoptic article in the Weekly Standard, the confusion of our present politics, which is only compounded by the abstraction of the “anti-establishment,” stems from an ambiguity concerning the nature of the “system” that we attack or criticize. “Progressives” align themselves against a system supposedly dominated by free-market economics, but by now “Progressivism is the system, at least as much as, if not more than, liberal capitalism. And with its vast interests to defend and its clients to sustain, progressivism is also every bit as much constitutive of the status quo.
Just as liberal capitalism has bred pathologies like crony capitalism, progressivism has created its dysfunction of crony progressivism.” The insidious political genius of progressivism is that “as its actual influence expanded to cover more and more aspects of American life, progressives continued to disclaim responsibility for any of the ills that plagued society. These were all the fault of the system. Like Peter Pan, progressivism will not grow up. By its own self-conception, it cannot.”
Posted at 10:55 AM | Permalink
The biggest winners in last night’s New Hampshire primary—Trump, Sanders, and Kasich—all promise the magic of socialism without consequences. Kasich adds the annoying qualifier that to disagree with him is sinful. I’d expected more from the Granite State.
Posted at 09:49 AM | Permalink
The Rubio misdemeanor:
“We are taking our message to families that are struggling to raise their children in the 21st century because, as you saw, Jeanette and I are raising our four children in the 21st century, and we know how hard it’s become to instill our values in our kids instead of the values they try to ram down our throats.
“In the 21st century, it’s becoming harder than ever to instill in your children the values they teach in our homes and in our church instead of the values that they try to ram down our throats in the movies, in music, in popular culture.”
The Churchill felony:
Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never ...
Posted at 11:03 PM | Permalink
Posted at 10:53 AM | Permalink
A small-L libertarian breaks the news to the Paulnuts:
Here’s the deal. You don’t have to like the status quo. You don’t have to like where the 2016 presidential contest is heading. You don’t have to settle for less than you expect from a candidate. I’m not going to berate you for abstaining or voting third party if that’s what you feel you should do. But I am going to suggest that political success will not come for the liberty movement until its activists move past conspiratorial excuses. The real reason Rand Paul is suspending his campaign is that it has not attracted enough interest, plain and simple. People aren’t buying what he’s selling.
Rand Paul did not fail because of the Republican establishment. He did not fail because of the media. He failed because politics is first and foremost about people, and the people just weren’t with him. There is no silent majority. There is no grassroots groundswell tamped down by an oppressive establishment. People just don’t agree with you. Deal with it, and come up with a strategy which acknowledges that reality.
Posted at 08:53 PM | Permalink
A very expensive, poorly functioning ladder:
Despite being backed by the monumental Right to Rise super PAC, Jeb Bush said Monday he would “eliminate” the Supreme Court decision that paved the way for super PACs.
“If I could do it all again I’d eliminate the Supreme Court ruling” Citizens United, Bush told CNN’s Dana Bash. “This is a ridiculous system we have now where you have campaigns that struggle to raise money directly and they can’t be held accountable for the spending of the super PAC that’s their affiliate.”
Posted at 06:39 PM | Permalink
Kevin Williamson concludes that electing a Black Lives Matter blacktivist as mayor could make Baltimore no worse and gives him the most backhanded endorsement imaginable:
Serving a term as mayor of Baltimore would be an excellent educational opportunity for Mckesson, and he needs it: The banality of his political prose is exceeded only by the banality of his political thinking, to the extent that we can call the products of his mind “thought.” He believes that serving as mayor without having come up through the regular political channels would present him with the opportunity to put into place a progressive agenda unsullied by what has come before. What he is not quite clever enough to understand is that most of his ideas were put into place 40 years or more ago in Baltimore, Cleveland, Detroit, etc., and that what we see there is not the absence of progressive leadership but the result of it.
To quote Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: He’s silly and he’s ignorant, but he’s got guts. It is one thing to bitch and moan and carry a placard, but Mckesson is offering to step beyond Twitter and into the real world of how the sausage gets made in a city such as Baltimore (344 murders last year).
And though sensible people hold Mckesson in low esteem, there is no reason to believe that he is doing this in anything other than good faith. Off of the bench and into the game: Good on him. And if the education of DeRay Mckesson turns out to be as deliciously brutal and pitiless as expected, then it also presents an opportunity to educate, to some extent, a generation of silly and ignorant young activists in aching need of a swift kick in the ass from reality.
Please do proceed, Mr. Mckesson. We’ll be watching.
Posted at 12:01 PM | Permalink
The NARAL baby death squad objected via Twitter to the Doritos commercial starring an unborn baby:
#NotBuyingIt - that @Doritos ad using #antichoice tactic of humanizing fetuses & sexist tropes of dads as clueless & moms as uptight. #SB50
Really? The ad didn’t show any of the couple’s other children. Of what person or persons were these characters a mother and father? So it’s a fetus, but not human, but already has a mom and dad, who are human.
Posted at 11:37 AM | Permalink
There’s a conspiracy to keep you from getting free stuff. That’s not just Bernie Sanders’s message, it’s Donald Trump’s:
In a nearly one-hour speech, Trump railed against pharmaceutical companies. He railed against oil companies. And insurance companies. And defense contractors. And he set himself against a political system that he said allows big-money corporate “bloodsuckers” to control the government with campaign contributions.
“Whether it’s the insurance companies, or the drug companies, or the oil companies, it’s all the same thing,” Trump said. “We’re never going to get our country back if we keep doing this.”
Trump promised to allow the government to negotiate drug prices — a common position among Democrats but rarely heard at nominally Republican events. He said he would not raise military spending, arguing that the nation’s defenses can be improved without increasing its already huge Pentagon budget. He promised tough sanctions on American companies that move jobs overseas.
Trump was, in other words, in full populist mode as he wrapped up his New Hampshire campaign, in which he leads the closest Republican competition by about 15 points, according to the RealClearPolitics average of polls.
There were portions of Trump’s Plymouth speech that sounded like Bernie Sanders, if Sanders had Trump’s sense of showmanship. In fact, Trump mentioned Sanders favorably, saying they agree on trade. Trump also said Sanders is correct in his charge that Hillary Clinton is compromised by the big-money contributions she has accepted — a charge the billionaire developer aimed at his Republican rivals as well.
Posted at 11:22 AM | Permalink
Posted at 01:23 PM | Permalink
... the basis for a civil war:
Hillary Rodham Clinton is not qualified to be president of the United States of America, because she doesn’t know what the United States of America are.
Terry Shumaker, former U.S. ambassador to Trinidad (I wonder what that gig cost him) and current abject minion in the service of Mrs. Clinton, quotes Herself telling an audience in New Hampshire: “Service is the rent we pay for living in this great country.”
There is a very old English word for people who are required to perform service as a rent for their existence, and that word is serf. Serfdom is a form of bondage.
Americans are not serfs. We are not sharecroppers on Herself’s farm or in vassalage to that smear of thieving nincompoopery in Washington that purports to rule us.
We don’t owe you any damned rent.
Of course Americans perform service: in our families, in our churches, in civic organizations, through charity. We serve because we believe in it, not because we have to justify our consumption of O2 to some despicable low-rent Lady Macbeth who is so keenly aware of her own profiteering and corruption that she violated a stack of federal statutes to keep her work correspondence away from proper oversight. We may be called to justify ourselves before God one day, but not before that.
Herself imagines the United States of America to be a nation of serfs. Whom do you think she imagines as their overlord?
And that is why any sane and self-respecting country would have kept this woman far away from any public office, much less let her flirt with the presidency.
Posted at 03:51 PM | Permalink