Everything

Nuclear North Korea: #HotTakes

Published

2 years ago

September 4, 2017

With North Korea continuing down the same path of nuclear weapons advancements, Americans have mixed feelings about how to proceed. Unlike many issues that have very clear conservative and/or Federalist perspectives for a unified voice, the complexity of the the North Korea situation delivers the most diverse set of foreign policy perspectives we’ve seen from any issue since the Iraq War.

As Facebook used to say, “It’s complicated.”

Here are some of the right-leaning hot takes on the topic int he last 24 hours:

Senator Ben Sasse issues decisive statement on North Korea

Susan Wright, RedState

They may be forced to call him “Dear Leader,” but we can see by the way they’re forced to live that he’s not a leader, but a dictator, and he is rabid.

Keep in prayer over this situation. Pray for our leadership, that God give them wisdom. Pray for our allies to come together in this moment. And pray for peace.

White House warns U.S. will use its ‘nuclear capability’ if North Korea attacks an ally

Kyle Feldscher, Washington Examiner

The White House said North Korea’s test of a nuclear weapon would not drive the allies apart.

“The two leaders condemned North Korea’s continued destabilizing and provocative actions, confirmed the two countries’ ironclad mutual defense commitments, and pledged to continue close cooperation,” the statement read.

Hostile and Dangerous: President Trump responds to North Korean nuclear test

Emily Zanotti, DailyWire

Trump has convened his national security team, as well as tapped his Treasury Secetary, Steve Mnuchin, for ideas. According to sources close to the White House, Mnuchin is tasked with putting together a comprehensive economic sanctions plan that will outline harsher punishments for North Korea. But it’s hard to get much harsher than what North Korea already faces: an almost complete blockade of trade with most Western nations.

Mattis warns U.S. could bring “total annihilation” to North Korea

John T. Bennett, Roll Call

“We made clear that we have the ability to defend ourselves and our allies, South Korea and Japan, from any attack,” Mattis said of the U.S. military. “And our commitment among the allies is ironclad: Any threat to the United States or its territories, including Guam, or our allies will be met with a massive military response, a response both effective and overwhelming.

“Kim Jong Un should take heed of the United Nations Security Council’s unified voice — all members unanimously agreed on the threat North Korea poses and they remain unanimous on their commitment to the de-nuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” he said, then concluding the prepared statement with what sounded like a threat of an armed conflict unless Kim changes his behavior in a major way.

Cruz: U.S. response requires greater missile defense

Kelsey Tamborrino, Politico

“Missile interception technology has increased dramatically, and the next arena where this is going to play out is in space,” Cruz said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

“We need to do the investment now, so that in years to come we have that intercept capability,” added the Texas Republican, who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

North Korea responds to Trump’s “fire and fury” threat with a hydrogen bomb

Bruce Klingner, National Interest

Pyongyang last night conducted its first test of a hydrogen (thermonuclear) bomb. The device was ten times more powerful than any of those detonated in North Korea’s five earlier atomic (fission) nuclear tests, signifying yet another surprise breakthrough in the regime’s nuclear program.

This is the first nuclear test during President Trump’s tenure, and the world will be watching to see how he responds. One thing is certain: this test will further roil the already unsettled dynamics in northeast Asia.

Mattis warns North Korea of ‘massive military response’ if it threatens US, allies

Julia Manchester, The Hill

Mattis’s aggressive, holiday-weekend statement comes hours after North Korean state media announced the country had successfully tested a miniaturized hydrogen bomb capable of fitting on an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

The little man with the big gun is an imminent threat. The U.S. and the world must address this situation now. https://t.co/8nkVNGYw1b

— JD Rucker (@JDRucker) September 4, 2017

White House warns U.S. will use its 'nuclear capability' if North Korea attacks an ally https://t.co/9x7KRN25XC

— Nick Short 🇺🇸 (@PoliticalShort) September 4, 2017

.@KellyannePolls: "@POTUS is not going to broadcast to North Korea or anyone else ahead of time what the United States will do next." pic.twitter.com/aEgfHWbP1c

— Fox News (@FoxNews) September 4, 2017

The United States is considering, in addition to other options, stopping all trade with any country doing business with North Korea.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 3, 2017

South Korea detects that North Korea is preparing for a possible ballistic missile launch https://t.co/nzOBsXImkD pic.twitter.com/yra0f3Knp1

— Bloomberg (@business) September 4, 2017

The only certainty is that the situation is volatile. The entire world is watching how the leader of the most powerful nation on earth will respond to threats from arguably the most dangerous leader on earth.

Related Topics:Hot Takes North Korea Nuclear

Click to comment

Judiciary

Census case will demonstrate if the Supreme Court is political or not

Published

6 hours ago

April 24, 2019

JD Rucker

Census case will demonstrate if the Supreme Court is political or not

There is an unnecessary amount of controversy surrounding whether or not a citizenship question can be added to the upcoming United States census. But now that it’s here, the outcome of the case will say a great deal about the makeup of the Supreme Court and whether or not it has become a body that is driven solely by politics despite the intent of the founders to make sure it never would be.

On the surface, this case seems rather mundane. It’s just a question about the citizenship status of individuals. Some may be wondering what the big deal really is. In reality, it’s a very big deal. Census data is used to determine pretty much everything as it pertains to the relationship between the federal government and the states. Grant money, House of Representative seats, and district allocations are among the many changes that will all be determined by the census.

From a purely political perspective, this should be a no-brainer to conservatives. Of course the question should be included. It’s unfair for states who allow a higher level of illegal immigrants to gain more power as a result. These are not voters (at least they’re not supposed to be). It’s idiotic to give states a great incentives to bring in as many illegal immigrants as possible, so if the presence of a censorship question lowers the numbers reported, that’s not a bad thing.

Politically, the citizenship question is a winning play for conservatives.

But here’s the problem. The judiciary is not supposed to be driven by politics. Their job is to interpret the Constitution and the law of the land to determine how it’s to be enforced by the executive branch and whether the legislative branch is in line with the intent of the Constitution through the laws they establish. By those criteria, the Trump administration has a major problem with the citizenship question. The Census Act clearly states Congress is to be given notice of changes to the census three years in advance. They were not. The citizenship question was not part of the original list sent by Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in March, 2017. It was sent in the March, 2018 list, but that’s not enough time for Congress to review if we’re going solely based on the letter of the law.

This is an insanely stupid aspect of the law; it shouldn’t take Congress three years to read a question and determine whether or not they need to make new laws as a result. But it’s the law nonetheless and Ross broke it by not including the question in his original list. It was a rookie mistake made by someone who really shouldn’t be in his position, but what’s done is done.

Part of my heart says the censorship question is righteous and does not violate the Constitution, therefore it should be allowed. But the other part of my heart longs for a judiciary that is truly apolitical, one that does its job as laid out in the Constitution. If that’s the measure of this case, then the Administration clearly did not meet the standards set forth in the law to add the question to the census.

Where I take solace is knowing the balance of political bias within the judiciary favors the left. If it’s impossible to completely remove politics from the judiciary, then any win for conservatism is acceptable just as any loss for conservatism is unwelcome. I desperately want the originalist perspective to prevail in our judiciary, but if such apolitical adherence is only possible when convenient or in a robotic utopia of a truly impartial judiciary, then I’m forced to defer to the side of my heart that says, “Take the win and move on.”

We need the citizenship question in the census, and though I would have preferred to have seen it handled properly by the Commerce Department, I’ll accept a victory on it even if it comes by the hand of conservative bias.

JavaScript required We are sorry but without JavaScript enabled, this widget does not work. Please enable JavaScript in your browser’s settings and reload this page. Reload

Culture and Religion

Matthew 22:37 – ‘love the Lord thy God’

Published

8 hours ago

April 24, 2019

JD Rucker

Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. – Matthew 22:37 (KJV)

We’ve all heard this verse, but have we really contemplated it? This is a verse that sits in the middle of many different things happening. The Pharisees and Sadducees were questioning Him. His answers were profound and defining.

This important portion of this message is echoed three times: all. Love thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all they mind. This is the most important Commandment according to Yeshua.

Boost This Post

Get this story in front of tens of thousands of patriots who need to see it. For every $30 you donate here, this story will be broadcast to an addition 7000 Americans or more. If you’d prefer to use PayPal, please email me at jdrucker@reagan.com and let me know which post you want boosted after you donate through PayPal.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

Opinions

Sign the petition demanding term limits on Capitol Hill

Published

8 hours ago

April 24, 2019

JD Rucker

Sign the petition demanding term limits on Capitol Hill

It’s time for term limits. This has been on my heart for some time, but I have held back because there are so many other important issues to cover. Today, I realized if I wait until more pressing issues are solved, I’ll be waiting forever. There are always going to be more pressing issues than term limits, but here’s the thing. Our representatives realize this, too, which is why it’s never given the attention it deserves. They use these other issues as cover to prevent them from having to address the one issue that will affect them the most.

This is my first petition on Change.org. I’ll admit I’ve never been a fan of the site because it is mostly progressive topics on the table, but this is an issue that even progressives should be able to acknowledge as a problem.

Here’s what I posted:

Set term limits for U.S. Representatives and Senators

Corruption is rampant in Washington DC. One of the biggest reasons this is the case is because lifetime politicians have become power brokers, making them the beneficiaries of favors, payoffs, and under-the-table deals. They live in a perpetual state of campaigning rather than focusing on addressing the problems that face Americans.

Term limits were never included in the Constitution because it was expected by the founders that those serving as our representatives in the legislative branch would do so as a duty to be fulfilled rather than a luxurious position of excess. They did not anticipate the electoral benefits of incumbents, nor did the realize the two-party system would polarize the nation to the point that positions could be made essentially permanent.

Power should not be accumulated over the length of a long career. It should be earned through action and earnestly held for a brief period of time. Today, too much power is consolidated in Washington DC, partially as a result of the extended lengths in which our representatives enjoy their tenure.

Members of the House of Representatives and the Senate should be there because they want to serve their country, not because they enjoy being part of the DC Country Club. Term limits are very popular among the people, but Capitol Hill continues to ignore our will by failing to address it. Why should they? Only they can be hurt by it, and it does not behoove them to hurt themselves.

Instead, they continue hurting us.

We demand Congress immediately put together legislation that spells out term limits for themselves. Americans need to know who is willing to suppress their own power for the sake of the nation. This can only happen by bringing legislation to the floor.

Imagine Capitol Hill without the perpetual campaigning. Imagine forcing our representatives to work within a time limit instead of working to stay in the DC Country Club forever. It’s time for term limits in the House and Senate.