Benjy, 🐈 heir of 🌈AlphaCat & Sisfur

Hope so. I’ve been completely baffled by so much that’s been happening

Has America finally regained its sanity? 🥳

I think this @realtimmy2026 is a crybaby or something.

IS MAGA CONSERVATIVE—OR IS CONSERVATISM WHATEVER DONALD TRUMP SAYS IT IS TODAY? I am a Republican. I consider myself a conservative. I am not a Democrat, and I am not MAGA. I applaud President Trump when I believe he is right. I support securing our borders, enforcing immigration laws, eliminating unnecessary regulations, encouraging technological innovation, and pursuing peace in the Middle East. I also support legal immigration, free enterprise, fiscal responsibility, individual liberty, constitutional limits on government, and strong alliances with democratic nations. I don’t believe supporting a president requires defending everything he says or does. And that brings me to a question for Republicans who consider themselves conservatives: What exactly are the enduring principles of MAGA? Are they principles that exist independently of Donald Trump? Or does conservatism become whatever Donald Trump happens to say it is today? Consider his own words—and his administration’s actions. 1. IS MAGA ECONOMIC CONSERVATISM—OR A FUNDAMENTAL MISUNDERSTANDING OF TRADE? On September 16, 2026, at a political rally in North Carolina, Trump declared: “And if we stop trading with every country that we have a deficit with, which is most of them, and which would be very easy to do, we’d make at least $1.5 trillion a year.” He continued: “The word deficit, you have to understand is nothing more than a fancy word for loss.” Think about that. The President of the United States believes a trade deficit is a financial loss that can be recovered by refusing to trade. A trade deficit is not a loss. A trade surplus is not a profit. A trade deficit means Americans purchase more goods and services from foreigners than foreigners purchase from Americans. Americans receive valuable goods and services. Foreigners receive dollars or dollar-denominated claims, which they can spend, hold, or invest. Those transactions are not equivalent to losing money. And here’s where Trump’s claim becomes especially revealing. If stopping trade really generated $1.5 trillion in annual savings for the federal government, we could eliminate most of our approximately $2 trillion annual federal budget deficit almost overnight. Except we couldn’t. The federal budget deficit measures government spending minus government revenue. The trade deficit measures imports minus exports. They are entirely different accounting concepts. There is no $1.5 trillion windfall waiting for the Treasury. And if Trump stopped those imports, he would also eliminate the tariff revenue collected on them. When did misunderstanding basic accounting become a conservative economic philosophy? Source: Roll Call Factba.se, September 16, 2026. rollcall.com/factbase/trump/… 2. IS MAGA FISCAL CONSERVATISM—OR THE BELIEF THAT TRADE DEFICITS PAY OFF THE NATIONAL DEBT? On March 31, 2016, Bob Woodward interviewed Donald Trump for The Washington Post. TRUMP: “We’ve got to get rid of the $19 trillion in debt.” WOODWARD: “How long would that take?” TRUMP: “I think I could do it fairly quickly, because of the fact the numbers…” WOODWARD: “What’s fairly quickly?” TRUMP: “Well, I would say over a period of eight years. And I’ll tell you why.” Asked about tax increases, Trump replied: “I don’t think I’ll need to. The power is trade. Our deals are so bad.” Ten years later, Trump still describes trade deficits as financial losses. Trade agreements can affect growth, employment, and tax revenues. But a trade deficit is not a federal expenditure. You cannot pay off the national debt simply by eliminating a trade deficit. Is MAGA committed to fiscal arithmetic—or to Trump’s theory of trade? Source: The Washington Post, April 2, 2016. washingtonpost.com/news/fact… 3. IS MAGA FISCAL RESTRAINT—OR EXPANDING GOVERNMENT SPENDING? Is MAGA: A president promising to eliminate $19 trillion in national debt in eight years? Or is MAGA: “Our Military Budget for the year 2027 should not be $1 Trillion Dollars, but rather $1.5 Trillion Dollars.” — Donald Trump, January 7, 2026. In the same statement, Trump argued that tariffs could support increased military spending, reduce the debt, and finance payments to Americans. A stronger national defense may be desirable. But that does not make its cost disappear. When did promising trillions in additional federal spending without a credible financing plan become fiscal conservatism? 4. IS MAGA FREE-MARKET CAPITALISM—OR GOVERNMENT PRICE CONTROLS? On August 29, 2024, Trump was asked about Kamala Harris’s proposed restrictions on price gouging. He answered: “So, that’s a communist plan. It’s never worked, and it’s been tried by others. Believe it or not. Richard Nixon tried it.” He continued: “It has never worked. It’s called control. They want control.” Now consider Trump’s announcement on January 9, 2026: “Effective January 20, 2026, I, as President of the United States, am calling for a one year cap on Credit Card Interest Rates of 10%.” A credit card interest-rate ceiling is a government-imposed price control on lending. And who introduced legislation to make a 10% cap federal law? Senator Bernie Sanders and Republican Senator Josh Hawley. Their February 4, 2025, bill, S. 381, proposed a five-year cap. It has not advanced to a Senate floor vote. Harris’s grocery price-gouging proposal and Trump’s credit-card cap are different policies. Neither is communism merely because it regulates prices. But both involve government intervention in private markets. When Democrats propose price controls, Trump calls it communism. When Trump, Bernie Sanders, and Josh Hawley propose a price ceiling, MAGA calls it affordability. So is MAGA opposed to price controls—or only to price controls proposed by Democrats? Sources: Trump’s January 9, 2026, statement; S. 381, 119th Congress. congress.gov/bill/119th-cong… 5. IS MAGA CAPITALIST—OR SOCIALIST? This may be the most revealing economic question of all. What is one of the defining characteristics of socialism? Social or public ownership or control of the means of production, rather than primarily private ownership. Now consider what the Trump administration has been doing. The federal government has acquired or negotiated ownership interests in American businesses. Examples include: INTEL: The federal government agreed to acquire approximately 9.9% of the semiconductor company in an $8.9 billion stock investment. MP MATERIALS: The Department of Defense acquired an equity position of approximately 15% in a major American rare-earth mining company, becoming its largest shareholder. LITHIUM AMERICAS: The government acquired approximately 5% of the company and a separate 5% economic interest in its Thacker Pass mining joint venture. TRILOGY METALS: The administration arranged a 10% equity stake, with warrants that could increase its position. These investments are part of a broader federal effort to secure domestic production of semiconductors, rare-earth minerals, and other strategically important materials. And the federal government is no longer simply a regulator or customer. It is becoming a shareholder. To be precise, minority government ownership is not necessarily government control. Intel’s agreement, for example, gives Washington no board seats or special governance rights. And not every government investment constitutes socialism. There are legitimate national-security arguments for supporting domestic production of critical technologies and materials. But those arguments do not erase the philosophical question. For generations, conservatives have defended private ownership, competition, and the allocation of capital through markets rather than political decisions. Now Washington is selecting particular companies in which taxpayers will own equity. Government becomes an investor, regulator, lender, customer, and sometimes a participant in decisions affecting an industry’s future. Is this traditional free-market capitalism? Is it state capitalism? If you owned a competitor to Intel and you bid on the same government contract do you believe you’d be treated fairly? If you are a drone manufacturer and compete for a government contract against Powerus ( partly owned by Don Jr and Eric Trump) would your bid have a chance? Could regulations be altered to favor government owned or Trump owned companies? Is this a movement toward the public ownership and direction of the means of production that conservatives have historically opposed? And consider the irony. A movement that routinely labels Democrats socialist is cheering a Republican administration’s acquisition of ownership interests in private companies. If a Democratic president acquired equity stakes in Intel, mining companies, and dozens of other businesses, what would MAGA call it? Why should the definition change when Donald Trump does it? Sources: Intel’s August 22, 2025, agreement; Reuters, February 2026; Council on Foreign Relations, 2026. intel.com/content/www/us/en/… csis.org/analysis/understand… 6. IS MAGA BRINGING MANUFACTURING HOME—OR FINANCING GOVERNMENT THROUGH IMPORT TAXES? Trump argues tariffs will encourage companies to manufacture in America. He also argues that tariffs will generate enormous revenues to finance government spending, debt reduction, and dividends to Americans. But these objectives compete. If tariffs eliminate imports, the revenue from taxing those imports disappears. If tariffs generate substantial revenue, Americans are continuing to import and pay taxes on foreign goods. Tariffs can protect selected industries or generate revenue. They cannot generate revenue from imports that never happen. And tariffs are collected from American importers, even though some of their economic burden may ultimately fall on foreign producers. Is MAGA’s objective to eliminate imports—or to depend on taxing them? 7. IS MAGA MATHEMATICAL CONSERVATISM—OR IMPOSSIBLE PRICE REDUCTIONS? On September 22, 2025, Trump declared: “I’m going to be reducing drug prices by 1,000 percent, by 900, 600, 500, 1,200.” A 100% price reduction makes a product free. A 500% reduction from a $100 price would make the new price negative $400. A 1,000% reduction would make it negative $900. Those are not possible reductions for an ordinary product sold at a nonnegative price. Trump may be confusing the percentage by which an old price exceeds a new price with the percentage reduction from the old price. But those are not the same calculation. Shouldn’t a president promising extraordinary economic results understand the arithmetic behind them? Source: Roll Call Factba.se, September 22, 2025. rollcall.com/factbase/trump/… 8. IS MAGA ENDING WARS—OR STARTING THEM? On election night, November 6, 2024, Trump declared: “I’m not going to start a war. I’m going to stop wars.” On February 28, 2026, the United States and Israel launched a war against Iran. On April 7, Trump warned: “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will.” I support preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. I support the goal of peace in the Middle East. But a desirable objective does not automatically justify every method used to pursue it. A conservative should be able to applaud the goal of peace while questioning the necessity, constitutionality, cost, and consequences of war. Is MAGA opposed to unnecessary Middle Eastern wars—or only to wars launched by other presidents? Source: PolitiFact, April 7, 2026. politifact.com/article/2026/… 9. IS MAGA REAGAN CONSERVATISM—OR ADMIRATION FOR AUTHORITARIAN POWER? On June 12, 1987, President Ronald Reagan challenged Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev: “Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” Reagan negotiated with authoritarian leaders. He understood diplomacy. But he publicly identified freedom as a fundamental American principle. Now compare Trump’s public language about authoritarian rulers. On September 29, 2018, speaking about Kim Jong Un: “And then we fell in love. OK? No, really! He wrote me beautiful letters.” In October 2024, speaking about Xi Jinping: “He controls 1.4 billion people with an iron fist. He’s a brilliant guy whether you like it or not.” Diplomacy is necessary. Recognizing an adversary’s power is prudent. But admiration for the ability to rule with an iron fist is not the same as defending political freedom. When did admiration for authoritarian strength become a conservative principle? 10. IS MAGA DEFENDING NATO—OR THREATENING ITS MEMBERS? On April 12, 2017, Trump declared: “The NATO alliance has been the bulwark of international peace and security.” On February 10, 2024, Trump described what he told a NATO leader whose country was not meeting defense-spending expectations: “I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want.” The context matters. There is a legitimate conservative argument that NATO members should shoulder more of their defense costs. But encouraging Russian aggression against an ally is a different proposition. Is NATO an indispensable alliance protecting American security—or an arrangement in which America may encourage aggression against members that fail to satisfy Trump? 11. IS MAGA PROTECTING INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY—OR EXPANDING FEDERAL AUTHORITY? In April 2016, Trump discussed North Carolina’s transgender bathroom law: “People go, they use the bathroom that they feel is appropriate.” He favored leaving existing arrangements in place. As president, he subsequently supported increasingly restrictive federal policies concerning transgender Americans. These policies address different legal settings, but the broader philosophical question remains. Is the conservative principle individual liberty and limited government—or using federal power to impose a preferred social policy? SO WHAT EXACTLY IS MAGA? I give Trump credit when I believe he deserves it. I applaud stronger border enforcement. I support legal immigration. I support eliminating unnecessary regulations. I support technological innovation and the entrepreneurs who make it possible. And I support the goal of lasting peace in the Middle East. But I do not confuse a worthy objective with a sound policy. Nor do I believe that a president’s good intentions—assuming they are good—excuse bad economics, faulty arithmetic, unnecessary wars, or the abandonment of conservative principles. There is an old saying: “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” The warning isn’t that intentions are irrelevant. It’s that intentions cannot substitute for sound judgment or accountability. A political philosophy should tell us when to support a president—and when to oppose him. It should not require us to redefine our principles whenever the president changes his position. I was a conservative before Donald Trump became a Republican. I intend to remain one after he leaves office. Conservatism is a philosophy. MAGA is a political movement. They are not automatically the same thing. And if Donald Trump can take either side of an issue and MAGA applauds both, then what exactly does MAGA stand for? Is MAGA a set of conservative principles—or is its defining principle simply agreeing with Donald Trump STOCKMAN REPUBLICAN

BFs giant PT rubber band just snapped and hit me in the head. DAMMIT THAT HURTS!!!!!

Such glorious autumnal colours our Acers parade these last few days

yeah no kidding. that was not on me.

Thanks to everyone who mentioned this. I did this interview in early sep. had no idea it was coming out til this evening. my interview was cut to a few snippets but at least you can see Larry with me briefly.

Surface to sky missiles were places surrounding Mar A Lago- could that be the cause?

My account here is focused on cats and AI.

Sorry I’m a Green Bay Packers fan so I can’t

A rather interesting football Sunday. No @Bears, no @packers. I guess it's team @Lions today, knock those @Vikings outta the box.

Try Amazon US: amazon.com/s?k=Rulers+for+qu…

EBay too ebay.com/itm/237120030192

Oooh I googled manifore ruler USA and it game me a linke to the US Amazon for the same one amazon.com/dp/B0CPX9M141?lv=…