publius-in-extremis
Publius in Extremis
publius-in-extremis

It’s funny how everyone says that conservatives or “gun nuts” are violent, yet the vast majority of cyber-bullying I see here comes from people ostensibly on the left. Fascinating.

It must be exhausting to be so terrified of people with positions on things that have broad, uncontroversial appeal.

If I beat you with a baseball bat, that’s an assault weapon. It’s a meaningless term invented to frighten children.

Red flag laws are not a great solution because they can relatively easily be used to harass and hamstring otherwise innocent people. If someone has a documented history of violence convictions that’s one thing and we can certainly talk about whether those people should enjoy any right to firearms (depending on the

The Green New Deal is as much a leftist wank fantasy as promising to give everyone a unicorn and a billion dollars. Climate change is an important issue we absolutely need to address, but this is not the way in which to do it.

I believe the argument is that the ACA was only enforceable constitutionally so long as it was essentially a tax. Now that the individual mandate is no more, the ACA no longer falls under Congress’s ability to tax and therefore has no constitutional basis for enforcement.

If this ultimately results in better legislation down the line that isn’t unconstitutional, then this is a net good. Just because you think a thing is right, does not make it legal, nor does a thing being legal necessarily make it right. Regardless though, to quote a line from The Big Lebowski: “This isn’t ‘Nam

In b4 the cries of “not real socialism”.

It’s a distinction without difference in today’s world. If someone is clinging to the classical definition of liberal, you might as well give it up and call yourself a moderate or a libertarian depending how far to the side of the individual you swing. Either way, it has been made clear that the left does not want

I’m not terribly enthused about that prospect either, frankly. But I’ll put it this way: I will be as surprised if Trump loses as everyone who wasn’t paying attention to what was happening on the ground in 2016 was that Trump won.

And cue the calls from the leftists who can’t or won’t accept that their narrative is what most of us who are reasonable people have said all along: There isn’t any proof that Trump colluded with the Russians. Does this make Trump a good person? Of course not. Does it mean he probably hasn’t committed other crimes?

One of New Zealand’s major booksellers also pulled Jordan Peterson’s book “because reasons”, yet you can still freely buy Mein Kampf from them. I would hazard a guess the same is probably true for The Communist Manifesto too (both of these are far more dangerous books than a self-help book).

Only an idiot thinks banning an idea stops an idea.

That’s simply not the case. Let’s say Colorado for example votes for the Democratic candidate, as they tend to do. However, the Republican candidate in our theoretical election with the NPVIC in force has enough of the popular vote to win, thus they get all of Colorado’s electoral votes. Now, if a majority of

Your presumption is that the public will only continue to drift left. I’d argue that’s a dangerous and hubristic assumption to make given the rise of right nationalist populism globally.

Feel free to be the first to storm the barricades. I’m sure everyone will be right behind you.

Prepare to be underwhelmed.

People that say that don’t remember playing Perfect Dark with DarkSims.

The actual flying around and combat in Anthem was fun. Everything else that surrounds it, sucks.

At least your vote went to the person you voted for. It’s unfortunate if that person chooses to ignore how the game is played and loses as a result. Hillary Clinton did not lose because of the Electoral College. She lost because she didn’t think the key states that narrowly flipped to Trump mattered.