Category Archives: Fascism

Liberals Grow A Funny Bone

Barack Obama, Critique, Fascism, Foreign Policy, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, War

Liberals are especially slow on the uptake. Some outside CNN amd MSNBC, however, have begun to cock a snook at the Obama faithful who fawn over His every utterance and action.

Transcribed by News Busters, this video clip is worth watching (from an evolutionary perspective). “Liberals parodying liberals” is how Mark Levin described it:

Text courtesy of News Busters:

“Our president can’t launch into another war without you. And remember: when we voted for him in 2008 and 2012, we promised to support him no matter what.”

“That’s why we here at the ‘Americans for Whatever Barack Obama Wants, Did You Know He’s Friends With Jay-Z?’ have launched a Kickstarter campaign to fund World War III.”

“And America is dead-ass broke, so our goal is to raise $1.6 trillion on behalf of the U.S. government.”

“That’s where you come in.”

“Even a small donation will make all the difference.”

“World War III is a very important, very progressive war that Obama tells me is very important. So it must be.”

“When I first saw the President speak in 2008 in a YouTube clip posted to my Facebook page, I knew he was going to be right all the time. So I support World War III, and IV, and any moon war the President may want to start.”

“I mean, there is no way that he or the cabal of corporate interests, spy agencies, and shadow bankers who tell him what to do would ever mislead us.”

“The $1.6 trillion that we raise will help create a war that truly puts the liberal in neo-liberal. There will be millions of troops, thousands of organic, grass-fed bombs, hybrid Prius tanks, rockets controlled by iPads, and drones that play the Lumineers while they attack.”

“World War III is not going to be like those other Republican wars fought on just 1 percent of the world. This war is going to be fought on 99 percent of the world.”

“It will be everywhere: Russia, China, Africa, Cincinnati, your favorite brunch spot — the one with those kickass ranchero breakfast burritos.”

“World War III will also be the most social media-focused war ever. It’ll be all over Twitter, Facebook, Vine, Pinterest, and whatever eventually replaces Pinterest, and I mean, just think of all the hilarious skits we can make of cats reacting to their owners’ homes being obliterated.”

“Lots of shock, but tons of awww.”

“And come on, guys, how good will Michelle’s arms look in sleeveless Army fatigues?”

“We have a lot of great rewards for our donors. If you donate $10 to the World War III project, you’ll get a shout out on social media.”

“Hashtag #thankyou!”

“A $25 donation will get you a piece of rubble from a war-torn Middle Eastern country, kissed by Sen. Lindsay Graham.”

“A $100 donation gets you a day pass to leave your local refuge camp.”

“You’ll probably end up in a refuge camp, but it’ll have free Wifi.”

“And a $10 million donation gets you your own Senator for a year.”

“So please, help us reach our goal of $1.6 trillion so we can make World War III a reality. Why? Because Obama.”

“Because Obama.”

Train The Cameras On Police And First Responders

Crime, Economy, Fascism, Free Markets, Government, Law, Private Property, The State

Police and state-employed firefighters must be tethered electronically by video cams. The cameras worn on the helmets of weaponized government workers—they have enormous license to use their weapons—serve to keep them accountable. Business (say, free-market firefighters hired by an insurer) already polices its workforce, as it is in the business of pleasing, not killing, those it serves. Preventing fraud and abuse on the job is integral* to the job. (Guess why.) When will people get that the incentives that are at work in private property are missing from state-run systems?

Twelve or so minutes into “The Five” on Fox News, a heated airhead debate ensued over the suggestion of removing cameras from the helmets of cops and first responders. Airhead Bob Beckel said cameras must go. Kimberly Guilfoyle (not an airhead, but a bona fide statist) agreed. Poor Dana Ditz. She got it right but by default. She wants to give the boys in blue all the power in the world “to protect us.” Because Dana Ditz can’t reverse a situation in her not-so-nimble mind, she failed to see that cops filming also means cops being filmed, and abuses more likely exposed. (* Today, our Dana discovered the word “integral.” But in pronouncing it, she placed the emphasis incorrectly on the second syllable. Here’s the right way to say “integral.”)

Remember the only victim of the Asiana Airlines Flight 214 crash, last month? She was killed not by the crash, but by our brave first responders.

FSGate:

The San Francisco Fire Department supervisors who took charge of the Asiana Airlines Flight 214 crash scene were not alerted by firefighters that a 16-year-old passenger had been found near the plane, leaving them powerless to prevent the girl from being run over by a rig after she was covered by fire-retardant foam, footage of the incident shows.

In the case of state employees, the incentive is absent to be really, really, really careful. After all, responsibility for damages and deaths is collectivized; taxpayers pick up the tab; lawmakers enact laws that shield the perp from responsibility, even protecting identities. (That’s why I say name and shame the pimps at TSA.)

Film them. The many good cops won’t mind

The Latest Escapade Of IRS Dominatrix Lois Lerner

Ethics, Fascism, Government, Morality, Taxation, The State

This news item is not easy to come by on Google. It concerns IRS dominatrix “Lois Lerner’s statements in late 2010.” These demonstrate that the Internal Revenue Service was being leaned on to “do something to stop the flow of money from corporations to political campaigns.”

Lerner revealed this while speaking “to a small group at Duke’s Sanford School of Public Policy.” (What amazes me is the network of contacts and speaking engagements these bureaucrats carve out for themselves while on the job. Corruption and conflict of interest is standard operating procedure with government. It doesn’t rate a mention in the article. Journalists and the public think it perfectly proper for public officials to grease the skids for future opportunities while in office.)

Via John Sexton @ Breitbart.com:

Newly uncovered video shows Lois Lerner discussing the political pressure that swirled around the IRS in 2010. Lerner says “everyone” was “screaming at” the IRS to stop the flood of money pouring into the 2010 elections through 501(c)(4) groups as a result of Citizens United.

Lerner spoke to a small group at Duke’s Sanford School of Public Policy on October 19, 2010, just two weeks before the wave election that brought the Tea Party and Republicans significant gains in Congress. During her appearance Lerner was asked about the flow of money from corporations to 501(c)(4) groups. “Everyone is up in arms because they don’t like it” Lerner replied, adding “Federal Election Commission can’t do anything about it; they want the IRS to fix the problem.”

Lerner goes on to outline the fact that 501(c)(4) organizations have the right to do “an ad that says vote for Joe Blow” so long as their primary activity is social welfare. However Lerner again emphasizes the political pressure the IRS was under at the time saying, “So everybody is screaming at us right now ‘Fix it now before the election. Can’t you see how much these people are spending?'” Lerner concludes by saying she won’t know if organizations have gone too far in campaigning until she looks at their “990s next year.”

Contrary to Lerner’s statement, everyone did not object to the Citizens United decision. The pushback was clearly partisan with the most high profile opponent being President Obama himself. Days after the decision, Obama used his weekly radio address to attack the ruling saying it would “open the floodgates” to special interest advertising in elections.

MORE.

Thomas Jefferson & The Tyrants

Classical Liberalism, Fascism, Founding Fathers, libertarianism, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, Private Property

“During a joint meeting with Vietnamese President Truong Tan Sang,” last Thursday, reports the Washington Times, “President Obama … made the absolutely ludicrous assertion that ‘Ho Chi Minh was actually inspired by the U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution, and the words of Thomas Jefferson.”

A fine book on “the political theory of Thomas Jefferson” is “Liberty, State, and Union” by Marco Bassani, professor of history and political theory at the University of Milan, Italy. In it, Bassani notes that all sorts of hideous tyrants (whom Obama joins) have appropriated the decidedly classical liberal thinking of Thomas Jefferson for their own ends.

Still, I wonder if we libertarians do protest too much in an attempt to finesse some of Thomas Jefferson’s philosophical missteps? By way of an example, consider the debate, on the Tenth Amendment Center’s site, expanded upon by historian Tom Woods.

I remain unpersuaded. I believe that Felix Morley, great writer and scholar of the Old Right, was also in no two minds about early Americans having been undeniably influenced by Jean Jacques Rousseau. There was, noted Morley in his magnificent “Freedom and Federalism,” some admiration in America for the manner in which the common democratic will found expression in revolutionary France. The influx of Marxist ideas much later from Europe further cemented America’s ideological immolation.”

I am also not inclined to finesse the odd “slip” that saw this most brilliant man—as Thomas Jefferson no doubt was—replace “property,” in The Declaration, with the “pursuit of happiness.”

The “Virginia Declaration of Rights,” written by George Mason in 1776, harmonizes “property” and the “pursuit of happiness”:

“That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.”

Elsewhere, Jefferson affirmed the natural right of “all men” to be secure in their enjoyment of their “life, liberty and possessions.” But in the Declaration, somehow, he opted for the inclusiveness of “the pursuit of happiness,” rather than cleave to the precision of “property.”

Unforgivable.