lewrockwell--2020-12-11--Less Electoral College? No, More Electoral College

For the past 20 years we have been assaulted by the Marxist left in the U.S. about how terrible the electoral college is .
In their quest for a purely egalitarian society — you know one without enforceable rules , culture , sexes and differences of any kind — the electoral college represents the ultimate thwarting of their intentions to rule through mobocracy .
It ’ s been a long and winding road through the institutions for these Marxists , undermining our educational system , media , government bureaucracies and buying off/ ’ electing ’ government officials to stepwise push @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That ’ s where we are today and the only thing that stands between a fraudulent popular vote and a Biden-as-proxy-for-Davos presidency is the electoral college .
This is the essence of Trump ’ s legal challenges to the vote in the states where the rules were gamed to ensure a victory regardless of who actually showed up to the polls on November 3rd .
Amolife 7 Pieces Patio ... Buy New $ 459.89 That much is clear even to the most compromised of judges and election officials who have thrown out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of legal grounds , c.f .
the ruling in Michigan against Sidney Powell where the judge all but admitted the fraud but struck down the case with prejudice because of ‘ timing ’ and ‘ disenfranchisement.
’ But the last I checked our legal system is predicated on a bad law or rule causing material harm before the suit can be brought forth .
Our system doesn ’ t allow for potential harm , only challenging the law after it has actually harmed someone .
Only once the ‘ ballots were cast , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election certified , ’ in the words of U.S. District Judge Linda V. Parker , could there be a legal basis for voters being harmed by the way the election was conducted .
Only then could a suit be brought forth .
Bring the suit too early and there ’ s no basis for ‘ material harm.
” Bring the suit after the vote and the judge rules it ’ s ‘ disenfranchisement.
’ You got ta love the rhetorical backflips people do to justify their confirmation bias .
I do agree with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brought forth a case she expected to lose with the intention of undermining the validity of our electoral process .
Because , in fact , the electoral process is subject to massive fraud with incentives to rig and/or game the outcome for political benefit .
Make no mistake , Republicans and Democrats both use this compromised system to their benefit when it suits them .
This , of course , begs the question , “ Who do they actually work for ?
Us or someone else ?
” And it is important with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people as possible understand what has happened in past elections , what happened last month and what will happen in the future elections , if they are ever allowed to occur .
Maybe that was Powell ’ s intention in going to Federal Court rather than State court where she would have had more chance of success , per arguments from Robert Barnes .
Which brings me back to why the electoral college is so very important .
Because , in theory , absent a corruptible system on a mass scale , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ towards declaring the winner of a presidential election .
But what happens when that system is obviously tainted , the people administering it motivated by the darkest impulses and the disenfranchisement of millions of voters takes place because of the cheating ?
Then there has to be a check on that power .
And the electoral college is that check .
Hanover STRATH6PCFP-RE ... Buy New $ 2,199.00 There has to be a way for those that uncover fraud but are stonewalled by people with the power to define fraud , in this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to bring that evidence forth and have The People , through the electors and their State Legislatures , retain the power to decide what the real outcome of the election should be .
It ’ s not perfect .
No system is .
To turn the argument of the Marxist left about guns on its head , no peaceful society needs private ownership of guns .
And a truly peaceful , perfect society doesn ’ t .
Guns become a hobby for hunters , shooters and the collectors .
But we don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until we do our guns remain the check on government overreach in the same way the electoral college performs that check , pro-forma as it may in fact be , on election fraud and the tyranny of low-information voters .
Back to the lawsuits .
Anyone crowing about Powell ’ s suit being thrown out needs to take a second to ponder what was said in the dismissal .
Because ‘ making fraud legal ’ doesn ’ t make it right nor inspire confidence .
The courts are supposed to enforce the law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to accept the disenfranchisement of ‘ 5.5 million ’ people in Michigan but ignored the disenfranchisement of the marginal few hundred thousand that tipped the election ’ s result and the selection of electors without even considering a review .
That should stun you in its implication .
Tyranny of the majority trumps investigation into material evidence of malfeasance .
It is precisely because the courts have been so nakedly partisan ( or just plain spineless ) in their rulings that Texas made the most consequential move in the entire post-election wrangling .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court against Georgia , Michigan , Pennsylvania and Wisconsin on specific constitutional grounds for violating “ the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they did not go through the legislatures… ” when changing their standards for mail-in ballot acceptance .
Patio Sense Coconino W ... Buy New $ 136.99 What I said in this month ’ s Gold Goats n ’ Guns Newsletter was : States like Pennsylvania , Michigan and Wisconsin have , for all intents and purposes , forfeited their right to be represented at the Electoral College .
They have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a high school class president no less the ‘ leader of the free world.
’ And that should have people in places like Florida and Texas incensed .
They counted more votes in a matter of hours and certified the results .
How far has Florida come in twenty years since Bush v. Gore ?
Now even corrupt counties like Broward count their ballots in a timely manner and that ’ s that .
If it is perceived by them that a few dozen corrupt party hacks rigged their elections why should Floridians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their representatives in Washington ?
Why should they listen to anything any of them say for any reason ?
Why should they accept President Harris and the crazy court of jackals she ’ ll appoint to her cabinet ?
Millions of Americans will be wondering why should America exist in practice if it doesn ’ t exist in principle ?
That is the legacy of this election .
And this is exactly the response to the mountain of evidence about this election I was hoping to see from states like Texas — refusal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corrupt party apparatchiks who believe in power for power ’ s sake and rule by theft .
Frankly , I want Florida and other states who got their vote counts right to join with Texas here .
Many have virtue signaled support for Texas but none have signed on as plaintiffs .
And I do believe the more political pressure placed on the SCOTUS is what is needed to get a fair hearing of this case on the merits of the law .
c.f .
that whole fallen society thing above .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by people becoming ungovernable .
And in a period of history where the thin veneer of civility on which our entire political edifice rests is being willingly ripped away to reveal naked power grabs it is even more important everyone on all sides of the political divide understand the stakes here .
This isn ’ t about Trump or Biden winning the election .
Fraud of this magnitude is unacceptable .
Cheating of this size and scope can not be countenanced nor can it be excused away as de rigeur and de facto @ @ @ @ @ @ @ society .
That ’ s , frankly , loserthink , in Scott Adams ’ parlance , and a guarantee that all the terrible things people have done to each other in the past will occur again as checks against power ruthlessly applied wither to bullying .
Again , no system like this is without its flaws .
At its heart voting is a violent act to determine which tyrant rules not only you but everyone else .
It should be used sparingly and with extreme caution .
The idea that it should be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a tyrannical impulse rather than a paean to egalitarian principles .
Only people motivated to vote should vote .
If that means a reasonable opportunity cost to execute that privilege then so be it .
Moreover , with a second authentication process like the electoral college in place it retards the impulse to cheat to win .
And this is why I want to see more electoral college checks on voter fraud rather than fewer .
I want the electoral college used for my Governor , my State Rep. , my county commissioners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my counties here in Florida to have the power to check the fraud and , if necessary , disenfranchise the people of another county that refuses to conduct themselves as upstanding members of the community .
This would have stopped Broward county ’ s legendary fraud machine dead in its tracks and there would have been no need for Bush v. Gore in 2000 .
Because if we don ’ t acknowledge our baser angels then we are doomed to a cycle of violence which will make “ The Recent Unpleasantness of 1861 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Amish dairy farmers .
What scares me most is I believe that is the intent of the people who perpetrated this fraud in the first place .
This is what Texas is signaling with its suit and it calls directly into question the validity and applicability of the Constitution in 2020 and beyond .
If the SCOTUS fails to live up to its role as guarantor of its move basic function — arbiter between the several States — then what was settled law ( ironically through naked use of force ) when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If we ’ re going to have this consensual hallucination called government then we should admit it flaws and ours in the open and build systems to determine who runs it which are less susceptible to gamesmanship .
Otherwise , what ’ s the point of holding elections .
They just become the ultimate opiate of the masses .
I ’ d go on about blockchain-based voting as a potential cure for what ails us here but that ’ s a different subject for a different day .
Today is about specifying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not offering implementations other than to argue the merits of what protections the electoral college grant us against forces of naked aggression .
The arguments against the electoral college are simply veiled arguments against Federalism .
And while I ’ m happy to entertain arguments against any coercive form of government , in the case of the U.S. our Federal system is a flawed but robust system which has given ground slowly to these political terrorists over the past couple hundred years .
It is in a terminal state of collapse today and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ survive these challenges in any practical sense .
Good on Texas for reminding us where the limits to power are and bringing up real questions about where we are headed .
The Best of Thomas Luongo

For the past 20 years we have been assaulted by the Marxist left in the U.S. about how terrible the electoral college is. In their quest for a purely egalitarian society — you know one without enforceable rules, culture, sexes and differences of any kind — the electoral college represents the ultimate thwarting of their intentions to rule through mobocracy.
It’s been a long and winding road through the institutions for these Marxists, undermining our educational system, media, government bureaucracies and buying off/’electing’ government officials to stepwise push the U.S. to the brink of takeover.
That’s where we are today and the only thing that stands between a fraudulent popular vote and a Biden-as-proxy-for-Davos presidency is the electoral college.
This is the essence of Trump’s legal challenges to the vote in the states where the rules were gamed to ensure a victory regardless of who actually showed up to the polls on November 3rd. Amolife 7 Pieces Patio... Buy New $459.89 (as of 07:38 UTC - Details)
That much is clear even to the most compromised of judges and election officials who have thrown out cases with obvious merit on the flimsiest of legal grounds, c.f. the ruling in Michigan against Sidney Powell where the judge all but admitted the fraud but struck down the case with prejudice because of ‘timing’ and ‘disenfranchisement.’
But the last I checked our legal system is predicated on a bad law or rule causing material harm before the suit can be brought forth. Our system doesn’t allow for potential harm, only challenging the law after it has actually harmed someone.
Only once the ‘ballots were cast, the vote counted’ and ‘the election certified,’ in the words of U.S. District Judge Linda V. Parker, could there be a legal basis for voters being harmed by the way the election was conducted. Only then could a suit be brought forth.
Bring the suit too early and there’s no basis for ‘material harm.” Bring the suit after the vote and the judge rules it’s ‘disenfranchisement.’ You gotta love the rhetorical backflips people do to justify their confirmation bias.
I do agree with Judge Parker however that Powell may have brought forth a case she expected to lose with the intention of undermining the validity of our electoral process. Because, in fact, the electoral process is subject to massive fraud with incentives to rig and/or game the outcome for political benefit.
Make no mistake, Republicans and Democrats both use this compromised system to their benefit when it suits them. This, of course, begs the question, “Who do they actually work for? Us or someone else?”
And it is important with the stakes this high that as many people as possible understand what has happened in past elections, what happened last month and what will happen in the future elections, if they are ever allowed to occur.
Maybe that was Powell’s intention in going to Federal Court rather than State court where she would have had more chance of success, per arguments from Robert Barnes.
Which brings me back to why the electoral college is so very important. Because, in theory, absent a corruptible system on a mass scale, the electoral college is an unnecessary procedural step towards declaring the winner of a presidential election.
But what happens when that system is obviously tainted, the people administering it motivated by the darkest impulses and the disenfranchisement of millions of voters takes place because of the cheating?
Then there has to be a check on that power. And the electoral college is that check. Hanover STRATH6PCFP-RE... Buy New $2,199.00 (as of 07:38 UTC - Details)
There has to be a way for those that uncover fraud but are stonewalled by people with the power to define fraud, in this case a corrupt and byzantine judiciary, to bring that evidence forth and have The People, through the electors and their State Legislatures, retain the power to decide what the real outcome of the election should be.
It’s not perfect. No system is.
It’s like 2-factor authentication for elections.
To turn the argument of the Marxist left about guns on its head, no peaceful society needs private ownership of guns. And a truly peaceful, perfect society doesn’t. Guns become a hobby for hunters, shooters and the collectors.
But we don’t live in a perfect society and until we do our guns remain the check on government overreach in the same way the electoral college performs that check, pro-forma as it may in fact be, on election fraud and the tyranny of low-information voters.
Back to the lawsuits. Anyone crowing about Powell’s suit being thrown out needs to take a second to ponder what was said in the dismissal. Because ‘making fraud legal’ doesn’t make it right nor inspire confidence. The courts are supposed to enforce the law not interpret it.
Judge Parker refused to accept the disenfranchisement of ‘5.5 million’ people in Michigan but ignored the disenfranchisement of the marginal few hundred thousand that tipped the election’s result and the selection of electors without even considering a review.
That should stun you in its implication. Tyranny of the majority trumps investigation into material evidence of malfeasance.
It is precisely because the courts have been so nakedly partisan (or just plain spineless) in their rulings that Texas made the most consequential move in the entire post-election wrangling.
It filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin on specific constitutional grounds for violating “the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they did not go through the legislatures…” when changing their standards for mail-in ballot acceptance. Patio Sense Coconino W... Buy New $136.99 (as of 07:38 UTC - Details)
What I said in this month’s Gold Goats n’ Guns Newsletter was:
States like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin have, for all intents
and purposes, forfeited their right to be represented at the Electoral
College. They have overseen sham elections not worthy of electing a
high school class president no less the ‘leader of the free world.’ And that should have people in places like Florida and Texas
incensed. They counted more votes in a matter of hours and certified the results. How far has Florida come in twenty years since Bush v. Gore? Now even corrupt counties like Broward count their ballots in a timely
manner and that’s that. If it is perceived by them that a few dozen corrupt party hacks
rigged their elections why should Floridians or Texans consent
to be governed by their representatives in Washington? Why
should they listen to anything any of them say for any reason? Why should they accept President Harris and the crazy court of
jackals she’ll appoint to her cabinet? Millions of Americans will
be wondering why should America exist in practice if it doesn’t
exist in principle? That is the legacy of this election.
And this is exactly the response to the mountain of evidence about this election I was hoping to see from states like Texas — refusal to be governed by a bunch of corrupt party apparatchiks who believe in power for power’s sake and rule by theft.
Frankly, I want Florida and other states who got their vote counts right to join with Texas here. Many have virtue signaled support for Texas but none have signed on as plaintiffs. And I do believe the more political pressure placed on the SCOTUS is what is needed to get a fair hearing of this case on the merits of the law. c.f. that whole fallen society thing above.
This is the essence of what I mean by people becoming ungovernable.
And in a period of history where the thin veneer of civility on which our entire political edifice rests is being willingly ripped away to reveal naked power grabs it is even more important everyone on all sides of the political divide understand the stakes here.
This isn’t about Trump or Biden winning the election. Fraud of this magnitude is unacceptable. Cheating of this size and scope cannot be countenanced nor can it be excused away as de rigeur and de facto evidence of our inevitable decline as a society.
That’s, frankly, loserthink, in Scott Adams’ parlance, and a guarantee that all the terrible things people have done to each other in the past will occur again as checks against power ruthlessly applied wither to bullying.
Again, no system like this is without its flaws. At its heart voting is a violent act to determine which tyrant rules not only you but everyone else. It should be used sparingly and with extreme caution.
The idea that it should be frictionless is itself an open admission of a tyrannical impulse rather than a paean to egalitarian principles. Only people motivated to vote should vote. If that means a reasonable opportunity cost to execute that privilege then so be it.
Moreover, with a second authentication process like the electoral college in place it retards the impulse to cheat to win.
And this is why I want to see more electoral college checks on voter fraud rather than fewer. I want the electoral college used for my Governor, my State Rep., my county commissioners and my sheriff elections.
I want my counties here in Florida to have the power to check the fraud and, if necessary, disenfranchise the people of another county that refuses to conduct themselves as upstanding members of the community.
This would have stopped Broward county’s legendary fraud machine dead in its tracks and there would have been no need for Bush v. Gore in 2000.
Cheaters don’t get cookies.
Because if we don’t acknowledge our baser angels then we are doomed to a cycle of violence which will make “The Recent Unpleasantness of 1861 to 1865” look like a convocation of Amish dairy farmers.
What scares me most is I believe that is the intent of the people who perpetrated this fraud in the first place.
This is what Texas is signaling with its suit and it calls directly into question the validity and applicability of the Constitution in 2020 and beyond. If the SCOTUS fails to live up to its role as guarantor of its move basic function — arbiter between the several States — then what was settled law (ironically through naked use of force) when Lee surrendered at Appomattox will be reconsidered.
If we’re going to have this consensual hallucination called government then we should admit it flaws and ours in the open and build systems to determine who runs it which are less susceptible to gamesmanship.
Otherwise, what’s the point of holding elections. They just become the ultimate opiate of the masses.
I’d go on about blockchain-based voting as a potential cure for what ails us here but that’s a different subject for a different day. Today is about specifying what’s wrong with our system not offering implementations other than to argue the merits of what protections the electoral college grant us against forces of naked aggression.
The arguments against the electoral college are simply veiled arguments against Federalism. And while I’m happy to entertain arguments against any coercive form of government, in the case of the U.S. our Federal system is a flawed but robust system which has given ground slowly to these political terrorists over the past couple hundred years.
It is in a terminal state of collapse today and the odds are long that it will survive these challenges in any practical sense. Good on Texas for reminding us where the limits to power are and bringing up real questions about where we are headed.
Reprinted with permission from Gold Goats ‘n Guns.
The Best of Tom Luongo


lewrockwell--2020-12-11--The Essence of Progressivism Is Refusal To Deal With Reality

Reality is harsh .
Let ’ s face it , our world is imperfect , often even deadly .
Not only that , it ’ s always going to be imperfect .
So let ’ s get to work on enjoying our brief lives as best we can amidst the imperfection , while striving for such incremental improvements to the world as are within our modest capabilities .
If you think that way , you definitely are not “ woke.
” To be a woke progressive the first requirement is that you must refuse to acknowledge the real world as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world is something else , something immediately transformable into a fantasy of perfection through coercive collective action .
You also must firmly close your eyes to any facts or evidence that might contradict such progressive fantasy , and indeed you must demand that any such facts or evidence be suppressed and never mentioned .
Among numerous illustrations of this point , perhaps the most striking is the current hysteria sometimes going by the name “ anti-racism.
” Here , the official progressive fantasy is that any under-representation of blacks ( or other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ designated heights of society can only be the result of “ systemic racism.
” Therefore all must commit to the coerced program of “ anti-racism , ” whereupon , I presume , perfection will promptly be achieved .
COSIEST 5-Piece Faux B ... Buy New $ 1,299.00 Over the past several months , you can not have missed the parade of major societal institutions — large corporations , banks , law firms , universities , and so on — caught with insufficient numbers of minorities in their ranks and pledging to rectify the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a handful of examples , here is a list from Ongig.com from July of the “ awesome ” “ diversity ” commitments of 25 major companies ; or here , from Glassdoor.com from August , a list of diversity commitments from another 12 major companies ; or here , from the American Bar Association , a list of hundreds of signatories , including dozens of major law firms , to the ABA ’ s “ Pledge for Change ” to increase diversity .
You can easily find many , many more examples with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back in August , I predicted that the latest round of affirmative action commitments would be no more successful than prior rounds that have been going on for the past fifty years or more .
The main basis for my prediction was my personal experience of involvement in affirmative action efforts of a major law firm over several decades , and awareness from that experience of the difficulty of moving metrics in any significant way .
In simple terms , there is a very limited pool of qualified candidates .
You can make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but all of your dozens of competitors will also make offers to all of them , and in the end you will actually employ very few .
You can also try making job offers to obviously unqualified candidates .
Many of these will accept your offer , but in nearly every case they will fail quickly in a rather cruel process .

Reality is harsh. Let’s face it, our world is imperfect, often even deadly. Not only that, it’s always going to be imperfect. So let’s get to work on enjoying our brief lives as best we can amidst the imperfection, while striving for such incremental improvements to the world as are within our modest capabilities.
If you think that way, you definitely are not “woke.” To be a woke progressive the first requirement is that you must refuse to acknowledge the real world as it exists. You must pretend that the world is something else, something immediately transformable into a fantasy of perfection through coercive collective action. You also must firmly close your eyes to any facts or evidence that might contradict such progressive fantasy, and indeed you must demand that any such facts or evidence be suppressed and never mentioned.
Among numerous illustrations of this point, perhaps the most striking is the current hysteria sometimes going by the name “anti-racism.” Here, the official progressive fantasy is that any under-representation of blacks (or other minority group of your choice) at designated heights of society can only be the result of “systemic racism.” Therefore all must commit to the coerced program of “anti-racism,” whereupon, I presume, perfection will promptly be achieved. COSIEST 5-Piece Faux B... Buy New $1,299.00 (as of 07:39 UTC - Details)
Over the past several months, you cannot have missed the parade of major societal institutions — large corporations, banks, law firms, universities, and so on — caught with insufficient numbers of minorities in their ranks and pledging to rectify the situation immediately if not sooner. As a handful of examples, here is a list from Ongig.com from July of the “awesome” “diversity” commitments of 25 major companies; or here, from Glassdoor.com from August, a list of diversity commitments from another 12 major companies; or here, from the American Bar Association, a list of hundreds of signatories, including dozens of major law firms, to the ABA’s “Pledge for Change” to increase diversity. You can easily find many, many more examples with simple internet searches.
In a post back in August, I predicted that the latest round of affirmative action commitments would be no more successful than prior rounds that have been going on for the past fifty years or more. The main basis for my prediction was my personal experience of involvement in affirmative action efforts of a major law firm over several decades, and awareness from that experience of the difficulty of moving metrics in any significant way. In simple terms, there is a very limited pool of qualified candidates. You can make job offers to all of them, but all of your dozens of competitors will also make offers to all of them, and in the end you will actually employ very few. You can also try making job offers to obviously unqualified candidates. Many of these will accept your offer, but in nearly every case they will fail quickly in a rather cruel process.
Read the Whole Article


lewrockwell--2020-12-11--Voter Fraud Never Happens! (Except in these 10,000 cases)

The media have been lying about voter fraud for 20 years .
The New York Times and The Washington Post will tell you : Let ’ s get something straight .
There are only two cases of voter fraud in history and they were both Republicans .
NEVER ?
No voter fraud ever ?
That ’ s your first clue they ’ re lying .
Liberals don ’ t try to say partial-birth abortion never happens .
They don ’ t say black men killing cops never happens .
They don ’ t say immigrants ripping off government programs never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I bet you couldn ’ t find EVEN ONE !
SOLAURA 3-Piece Outdoo ... Buy New $ 199.95 John Ashcroft absolutely had a Senate seat stolen from him in 2000 when a state judge ordered polls in heavily Democratic St. Louis to remain open for an extra three hours .
Republicans didn ’ t even hear about it for another hour .
Despite an appellate court striking down the ridiculously lawless order , St. Louis was given an extra 3 1/2 hours to kick out tens of thousands of additional votes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Twitter : This claim about election fraud is disputed .
A week after the 2004 Washington state gubernatorial election , Republican Dino Rossi was up by 3,492 votes against Democrat Christine Gregoire .
Then Democratic King county began finding “ misplaced ” ballots , eventually producing more than 10,000 of them .
So that ’ s another 800 votes for Gregoire .
Oh wait — you ’ re not going to believe this …

The media have been lying about voter fraud for 20 years. The New York Times and The Washington Post will tell you: Let’s get something straight. There are only two cases of voter fraud in history and they were both Republicans.
NEVER? No voter fraud ever?
Nope!
That’s your first clue they’re lying. Liberals don’t try to say partial-birth abortion never happens. They don’t say black men killing cops never happens. They don’t say immigrants ripping off government programs never happens. Only voter fraud NEVER HAPPENS.
I bet you couldn’t find EVEN ONE! SOLAURA 3-Piece Outdoo... Buy New $199.95 (as of 07:39 UTC - Details)
How about these?
— JOHN ASHCROFT, 2000
John Ashcroft absolutely had a Senate seat stolen from him in 2000 when a state judge ordered polls in heavily Democratic St. Louis to remain open for an extra three hours. Republicans didn’t even hear about it for another hour. Despite an appellate court striking down the ridiculously lawless order, St. Louis was given an extra 3 1/2 hours to kick out tens of thousands of additional votes. Ashcroft lost the election by 49,000 votes.
Twitter: This claim about election fraud is disputed.
— WASHINGTON STATE, 2004
A week after the 2004 Washington state gubernatorial election, Republican Dino Rossi was up by 3,492 votes against Democrat Christine Gregoire. Then Democratic King county began finding “misplaced” ballots, eventually producing more than 10,000 of them.
Hey, guys! I found another box of ballots under the sink!
So that’s another 800 votes for Gregoire.
Oh wait — you’re not going to believe this …
You found more votes?
Bingo! 600 votes for Gregoire.
Read the Whole Article


lewrockwell--2020-12-11--Lockdowns Do Not Slow Covid Spread, Three Studies Show

Across America and Europe , many government officials are resuming lockdowns and tightening restrictions in the face of rising COVID-19 cases , hospitalizations , and deaths .
The collateral damage of lockdowns , which has been well documented , includes widespread poverty , depression , bankruptcy , and unemployment .
Meanwhile , the benefits of lockdowns remain murky .
Several studies show there is little correlation between government restrictions and lower COVID mortality rates .
Here are three of them .
A study published on July 21 in The Lancet , a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal founded in 1823 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Researchers collected data from the 50 countries with the most cases and found lockdowns were not associated with mortality reductions in critical COVID-19 cases , although factors such as obesity , smoking , and life expectancy were .
4 Piece Outdoor Furnit ... Buy New $ 1,575.00 “ …government actions such as border closures , full lockdowns , and a high rate of COVID-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality , ” the study concluded .
Similarly , a study published @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after The Lancet paper found neither lockdowns nor lockdown stringency were correlated with lower death rates .
Researchers crunched data from 160 countries over the first 8 months of the pandemic , testing numerous factors—such as public health , demographics , government policy , economy , and environment—to determine how each correlated with COVID-19 mortality .
“ Stringency of the measures settled to fight pandemia , including lockdown , did not appear to be linked with death rate , ” the researchers concluded .
Research from Tel Aviv University published in October on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may not save lives .
Researchers analyzed mobility data collected from iPhones and found no statistical association between lockdown severity and the number of COVID-19 fatalities .
“ We would have expected to see fewer Covid-19 fatalities in countries with a tighter lockdown , but the data reveals that this is not the case , ” the researchers explained .

Across America and Europe, many government officials are resuming lockdowns and tightening restrictions in the face of rising COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths.
The collateral damage of lockdowns, which has been well documented, includes widespread poverty, depression, bankruptcy, and unemployment. Meanwhile, the benefits of lockdowns remain murky.
Several studies show there is little correlation between government restrictions and lower COVID mortality rates. Here are three of them.
1. The Lancet, July
A study published on July 21 in The Lancet, a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal founded in 1823, indicated that government lockdowns were ineffective.
Researchers collected data from the 50 countries with the most cases and found lockdowns were not associated with mortality reductions in critical COVID-19 cases, although factors such as obesity, smoking, and life expectancy were. 4 Piece Outdoor Furnit... Buy New $1,575.00 (as of 07:40 UTC - Details)
“…government actions such as border closures, full lockdowns, and a high rate of COVID-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality,” the study concluded.
2. Frontiers in Public Health, November
Similarly, a study published by Frontiers in Public Health several months after The Lancet paper found neither lockdowns nor lockdown stringency were correlated with lower death rates. Researchers crunched data from 160 countries over the first 8 months of the pandemic, testing numerous factors—such as public health, demographics, government policy, economy, and environment—to determine how each correlated with COVID-19 mortality.
“Stringency of the measures settled to fight pandemia, including lockdown, did not appear to be linked with death rate,” the researchers concluded.
3. Tel Aviv University Study, October
Research from Tel Aviv University published in October on the website medRxiv said that strict lockdowns may not save lives. Researchers analyzed mobility data collected from iPhones and found no statistical association between lockdown severity and the number of COVID-19 fatalities.
“We would have expected to see fewer Covid-19 fatalities in countries with a tighter lockdown, but the data reveals that this is not the case,” the researchers explained.
Read the Whole Article


lewrockwell--2020-12-11--Whole Foods Takes Two Steps Forward, One Step Back on Black Lives Matter Uniforms

Whole Foods Market seems to have gotten its tail in a crack , at least in Canada .
What ’ s the story ?
When the Black Lives Matter movement picked up steam earlier this year , some WFM employees came to work there wearing insignias and clothing in support of that organization .
What was the reaction of this world-class grocer ?
Those in charge banned all employees from sporting such indications .
Why would they do any such thing ?
Was this corporation racist , under the control of white supremacists ?
Don ’ t be silly .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of discriminating against anyone , let alone black people .
It was never even accused of any such action , not even by those who are the most avid in ferreting out such behavior .
Christopher Knight Hom ... Buy New $ 1,749.99 Rather , the people running WFM made a not unreasonable decision .
They didn ’ t want to alienate a large proportion of their customers , perhaps as many as half of them .
They feared that this would occur if Whole Foods Market were widely seen because of these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ backing BLM .
In any case , this corporation is a supermarket , for goodness ’ s sake .
Political philosophy simply had nothing to do with moving merchandise in their view .
But then they made a mistake insofar as the country to the north of us is concerned .
They also banned the wearing of the poppy — a serious blunder .
If the flag of Canada is all but sacrosanct to its citizens , the wearing of the poppy is if anything even more so .
To denigrate this symbol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most fervent communist in that country , of which there are all too many , nor the most extreme Nazi , of which , happily , there are very few , but still too many .
It stands for Remembrance Day , honoring the war dead who fought in Canadian armed forces .
Logical consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds .
What ’ s next ?
Banning yarmulkes for Jews , turbans for South Asians , crosses for Christians ?
No , no , no — all property-owners , whether retailers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ set up dress codes to their liking , no matter how outré .
They can require the wearing of propeller beanies or those eyeglasses with fake noses ( worn over masks , of course ) , or psychedelic-colored tee shirts .
You don ’ t like it ?
Don ’ t patronize that store .
The Best of Walter E. Block

Whole Foods Market seems to have gotten its tail in a crack, at least in Canada. What’s the story?
When the Black Lives Matter movement picked up steam earlier this year, some WFM employees came to work there wearing insignias and clothing in support of that organization. What was the reaction of this world-class grocer? Those in charge banned all employees from sporting such indications.
Why would they do any such thing? Was this corporation racist, under the control of white supremacists? Don’t be silly. WFM never came within a million miles of discriminating against anyone, let alone black people. It was never even accused of any such action, not even by those who are the most avid in ferreting out such behavior.
Christopher Knight Hom... Buy New $1,749.99 (as of 07:41 UTC - Details) Rather, the people running WFM made a not unreasonable decision. They didn’t want to alienate a large proportion of their customers, perhaps as many as half of them. They feared that this would occur if Whole Foods Market were widely seen because of these clothing choices of their employees as strongly backing BLM. In any case, this corporation is a supermarket, for goodness’s sake. Political philosophy simply had nothing to do with moving merchandise in their view.
But then they made a mistake insofar as the country to the north of us is concerned. They also banned the wearing of the poppy — a serious blunder.
If the flag of Canada is all but sacrosanct to its citizens, the wearing of the poppy is if anything even more so. To denigrate this symbol is simply not done, not by the most fervent communist in that country, of which there are all too many, nor the most extreme Nazi, of which, happily, there are very few, but still too many. It stands for Remembrance Day, honoring the war dead who fought in Canadian armed forces.
Logical consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. What’s next? Banning yarmulkes for Jews, turbans for South Asians, crosses for Christians? No, no, no — all property-owners, whether retailers or homeowners, have the right to set up dress codes to their liking, no matter how outré. They can require the wearing of propeller beanies or those eyeglasses with fake noses (worn over masks, of course), or psychedelic-colored tee shirts. You don’t like it? Don’t patronize that store.
Read the Whole Article
The Best of Walter E. Block


lewrockwell--2020-12-11--Google/YouTube Is Erasing All Evidence of Election Fraud

Google/YouTube didn ’ t try to be subtle .
It announced on Wednesday that it would delete any videos that so much as mentioned the word “ fraud ” in connection with Joe Biden ’ s patently fraudulently ascension to the top of the ticket in the days after the November 3 election .
The implications of this are so enormous that it ’ s currently difficult to assimilate all of them , let alone understand what needs to be done to hang on to American liberty .
You can not discuss what Google just did without first turning to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which he wrote as a warning about the dangers of a modern totalitarian government .
The book ’ s protagonist , Winston Smith , is a member of Big Brother ’ s party who works in the Records Department of the Ministry of Truth .
In fact , there is no “ truth ” in Oceania .
Instead , the only “ truth ” is Big Brother ’ s perpetual perfection .
In his job , Winston receives messages telling him to locate past predictions from Big Brother that events had proven to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rewriting the statements ( using a method similar to today ’ s speech recognition technology ) to conform to actual events .
Then : Patio Set with Fire Pi ... Buy New $ 518.99 As soon as Winston had dealt with each of the messages , he clipped his speakwritten corrections to the appropriate copy of ‘ The Times ’ and pushed them into the pneumatic tube .
Then , with a movement which was as nearly as possible unconscious , he crumpled up the original message and any notes that he himself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the memory hole to be devoured by the flames .
Having had a refresher course in how completely evil totalitarian dictatorships work , you ’ re ready for Google/YouTube ’ s announcement about its new policy .
The policy rejoices under the Orwellian name “ Supporting the 2020 U.S. election , ” which actually means squelching all challenges to the massive human and electronic fraud that pushed Biden over the top .
The announcement begins by assuring everyone : As you may recall , if your memory hasn ’ t been memory-holed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Google/YouTube systematically censored any negative coverage about Biden — most especially reports about Hunter Biden ’ s sexual and drug debauchery and about his corrupt dealings with China and Ukraine , including written evidence and first-person statements about Biden ’ s knowledge of and profiting from Hunter ’ s deals .

Google/YouTube didn’t try to be subtle. It announced on Wednesday that it would delete any videos that so much as mentioned the word “fraud” in connection with Joe Biden’s patently fraudulently ascension to the top of the ticket in the days after the November 3 election. The implications of this are so enormous that it’s currently difficult to assimilate all of them, let alone understand what needs to be done to hang on to American liberty.
You cannot discuss what Google just did without first turning to George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, which he wrote as a warning about the dangers of a modern totalitarian government. The book’s protagonist, Winston Smith, is a member of Big Brother’s party who works in the Records Department of the Ministry of Truth.
In fact, there is no “truth” in Oceania. Instead, the only “truth” is Big Brother’s perpetual perfection. In his job, Winston receives messages telling him to locate past predictions from Big Brother that events had proven to be wrong. He is responsible for rewriting the statements (using a method similar to today’s speech recognition technology) to conform to actual events. Then: Patio Set with Fire Pi... Buy New $518.99 (as of 07:43 UTC - Details)
As soon as Winston had dealt with each of the messages, he clipped his speakwritten corrections to the appropriate copy of ‘The Times’ and pushed them into the pneumatic tube. Then, with a movement which was as nearly as possible unconscious, he crumpled up the original message and any notes that he himself had made, and dropped them into the memory hole to be devoured by the flames.
Having had a refresher course in how completely evil totalitarian dictatorships work, you’re ready for Google/YouTube’s announcement about its new policy. The policy rejoices under the Orwellian name “Supporting the 2020 U.S. election,” which actually means squelching all challenges to the massive human and electronic fraud that pushed Biden over the top. The announcement begins by assuring everyone:
Our main goal going into the election season was to make sure we’re connecting people with authoritative information, while also limiting the reach of misinformation and removing harmful content. The work here is ongoing and we wanted to provide an update.
As you may recall, if your memory hasn’t been memory-holed, in pursuit of this main goal, Google/YouTube systematically censored any negative coverage about Biden — most especially reports about Hunter Biden’s sexual and drug debauchery and about his corrupt dealings with China and Ukraine, including written evidence and first-person statements about Biden’s knowledge of and profiting from Hunter’s deals.
Read the Whole Article


lewrockwell--2020-12-11--A Time for Misbehaving

A Time for Misbehaving

Note : This is a prescient read , especially considering that the book A Time for Anger , from which the following is quoted ( Chapter 9 and the conclusion of the book ) , was written in 1982 – long before the Internet , smart phones , and social media ; decades before Obergefell , Covid , and world leaders openly talking about a global Great Reset of the entire world ’ s social , political , and economic system ; and in a time when our churches were still well-attended , when Ronald Reagan was overwhelmingly elected to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and its sway over Eastern Europe were tottering .
Unfortunately , the author , Frank Schaeffer , has since renounced his faith and surrendered to the very enemy that he spoke against – which makes his warnings all the more worth reading today .
Italics are in the original text .
Christians and those of Judeo-Christian principle have been far too well behaved in the recent past .
Every person of true moral principle is on a collision course with the modern , inhuman , technological state and society in which we live @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should be prepared to stand and fight against this “ brave new world.
” The Jews have endured state and often religious persecution throughout history for not abandoning their principles .
The early Christians went to the lions rather than transgress God ’ s law and bow to a secular power .
They were rebels ; the Romans saw them as having committed acts of civil disobedience .
Christ himself died rather than compromise .
All he had to say to the high priest was that he was not God ; or he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a king before the Romans , and he would have gone free .
Atrocities unthinkable a few years ago go on today with the state ’ s sanction .
More are in the offing .
Why is there such roaring , massive silence on the part of those who should know better ?
Abortion , infanticide , euthanasia , and a deliberate assault on the family structure are realities .
The continued curbing of religious freedom grinds on .
They are part of our world no matter how long we pretend otherwise .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , Norman Ravitch speaks of the Christian involvement in society today in the following terms : The silence , noninvolvement , studious “ scholarship ” and other tactics used by Christians to avoid involving themselves in society around them must stop .
Evangelists and theologians who hide behind their “ evangelical work ” or their theology or , as Ravitch says , their tendency to write in a private language merely for one another , must stop .
We must once again commit ourselves to a robust view of truth .
Religious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every area of life : politics , law , medicine , family life , education , science , the media , and the arts .
We must provide the example of an alternative way of living by placing our children and their care before our own ambitions and materialism .
COSIEST 4-Piece Outdoo ... Buy New $ 538.00 Where are our champions ?
The ACLU and other elitist “ civil libertarian ” absolutists never rest .
Christian lawyers have too often been more intent on holding theoretical seminars and “ fellowshipping together.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ profession grows more and more inhuman day by day .
The abortion clinics hack babies apart and burn them with saline solutions .
Where are the Christian champions of medicine as a vocation , a healing science , one that fights to save life ?
The so-called pluralistic politician and judge more toward greater and greater control of the citizenry .
Where are the Christian men and women to stand up and fight in the political arena without compromise ?
The public educational system turns our generation after generation of baffled , rootless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been taught that there are no moral absolutes ; they have been delivered by that system into the hands of such persons as Planned Parenthood ’ s high priests and instructed in their pitiful religion of “ do your own thing.
” Where is the Christian counter-attack on these modern-day death camps ?
Where have we been and what will we do now to save our country and the rest of western civilization from the future that the bio-engineers and power-hungry ethicists have in store ?
We must choose between a secular Caesar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all-powerful state , with the most powerful techniques of control ever known at its disposal , or the God of the Old and New Testaments .
The alternative to standing up and taking action finds expression in the Book of Isaiah , chapter 7 , verse 11 : “ For how long , O Lord ?
And He answered , until the cities lie ruined and without inhabitants , until the houses are left deserted and fields ruined and ravaged , until the Lord has sent everyone far away and the land is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the solution comes : “ The Lord Almighty is the one you are to regard as holy , He is the one you are to fear , He is the one you are to dread , and He will be a sanctuary.
” Giantex Set of 4 Patio ... Buy New $ 139.99 The evidence in our own day that “ faith without deeds is useless ” surrounds us everywhere .
Having accepted the myth of neutrality , the opposition ’ s lie , we have given over the battlefield to the enemy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been a religion of faith without deeds for too long .
It is time that mighty deeds be done again .
Truth equals confrontation .
The Best of Larry L. Beane

Note: This is a prescient read, especially considering that the book A Time for Anger, from which the following is quoted (Chapter 9 and the conclusion of the book), was written in 1982 – long before the Internet, smart phones, and social media; decades before Obergefell, Covid, and world leaders openly talking about a global Great Reset of the entire world’s social, political, and economic system; and in a time when our churches were still well-attended, when Ronald Reagan was overwhelmingly elected to two terms, and as Soviet Communism and its sway over Eastern Europe were tottering. Unfortunately, the author, Frank Schaeffer, has since renounced his faith and surrendered to the very enemy that he spoke against – which makes his warnings all the more worth reading today. Italics are in the original text.
A Time for Misbehaving
Christians and those of Judeo-Christian principle have been far too well behaved in the recent past.
Every person of true moral principle is on a collision course with the modern, inhuman, technological state and society in which we live. Every person of true moral principle should be prepared to stand and fight against this “brave new world.”
The Jews have endured state and often religious persecution throughout history for not abandoning their principles. The early Christians went to the lions rather than transgress God’s law and bow to a secular power. They were rebels; the Romans saw them as having committed acts of civil disobedience.
Christ himself died rather than compromise. All he had to say to the high priest was that he was not God; or he could have renounced his claim to be a king before the Romans, and he would have gone free.
Atrocities unthinkable a few years ago go on today with the state’s sanction. More are in the offing. Why is there such roaring, massive silence on the part of those who should know better? Abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, and a deliberate assault on the family structure are realities. The continued curbing of religious freedom grinds on. They are part of our world no matter how long we pretend otherwise.
Writing in Commentary magazine (April 1982), Norman Ravitch speaks of the Christian involvement in society today in the following terms:
Like the proverbial poor Greeks, who survive by taking in one another’s wash, theologians and scholars in religious studies write primarily for one another; seldom does the import of their labors have any effect on the consciousness of Christian believers or on the wider educated public.
The silence, noninvolvement, studious “scholarship” and other tactics used by Christians to avoid involving themselves in society around them must stop. Evangelists and theologians who hide behind their “evangelical work” or their theology or, as Ravitch says, their tendency to write in a private language merely for one another, must stop.
We must once again commit ourselves to a robust view of truth. Religious people must once again become involved in every area of life: politics, law, medicine, family life, education, science, the media, and the arts. We must provide the example of an alternative way of living by placing our children and their care before our own ambitions and materialism. COSIEST 4-Piece Outdoo... Buy New $538.00 (as of 07:43 UTC - Details)
Where are our champions?
The ACLU and other elitist “civil libertarian” absolutists never rest. Christian lawyers have too often been more intent on holding theoretical seminars and “fellowshipping together.”
The arrogant attitude of the abortion-rich medical profession grows more and more inhuman day by day. The abortion clinics hack babies apart and burn them with saline solutions. Where are the Christian champions of medicine as a vocation, a healing science, one that fights to save life?
The so-called pluralistic politician and judge more toward greater and greater control of the citizenry. Where are the Christian men and women to stand up and fight in the political arena without compromise?
. . .
The public educational system turns our generation after generation of baffled, rootless, religiously neutered neo-barbarians, who have been taught that there are no moral absolutes; they have been delivered by that system into the hands of such persons as Planned Parenthood’s high priests and instructed in their pitiful religion of “do your own thing.”
Where is the Christian counter-attack on these modern-day death camps? Where have we been and what will we do now to save our country and the rest of western civilization from the future that the bio-engineers and power-hungry ethicists have in store? We must choose between a secular Caesar, the bondage and death of an all-powerful state, with the most powerful techniques of control ever known at its disposal, or the God of the Old and New Testaments.
The alternative to standing up and taking action finds expression in the Book of Isaiah, chapter 7, verse 11: “For how long, O Lord? And He answered, until the cities lie ruined and without inhabitants, until the houses are left deserted and fields ruined and ravaged, until the Lord has sent everyone far away and the land is utterly forsaken.” A little later, the solution comes: “The Lord Almighty is the one you are to regard as holy, He is the one you are to fear, He is the one you are to dread, and He will be a sanctuary.” Giantex Set of 4 Patio... Buy New $139.99 (as of 07:43 UTC - Details)
. . .
The evidence in our own day that “faith without deeds is useless” surrounds us everywhere. Having accepted the myth of neutrality, the opposition’s lie, we have given over the battlefield to the enemy and they have run rampant.
Ours has been a religion of faith without deeds for too long. It is time that mighty deeds be done again. Truth equals confrontation.
Reprinted with the author’s permission.
The Best of Larry L. Beane


lewrockwell--2020-12-11--Why Beltway Conservatives Hate the Trump Populists

The 2020 election has put on display a growing rift within the conservative movement and the Republican Party .
As the Washington Examiner notes this week , “ The dividing lines have only deepened since media organizations called the election for his challenger Joe Biden.
” This rift is between populist Trump supporters and the old conservative establishment .
The traditional gatekeepers of conservatism tend to wield wide influence within the Republican Party .
The current group of editors , punits , and columnists came to power in the days when George W. Bush was president and the conservative movement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Divide Great Deal Furniture M ... Buy New $ 175.75 Therefore on one hand are the Trump populists , who are focused on elements of a culture war and who back a relatively restrained nationalistic view of foreign policy .
They view themselves as being essentially locked out of institutions of governance by the “ deep state ” and other elements of the permanent government .
They view themselves as beleaguered , and as such they employ a more aggressive tone and posture toward those—with the exception of close allies—who presently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other hand are the mainline conservatives , who view themselves as the “ reasonable ” ones or as “ the adults in the room.
” They are generally comfortable with the status quo and seek a stable political system within which they hope to soon wield power .
Unlike the Trump supporters , these conservatives are heavily focused on foreign policy and the frequent and aggressive use of state power in the international sphere .
They downplay domestic policy and culture war issues , preferring to instead embrace a position of tepid opposition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
How the Old Guard Lost Control of the Conservative Movement In practice , outside the areas of immigration and foreign policy , the differences between these groups are relatively minor .
The rift is largely one of culture and tone and preferred tactics .
But the divide is nonetheless very real , and at some point early in the Donald Trump presidency the anti-Trump conservatives from the old guard realized they had lost control of the movement they once dominated .
The flagship publication of the conservative movement had long been National @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 2016 campaign , NR had declared its everlasting enmity toward Donald Trump , devoting much of the magazine ’ s January 2016 issue to a feature titled “ Against Trump.
” This , however , had little effect at all on the rank and file within the Republican Party or within the conservative movement .
During his presidency , Donald Trump enjoyed overwhelming support—often exceeding 80 percent—from Republicans .
Conservative evangelicals , a key component of the conservative movement , supported Trump to the tune of 90 percent in many cases .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ think tanks , enthusiasm for Trump has remained sizable , and even arguably fanatical in many corners of the conservative movement .
And , as noted by Tea Party movement cofounder Michael Johns “ No Republican in our lifetime has garnered more votes than this president or been able to bring more people together in an activist way .
We ’ d be making a huge mistake not to learn the lessons of Trumpism.
” COSIEST 5-Piece Warm G ... Buy New $ 799.00 Not surprisingly , the old conservative movement , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never Trump ” agenda , is less than pleased .
Specifically , we ’ re talking about pundits like Ramesh Ponnuru , Kevin Williamson , Jonah Goldberg , and Jennifer Rubin .
As the pro-Trump rank and file showed little interest in expansive foreign policy , and took a much greater interest in the culture war , these old-school pundits began to argue for a reevaluation of the very word “ conservatism.
” In 2018 , for example , Rubin declared that “ ’ conservative ’ has become practically synonymous with ‘ Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ embraces the term “ classical liberal ” instead .
The trend apparently caught on among the anti-Trump parties , as illustrated in a 2018 article for Politico titled “ Why the ‘ Classical Liberal ’ Is Making a Comeback.
” According to Politico , conservatives like Goldberg are encouraging terms like “ classical liberal ” to distance their preferred brand of conservatism from the Trump brand .
According to Goldberg , this would allow American rightists to embrace a term that does not imply the “ full-suite Republican-style conservatism ” that has come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Some former conservatives have already explicitly abandoned both the label and the movement .
Bill Kristol , for example , announced in February that he had joined the Democratic Party , the party of the center-left and not generally a popular ideological destination for conservatives .
Kristol , of course , is a longtime opponent of the populist right and his career has primarily focused on pushing highly aggressive foreign policy such as 2003 ’ s Iraq invasion .
Clearly , Trump ’ s conservative supporters have offered little for Kristol to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the conservative camp will likely depend on whether or not the Trump faction of the movement continues to dominate the party .
Similarly , the odds that people like Rubin and Goldberg will openly follow Kristol to the center-left are likely to increase the longer “ Trumpism ” remains ascendant .
Patio Sense Deluxe Coc ... Buy New $ 151.00 The bad news in all of this is that from a laissez-faire perspective , neither faction offers much to get excited about .
The old National Review faction , of course , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serious efforts to scale back either the federal welfare state or the national security state .
The anti-Trump conservative movement remains dedicated to continuing and expanding US wars around the globe , defending the prerogatives of the American surveillance state , and in enabling legislation such as the PATRIOT Act .
Compared to this , the Trump faction , which is skeptical of intelligence agencies like the CIA , and which is relatively unenthusiastic about foreign intervention , offers a relative improvement over the “ usual ” conservatives .
Yet when it comes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spending , and gargantuan deficits , neither side offers anything more than the most flimsy nominal opposition .
Moreover , the Goldberg-Rubin faction ’ s coziness with federal politicians and federal bureaucrats in the Pentagon speaks to an unwillingness to engage in tactics or rhetoric that might endanger the legitimacy or stability of the regime .
The fact Trump popular are far less invested in the political status quo may be the chief source of their charm .
They view themselves as being out of power , and see little value in preserving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presumed to be under the control of ideological enemies .
Why seek to defend the legitimacy of institutions over which one is unlikely to ever have any control ?
This , it seems , is a driving factor behind the division in the Republican Party .
The old guard conservatives hope to exercise power again in the medium term and thus want to move on from the 2020 election and get back to the usual business of bipartisan compromise .
The populists , however , expect to be totally locked out of power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it only makes sense to expose election fraud and to challenge the legitimacy of the entire system .
Note : The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute .
The Best of Ryan McMaken

The 2020 election has put on display a growing rift within the conservative movement and the Republican Party. As the Washington Examiner notes this week, “The dividing lines have only deepened since media organizations called the election for his challenger Joe Biden.”
This rift is between populist Trump supporters and the old conservative establishment. The traditional gatekeepers of conservatism tend to wield wide influence within the Republican Party. The current group of editors, punits, and columnists came to power in the days when George W. Bush was president and the conservative movement looked very different.
The Two Sides of the Divide
Great Deal Furniture M... Buy New $175.75 (as of 07:44 UTC - Details) Therefore on one hand are the Trump populists, who are focused on elements of a culture war and who back a relatively restrained nationalistic view of foreign policy. They view themselves as being essentially locked out of institutions of governance by the “deep state” and other elements of the permanent government. They view themselves as beleaguered, and as such they employ a more aggressive tone and posture toward those—with the exception of close allies—who presently occupy positions of power. On the other hand are the mainline conservatives, who view themselves as the “reasonable” ones or as “the adults in the room.” They are generally comfortable with the status quo and seek a stable political system within which they hope to soon wield power. Unlike the Trump supporters, these conservatives are heavily focused on foreign policy and the frequent and aggressive use of state power in the international sphere. They downplay domestic policy and culture war issues, preferring to instead embrace a position of tepid opposition to the Left’s legislative agenda.
How the Old Guard Lost Control of the Conservative Movement
In practice, outside the areas of immigration and foreign policy, the differences between these groups are relatively minor. The rift is largely one of culture and tone and preferred tactics.
But the divide is nonetheless very real, and at some point early in the Donald Trump presidency the anti-Trump conservatives from the old guard realized they had lost control of the movement they once dominated.
The flagship publication of the conservative movement had long been National Review, for instance, but during the 2016 campaign, NR had declared its everlasting enmity toward Donald Trump, devoting much of the magazine’s January 2016 issue to a feature titled “Against Trump.”
This, however, had little effect at all on the rank and file within the Republican Party or within the conservative movement. During his presidency, Donald Trump enjoyed overwhelming support—often exceeding 80 percent—from Republicans. Conservative evangelicals, a key component of the conservative movement, supported Trump to the tune of 90 percent in many cases.
Outside the Beltway-based Bush-era conservatives and their think tanks, enthusiasm for Trump has remained sizable, and even arguably fanatical in many corners of the conservative movement. And, as noted by Tea Party movement cofounder Michael Johns “No Republican in our lifetime has garnered more votes than this president or been able to bring more people together in an activist way. We’d be making a huge mistake not to learn the lessons of Trumpism.” COSIEST 5-Piece Warm G... Buy New $799.00 (as of 07:44 UTC - Details)
Not surprisingly, the old conservative movement, which invested so much in supporting the “never Trump” agenda, is less than pleased. Specifically, we’re talking about pundits like Ramesh Ponnuru, Kevin Williamson, Jonah Goldberg, and Jennifer Rubin.
As the pro-Trump rank and file showed little interest in expansive foreign policy, and took a much greater interest in the culture war, these old-school pundits began to argue for a reevaluation of the very word “conservatism.” In 2018, for example, Rubin declared that “’conservative’ has become practically synonymous with ‘Trump lackey,’” so she now embraces the term “classical liberal” instead.
The trend apparently caught on among the anti-Trump parties, as illustrated in a 2018 article for Politico titled “Why the ‘Classical Liberal’ Is Making a Comeback.” According to Politico, conservatives like Goldberg are encouraging terms like “classical liberal” to distance their preferred brand of conservatism from the Trump brand. According to Goldberg, this would allow American rightists to embrace a term that does not imply the “full-suite Republican-style conservatism” that has come to be known in the Trump years.
Some former conservatives have already explicitly abandoned both the label and the movement. Bill Kristol, for example, announced in February that he had joined the Democratic Party, the party of the center-left and not generally a popular ideological destination for conservatives. Kristol, of course, is a longtime opponent of the populist right and his career has primarily focused on pushing highly aggressive foreign policy such as 2003’s Iraq invasion. Clearly, Trump’s conservative supporters have offered little for Kristol to embrace. Whether or not Kristol returns to the conservative camp will likely depend on whether or not the Trump faction of the movement continues to dominate the party. Similarly, the odds that people like Rubin and Goldberg will openly follow Kristol to the center-left are likely to increase the longer “Trumpism” remains ascendant.
Can the Trump Movement Embrace a Profreedom Agenda?
Patio Sense Deluxe Coc... Buy New $151.00 (as of 07:44 UTC - Details) The bad news in all of this is that from a laissez-faire perspective, neither faction offers much to get excited about. The old National Review faction, of course, has long been explicitly opposed to any serious efforts to scale back either the federal welfare state or the national security state. The anti-Trump conservative movement remains dedicated to continuing and expanding US wars around the globe, defending the prerogatives of the American surveillance state, and in enabling legislation such as the PATRIOT Act. Compared to this, the Trump faction, which is skeptical of intelligence agencies like the CIA, and which is relatively unenthusiastic about foreign intervention, offers a relative improvement over the “usual” conservatives. Yet when it comes to the central bank, runaway federal spending, and gargantuan deficits, neither side offers anything more than the most flimsy nominal opposition. Moreover, the Goldberg-Rubin faction’s coziness with federal politicians and federal bureaucrats in the Pentagon speaks to an unwillingness to engage in tactics or rhetoric that might endanger the legitimacy or stability of the regime.
The fact Trump popular are far less invested in the political status quo may be the chief source of their charm. They view themselves as being out of power, and see little value in preserving or being deferential toward institutions that are presumed to be under the control of ideological enemies. Why seek to defend the legitimacy of institutions over which one is unlikely to ever have any control? This, it seems, is a driving factor behind the division in the Republican Party. The old guard conservatives hope to exercise power again in the medium term and thus want to move on from the 2020 election and get back to the usual business of bipartisan compromise. The populists, however, expect to be totally locked out of power if their candidate loses. And thus it only makes sense to expose election fraud and to challenge the legitimacy of the entire system.
Note: The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute.
The Best of Ryan McMaken