Raising Rifle-Buying Age to 21 Would Disarm American Heroes and Spit on Founding Intent

Too young at the time of his legendary heroics to be trusted with a rifle? (U. S. Army publicity photo)

The latest citizen disarmament plot currently being hatched will raise the minimum age for rifle purchases to 21. While some are specifically calling out semi-automatic rifles, others want it all. Such plans are  gaining traction at the state and federal level by no shortage of Democrat opportunists and “bipartisan” Republican panderers, including Sen. Marco Rubio and President Donald Trump.

An interesting article over at Firearms News notes Audie Murphy would have been deemed “too young” to be trusted with a rifle at the time his legendary heroics earned him recognition as the most decorated combat soldier of WWII.  It goes on to imagine a gun store clerk telling not just him, but “our young combat heroes, veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, who may have lost limbs and fought for our freedom, that they have no Second Amendment freedom because they are not 21 years old.”

Could anything be more offensive and absurd?

That’s what these oath-breaking poltroons are doing when they propose disarming Americans old enough to give “the last full measure of devotion” to their country. That’s what corporate cowards like Edward Stack of Dick’s Sporting Goods (and Walmart and other despicable gunkapo profiteers) are saying.

As for those proposing legislative changes, that would also seem to fly in the face of 10 U.S. Code § 246 – Militia: composition and classes:

“(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. (b) The classes of the militia are— (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.”

No guns allowed?

The Second Militia Act of 1792 recognized 18 as the age of conscription, and the Founders recognized that this did not in itself establish limits and bans. From Continental Congress Delegate and political economist Tench Coxe:

“THE POWERS OF THE SWORD ARE IN THE HANDS OF THE YEOMANRY OF AMERICA FROM SIXTEEN TO SIXTY. The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared to any possible army must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are these militia? [A]re they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American. . . . [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”

Pretenders, frauds and outright traitors seeking to usurp a birthright are no friends to Liberty. They’re wrong on history, wrong on morality, wrong on the Constitution…

There will be no compromise with such as these. Equivocating, desperate excuse-making and weasel-words notwithstanding, anyone – anyone – seeking to exploit the bloody failures of tyranny by imposing more Intolerable Acts, infringements and restrictions on freedom is selling me out, selling you out, selling our children out, and should be spoken to  accordingly and in no uncertain terms.

—–

If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please make a donation to support our work.  You can donate HERE.

—–

David Codrea’s opinions are his own. See “Who speaks for Oath Keepers?”

The post Raising Rifle-Buying Age to 21 Would Disarm American Heroes and Spit on Founding Intent appeared first on Oath Keepers.

Raising Rifle-Buying Age to 21 Leads to Inconvenient Truth

Rubio thinks he can appease the mob by pledging to “take [a] right away.” (CNN YouTube screen capture)

“I absolutely believe that in this country if you are 18 years of age, you should not be able to buy a rifle, and I will support a law that takes that right away,” Sen. Marco Rubio pandered to an inflamed mob at a CNN “town hall meeting,” drawing applause from a crowd that for the most part would never vote for him in a million years, no matter how many gun owners he betrays. And he wasn’t done throwing those that trusted him with political power under the bus, also offering up a “bump stock” ban, prior restraint disarmament orders and a willingness to put a normal capacity magazine ban on the table. That and he’s dead set on keeping schools “gun-free zones,” nixing any plan to recognize the right of teachers who so choose to keep and bear arms.

So naturally it was in CNN’s interest to portray this poltroon, who by his own words doesn’t understand what a right is and that no one has legitimate authority to take any away, as “a staunch supporter of Second Amendment rights.”  Getting low-information viewers to swallow that lie allows them to portray anyone who opposes serial surrenders as an “extremist,” and with just a bit more media conflation, as a fascist and a hater.

And Rubio is hardly alone. Donald Trump has now thrown his hat in the “Ban semi-auto rifles for anyone under 21” ring. It’s fair to wonder, with the green light given him by NRA on “Fix NICS” and “bump stocks,” if his contention that “The NRA will back it and so will Congress” means any vocal opposition from Fairfax will be for show, and at the end of the day members will be fed a load of “Who else do you have to vote for?”

It’s also fair to wonder how anyone with judgment so impaired they’re too young to own a semi-auto could be considered mature enough to vote, to contract, to parent, to cohabit or marry, to join the military and deploy with actual “in common use at the time” ordnance,” or to make any of the daily adult choices expected of a free citizen. Instead, we see a “progressive” law professor making the case—as amplified by CNN, to lower the voting age to 16.

Time was, that would have been considered “the yeomanry of America,” but that’s not what they have in mind. Anybody remember “Wild in the Streets”?

Never ones to let a crisis they contribute to go to waste, CNN has resurrected a video from Bryant Gumbel showing a 13-year-old buying a bolt-action .22 from a private collector at  a Virginia gun show. What is it with CNN and scripts, or with gun-grabbers using actors?

“The HBO clip has resurfaced following a deadly school shooting in Florida,” The Daily Mail “reports.”  All by its own self, no doubt. And it’s being used to show minors can’t buy cigarettes, scratch-offs and porn, but it’s open season on children  and unrestricted gun sales.

First, consider the source. We’re talking about someone who calls us “pigs.” They admit things are scripted, but not how much.  Who is the seller?  Which gun show did this take place at?  Does it require an adult to accompany juveniles to get in, so would it be fair for a seller to assume “adults” he could have seen with the boy were overseeing things, and that he’d have some ‘splainin’ to do when he showed up with purchase in hand for the ride home?

What else was said, by or to him, by the boy or by the crew that has not been revealed in order to maintain a “pig” presumption with viewers?

In any case, Virginia law was not broken. While the Code of Virginia makes it “unlawful for any person under 18 years of age to knowingly and intentionally possess or transport a handgun or assault firearm anywhere in the Commonwealth,” the same does not apply to the rifle allegedly purchased on camera.

That’s the way things have been in much of the country for much of my lifetime.

Time was, boys and rifles did not result in school shooting headlines.

Years back I related the story of a friend of mine, then 13, who used to take his scoped .22 rifle on a Santa Monica bus to do target practice, opening the action to show the driver it was unloaded and walking several blocks to and from the range. I’ve told the story in “Lies of Omission” of my encounter with a deputy while my friends and I were having fun with a 16-gauge shotgun.

“You boys being careful?” he asked after rolling down the cruiser window, getting a feel for our demeanor and behavior.

“Yes sir,” I replied, gun broken open.

“See that you are,” he replied before driving off, satisfied that there would be no need to prone us out, and that we were doing nothing any different than what he used to do when he was our age. If any stop signs showed up peppered with dents, he had my license plate.

It was a way of life, especially in Virginia before the “progressive” grasp over all aspects of our lives had established an intended death grip on everyone’s throats. Boys routinely took rifles with them to school to do some hunting on the way home. It was part of a culture those who would “fundamentally transform” America need to destroy.  And what the idiot Republicans going along with the betrayal of their oaths fail to account for is that “21” is just another incremental slide down the “slippery slope.”  The gun-grabbers don’t want anyone of any age who is not serving the power elites to own a rifle (or a handgun) for the same reason totalitarians throughout history have looked to citizen disarmament as their best guarantor of success.

But what these examples of past freedoms enjoyed by young people throughout our history prove beyond any doubt is that we, who they furiously demand to disarm, could be trusted with guns when we were young, as could those who raised us. Look at the “progression” of the numbers of incidents as the country changed politically, and the objective conclusion is that the Republic Mr. Franklin challenged us to keep is being destroyed from within by an oxymoronic  culture of “progressive values.”

Helping that along is rapidly accelerating slow suicide. Republicans either need to stop being useful idiots or else admit the false “conservative” wing is –and has been all along — a controlled opposition con job. With each new betrayal, they’re making it easier and easier to assume the worst.

—–

If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please make a donation to support our work.  You can donate HERE.

—–

David Codrea’s opinions are his own. See “Who speaks for Oath Keepers?”

The post Raising Rifle-Buying Age to 21 Leads to Inconvenient Truth appeared first on Oath Keepers.

The Yield Curve Is Crashing-er

Stoccks are at record highs on the basis that Marco Rubio might a "yes" and John McCain will make it through the weekend... but if everything is so awesome, why is the yield curve collapsing?

This is the 5th weekly plunge in the yield curve in a row - the longest streak since March 2016

 

The yield curve is now the flattest since Nov 2007, with the flattenig accelerating...

 

2017 is the fastest yield curve collapse since 2007...

 

If this is not going to end badly, we are going to need more QE - as JPMorgan shows in the chart below - each episode of QE steepened the curve and lengthened the current cycle...

Stocks Surge To All Time High On Conflicting Reports About Rubio"s Support For Tax Bill

Update: minutes after the trial balloon was floated, the initial Fox report has been denied:

• SEN. RUBIO STILL A `NO" ON TAX BILL, HASN"T SEEN TEXT YET: AIDE

Yet somehow, despite sliding on yesterday"s Rubio news, stocks have refused to react to today"s rejection, and are now trading at all time highs clearly certain that nothing can derail tax reform now.

Earlier GOP Rep. Kristi Noem said that the child tax credit demanded by Rubio, is being made refundable to $1,400 per child, Bloomberg reports. "We’re in a good spot," she say. As a reminder, yesterday Marco Rubio said the credit had to expand from $1,100 to win his vote for the overall tax legislation.

For now, however, Rubio spokeswoman said he hasn’t yet seen bill text: “We have not seen bill text, and until we see if the percentage of the refundable credit is significantly higher, then our position remains the same,” Rubio spokeswoman Olivia Perez-Cubas said in email Friday morning.

GOP Sen. Mike Lee’s office also says he hasn’t seen text; Lee has voiced similar concerns about child tax credit as Rubio.

* * *

Earlier

And just like that, stocks priced in tax reform for the n^th consecutive day, because one day after speculation that Marco Rubio would be a hurdle to the passage of tax reform, which pushed stocks modestly lower, moments ago Fox - or is that Disney - reported that Marcio Rubio is a "yes" on the tax bill, sending risk assets soaring in the latest "buy-everything" euphoria.

Source to FBN: Sen. @marcorubio will be a "yes" on tax bill. pic.twitter.com/qd4OXaUawR

— FOX Business (@FoxBusiness) December 15, 2017

Rubio"s turn comes shortly after Speaker Paul Ryan told the media that the Senate and House are both planning to hold votes on the bill by end-of-day Wednsday with the first vote likely coming in the House Tuesday and the Senate following either Tuesday or Wednesday. Separately, Senator Brady announced that the tax measure is now done, and should win every senator"s support.

• BRADY: TAX MEASURE DONE, SHOULD WIN EVERY SENATOR"S SUPPORT

The result in markets was fast and furious, with the S&P, dollar, yields and the USDJPY all surging following the report.

And putting yesterday"s and today"s moves in context:

Yesterday - SPX down 10 on news Rubio wont vote yes on principle...

Today - SPX up 17 on news he will vote yes and has no principles.

— DMW (@dmwlsw) December 15, 2017

Sexual Assault Storm Tells us Something Else About Power

Via The Daily Bell

Let’s talk about power. The way I see it, there are basically two types of power, political and economic. You can wield power through the government, or through your giant bank account.

In the crony world of corporate-political America, the lines are blurry. These days most people gain their political or economic power by mixing the two. But you can still tease apart whether someone’s power derives mostly from political or economic sources.

And there are all these people with either type of power who secretly behind closed doors act completely inappropriately when it comes to sexual advances.

(There’s more to the story about why the media is just now reporting these things. Read my take on the media’s plan for using sexual assault accusations as a weapon. But for our current discussion, suffice to say, most of these guys are major creeps exploiting their positions.)

So what happens to the people in each power-house when they are caught, with credible evidence?

The economically powerful in the private sector get fired. They have sponsors pulled, they have projects canceled. The power they used to take advantage sexually is seriously diminished. Even if it doesn’t cost them outright, it costs them in network connections. It costs them in reputation, and reputation is a key component of economic power.

The latest to be fired is Matt Lauer. Weinstein and Spacey lost projects and gave up lucrative deals. Mark Halperin and Charlie Rose were fired. Louie C.K. lost a whole bunch of shows and specials.

And the politically powerful are not affected. Al Franken has not resigned. John Conyers has not resigned. Some people even think Trump is getting off easy, although his controversy is more about words than actions. Bill Clinton is lucky he is from a different era. Roy Moore will become a Senator if a slim majority of Alabama voters approve.

The L.A. Times is taking politicians to task on the difference.

Congress also has more than a whiff of entitlement, accustomed to operating by its own rules while other organizations rush to protect themselves from liability.

Beyond that, some lawmakers argue that voters, not colleagues, should serve as the ultimate judges of those under scrutiny.

When Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) was asked Wednesday about the difference between quick actions taken against non-politicians and lagging moves against members of Congress like Rep. John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, he blurted out one line:

“Who elected them?” he said, referring to the private-sector figures.

This highlights the problem with holding government accountable. This shows how much easier it is to hold the private sector accountable. When people and organizations have to worry about their wallets, they respond.

The market is very effective at regulating behavior. We, the people, have the power hit the economically powerful where it hurts: their wallets.

We have no such power with politicians. In fact, the taxpayers fund their settlements! The government doesn’t stand to lose “business” no matter what its members do. They will still be funded by tax dollars, we have no choice.

And to fire them, we need to wait until the next election cycle. But even then, the politicians at fault might not be in your district. Even if they are, you need a majority to hold them accountable.

Public pressure on politicians does nothing to curtail their power unless it causes them to lose an election. But as consumers, we can immediately affect the power of people in the private sector. They don’t need a slim majority to maintain power, they need a broad customer base excited to hand over their dollars.

The private sector has built-in incentives to punish people who fall into disfavor with customers.

Political power is a creepy club of factions and games. When someone in the private sector is accused of sexual misconduct, their peers quickly disown them. They are banished, exiled, shunned, and may God have mercy on their souls.

But politicians know that their power is not subject to the same constraints as economic power.

Democrats have remained coy about whether or not Franken and Conyers should resign. Some Republicans have called for Roy Moore to drop out of the Alabama Senate race. But President Trump remains supportive. Marco Rubio says it is a “difficult situation.”

Because on the one hand, as a Republican, you want the Republican Party to keep the seat. On the other hand, I personally find the accusations against him to be credible, and I don’t think he has done or said anything in the last month that has helped himself or in any way made me feel better about it,” Rubio said. “But he’s staying in the race, the people of Alabama will have their vote and we’ll move on from there.”

So that is that, colleagues wash their hands of the situation. Let the voters decide their fate. Because that always works so well…

Power Goes to Their Head

I think power does basically the same thing to people whether it is economic or political power.

And if these people are willing to put their careers on the line for a cheap sexual thrill, imagine what else they are capable of.

I don’t know if this says something about human nature, our culture, or men in general. But the lesson I get out of it all is that power imbalances cause people to do crazy things. How easy it is for power to go to someone’s head.

Behavior that everyone knows is completely inappropriate is common among people who feel above others.

Those with economic power learn from their fall from grace. Congress’ solution? They will implement sexual harassment training for politicians and staff, and call it a day.

Tax Bill Fiasco: Senate Considering 1 Year Corporate Tax Cut Delay; Dollar Slides

Suddenly Republican tax reform is looking deader than a doornail.

According to the Washington Post, which cites " four people familiar with a draft of the legislation " not only is there little to no compromise on the way forward, but the only thing Senate Republicans leaders can agree on is to punt the centerpiece of the GOP tax plan by at least a year, and are considering a one-year delay in the implementation of a major corporate tax cut. This change would lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent in 2019, not 2018 as currently constructed by a House GOP bill. And while the delay would save $100 billion in much needed funds, it would be met with resistance from Trump, who wants the tax cuts implemented immediately.

In any case, to ensure that companies don’t postpone major investment decisions and wait for the lower rate in 2019, Senate Republicans are considering allowing companies to immediately deduct capital investments in 2018 from their taxable income, the WaPo sources said.

The news comes amid the expected growing opposition in the Senate to the current bill. One day after Trump nemesis John McCain said tax reform is "dead on arrival", on Tuesday, Sen. Ted Cruz said that the House tax bill could end up raising taxes on some middle-class Americans, and he pushed for assurances that the Senate bill would lower everyone’s taxes. Meanwhile, senators Marco Rubio and Mike Lee are pushing for an expansion of the child tax credit beyond what was introduced in the House. They have called for raising the child tax credit from $1,000 to $2,000. The House bill would raised the credit to $1,600.

Furthermore, the WaPo adds, that significant differences are also expected on the individual income-tax provisions.

Senate negotiators are planning to eliminate the state and local tax deductions that families take, going further than the House bill. They are also expected to retain roughly seven income tax brackets, rather than the four the House has proposed.

 

Details could change ahead of a formal release of a bill this Thursday by the Senate Finance Committee.

There will be a number of other changes to the taxes that certain businesses pay and the way companies are taxed on overseas earnings. Senate negotiators aren’t planning to include a temporary $300 “family flexibility credit” contained in the House bill. It’s this credit, which would expire after five years, that has fueled criticism that the House bill would eventually lead to higher taxes for some middle class families.

Separately, Bloomberg reports that on Tuesday afternoon President Trump called into a meeting between Senate Democrats, National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn and White House Legislative Affairs Director Marc Short, Democratic Sen. Jon Tester tells reporters. Tester said that Trump spoke (maybe screamed would be a better description) for about 15 minutes by phone from Asia and insisted the rich will be hurt by the tax bill.

During the same meeting, Dem. Senator Sherrod Brown gave Cohn copies of two bills he wants in the tax package, including one that would boost income of those making $20k-$70k. Brown added that Trump said over the phone he liked the ideas in the bills Brown presented; “I don’t know if McConnell is not hearing what the president is saying or if McConnell is not paying attention," Brown says.

Or maybe Trump just hasn"t heard yet that Senate Republicans, after failing to repeal Obamacare not too long, now plans to concede on the most important aspect of Trump"s proposed tax plan.

In any case, a decision on delaying the implementation of the corporate rate has not been made, the WaPol said. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R-Texas), in writing his legislation, was considering having the corporate tax rate cut phase out after eight years but made a change the night before the bill was introduced to effectively make it permanent.

With the news of the potential delay hitting the market, the dollar in general, and the USD/JPY in particular was the first casualty and the pair was sold by leveraged accounts in Tokyo.

Intel Memo: Marco Rubio Targeted For Assassination By Venezuela Lawmaker

Senator Marco Rubio may have been targeted for assassination by one of Venezuela"s most powerful lawmakers and long time secretive head of the country"s security services. According to the Miami Herald, the US Department of Homeland Security disseminated a sensitive memo to federal agencies last month which identified Diosdado Cabello Rondon as behind the "order to have Senator Rubio assassinated," while also noting the intelligence to be unverified as “no specific information regarding an assassination plot against Senator Rubio has been garnered thus far."

Cabello Rondon is widely believed to be Venezuela"s second most-powerful man and head of the country"s military and security services. US media has referred to him as "the Frank Underwood of Venezuela" (from the TV series House of Cards) for his well-known history of corruption, suspicion of drug trafficking, and Machiavellian plotting against rivals and involvement in pro-Chavez military crackdowns. As a behind the scenes influential military leader he"s kept both the late president Hugo Chavez and current socialist strongman Nicolas Maduro in power.

Diosdado Cabello Rondon, currently Vice President of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela, also believed to be powerful leader of the country"s security services. Photo Source: Wiki Commons.

Politico has also obtained the memo and reports the following contents of the intelligence report marked "law enforcement sensitive" (the memo"s contents are in bold):

“In some unspecified manner, CABELLO RONDON’s problems involved U.S. Senator Marco Rubio,” said the memo, obtained by POLITICO, which is not releasing information that could endanger Rubio, his family or confidential law enforcement methods or sources.

The memo said that Cabello Rondon may even have discussed raising the money to kill Rubio or deal with the “problems” facing Venezuela’s ruling regime.

“CABELLO RONDON did indeed issue an order ... to have Senator Rubio assassinated,” the memo said. “Additionally, CABELLO RONDON was communicating with unspecified Mexican nationals in furtherance of the matter.”

Rubio has long been a fierce critic of Cabello with the two having recently engaged in a public war of words. During a July 19 Senate hearing Rubio called Cabello “the Pablo Escobar of Venezuela” as US authorities have an active drug investigation against Cabello and other Venezuelan leaders pending. Rubio is further spearheading efforts to increase sanctions on the socialist Latin American country, including the controversial proposal of an oil embargo, which other congress members warn could send the entirety of Venezuela into an economic tailspin and a worsened humanitarian catastrophe. But the Florida senator"s influence over US-Venezuela relations is hugely significant as it"s widely reported that he has President"s Trump"s ear regarding US policy toward the geopolitically important country.

Meanwhile, the war of words ratcheted up this summer when Cabello took to Twitter and called the Florida senator “Narco Rubio” in response to an attack by Rubio:

Fact that Narco leader @dcabellor annouced #6Aug military rebellion & govt response shows who"s in charge of security forces in #Venezuela

— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) August 6, 2017

Narco Rubio, alias @marcorubio, lo peor de la política imperial, aparece como el defensor de los terroristas que atacaron Fuerte Paramacay.

— Diosdado Cabello R (@dcabellor) August 6, 2017

It appears that both Senator Rubio and the Capitol police are taking the intelligence memo warning of a possible assassination plot seriously, especially after the June 14 unrelated shooting in Virginia which targeted Republican members of Congress at a baseball event. Multiple media reports have detailed a noticeably heightened security presence around Rubio, including a mixed Florida and Capitol police detail, as well as at times three additional plainclothes officers. According to the Miami Herald:

Capitol reporters first noticed police officers trailing Rubio almost a month ago. When he was interviewed last week by Herald news partner WFOR-CBS 4, Rubio’s security included at least one Miami-Dade County Police officer. MDPD was one of the law-enforcement agencies asked to help protect Rubio.

Local media began noticing the increased security in late July, which was large enough to become the subject of some conjecture. With the Sunday publication of the assassination plot memo we now know why. Multiple media outlets have sought comment from both Rubio"s staff and the Venezuelan Embassy, though no responses have been issued. 

As it appears that Rubio now has reason to make his public fight against Venezuela"s ruling socialist party a personal vendetta, we can expect the rhetoric to intensify even more in the coming week, especially following Trump"s unexpected comment on Friday afternoon that the US has a "military option for Venezuela."

America Doesn't Need Global Perpetual War To Prove We Love Liberty

Authored by Joey Clark via TheAntiMedia.org,

I can forgive a man who loses his temper, but to lose one’s temperance lock, stock, and barrel? That is a damnable offense. Without a sense of moderation, even the most courageous and prudent man will fail in his quest for justice and may even become that which he wishes to destroy.

Yet, “moderation” has come to mean something wholly different than temperance in American politics. Rather than restraint, American moderates insist our shared classically liberal ideals call for the prodigal spending of our wealth, as well as bellicose and bloody actions abroad — not only on behalf of the American people but also on behalf of the liberty of all people on the face of the earth.

“Human rights exist above the state and beyond history. They cannot be rescinded by one government any more than they can be granted by another. They inhabit the human heart, and from there, though they may be abridged, they can never be extinguished,” writes Senator John McCain in an op-ed for the New York Times, wherein he chastises Secretary of State Rex Tillerson for suggesting the United States government cannot always act simply with its ideals and values in mind.

That the U.S. must show restraint — a sort of realist, “first do no harm” foreign policy in advancing its ideals with the many diverse nations around the globe - McCain considers to be a type of retreat of American values that can only lead the oppressed peoples of the world to despair that America is no longer their champion.

“Our values are our strength and greatest treasure,” McCain writes. “We are distinguished from other countries because we are not made from a land or tribe or particular race or creed, but from an ideal that liberty is the inalienable right of mankind and in accord with nature and nature’s Creator.”

Yes, John, America purports to stand for universal human rights and the liberty of all, but does this love of liberty require us to threaten and actually wage war as long as there are monsters abroad to destroy?

Does our zeal for our libertarian ideals really behoove us to be forever tilting at windmills? Or, could this Quixotic quest actually be counterproductive to spreading the seed of liberty around the world?

Could the love of power and the constant use of fear and force to advance liberty, in fact, pervert the cause of liberty?

Aggressive wars, even wars prosecuted in the name of liberty, have a way of sowing discord and devastation, both abroad and at home. The loss of life, the wasting of wealth, the destruction of social institutions, and the corroding of the commercial, liberal, limited government spirit — these are only some of the effects of war.

War should be a last resort not only because of its costs in terms of blood and treasure but also because war always requires the sacrifice of liberty, e.g. today’s intrusive surveillance state. Furthermore, we should be wary of liberty becoming synonymous with American military intervention and global rule (even under the imprimatur of the “international liberal order.”)

Are we truly prepared to say the bloody military misadventures in Vietnam, Iraq, Libya, and beyond represent America’s best ideals? Or, were these wars for democracy and human rights really just another episode of Americans, as Aldous Huxley observed of politics long ago, exercising their will to power dressed up by political gentlemen in the noble toga of American ideals?

No, liberty needs much more than tough talk and the toppling of tyrants to blossom. We must recognize that the spontaneous order of a free society cannot be built by war or centrally planned by Washington. Liberty must first occur in the hearts and minds of foreign peoples themselves before they are encouraged to rebel.

As John Adams noted of the American revolution:

“The Revolution was effected before the War commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments of their duties and obligations …This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.”

Whether it be Russia or Saudi Arabia, North Korea or Syria or China, many tyrannical governments operate based on cultures going back centuries. It will be largely up to their own people to effect the change needed in their cultures and political institutions. America’s role in this struggle must be to serve as an example of a free society, as well as a well-wishing persuader. How tragic it would be to see those with a revolutionary zeal for liberty, in losing their temperance, give into an imperial mindset and use of imperial means.

Liberty has never been something to be imposed by immense, let alone imperial power. We would be foolish to think simply cutting the head off the snake (or threatening to do so) will usher in new Jeffersons, Franklins, and Paines in foreign lands. No, such societies, when thrown into the maelstrom of war, tend not to be incubators for liberty, but rather, fertile ground for vengeful and power-hungry tyrants in waiting. Accordingly, we must be patient in our efforts to bring liberty to all.

As Rex Tillerson said to Marco Rubio in his confirmation hearing to be secretary of state regarding the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia:

“I share all the same values that you share and want the same things for people the world over in terms of freedoms. But, I’m also clear-eyed and realistic about dealing in cultures—these are centuries long cultures, cultural differences. It doesn’t mean we can’t affect them and affect them to change. In fact, over the many, many years that I’ve been traveling to the Kingdom, although the pace has been slow, slower than any of us wish, there is a change underway in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. How and if they ever arrive at the same value system we have, I can’t predict that….what I wouldn’t want to do is to take some kind of a precipitous action that suddenly causes the leadership in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to have to interrupt that.”

Dare I say, what a temperate stance by the now Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. If the United States acts too brutishly on the world stage, we may very well experience an unwanted, illiberal backlash. In the future, it may serve Tillerson well, at least for the sake of eloquence, to recite a well-known presidential sentiment to neoconservatives such as McCain and Rubio, that “Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.”

In the meantime, Senator McCain and his ilk should be wary. If the United States government continues as it does today, bestriding the narrow world like a colossus, it will most likely be stabbed through the heart by daggers inscribed with the nation’s founding principles, the words “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” shedding salty tears of blood from sullied steel. I worry an American Colossus — full of dissonance, full of sound and fury, full of fear and vaunting — will not inspire a love of liberty but a fear and resentment of America’s power.

Indeed, Senator McCain, we can see the world for what it is and then seek to make it better, but we must first keep our temperate wits about us, else our courage, prudence, and passion for justice and liberty for all may very well turn us into the monsters we seek to destroy.

In Praise of Tillerson, Trump's Secretary Of State Pick

Submitted by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

The Financial Times reports Tillerson Gets Rough Ride from Russia Hawks on the Hill.

The rough ride was from Senator John McCain, Senator Marco Rubio, and Senator Lindsey Graham.

Rex Tillerson, Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of state, faced a tough grilling over his relationship with Russia and its president Vladimir Putin on Wednesday, while also stumbling on whether ExxonMobil had lobbied against Russian sanctions.

Mr Tillerson faced pointed questions from Marco Rubio, a Republican member of the Senate foreign relations committee, who several times said he found some of Mr Tillerson’s answers “troubling” and “discouraging”.

Leaving the committee hearing into Mr Tillerson’s nomination, Mr Rubio told reporters he was “prepared to do what is right” in regards to confirming or blocking Mr Tillerson’s appointment, leaving open the possibility that he could be leaning towards the latter.

In addition to Mr Rubio, two other Republican senators — John McCain and Lindsey Graham — have also stated that they have concerns about Mr Tillerson’s relationship with Mr Putin.

All I Need to Know

That’s about all I need to know. Anyone the collective neocon trio of McCain, Graham, and Rubio is displeased with, is assuredly a better choice than someone they like.

Rubio Makes Ass Out of Himself

During the hearing, Mr Rubio showed the committee a list of political opponents of Mr Putin who had died, grilling Mr Tillerson on whether those individuals had been killed on the orders of the Russian president, and whether Mr Putin should be classified as a war criminal.

When Mr Tillerson replied that he needed more access to classified information to form a judgment, Mr Rubio shot back: “None of this is classified, Mr Tillerson. These people are dead.”

If there is information, not allegations that Putin killed those people, let’s see it.

Tillerson’s non-rush-to-judgment is precisely what the US needs as Secretary of State.

His responses weren’t perfect. But no one else’s would have been either.

Drain the Swamp

The sooner the US rids itself of neocons like McCain, Graham, and Rubio, the better off the US will be, and the safer the world will be.

— Mike Mish Shedlock (@MishGEA) January 12, 2017