Tag Archives: fascism

Jabberwonky – August 11th


When: Sunday, August 11th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Jabberwonky on Blog Talk Radio


`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

Whether it’s “down the rabbit hole”, or “through the looking glass”, the world of politics is often referred to in the lexicon given to us by Lewis Carroll. No matter what, those terms are resurrected when referring to something that has gone terribly wrong. And that’s what’s here on Jabberwonky…

Tonight: After a little hiatus due to vacation, it’s time to talk a little bit about how our politicians decide to spend their free time – and our tax dollars. Also, more fun with the IRS, sex and politics California-style, socialism v. fascism in America, and just how screwed up is our nation’s foreign policy and security apparatus.

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on BlogTalkRadio

Yes, It Can Happen Here

Let’s forget about blame games and about parties for a moment. We American citizens are faced with an incipient tyranny of unimaginable proportions. We must confront this beast openly and honestly if we are to judge how best to contain it and counter it.

There are some who may think this is merely the “paranoid style” of politics gone awry. But for them I say plainly: Yes, it can happen here.

At the present stage of development, what we are witnessing in the United States is a moderate form of fascism. This form of government is characterized by command control of the economy, intense political propaganda, and a police state apparatus that tramples the rights of individuals. Those who believe fascism to be primarily nationalist, racist, and anti-semitic have a conception of the political system as defined by circumstantial manifestations – fascism is an ideology of unity in a party headed by a great leader.

Whether the cleavage the would-be ruler chooses to accentuate or exploit is class, ethnicity, nation, or religion (or some combination of these) – it is a matter of the flavor of a given fascism at hand, not a matter of distinct political ruling principles. The flag sold recently by the Obama campaign (until it was taken down from its website after bloggers caught on to it) bearing the logo of the president displays with vivid colors and powerful symbolism the national reorientation from our traditional ideals towards an aspiring dictator.

The goal of the New Left has been to smash America into pieces and to unify it and reorient it around the party and its carefully constructed frontman. The great leader is the public relations persona, the charming, smiling “face” of the organization. Barack Obama is that frontman.

This is not to say that the aspirations of the magnates attempting to seize control of the United States are circumscribed by national boundaries. Fascism can even theoretically be extrapolated out to the world stage, with nations as the distinct cleavages to be ‘unified’ by a great leader (acting on behalf of a governing body of aspiring oligarchs).

The great leader is usually a classic narcissist. He can be extremely dangerous, especially in the face of public ridicule. He believes himself to be a Hegelian “big man of history” who is ahead of his time and the embodiment of the Zeitgeist. The great leader’s arrogance and narcissism can easily be publicly received as self-confidence, but this is usually a false image. Narcissists can be notoriously sensitive when it comes to criticism.

The great leader usually wields what Max Weber referred to as “charismatic authority.” He is a well-trained liar and manipulator. He may feel himself to be as a canvass upon which the collective paints its desires. This feeling of unity with the masses can feed into egomania and megalomania. Grandiose plans and desires may feel easily within reach. He may perceive himself or herself to be specially anointed by God. There have been great leaders who believed themselves to be gods, or acting in the aegis of God.

Control of the economy in collectivist regimes is carried out in many different ways. Private property may be abolished, but this is very rare; more common is the seizure and re-distribution of quasi-private property by the state. Capital may be abolished, but again this is highly impractical; so many collectivist regimes issue internal currency or industrial credits (similar in concept to “carbon credits”). Regulations may channel business into desired production, may kill small businesses in the interest of larger ones, and can potentially control the economy through a system of prohibitions.

There are a myriad of means to control economies and the most effective is to control the currency through a central bank. Central banks can trigger an economic crisis through overly rapid and massive inflation of the money supply or alternatively, a sudden constriction of the money supply – both can play right into the ruling elites’ hands. The chaos that ensues from a collapse of the currency demands swift and strong government action. Never let a good crisis go to waste, as it has been remarked.

It is inevitable in a command economy that an overly controlling central government unleashes a host of unintended consequences in the economy. A market economy is founded on, and is most sensitive to, the demand of each individual for a desired good or service at any given moment. This type of economy is fundamentally opposed to the drive for control of any collectivist government.

Market economy is not merely a matter of idiosyncracies; but what medical treatment an individual requires, what kind of food he wants to eat, how much, and when, what kind of exercise he needs to do and how much – it is inconceivable that millions of individual, distinct human beings can be programmed to operate in a desired manner by a few hundred politicians in Washington.

But this doesn’t stop the government from trying. As the central government’s best-laid plans inevitably go awry, more and more regulations are passed ostensibly to correct the problems; but since these “laws” are passed with a mind to establishing more government controls, they merely exacerbate any system founded on individual freedom.

The fascist regime is saturated with political propaganda. Politics infiltrates every sphere of life, and privacy seems to dissolve, like salt in a solution. Neighbors may spy on their neighbors, children on their parents, wives on their husbands, and teachers on their students. Speech is highly charged and explosive, leading to convenient calls to have it more regulated, thus cutting off dialogue and leading directly to frustration and violence. Television ads, billboards, newspaper and magazine articles, radio “PSAs” (propaganda service announcements), inundate the citizen with praise and support for the policies of the government and for the great leader.

Last but not least comes the police state. When the masses rise up against their oppressors, by that time it is often too late. If an economy completely collapses, those in the military may find themselves in the position of obeying orders or either starving or putting their loved ones at risk. It is crucially important that America’s last line of defense is loyal to the ideals of freedom and the Constitution itself, and not to any one man or party.

In summary, fascism is the drive to unify the political, economic, social, and private spheres of human existence in the state. The state is necessarily oligarchic and “democratic” control of a state is a ruse used to justify such “unification.” The safest place for power to reside in the nation is in the hands of individuals to the extent concordant with public order.

Those who have supported the Democratic Party for decades need to realize that it is clearly and unabashedly in favor of unlimited government. Those who are working within the Republican Party to check and remove the statists and charlatans within it have their hands full dealing with establishment types, who seem to be engaging in a deadly dance with the Democrats. Two steps forward, one step back, as they say.

Many people think that it cannot happen here, in the “exceptional” United States. But the signs are all around for anyone to take notice of and to compare to totalitarian regimes of the past. The propagandizing of children, the deification of a great leader, the nationalization of industry, the control of the currency, the overwhelming media propaganda, the attempt to create crises that demand swift and strong government action – does this not describe what is taking place in this country now?

America is at a crossroads. The temptation of turning to government to solve all our problems will be great. The price of standing up for liberty will become more costly. But if we continue our complacent abdication of personal responsibility for safeguarding this country for ourselves and our posterity, there will be nowhere to escape. We will be prisoners in our own nation and a shameful people in the judgment of history.

Conservatism-The Opposite of Fascism: Part 1

I recently read an article on Addicting Info. A highly Liberal blog with weak talking points. Nevertheless, I realized that the sheep, I mean readers who follow them, believe the indoctrinated falsity upon which they preach.  The article in which I am speaking about, is one which compared Conservatism, to Fascism, essentially referring to them as one in the same. In the article, the first thing I can see, is the photo shopped cross put into piece’s featured image.  The image itself, is one of Sarah Palin, smiling, wrapped up in an American Flag, holding a cross in her hand. Obviously, in the original image, she does not hold a cross in her hand. 

However, when Liberals argue that Conservatism & Fascism are the same ideology, they often used a quote by Sinclair Lewis, in which Lewis says: “When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.” 

So, to fuel the Liberal Stereotype of all Conservatives wear crosses around their necks and wave American Flags every chance they get, and profile everyone else who doesn’t as unpatriotic,  it would need to be necessary for them to edit an original image, even to prove their own agenda. Ethics are silly things away, who could forget MSNBC’s recent gaffe? This week,  I would like to debunk this theory, one day at a time. One article a day. This isn’t a hard myth to debunk. So, let’s start with the first three that come off of Addicting Info’s list, shall we?

1. You are obsessed with national power and pride and believe your country doesn’t have to follow the rules and shouldn’t ever apologize for doing things that are wrong. You think your nation can do whatever it wants.

By all means, I’m pretty sure Conservatives don’t believe that never apologizing for something is a bad thing. We believe that we should not apologize for our foreign policy, that it is a sign of weakness. And launching a tour who’s main purpose is to apologize is a sign of submission to other countries, and not a sign of strength or leadership. By all means, our country should follow international rules, just like any other country.

2. You believe in the rule of the few, election rigging, political decisions being made by a select group of officials behind closed doors, embrace the informal and unregulated exercise of political power, arbitrary deprivation of civil liberties, and little tolerance for meaningful opposition.

Holy crap. This is like reading recent news of The Obama Administration. Remember when the healthcare overhaul was all done behind close doors? I do. Remember the election fraud of Acorn? As for group of select few making the decisions for many, what about George Soros, pulling the strings behind President Obama? Or Harry Reid & Pelosi? Remember how everything functioned around them when they held the ‘super majority?’ Or what about when President Obama released the executive order banning protest? (See H.R. 347) Also, unregulated exercise of political power? Let’s look back to the ‘Dream Act’ shall we? That was where the President just ‘went around’ Congress.

Don’t even get me started on ‘tittle tolerance for meaningful opposition.’


3. You believe in survival of the fittest, an every man for himself mentality that causes you to believe that poor people and sick people are weak and must be punished. You think rich people are strong because they are wealthy and that they should rule us. You also believe your race is superior to all others.

Race superior to all others, huh? Only Liberals can turn any, and I do mean, any argument into a race issue. Poor people and sick people shouldn’t be punished just because they are poor and sick, and anyone would have lots of trouble trying to find a conservative who actually believes that crap. Answer to your problems? Capitalism, my friends. Free enterprise is the only thing to bring up the poor into the middle class. Also, if we believe Rich People rule, then tell me about George Soros again, I doubt he rules at all. As far as sick people go, I don’t believe they should be punished because they are sick. I believe they should be treated. And forcing them to buy healthcare is not an answer.


I’ll be doing 4 of these a day until I reach number 18. All from the original addictinginfo.com piece. Stay tuned, and feel free to tweet any suggestions to me! @Tanner_WB

Debunking the Big Lie that American Conservatives are Like Fascists

There is a false opposition between socialism and fascism common in left-wing circles that excludes the middle ground of Constitutional republican government and individual rights. The conflation of all things to the right of leftism as “fascism,” whether done intentionally or unintentionally, is the cause of much confusion.

Let’s debunk a few myths that drive the comparison between fascism and American conservatism.

1. American conservatives are for individual rights, not statism.
2. They believe individuals are ends in themselves, and not a means to an end.
3. They are for liberty, not totalitarianism.
4. They are for free markets, not corporatism or state capitalism.
5. They are for private property, not state property.
6. They are for a color-blind, legally equal society based on individual rights, not group rights.
7. They are for freedom of religion, not theocracy.
8. They are suspicious of government authority, not obeisant.
9. They tend not to deify political leaders, though they revere leaders like Ronald Reagan.
10. They are for less government intervention, not control over every aspect of life.
11. They are patriotic, not nationalist.
12. They are for federalism, not centralized government.
13. They are for checks and balances, not unification.
14. They support gun rights not because the seek to harm others, but to protect and defend themselves.
15. They display judgment in the context of moral and cultural relativism.

Not much “fascistic” about that, is there?

Kyle Becker blogs at RogueGovernment, and can be followed on Twitter as @RogueOperator1. He writes freelance for several publications, including American Thinker and OwntheNarrative, and is a regular commentator on the late night talk show TB-TV.

The “Personal Energy Subsidy” No One Talks About

Members of Congress have recently been embroiled in a battle to stop what many have termed “Big Oil Company Subsidies.” These government-sponsored subsidies come in many forms, such as corporate tax breaks for common expense tax write-offs, and for depletion of equipment costs. Keep in mind, that these same tax breaks are also given to every other manufacturer in America, not just Big Oil Companies. Randall Hoven outlines the situation precisely in an article titled About Those Oil Subsidies.

The Big Oil subsidy outcry is just another ploy by the American left to bash the very fossil fuel that has been the main producer of affordable energy in America ever since the invention of the various versions of electricity generators and the subsequent evolution of the energy industry. As with any production company, the free market energy system is based on competition-driven cost controls, where affordability is job one. Allow big government to completely control the energy industry and the results will be higher prices for everyone who can afford to pay, while also using it as a tool for stealth wealth redistribution and vote-buying to stay in power. Now that the big government myth about the big oil companies not paying their fair share has been busted wide open, and some of the reasons behind that power grab have been theorized, let’s take a look at one of the biggest energy subsidies ever handed out by the U.S. Government. Personal, welfare-dependence-driven energy subsidies that cost U.S taxpayers billions of dollars every year.

In a democratic society, fairness, and equality are supposed to be the cornerstone of the system. When certain groups or sectors of society are given preference over another one by a government through the usage of tax dollars, this becomes a blatant example of taxation without representation. ( of ALL people not just some of them) Other words that may be used to describe this scenario may include Fascism, tyranny, socialism, and political oppression.  So how can big government manipulators explain why one sector of American society has to pay for their utility usage, while another very large sector receives a personal energy subsidy from the U.S. Government that the rest of society is made to pay for?

While the oil companies “subsidies,” which are in fact tax breaks, have been put at around $4 billion dollars a year, how much do the personal energy subsidies cost the taxpayer each year?   All states have their own personal energy subsidy programs, which are at least partly funded by federal tax dollars. The website Welfare Info is a good place to explore the current welfare system, and just what government “subsidies” the career welfare class receives.

[Note: There is a big difference between an American tax-paying, energy producing company getting legal tax breaks (unjustly termed “subsidies” by the leftists and enviro-terrorists) and a non-producing, non-taxpaying career welfare sector receiving personal energy subsidies to pay their utility bills at the expense of the working class in America.]

From the above welfare info site, the following personal energy subsidies are outlined as follows: (emphasis added)

Another of the welfare programs is the energy or utility assistance program which is intended to help those who cannot afford to pay for basic utility needs, such as heat, electricity and/or gas and water. Like the child support program, it will supplement part of or provide 100% of the monthly utility costs.

Although the state by state personal energy subsidy programs are unique, they all contain on commonality: One sector of American society is being made to pay for another sector’s energy bills through government programs, many of them consisting of utility companies forming “partnership programs” with state and local governments. So who qualifies for  these taxpayer-funded personal energy subsidies? Can a non-U.S. citizen have their utility bill paid by U.S. taxpayers, or receive other welfare payments ?

Again from Welfare Info: (emphasis added) “You must be a citizen of the United States or a qualified non-citizen legal resident, (restrictions apply).” So, not only are U.S. taxpayers being made to subsidize career welfare people’s personal energy bills, they are also being made to subsidize what amounts to payments to criminal illegal aliens who broke the law while entering the United States.

Again, how much do these personal energy subsidies cost the U.S. taxpayer?  The fact is, that the big government bureaucracy now has so many personal energy subsidy programs that it is all but impossible to put a total cost to the taxpayers on it, which appears to be have done by design over decades of nanny-state planning and dependency program creation. Utibility Bill Assistance  has a complete rundown of state by state personal energy subsidy programs, along with this explanation about another pair of federal personal energy subsidy programs:

There is also a federal program to provide utility bill assistance. The National Energy Assistance Directors’ Association is a primary educational & policy organization for the state and other organizations of the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which is often referred to as LIHEAP. LIHEAP is a federal government program that provides grants to states to help struggling with assistance on their their electric, heating and cooling utility bills.

In addition to LIHEAP, another program available is the weatherization program, which over 5 million Americans have taking advantage of, and which can save over $300 per year in utility bill costs. ( several spelling corrections made)

When discussing taxpayer-funded “subsidies” and entitlement programs, the Liberal nanny-state worshipers have proven incapable of seperating retired, career-taxpaying Senior citizens receiving SSI payments ( and in some cases personal energy subsidies) from the non-producing, non-taxpaying career welfare sector of society. This is done to obscure the facts that tax dollars have been used to create a welfare dependency in America in exchange for the welfare class vote, which is the base of today’s Liberal Democratic party. Liberal political operatives disgustingly disrespect working-class Seniors by lumping them in with the non-producing welfare class, in an attempt to falsely paint themselves as champions of the poor.

In summary, should America end all energy subsidies, as Democrats have been demanding in Congress recently? That would have to include ending the above-explained personal energy subsidies, along with the Democrat-sponsored green energy fraud and power-mongering usage of taxpayer dollars to spread misinformation designed to keep them in power by enriching their crony-capitalists and tax dollar thieves as was seen in the Solyndra scandal.  To end all energy subsidies would in fact crush the base of today’s fake Democrats, their environmental green energy fear-mongering, and their welfare-dependent vote begging fraud they have hoisted upon the American people under the guise of “helping them.”

Footnote: While several personal energy subsidy programs do indeed help deserving people cope with today’s skyrocketing energy prices, as Barack Obama promised America during his 2008 election campaign, the creation of the welfare class dependency in America has deteriorated family values, work ethics and the very foundation of American exceptional-ism, personal responsibility and the idea of working for what you want out of life. For a very serious look at some of the results of this systemic destruction of American values, please see The Ugly truth of America’s Welfare Class.






Crony-Capitalism Is As Phony As African-American

It seems the expression of the day now, the new “gravitas”, in referring to our political/economic system is “crony-capitalism”. This term is such a misnomer that it almost defies explanation. I looked up capitalism in Webster’s Dictionary and the term cannot possibly be partnered with the word “crony”. According to Webster, capitalism is defined as:

Capitalism: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.

Cronyism is defined as:

Cronyism; partiality to cronies especially as evidenced in the appointment of political hangers-on to office without regard to their qualifications.

How can one possibly put these two words together to describe our economic system? The two terms do not go together in any fashion, other than to make some pundit sound smart to those who don’t understand our economic and political systems.

A more correct term for our current political/economic system would be fascism. I also looked up fascism to get an accurate definition. According to Webster, fascism is:

Fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition: A tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control.

When I look at what the government is doing to our economic system today fascism seems to be a much more appropriate term. Look at the bailouts, TARP, Stimulus, and all the other government plans to pick winners and losers. In the auto industry bondholders took a beating while Democrat Party/Obama supporting unions made millions. The American taxpayer also took a bath in this little escapade. The banks and Wall Street firms are in the same category.

Those who support the entrenched government establishment of both political parties came out with billions of taxpayer money while those paying the bill, taxpaying citizens, got the shaft in a huge way. Executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac took tens of millions of dollars in “golden parachutes” into Wall Street with them. The executives at the big Wall Street firms and the biggest banks in the world reaped hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars in bonuses with the bailouts of the “too big to fail” scam foisted on We the People.

And then we have Queen Michelle running around with her “Lunchroom Gestapo”, inspecting the lunches of children. Turkey from home is unhealthy. Here, school child, take these fat filled, processed chicken nuggets instead. Oh, and we can’t buy the king size candy bars any more because we aren’t smart enough to figure out what is in our best nutritional interests so Queen Michelle extorted Mars Candy Company to insure the king sized bars are no longer available. And let’s feed the school kids a third meal at school because those obese wrecks of children are being starved to death because they aren’t being fed at home. Am I the only one who sees starving obese children being a bit of an oxymoron?

This is not capitalism, it is fascism. Crony fascism seems to be the proper term for our current political/economic system. We find the government, Barack Obama through his czars/cronies, running everything in this nation by fiat. Bureaucrats not approved by the Senate as provided for in the Constitution (Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2) make rules and regulations every day with no regard for the Constitution, the rule of law, or what is in the best interests of this nation and the citizens of this nation as a whole. As they do this the Republicans in Congress sit on their hands and do nothing to stop it. And why would they? George W. Bush and the current crop of Republicans are in this up to their ears. How can they complain when many of them were the actual authors of much of what has happened to our economic system over the last 10 years?

The United States of America is no longer a Republic. It is now a dictatorial oligarchy, ala Venezuela, ruled by Barack Obama and his czars with the complicit neglect of the Republican leadership in Congress. Members of Congress and various bureaucrats make millions by using insider trading advantages that are against the law for anyone outside of government to use. Our once vaunted capitalistic system is so rife with fascist corruption that it no longer resembles the system put in place by our founding fathers.

Politicians have so totally corrupted the system that it is questionable if capitalism can be revived. Unfortunately, most politicians seem to have no desire to revive our capitalistic system, nor the Constitution that brought it into existence. They are satisfied to enrich themselves and their cronies at the expense of We the People. When politicians and bureaucrats rule by fiat we no longer have a capitalistic system nor do we have a Constitutional system.

In Hitler’s Germany factories were run by private companies but they were controlled by the government in every aspect of business. This is where we find our nation’s industries and businesses today. Nothing can be done without the permission of some czar, bureaucrat, or judge. Every aspect of life is controlled from Washington D. C. If this doesn’t change soon future generations will not know any vestige of the freedom I grew up with.

The term African-American is a contrived term used to divide us by race, create a fake “oppressed minority”, and give preferential treatment to a group of people who don’t deserve it. Capital-Cronyism, in comparison, is a term used to create a fake economic system, disguise the true state of affairs in our business world, and create the illusion that we still operate under the system of business installed by our founding fathers. If people heard the word fascism used every day instead of “crony-capitalism” we would see an uprising of major proportions because there are still enough of us alive who understand the meaning of the term fascism to create discontent with government interference in the economic well-being of our nation.

We the People are being inundated with phony terms created by tyrants to subvert the Constitution and to subjugate the citizens without us realizing we are being enslaved. It is sad but so many people are either not intelligent enough to see what is happening, don’t care, or think that if they ignore what is happening that it isn’t real. One day soon these people will wake up and wonder where their freedom went. I can tell them where it went. Freedom went out the door of apathy, cowardice, or ignorance.

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

Bob Russell
Claremore, Oklahoma
February 23, 2012

Obama is Not a Socialist – He’s Something Worse

A Democracy Corps (left-leaning group started by James Carville) poll found that 55% of Americans polled believe that “Socialist” accurately describes the President.  That seems low and if the question had been changed to, “Does Capitalist describe our President?” I believe the number would have been darned-near zero.

While the Socialist moniker has been tossed about when discussing our anti-free-enterprise leader, I don’t think it’s as accurate as it could be.  Looking back through the history of Socialism, there are many things that point to Obama missing the mark.  Is it because he doesn’t understand the economic principle or that he understands that it is a great distraction or possibly a transition for the framework he feels should actually be put in place in America?

LeninThe Cloward-Piven strategy was intended to create an atmosphere ripe for Socialism, but I believe it’s being used to create what even Lenin lamented on his death-bed.  Lenin had witnessed his dream of a true Socialist government turned into nothing more than, “a bourgeois tsarist machine… barely varnished with socialism.” – the same classist elitism Lenin had struggled to end.

If Obama were a true Socialist, he would be looking for the Utopian society of ultimate equals that Lenin sought  – he is not.  In Verdery’s, What Was Socialism and What Comes Next the author creates a term that describes well one part of what I feel Obama is after: “Bourgeoiscracy” or well-connected party members that use their political office and connections to enrich themselves.

When the press or citizenry hit a nerve, Obama responds (or at least sends Gibby out to respond).  When criticism was leveled at health care reform, Jeremiah Wright or Professor Gates there were speeches, interviews and media events.  The media, pundits and majority of Americans have been calling Obama a Socialist for quite some time.. no reaction, no defensiveness, nothing – why?  It’s the perfect distraction.  He’s not trying to put a Socialist economy in place, he’s focused on the destruction of what is here so he can replace it with something much worse than Socialism: Entitlism (yeah, I had to make-up a new word for this idiocy).

At least Socialism either places value on the amount of work that goes into producing a thing or the end-use value of a product.  Entitlism figures that a person or entity deserves resources or wealth based solely on theKing Barack favor of the government.  In other words, people should get services, food, housing, cars, money because they do what Obama feels they should be doing or have suffered some ill that the ruling class feels is deserving of reward.  It isn’t about what the populace needs (Communism), nor what the country needs (nationalism, fascism or statism), not even what the world needs (One World Government) – it’s about what Obama and his ruling elite feel the commoners deserve.

It seems obvious that the Obama dream is a “Bourgeoiscracy” as a governing framework and Entitlism as the economic framework.  This fundamentally redefines the common good.  While fascist regimes determine what is good for commoners, entitlism allows the elitist Bourgeoicrats to decide who is common. Perhaps the rest of us will be fortunate enough to work for the good of the selected, chosen or preferred citizens – the deserving.

What’s worse is that even supposed conservatives are falling into Obama’s trap.  House Minority Leader, John Boehner, was paraphrased in a Washington Times article as suggesting that Social Security could be fixed by , “..curbing benefit growth by tying cost-of-living increases to the consumer price index rather than growth in wages, and providing benefits only to those who need them”.  Providing goods or services to a citizen based on need, oddly familiar – but still just a stepping stone to where Obama would take us – or a sleight of hand so that we focus on the specter of European socialism while he works to put something else in place.

If Obama was following the communist play book, the first step would be a Socialistic transition: Socialism concentrates on ownership of the means of production and creating a meritocracy.  The phrase, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution” illustrates that contributing to national production merits reward.  And step two would be the Communistic end-game, destruction of property rights, removal of value from goods and services, and modifying the phrase to, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need”.  Need has nothing to do with his plan.

Obama’s goal define the entitled – the deserving – and make a gradual transition to “from each according to his ability, to each according to his favor with the ruling elite” – enslavement.  Any system of government that decides who gets what based on any criteria will by it’s nature create inequality.  As Orwell portrayed in Animal Farm, “All animals are equal, some are more equal than others”.

Consider just a few of the Obama administration’s policy stances of late:

  1. Illegal Immigration:  Electing not to enforce laws against a set of people regardless of merit (productivity).
    • He has decided that illegal immigrants deserve the benefits of American citizenry because they act in a way desired by the rulers: they vote Democrat
  2. Health Care Reform: Brass-ring style health care insurance at roughly similar costs regardless if someone has taken care of themselves or not.
    • This will make more Americans dependent upon the government for yet another service.
    • Those who depend on government services overwhelmingly vote Democrat: deserving
  3. The ruling elite are planning to push the Union’s corrupt enlistment plan, card-check, during the upcoming lame-duck Congress
    • Unions are an anti-capitalistic force that will help bring about the transition Obama needs on the way to his entitlist dream: deserving
    • Unions vote heavily Democrat: deserving
  4. When Obama took over GM, he abandoned contractual agreements and put Unions above primary bond holders during the bankruptcy
    • The bond holders actually had taken a risk and invested in the company and were not treated fairly in the settlement.  Investors at this level tend to not vote Democrat: not deserving
    • Unions vote heavily Democrat: deserving
    • Unionized labor is an excellent tool for the creation of crisis (strikes, destruction of industry, condemning capitalism): the deserving
  5. Department of Justice dropping the New Black Panther suit against all but one of the poll place intimidation convicts and lowering the remaining convicts punishment substantially
    • The DOJ is alleged to have a new policy that prevents the prosecution of cases where the defendant is black (deserving) and the victim is white (undeserving)
    • The NBPP believes that it stands to seek reparations for it’s members simply because other groups got them: the deserving
  6. Repeal of the “Bush Tax Cuts” that relieve some of the extremely-progressive tax structure on the most-productive in our society
    • Those that will be hit with the Obama tax increase are largely Conservative voters: undeserving
    • The wealthy in our society have already been rewarded for their work: undeserving

Obama’s true goal is not to push us into Socialism.  It isn’t Communism, fascism, or any other currently-defined -ism – it’s somewhere near the authoritarian mess that was Communism during it’s downfall in Russia.  Not Marxism, but something similar to what Stalin put in place when Marx’s ideas failed to create the Utopia it promised.

This is simply my belief of where Obama would like to take the country and the world.  I also believe that real Americans will see this for what it is and turn things around.  2010 is more important than just preventing Cap-and-Trade or card check – it’s about protecting that which made this country great: individual liberty, free-market capitalism, and equality of opportunity.  Capitalism is not a dirty word.  Capitalism is simply being rewarded by a free-market for the product or services offered.  Those that color it negatively desire wealth for which they have no desire to work or take the necessary risks.  They feel that they are entitled to it.

Redistribution of wealth according to favor of the ruling elites is precisely the type of  Tyranny the founding Fathers worked so hard to prevent.  Obama’s disregard for the Constitution appears to be a purposeful plan.  Depending upon our status with the leadership we will either be relieved of our property or given someone else’s.  Deserving or undeserving, how will you rate?

Lefties Just Don't Understand

While perusing my usual circle of blogness, I tripped across a sentiment that I had seen spreading within the liberal community for some time.  In the “Open Mid-day Thread” from Laurence Lewis over at Daily Kos, was this thread starter on how the right is starting to appreciate big government:

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer wants more federal help with immigration. Texas wants federal funds to fix a congested rail intersection. Washington Senate candidate Clint Didier has received more than a quarter million federal dollars, in farm subsidies. It’s always good to see Republicans appreciating a strong federal government.

Now what Mr. Lewis doesn’t get is that Conservatives do actually appreciate a strong government, but only in the areas where the constitution has said it should be.  Fixing the congested rail intersection comes from Article I, clause 7 establishing Congress’ powers over “post roads”.   Several Supreme Court cases have tangled with this, but in the end, the established power stands.

It saddens me that I even have to keep saying this, but yes, Governor Brewer has every right to demand assistance from the federal government on illegal immigration – it’s a federal law that’s being broken.  It would seem that the left complains that Arizona went and created a state law to control illegal border activity, and now that a Republican is asking the feds to enforce federal law – libs are throwing that fact in the faces of supporters.  Which is it?  Should the federal or state government be dealing with this?  Oh wait, they don’t want this enforced at all.  We’re just supposed to focus on the state issue and forget all about the amnesty initiatives being floated in Congress.  “Not gonna’ do it”.

The farm subsidies, are questionable, but pointing at one Senate candidate in a left-leaning state as somehow indicating that Conservatives believe the government should be subsidizing the growing of crops is ludicrous.  The enviro-left has recently been pushing legislators to throw all kinds of government incentives to farmers to grow corn for ethanol production.  Subsidizing the price of corn does two things: increases the price of corn and entices farmers to plant fewer acres of the less-profitable crops.  While people around the world are struggling to pay these subsidized prices for corn and inflated prices for other crop-foods, saying that right-leaning Americans are appreciative of such government action, isn’t really correct.  Than again, I’m sure that’s Bush’s fault too.

Conservatives do like a strong America.  We like a good central government (not necessarily over-bearingly large).  The federal government should handle roads, regulation of inter-state/international trade and treaties, the defense of the nation, and the collection of taxes.  These are places that Conservatives find that our government can operate (albeit inefficient).  Health care, retirement, education.. the government has neither been effective nor efficient.

Liberals, really now, get over it.  Conservatives are not looking for anarchy any more than you are looking for fascism (well most of you).

Gain some perspective, if you can.  There’s no need to argue, lefties just don’t understand.