Wayne Allyn Root recently authored a commentary in which he makes a very interesting indictment of Mitt Romney. In my estimation, Root's commentary is emblematic of what's wrong with politics. See: http://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/columns/wayne-allyn-root/thoughts-trump-s-cabinet-mitt-and-castro-s-death. Root's issueless indictment of Mitt Romney is my indictment of the political system.
Despite not one constitutionalist being named for a cabinet position, Wayne Allyn Root says he likes all of the picks. That's because they all understand we are at war against an ideology. Somehow, the government will prevail in this war. The government will prevail by using the words "Islamic terrorists", which is the new abracadabra. The biggest menace we face, pursuant to Root, is radical Islam. As a Christian, I'm far from an apologist for radical Islam. But I believe it foolish to amplify the threat of individuals like the one at Ohio State University while marginalizing the threat posed by big government.
Rather than recognize the most efficient way to mitigate the threat of ISIS is freedom (i.e., the Second Amendment), Root argues for "extreme vetting". Might I remind the reader that Ohio State University is a gun free zone. Let's not forget that the United States has the largest security-industrial complex in the world. We still aren't safe. Doesn't Root understand that if we give up liberty for security, we will end up with neither? Amazingly, Root even manages to amalgamate the name of Mises with his statist platform.
I say the more free and prosperous we are, the more capable we will be in defending ourselves against terrorism. Imagine if I said the way to defeat ISIS is to ape ISIS. Yet, that's precisely what Trump has argued. Pursuant to that calculus, why not ape Democrats to defeat Democrats?
Wayne Allyn Root's desire for big government to save him is rather peculiar, considering the fact that he has ceaselessly attacked President Obama. Root has literally called for the arrest of President Obama for not making more war. Root has made countless Facebook posts that are little more than ad hominem attacks, calling President Obama mentally ill.
All the way up until just a few years ago, I never wrote about politicians being arrested or held legally accountable. I wrote about economics from an Austrian-school perspective. Where did that get me? The person who handled my veterans casework met with somebody high up at the VA. The result of that meeting? VA misfeasance was covered up. That I can prove. That's on top of other VA lies that have never been corrected as far as I'm aware, which look even worse when juxtaposed with the lie that having eczema from the anthrax vaccine is psychosis. I supported Sharron Angle. I defended the free market. I called for the privatization of the VA. That same person would make remarks implying I needed to get on something for beliefs like that. That person made about four different accusations, eventually admitting they weren't true. It's in Facebook records. One of those accusations was that I had made a death threat against Sharron Angle. Do you know what that did to me? The first thing that goes through my mind is that I can't support or oppose anybody if I am accused of such a thing towards a person I supported.
In 2010, in the midst of nearly destroying myself as I was pressured to do so, I had written about wanting Senator Reid to give President Obama a hug. Gentle reader, mentally process that. In 2011 and 2012 there were times I defended President Obama from my own father, who is now deceased. My father's criticisms of President Obama were misplaced, having nothing to do with issues. My father accused Obama of being a Muslim who was born in Kenya. I could prove my defense of President Obama from my own father. So I hate not President Obama. While I have a plurality of disagreements with Obama, I am capable of saying where he is correct - unlike Wayne Allyn Root. Unlike Wayne Allyn Root, I've never made an issue out of Obama's college records or birth certificate. I've scolded birtherism.
While I have a plurality of disagreements with Donald Trump, there are some things I agree with him on. Gentle reader, I was very close to voting for Donald Trump. In fact, I almost voted for Trump just because a family member was attacking him for being "sexist" and "racist". Do you know what my response was to this family member? I said that while the conclusion that Trump isn't vote worthy might be correct, the reasoning is flawed, based on propaganda coming from the mainstream news. If the perceptual filter is flawed, the reasoning and/or conclusions will likewise be flawed.
It's permissible to quarrel over personality-related matters, trashing Trump over some lewd comments he made a decade ago. It's impermissible to deal with issues. I'm opposed to the use of torture. My Commandant, General Charles Krulak, is opposed to the use of torture. Waterboarding is torture. General Krulak calls waterboarding a war crime. Statutory law proscribes the use of torture. The Constitution proscribes the use of torture. Unfortunately, the Republican Party has become the torture party. Gentle reader, look up the penalty for causing death by torture, as the Bush administration did.
Do you, gentle reader, understand the implications of waterboarding? All the government must do is make an accusation against somebody, and then it's permissible to waterboard. Gentle reader, that is the demolition of due process. I'd be concerned about the cognitive function of any person incapable of figuring that one out. While I have many disagreements with President Obama, he is absolutely right on this issue. While I agree with Trump on many issues, he is absolutely wrong on this issue. That said, I really appreciate the way Trump seems interested in de-escalating tensions with Russia. If Trump can save jobs by diminishing the burden of government, I'm all for that.
Does anybody know what I wrote on December 7, 2014? I predicted that prevailing policies, if not abandoned, would precipitate war with Russia. As I wrote back then, sanctions are a prelude to war. Of course, I was treated like a nutcase for saying that. So what became an election issue of 2016? The impending war with Russia if Hillary Clinton were elected. As much as I disagree with Trump, I do believe it is better than Hillary Clinton being in office. At the same time, I don't hate Hillary Clinton. I don't have it in me to hate anybody. I'm one of the most objective persons. Google the words: Donald trump earns accolades.
What I am very concerned about is the synergy of one-party rule. (Click on that link and you can see how original my writing is, which apparently I must demonstrate.) And this is why I, like the great commentator George Will, believe the best outcome we can obtain is gridlock. I reached the same conclusion as George Will independent of him. I support divided government, and I like the idea of Democrats controlling the Senate. Unless the desire is to end the debate on torture, I see no reason for the torture party to control the House, Senate, and White House simultaneously. As I've written over and over. My current prediction is that prevailing attitudes and beliefs will precipitate war against China and/or Iran.
Root argues that the most important trait is loyalty. Of course, he means loyalty to Trump. Therefore, pursuant to Root, Romney's biggest transgression is not any position on any issues, but his act of disloyalty in his speech in early 2016. In other words, Romney's biggest transgression was when he was the most right he has ever been. I deal with issues. If the test is loyalty to any person, I am going to fail it every time.
Unlike Root, I don't believe Romney's act of disloyalty is his biggest transgression. I must have watched Romney's speech from early 2016 a good thirty times, and each time I found myself liking it more. Romney wasn't exactly wrong in his indictment of Trump. While the grassroots attacked Romney, I found myself liking the man. Recently, I made a free-market indictment of Alex Jones's and Donald Trump's protectionist platform. I'm a free trader. Again. I used issues to deconstruct Alex Jones's economic fallacies. In Google News, run a search on the words: analyzing faux news alex jones. Conversely, Alex Jones tells George Will to go shoot himself. See: http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/05/04/alex-jones-celebrates-trump-victory-telling-george-will-blow-what-little-left-your-brains-out/210223
In the end, I voted for Gary Johnson, and the irony is that certain "libertarians" in Nevada hate me because 1) I'm against killing cops, and 2) I'm against mandatory vaccines, which is a position I'm not incapable of defending. These "libertarians" are also nexused with the very people who targeted me for being a Ron Paul supporting Austrian-schooler, playing games with my casework back in 2009. I actually liked Mitt Romney's speech in early 2016. I indict Alex Jones on issues. I'm against telling people to go shoot themselves. My very last post on another site was wanting Dina Titus to run for U.S. Senate in 2018. I have no representation in government. I get covertly harassed by the government. There's a problem in this country, alright.
I disagreed with Adam Kokesh's gun-march idea. Conversely, Alex Jones promoted Kokesh. I'm bad and I get covertly harassed. Ironically, while I don't even know Kokesh, Kokesh is nexused with people who are nexused with the people who targeted me. What direction am I supposed to move in other than towards Adam Kokesh?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).