Category Archives: Propaganda

Update II: Messiah’s Magical Medical Tour Ambles On

Barack Obama, English, Free Markets, Government, Healthcare, Political Economy, Propaganda, Regulation, Socialism

The so-called town halls set up for the propagandist-in-chief to peddle his policies are as alarming as the infomercials the networks avail him of. All the more so given that no forum airs any serious, substantive questions. There is something both mindless and eerie about the monolithic, collectivist nature of Obama’s “National Discussion on Health Care Reform.” Say after me, all together now, etc.

The guy is also flooding the Internet with his “message.” Is this propaganda? Heavens no. The toxic, and intoxicated journalistic profession would say this is but a savvy use of the new technology. And isn’t it all so very groovy and cool?

In last week’s “Obama’s Politburo Of Proctologists,” I explained one fundamental difference between the private market and the “public plan”: The latter “is a subsidized plan in which prices are artificially fixed below market level. As sure as night follows day, overconsumption and shortages always ensue. If he is as smart as he thinks he is, even the smarmy president must knows that, to compete with the state, private plans and insurers cannot offer services below their real cost for long.

Private practitioners who sell their wares at a loss—are not ‘too big to fail,’ and have yet to slip between the sheets with the derriere doctor-in-chief—will be waylaid. Conversely, because it enjoys a monopoly over force, the government is immune to bankruptcy. It covers its shortfalls by direct and indirect theft: by taxing the people, or flooding the country’s financial arteries with toxic fiat currency.

Other than to indenture doctors, the overall effect of forcing professionals to provide healthcare below market prices will be to decrease the supply and quality of providers and products.

My colleague Vox Day adds the following important points:

It would not be logical if the government were competing on anything remotely resembling a level playing field. However, that’s not the case with government, which has several advantages even when it doesn’t make use of its ability to assert a monopolistic position. First, a government agency has no need to make money. Subsidized by the taxpayers and public debt, it can run at a loss for decades. It can therefore undercut private competition by any amount it chooses, thus creating demand for its services even if they are inferior. Second, a government agency is allowed to exclude itself from regulations that apply to private competitors, giving it further competitive advantages that don’t necessarily show up on the balance sheets. For example, it is highly unlikely that one could successfully sue an employee at a government health care provider for malpractice. The Supreme Court upheld the Feres Doctrine in 1950, which prevents veterans from suing any Veterans Administration physician for malpractice. So, among other things, federal health care providers would not need to carry insurance due to their so-called sovereign immunity.

Obama and logic: never the twain shall meet.

An aside: My language-loving ears were stung when I heard the man, hailed for his literary skills, say in today’s portion of the week, “her and her husband …” It’s “she and her husband,” you doofus. And then, “One of the many options we have are….” It’s “one of the many options … IS.” Hint: One is singular. I’ll remind you that the fact the Obama speaks better English than Bush means nothing at all.

Update I: Chip Reid of CBS News and Helen Thomas skewer Obama’s cackling hyena of a press secretary, Robert Gibbs, over Obama’s town hall-by-invitation. Reid explains to the Mouth what a townhall is—a free for all. Both the public and the questions for the ostensible “National Discussion on Health Care Reform” were carefully preselected and screened. My sense that this was a convention of automatons was based on the fact that indeed it was. Thomas, a historical relic herself, says that this White House is the first to conduct itself in this manner: “The point is the control from here. We have never had that in the White House. And we have had some control but not this control. I mean I’m amazed, I’m amazed at you people who call for openness …” Imagine that: Thomas, who regularly gave Bush hell, might come to miss The Shrub, as we progress down the road to serfdom.

Update II (July 2): What Thomas told CNS News (via the Glenn Beck newsletter):

“Nixon didn’t try to do that,” Thomas said. “They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try. “What the hell do they think we are, puppets?” Thomas said. “They’re supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them.”

Thomas said she was especially concerned about the arrangement between the Obama Administration and a writer from the liberal Huffington Post Web site. The writer was invited by the White House to President Obama’s press conference last week on the understanding that he would ask Obama a question about Iran from among questions that had been sent to him by people in Iran.

“When you call the reporter the night before you know damn well what they are going to ask to control you,” Thomas said. “I’m not saying there has never been managed news before, but this is carried to fare-thee-well–for the town halls, for the press conferences,” she said. “It’s blatant. They don’t give a damn if you know it or not. They ought to be hanging their heads in shame.”

Asks Glenn (or his proxy): Does this mean Obama’s honeymoon with the press is coming to an end?

I answer (not that he’d know it): don’t count on it. The “parrot press” has a lot riding on that ass.

Update II: Messiah's Magical Medical Tour Ambles On

Barack Obama, English, Free Markets, Government, Healthcare, Political Economy, Propaganda, Regulation, Socialism

The so-called town halls set up for the propagandist-in-chief to peddle his policies are as alarming as the infomercials the networks avail him of. All the more so given that no forum airs any serious, substantive questions. There is something both mindless and eerie about the monolithic, collectivist nature of Obama’s “National Discussion on Health Care Reform.” Say after me, all together now, etc.

The guy is also flooding the Internet with his “message.” Is this propaganda? Heavens no. The toxic, and intoxicated journalistic profession would say this is but a savvy use of the new technology. And isn’t it all so very groovy and cool?

In last week’s “Obama’s Politburo Of Proctologists,” I explained one fundamental difference between the private market and the “public plan”: The latter “is a subsidized plan in which prices are artificially fixed below market level. As sure as night follows day, overconsumption and shortages always ensue. If he is as smart as he thinks he is, even the smarmy president must knows that, to compete with the state, private plans and insurers cannot offer services below their real cost for long.

Private practitioners who sell their wares at a loss—are not ‘too big to fail,’ and have yet to slip between the sheets with the derriere doctor-in-chief—will be waylaid. Conversely, because it enjoys a monopoly over force, the government is immune to bankruptcy. It covers its shortfalls by direct and indirect theft: by taxing the people, or flooding the country’s financial arteries with toxic fiat currency.

Other than to indenture doctors, the overall effect of forcing professionals to provide healthcare below market prices will be to decrease the supply and quality of providers and products.

My colleague Vox Day adds the following important points:

It would not be logical if the government were competing on anything remotely resembling a level playing field. However, that’s not the case with government, which has several advantages even when it doesn’t make use of its ability to assert a monopolistic position. First, a government agency has no need to make money. Subsidized by the taxpayers and public debt, it can run at a loss for decades. It can therefore undercut private competition by any amount it chooses, thus creating demand for its services even if they are inferior. Second, a government agency is allowed to exclude itself from regulations that apply to private competitors, giving it further competitive advantages that don’t necessarily show up on the balance sheets. For example, it is highly unlikely that one could successfully sue an employee at a government health care provider for malpractice. The Supreme Court upheld the Feres Doctrine in 1950, which prevents veterans from suing any Veterans Administration physician for malpractice. So, among other things, federal health care providers would not need to carry insurance due to their so-called sovereign immunity.

Obama and logic: never the twain shall meet.

An aside: My language-loving ears were stung when I heard the man, hailed for his literary skills, say in today’s portion of the week, “her and her husband …” It’s “she and her husband,” you doofus. And then, “One of the many options we have are….” It’s “one of the many options … IS.” Hint: One is singular. I’ll remind you that the fact the Obama speaks better English than Bush means nothing at all.

Update I: Chip Reid of CBS News and Helen Thomas skewer Obama’s cackling hyena of a press secretary, Robert Gibbs, over Obama’s town hall-by-invitation. Reid explains to the Mouth what a townhall is—a free for all. Both the public and the questions for the ostensible “National Discussion on Health Care Reform” were carefully preselected and screened. My sense that this was a convention of automatons was based on the fact that indeed it was. Thomas, a historical relic herself, says that this White House is the first to conduct itself in this manner: “The point is the control from here. We have never had that in the White House. And we have had some control but not this control. I mean I’m amazed, I’m amazed at you people who call for openness …” Imagine that: Thomas, who regularly gave Bush hell, might come to miss The Shrub, as we progress down the road to serfdom.

Update II (July 2): What Thomas told CNS News (via the Glenn Beck newsletter):

“Nixon didn’t try to do that,” Thomas said. “They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try. “What the hell do they think we are, puppets?” Thomas said. “They’re supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them.”

Thomas said she was especially concerned about the arrangement between the Obama Administration and a writer from the liberal Huffington Post Web site. The writer was invited by the White House to President Obama’s press conference last week on the understanding that he would ask Obama a question about Iran from among questions that had been sent to him by people in Iran.

“When you call the reporter the night before you know damn well what they are going to ask to control you,” Thomas said. “I’m not saying there has never been managed news before, but this is carried to fare-thee-well–for the town halls, for the press conferences,” she said. “It’s blatant. They don’t give a damn if you know it or not. They ought to be hanging their heads in shame.”

Asks Glenn (or his proxy): Does this mean Obama’s honeymoon with the press is coming to an end?

I answer (not that he’d know it): don’t count on it. The “parrot press” has a lot riding on that ass.

CAIR Commences ‘Share the Quran’ Campaign

Conflict, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Jihad, Multiculturalism, Propaganda

“Today,” reports Daniel Pipes, “CAIR took what is probably the most major step ever in the direction of da’wa (call to Islam) with the announcement of a ‘Share the Quran’ campaign. It involves sending free copies of the Koran over the next six months to 100,000 leaders: ‘governors, state attorney generals, educators, law enforcement officials, state and national legislators, local elected and public officials, media professionals, and other local or national leaders who shape public opinion or determine policy.'”

Dr. Pipes continues:

The Hamas-founded Council on American-Islamic Relations has long pretended to be a civil rights organization, comparing itself at times to the NAACP, but a close look at its record reveals the real CAIR agenda to be – in common with all Islamists – promoting the Shari’a. This can be achieved two ways. The more circuitous method influences American public opinion through the educational system, the media, the arts, the courts, and the political process. The more direct method converts Americans to Islam.
Route #1 is CAIR’s stock-in-trade, what it does most of the time. But every so often it tries route #2. For example, in 2004, CAIR published an advertisement titled “More in Common Than You Think” that argued for the similarities between Christian and Islam: “Like Christians, Muslims respect and revere Jesus. … Like Christians, every day, over 1.3 billion Muslims strive to live by his teachings of love, peace, and forgiveness.”

Here’s the part I’m not clear on. Pipes adds that “testimony by converts to Islam reiterates that putting the Koran into the hands of non-Muslims is the best bet for winning them to the faith.”

But to read the Kuran is to know it for the manual for murder it is. The good messages therein are plagiarized. Why would that be attractive?

Oops: ilana, what’s come over you? Need you ask—in the Age of the Idiot of all stripes—what it is about a political system masquerading as a religion, sanctioning blood-letting, and promising supremacy and power; what is it about such a belief system that a base, brutal idiot would find attractive? Okay, okay; you made your point.

CAIR Commences 'Share the Quran' Campaign

Conflict, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Jihad, Multiculturalism, Propaganda

“Today,” reports Daniel Pipes, “CAIR took what is probably the most major step ever in the direction of da’wa (call to Islam) with the announcement of a ‘Share the Quran’ campaign. It involves sending free copies of the Koran over the next six months to 100,000 leaders: ‘governors, state attorney generals, educators, law enforcement officials, state and national legislators, local elected and public officials, media professionals, and other local or national leaders who shape public opinion or determine policy.'”

Dr. Pipes continues:

The Hamas-founded Council on American-Islamic Relations has long pretended to be a civil rights organization, comparing itself at times to the NAACP, but a close look at its record reveals the real CAIR agenda to be – in common with all Islamists – promoting the Shari’a. This can be achieved two ways. The more circuitous method influences American public opinion through the educational system, the media, the arts, the courts, and the political process. The more direct method converts Americans to Islam.
Route #1 is CAIR’s stock-in-trade, what it does most of the time. But every so often it tries route #2. For example, in 2004, CAIR published an advertisement titled “More in Common Than You Think” that argued for the similarities between Christian and Islam: “Like Christians, Muslims respect and revere Jesus. … Like Christians, every day, over 1.3 billion Muslims strive to live by his teachings of love, peace, and forgiveness.”

Here’s the part I’m not clear on. Pipes adds that “testimony by converts to Islam reiterates that putting the Koran into the hands of non-Muslims is the best bet for winning them to the faith.”

But to read the Kuran is to know it for the manual for murder it is. The good messages therein are plagiarized. Why would that be attractive?

Oops: ilana, what’s come over you? Need you ask—in the Age of the Idiot of all stripes—what it is about a political system masquerading as a religion, sanctioning blood-letting, and promising supremacy and power; what is it about such a belief system that a base, brutal idiot would find attractive? Okay, okay; you made your point.