Wednesday, January 31, 2018

The State of the Union Address: One Hour and Twenty Minutes of Drudgery

If I hadn't decided to summarize President Trump's State of the Union address here at Target Liberty, I would have turned it off the television 10 minutes into the speech, maybe five.

This wasn't even a mediocre speech. It was one hour and 20 minutes of formularistic drudgery.

Trump pointed to the Capitol's balcony so many times to single out people who suffered great tragedy or who "benefitted" from Trump policy that I thought there was a chance he was going to recognize every single American who went to work in 2017 with a stubbed toe.

Between the recognition of the balcony people, Trump told us how he helped all Americans and was going to help us even more in 2018. Early on in the speech, he took credit for the Federal Reserve manipulated boom phase of the boom-bust cycle. It is not clear how the hustler-in-chief will deal with the bust phase, which all good students of Austrian school economics know follows a central bank created manipulated boom.

That said, most of the speech was about recognizing the dumb statist's favorite people: police, military and ICE agents. A sampling from the speech:
We are incredibly grateful for the heroic efforts of the Capitol Police Officers, the Alexandria Police...

 And we celebrate our police, our military, and our amazing veterans as heroes who deserve our total and unwavering support...

 Ryan Holets is 27 years old, and an officer with the Albuquerque Police Department.  He is here tonight with his wife Rebecca.  Last year, Ryan was on duty when he saw a pregnant, homeless woman preparing to inject heroin...

 I am asking the Congress to end the dangerous defense sequester and fully fund our great military...

Our warriors in Afghanistan also have new rules of engagement...

 Here tonight is one leader in the effort to defend our country:  Homeland Security Investigations Special Agent Celestino Martinez -- he goes by CJ.  CJ served 15 years in the Air Force before becoming an ICE agent and spending the last 15 years fighting gang violence and getting dangerous criminals off our streets.
Trump also focused on his pet boogeyman the brutal El Salvador-based gang MS-13. As far as I can tell, on an annual basis, more people die in the United States from falling out of bed (approx. 450) than by the hands of MS-13.

If Trump really thinks a key role for the government is to disband this gang, then I say, let's disband the federal government now. I don't need 30% plus of my income taxed to fight some group that I have never come across. In other words, as things stand, Trump's gang is taking a lot more from me than MS-13.

But the worse part of Trump's speech was summed up nicely by Ron Paul in a tweet:
Summary: The most dangerous part of the speech was the glorification of militarism and our aggressive foreign policy. Sadly, the Members' over-enthusiastic response to the militarism was not encouraging. #SOTU
Bottom line: Trump is a typical U.S. politician and he also seems to have a unique infatuation with government people who carry guns. One wonders where he is going to order the guns be pointed and used next. I doubt he is satisfied by just finger pointing for one hour and twenty minutes at people in the balcony



  1. I'm sorry, but the MS-13 part is a terrible argument.
    Ted Bundy killed only a handful more people in his entire career than lightning strikes do in any given year in the USA. Is that a reason for not pursuing Ted Bundy? I get that fighting crime (especially relating to drugs) is a very big umbrella that lets the gov. get away with a lot of liberty-decreasing things, but come on.
    Argue against the actual problems with the policy. If it's not important because it's not affecting you personally, this is a non-ironic case of check your privilege.

    1. RW has made enough money over the years to live above the poop his views would create when it come to immigration. Libertarianism has historical background founded by white nominally Christian males, not a bunch of stupid Africans, Chinese, or whatever else you can imagine.

      Even too many whites who have leftist ideas are ignorant of why things work relatively well in 'white supremacy' countries.

      Culture, race, and IQ do matter.

    2. Gang violence (not matter the flavor; street gang, mobster, random criminals) can be more cost effectively fought with an armed populace. The criminals are less likely to target people who will shoot them. Trump is acting like a liberal when he wants to add more badged orcs or in Chicago's case send in the military to more or less occupy the city. Both of these socialist solutions are also cheered on by the so-called anti-federal pro-gun conservatives

    3. "Both of these socialist solutions are also cheered on by the so-called anti-federal pro-gun conservatives"

      Not something I cheer, but they don't get any support from the left or the cuckservatives in the self defense department.

    4. Okay, but that's not what he was saying. I'm fairly sure that if Wenzel was beaten half to death one night (this is not a veiled threat, please don't get hung up on this part), he would go to the fucking police and expect them to do an actual investigation.

      Or what about James Damore? Guy's not even a libertarian, but he gets criticised for his lawsuit, but Walter Block gets a pass for his because he can twist some nobody-in-the-world-cares nuance of the NAP in his favour?

      The problem with the war on drugs is not that it targets actual violent criminal gangs. Creating them is another point, but they are already here, you can't ignore that. Libertarianism has always been somewhat naive and idealistic, but these days I feel like it's turning into a pipe dream, like communism, just in a different direction.

      A big part of that is differentiating from the alt-right, I guess, but this will keep alienating people until the movement will truly be dead.

    5. Re: Peterson,
      ─ Is that a reason for not pursuing Ted Bundy? ─

      Who said nobody should pursue MS-13 gang members? What president Trump said during the SOTU was a false equivalency between immigrants and MS-13 gang members, not unlike equating all men with Ted Bundy.

      ─ If it's not important [the policy] because it's not affecting you personally[...]─

      That's a dishonest assessment. Pointing out the waste of resources that entails a restrictive immigration policy which is justified on the existence of a few MS-13 gang members is not the same as obfuscating the issue or ignoring the problem.

      ─ The problem with the war on drugs is not that it targets actual violent criminal gangs. ─

      You would be missing the point that fighting gangs while keeping the war on drugs is like playing an expensive game of whack-a-mole.

      ─ Libertarianism has always been somewhat naive and idealistic ─

      What an incredibly ignorant assertion. Libertarianism is a personal political philosophy. You either are and act like a libertarian, or you don't. That does not mean you should expect others to behave like you do. *YOU* decide to behave like a decent human being. *I* decide to do so. But to say "I won't because you won't" is only a convenient excuse, a cop-out, not a reason to say that libetarianism is naive.

    6. Re: The Lab Mismanager,

      ─ Culture, race, and IQ do matter ─

      You're living proof that, together, they guarantee sh|t.

  2. Here is my favorite black American on immigration:

    I know libertardians want more stinky turd world people from poop hole countries coming here without any consequences for them.

  3. Pat Buchanan on civic nationalism:

    Thanks to vermin not assimilating into Western ways of doing things:

    I think the Dreamers and DACA's need to pay a $1 million or more each to become an American citizen. I'm sure Carlos Slim and Kochs have enough money to fund that idea.

  4. Nothing like scaring the bejesus out of the "white" culture!
    It's worked like a charm for every statist since the progressive era. Yet here we are living in the rotting carcass of what could have been.