OMB Director Mick Mulvaney strongly stressed his libertarian leanings in a recent interview with the Washington Examiner. According to the Examiner’s Alex Pappas, Mulvaney ‘said he considers himself in the libertarian wing of the party’. Mulvaney then went on to say, “I’ve always come from the sort of the school of thought that I don’t care what you do in the privacy of your own home.”
Mulvaney also mentioned that his staff had been working closely with Senior Advisor to the President, Stephen Miller, to turn the Trump campaign’s “policies into numbers”. Miller is widely seen as a close ally of White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon, so this may be promising for grassroots conservatives who are hoping that Trump sticks by his anti-establishment, ‘America First’ platform.
The OMB Director made clear that he differs from Trump on the major issue of entitlement reform, but agreed to defer to the President on this.
“We talked through the various mandatory spending programs and why I thought they needed to be changed, how I thought they could be changed. And at the end, I gave him a list, and he went down and said yes, yes, yes, no, no, no, yes, yes, no. The nos were Social Security retirement and Medicare.”
“It’s a policy dream come true to be able to make the arguments directly to the president of the United States, and if I lose, that’s great. I’m not the president. He is. And I absolutely respect his final decision.”
Mulvaney stated that his name was put into consideration for the post of OMB Director by Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), the Chairman of the Financial Services Committee and himself a strong advocate for sound money. Hensarling had previously been considered for Treasury Secretary, but was passed over for a more conventional establishment figure, movie producer Steven Mnuchin.
Mulvaney, a founding member of the House Freedom Caucus, initially endorsed Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) in last year’s Republican primaries, but was quick to get behind Trump after he won the Republican nomination.
And keep it the bedrooms we are sick of the left’s public perversions.
Depends on what you call “perversion”…I guarantee you you currently routinely do things in the bedroom that would have had you run out of town on a rail, probably tarred and feathered, if anyone found out, less than 70 years ago. Even if you ARE 70-85….(hell, you do NOT want to know what oldsters get up to in retirement communities…there’s a strong trade in erectile dysfunction pills in ALL of ’em….wife worked as a CNA in several while pursuing nursing degree.)
Shouldn’t be too quick to point fingers and call names…though you’re right about “you sure as HELL don’t have to rub our faces in it”…how often do you see someone into BDSM walking his sub on a leash through town? How often do you see a grown man in a bib, diaper, and pacifier on the street? How many folks into role-play heavily wear their “costumes” out and about in an in-your-face obnoxious manner (I.E. how many obviously faked sexy nurse, french maid, schoolgirl, cop, etc outfits do you see on the street outside of Halloween?) If they don’t need to do it, then LGBTs sure as hell don’t need the obnoxious displays they insist on so often. That simple.
I don’t care what you do “behind closed doors” (which also means in public, IF you can do it “without shocking the mundanes”), as long as everyone’s consensual, and of legal age…but there is no reason in hell you need to come out beyond that door to rub it in my face…you wouldn’t appreciate it if I obnoxiously displayed MY sexual preferences at you…guaranteed (unless he happens to have the same kinks, in which case, I might have to politely say he’s on the wrong team to draw my interest.)