The Book to Defeat Obama: Stanley Kurtz’s Spreading the Wealth
All of these measures were discussed in a major White House conference held on July 18, 2011, at an event not covered by the press and never given any publicity. Featuring Obama’s old mentor Kruglik, the movement to destroy the suburbs as the way to transform America by redistributing tax monies to the cities was the very topic of discussion. It is part of programs such as the Sustainable Communities Initiative, and to be run through the group set up by Kruglik, Building One America.
By showing what this group proposes and how Kruglik hopes to implement its plans, Kurtz ties together Obama’s past radicalism with his present-day actions. He has brought into the White House a group of radicals who are as extreme as Ayers and Dohrn, but who don’t have their negative name recognition. The essence of all the programs, described in detail by Kurtz, is to distribute money from the wealthy suburbs to the urban poor, a fulfillment of his long dream to destroy the suburbs, areas he thought of as a bastion of racism and individualism.
Obama, Kurtz shows, is running an active Alinskyite program in the present, not simply in the 1980s. It is a radicalism of a hidden, regionalist agenda, carefully kept below the radar, something that its exponents actually brag about. The programs waiting to be implemented actually are “nothing less,” Kurtz writes, “than a direct attack on large sections of his own middle-class supporters.” Building One America (an Orwellian name if there ever was one) is actually a movement to create forced equality of income, with the end result that everyone’s standard of living will fall. But it will promote “social justice,” of course, and real equality. It is, in essence, the dream of a left-wing social democracy in America, a new variant of the cradle-to-grave welfare state so adoringly favored by the inner group of Obama’s activist advisors.
In a masterful chapter on Saul Alinsky and his heritage, Kurtz has written what is perhaps the best account of what Alinsky’s tactics actually mean for Obama. As Kurtz writes: “Alinsky’s ideological reticence, his pragmatic gradualism in the service of hard-left goals, and his intentionally polarizing confrontation tactics have profoundly shaped both President Obama and the regionalist crusade he supports.” All of his original Alinsky mentors from the ’80s include people still with Obama today, such as Jerry Kellman, Mike Kruglik, and Greg Galluzzo — who worked first through the Gamaliel Foundation and today through One America — make up “the grassroots muscle behind the regionalist crusade.” So Kurtz concludes:
One America and the Obama administration is the ultimate example of this post-Alinsky turn by organizers to close alliances with politicians.
Look no further for the model for this: Canada. Especially Quebec and Ontario.
Look no further than the San Francisco Bay Area where regional agencies like the Metropolitan Transportation Commission are already implementing these ideas. They slipped the Vehicle Mileage Tax (GPS devices on cars to track your mileage for tax purposes) into their One Bay Area Plan after the public comment period. The list of community organizations that they consult with are predominantly social and environmental justice NGOs. The idea is to take money from those who have it (suburbs) and redistribute it around the Bay Area to subsidize transportation and housing projects that benefit the inner cities.
Don’t underestimate the power of collusion between auto insurance companies, health insurance companies and government regulators in setting “traffic policy”, especially now that we have government health care. Practically anything regulating use of the automoble can now be justified in the name of public safety: mileage tracking, “risk managed” insurance rates (i.e. raise policy prices), government supervised rate setting and many more tactics. Seat belt use enforcement (which actually is based in sound science) is just the beginning. It all adds up to reducing the number of cars owned by suburbanites, increasing the cost of owning cars and providing incentives to move into higher density housing where social control (via CCTV, Home Owners and Condo Owners associations, Neighborhood policing, Building standards & codes, multi culturalism, social mixing, and PUBLIC TRANSIT etc) are more easily implemented and enforced.
Obama’s “gas guzzler” scrap program–and the charity trade ins, like that of the Kidney Foundation are actually brilliant. It has created a shortage of cheaply bought and cheap to repair, reliable cars (North American full size vehicles) at the lowest end of the used car spectrum ($500-$3000). This means that several of my middle aged to elderly friends–with health problems and diminished earning potential–could not afford to replace their bangers. (I know. I’ve been looking for them.)
So these folks are actually now forced to take the bus. Since they have health problems, waiting 2 hrs. a day for the bus in extreme weather can only shorten their lives, reducing their dependence on government funded health care.
Oh yes. If you ACTUALLY WANT TO WORK and get off welfare you CAN’T FIND AN AFFORDABLE CAR TO GET YOU TO YOUR JOB.
“The agency often seems out of touch with financial reality and its mission to strengthen Bay Area transportation systems. Commissioners have embarked on a misguided and illegal empire-building scheme to use bridge toll revenues for real estate speculation.
They are pushing ahead with studies of an intrusive plan to tax cars, using a GPS-like tracker, based on the miles and time of day they travel.”
http://www.insidebayarea.com/opinion/ci_21193044/oakland-tribune-editorial-mtc-right-reject-ill-conceived
Post some evidence to support your claim. It is nonsense.
No need to go to Canada. Just check out Vermont.
It has a state wide property tax to “equalize” public educational funding throughout the state.
And to think that Vermont used to be rock ribbed conservative. No more.
The blueprint for how to take over an entire state (Vermont) was presented in a Playboy article, April 1974.
And now Vermont is no longer even, “likely Democratic” . It is guaranteed progressive.
I am still waiting to see what Congress is going to do about Obama gutting the Welfare Reform Act that Bill Clinton tried so hard to pass in 1996. Yet did you hear much about that in the mainstream media? Have you heard ANY debate about that repeal in the newspapers ANYWHERE (except for maybe the Wall Street Journal)? Have the network news programs and the Sunday morning talk shows had any major debates over it? Yet in one fell swoop, Obama is overturning what Bill Clinton, hardly a right-wing activist, put into place back in 1996, a program which actually worked and reduced the number of people on welfare. If Obama is doing this now, God only knows what he would do in a second term.
Cato the Elder was famous for ending all of his speeches with “Carthage must be destroyed.” Obama and his minions must not get another term, unless we really want to see the end of this nation as we now know it. Actually, Obama is worse than Carthage ever was, because he’s trying to destroy this country from within. And that just makes him more disgusting. November is coming. Vote. Carthage must be destroyed.
I am still waiting to see what Congress is going to do about Obama gutting the Welfare Reform Act that Bill Clinton tried so hard to pass in 1996.
LOL! How novel your holding out hope for “Congress”, Libertyship46. This feckless bunch of “Republican” appeasers will do absolutely, positively NOTHING. I’ve been reading your posts for a while. You’re an astute critic. At this point in history you should know better.
Let’s fast forward to January 2012. Now, the house, senate, and the WH have a majority of those “Repubs” in office…
The Dems had them in 2008, what did it get us?
I think the results will be surprizing to lefties and most Americans are going to love it.
The wefare reform that “Bill Clinton put in place”? How about “that Bill Clinton signed”, after a Republican Congress passed it? Clinton gets credit for signing it, but does anyone really believe that it was his program?
Signed it after vetoing it once as I recall, and as he did so, stared at the camera and said “We’ll fix this after the election”. Only later when it was seen as a big success, did the Clintonistas stop thinking about repeal and start taking credit for the bill.
For all the reasons stated, and so much more, the Radical-in-Chief must NOT get a second chance to destroy America. It will be the death of many.
Read, ‘Radical-in-Chief Obama Tasks (il)legally-bent AG Holder To ‘Criminalize’ Islamic Speech…Via Thuggish UN Dictates’…and several other related commentaries at my blog. It is not one thing in particular, it is everything he stands for – which is against America!
Go to http://www.adinakutnicki.com.
2012: Vote for the Mormon, not the Moron!
“…the complete exposure of President Barack Obama’s secret plans for his second term in office….”
The Great Historian now channels Dan Brown.
“…Linda Darling-Hammond, a proponent of a politicized curriculum for schools….”
She must belong to the Texas textbook commission.
Amazing how reversing previous politicization by the Left is such a bad thing.
Right. I’ve always felt that Phyllis Schlafly was under-represented in our history textbooks and that Thomas Jefferson was over-represented.
Kindly identify a history textbook with a right wing bias, in the way that Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States” has a left wing bias. Get back to me when you find a textbook that mentions the VENONA Papers, Alger Hiss, and the Rosenbergs, but does not mention Joseph McCarthy, in the way that the exact opposite of this is true. Regards.
I went to grade school in the 60′s, early 70′s (New York), and even there and then the textbooks had serious left-wing tendencies. For excample, my supposedly jingoistic history book had a section called “American Imperialism”.
One more question is: does Romney realize that this is what he’s fighting, and is he prepared to fight it? Or does he think he’s up against a conventional political opponent who is going to fight by the Queensbury Rules?
Romney doesn’t realize anything. He’s an empty brain. Well-meaning at best. Romney is only as good as those conservatives that surround him – and by this I mean not his paid cronies, but those in both chambers of the house, who have co-equal responsibility for the direction of this country’s future.
“He’s an empty brain.”
What solid evidence do you have for that statement and why do you state such?
Romney has proven he is extremely smart, strategic and organized in his thinking. I think he’ll work it out if he hasn’t already.
The average IQ of Fortune 500 CEOs is 150, and Romney is well above the average.
You know Romney realizes exactly what he’s fighting. It’s just that he can’t truly fight to win lest he’ll be branded a raaaaaacist. And believe me, that dog still hunts.
Then he needs to sic his 501C3s after him. Then he has plausible deniabilty.
We have HUD trying to do this in NY State,they want to put low income housing in some of the most expensive suburbs in Westchester County. Our county executive is fighting them, however they keep moving the goalposts. This would bring crime and lower property values to the houses in these areas, not to mention what it would do the schools and services, which are usually pretty small. It would destroy these neighborhoods.
I’ve seen this during a career of 30 years as a real estate broker / developer in Ontario, Canada prior to moving to the US south. First, transfers of money to municipalities from higher levels of government for infrastructure were tied to quotas mandating the building of “affordable housing”. Second, effective land rationing took place (use the Brit term green belt, whatever you want to call it) in the name of conservation. That effectively pushes higher densities and land costs. Thirdly, infrastructure fees, impost fees, permit fees what ever you want to call them went from about 2% of the cost of a new home to about 20% over course of 20 years. That effectively raised densities and funded municipal social programs (i.e. welfare). Fourthly, in the name of “sound planning” central policies were implemented from state government level downward to the municipalities which legislated the maximum amount of frontage, minimum coverage etc.
So you now have two generations of people–especially males–who have grown up in houses with not enough garden to swing a baseball bat, throw a football or run a footrace. Is it any wonder that we’ve seen riots in Toronto and Montreal, and LONDON, UK where this sort of mania started right after WW II? In the 19th C and early 20thC, young fellows got drafted into the army or worked their energy off on the farm. Now they go bezerk. CLOCKWORK ORANGE, redux.
Above comment, cont’d.
The best part is — whether you paid a high price for a small home, a low price for a big home or anything in between — NOWHERE IS SAFE TO LIVE, because chances are that you’ve got a “shelter”, “crack house”, “grow house” a “half-way house” or some other residence for fellow Americans whom we’d rather not meet by way of home invasion or other incident within spitting distance.
(credit to Tom Lehrer who fore saw all of this stuff 50 years ago).
I am very interested in the politics of regional planning in Canada– any suggestions on where to go for further reading and information?
I find it interesting that those in Westchester County who are fighting obama’s jackboot housing policies are those who put him in office in the first place.
Sara: We have 5 Tea Party groups in NY State, it’s not the upstaters as much as it is the city dwelling liberals and rent seekers.
I talk to a lot of people in the course of my day and I can tell you no one I know is voting for Obama come November
The universal goal of the left is to force the people of the burbs back to the cities where they can be watched and their wealth can be shared. The only difference between what Kurtz has described and what Pol Pot was doing in Cambodia when the killing fields were done is style. If you want to see what the workers paradise looks like in the view of the modern revolutionary Marxist (Obama is one), all you need to do is watch Jackie Gleason in the old 50′s TV comedy, The Honeymooners. Just add cams so the Party can keep an eye on potential counter revolutionaries.
Ditto Galveston, Texas, which has been told they must rebuild a block of low income housing units rather than use a voucher program, or risk loss of all their hurricane recovery funds.
The Communist Kenyan will probably get us into a shooting war with Iran shortly before the election (if he is down in the polls and looking at obvious defeat)and then beat the drum of ‘not changing horses in mid-stream’. Do not be deceived, friends….NOTHING is more important than defeating this monster in November. NOTHING.
I come to this forum to get to know the other side of Obama and hear serious arguments as to why he is so detrimental to this country.
But then I hear ‘He is a kenyan’. When its documented that he’s American. And that he is a monster!? What monstrous thing to do. If you call Hitler a monster I understand but what specifically makes Obama a monster
Sandra. Obama voted against the protection of live born infants, who had survived abortion attempts, in order to prevent any possible diminuation of Roe vs Wade. Regardless of whether or not abortion is murder, once a baby is physically independent of its mother, it must be considered a human being in its own right. To refuse protection to a new human being, and de facto to allow it to die, is incompatible with any christian value. However, Obama voted for precisely this, in pursuit of a purely political agenda.
Likewise, when he, Holder and Clinton all falsely claimed that 90% of the murders in Mexico were committed with American guns, and then instigated the Operation Fast and Furious and other programs to give guns to Mexican drug cartels, knowing that they were going to be used to commit hundreds or thousands of murders, thereby generating the public justification for further legislative attack upon the right to bear arms for self-protection, Obama again indicated that so far as he is concerned, human life is of no importance when set against his collectivist ideology.
Obama is a man who will sanction and commission murder on a large scale, in pursuit of his racist and collectivist ideology.
Bill Ayres and his wife, Bernadette Dorne, who happily planned the logistics of murdering 25,000,000 Americans, who refuse to be re-educated to their statist ideology.
Obama and all of his apologists are evil to their cores.
Sandra Smith, you might be interested in finding out that the Barack Obama birth certificate he posted has been found by legal investigators and every other forensic expert that examined it to be a clear forgery. I don’t know where Barack Obama was actually born but I do know he has been using falsified documents for decades. Your point again was what?
The one founding principle of modern day liberalism is, Liberals must be in command, make decisions, give the orders.
Obama’s goal is an American society where everyone has to come to him, personally, and beg. Obama will then judge; are you a loyal party member, are you loyal to Obama, or are you an opponent who makes trouble. If you are loyal to Obama, you get ‘your fair share’ however meager that might be; a grant, a job, diphtheria immunization for your children. If you are not loyal, not a friend, you get nothing. See Africa, food as a weapon.
Linking food stamps and voting registration was genius.We will be the first country to turn communist by paid revolution.Free money for every student,every debtor,every hypochrondriac,every homeowner,every farmer,every immigrant, every anybody who wants anything.History will show Boehner has allowed Obama to buy this election with our grandchildren’s money.
Something similar was tried by Johnson in the mid to late sixties. It was a more direct form of redistribution, guaranteeing, in much the same way as Freddie and Fannies did until more recently, low income loans and subsidies to enable lower income families to live in the suburbs. It worked only because the higher income people living in the suburbs quickly picked up after seeing their neighborhoods being busted and moved to the newer suburbs. Johnson had tried to speed up a natural process of use and renewal. It was radical enough even then, but it was doable in the sense that it didn’t go too far outside the parameters of political and economic reality.
No so with O’s plan, at least from the sound of it. Even if it is constitutional opposition by the states would soon reap him and the dems a whirlwind of trouble; not to mention the possibility that it might provoke an epidemic of civil disobedience. In Texas the late Ann Richard’s educational “Robin Hood”—a policy of taxing richer counties more and sending the additional revenues to poorer ones—was abandoned in the face of fierce opposition. O’s would be going way over his community organizer’s pay grade to try the same thing on a national scale.
If there was a national debate about it, there would be no chance.
But if Dear Leader is re-elected, there will be no more debates. He will use the administrative powers of the executive branch– the HHS mandate regarding birth control coverage as the most high-profile, altough not only, example. And what he can’t accomplish by *imposing* regulation, he will by *ignoring* statutes by Congress– no deportations, not implementing welfare reform, etc.
It is critical that Dear Leader be defeated, or we face rule-by-decree (“I shall do this…”, “I shall not do that…”).
At this point, we can still recover from these past four years; we will be doomed if Dear Leader rules by decree over the next four.
There’s still the original answer:
Just don’t expect to find it in a voting booth.
Robin Hood might have failed under Ann, but it was enforced on the state by a judge. The plaintiff in the case was a tiny, minority-majority district near San Antonio. Texas Monthly did a report. The valedictorian, and major plaintiff, got a full-ride scholarship to an Ivy League school. He quit college to come home, because he was “lonely.” Even the plaintiff, lavished with money, couldn’t transition to a better life.
Any large district is pretty much hair-cutted by Robin Hood. Like, say, Austin. I met a woman from a small-town district who had just moved to Austin. What I thought was normal- notes from the teachers asking us to send basic supplies- copier paper, hand sanitizer, pencils, snacks, gifts for kids- were things that she thought the district would always buy. When her kids went on field-trips, they went in private buses. Here? not so much. So, materially, the smaller districts get to keep their money and pay to visit larger, more powerful, better museumed cities. It’s a horrible trade- off.
Eanes is Westlake, home of the wealthy creative class in Texas. Film-makers, computer geniuses, writers of successful books, as well as farmers who’ve been here forever. Eanes triggers Robin Hood by being wealthy. This means that if you want your child in normal extracurricular activities- football, speech, anything, you first of all pay extraordinary high property taxes for education, you also pay a really big check at the start of each semester to let your kids into what is considered normal school stuff. The check if for muiltiple hundreds of dollars. If you have more than one kid, you could pay $1000 dollars, for the chance to play any sport in high school. Does that sound like a rich district?
Right now, that has the population frozen- the sort of stable people with children and an investment in the town- you know, the backbone of a place?- aren’t moving in. It’s like a mini- New Orleans- in New Orleans- you have to pay for private school. Rational, middle class people do not move there, for the most part. So, it’s harder to buy or sell houses, and the town skews away from young people.
The school districts that accept Robin Hood money famously (!!!!!) have graduation rates of less than 50%. So it’s basically pouring money out onto concrete, to drain down into the sewers.
People buy houses in towns with good school districts. Robin Hood limits how good a school can be. Really- our PTA fundraisers go to teacher training, not parties or field-trips for children.
I’m not in Eanes- I’m in a majority-minority school in Austin. The outside money is fantastic. The teachers are amazing. The kids- meh. It was a wealthy school. Then it was re-districted, again and again, to be the designated fail school for the south side of town. It’s heartbreaking- truly amazing teachers-ones with track records of valedictorians, college high honors graduates- being given over to kids who won’t last out eighth grade. It’s unbelievable how excited teachers are to get the good students- kids who would be considered regular, even ten years ago- in their class. Kids who, you know, do their homework, show up for class, study, read, practice math, pay attention in class, get upset when they get a red-slip. So far, in eight years, I’ve seen the same set of parents in back to school night. It’s not most of the parents.
We aren’t rich, we likely would live in an apartment in Eanes, which would likely cost more than our house payment now ( we’ve thought about it- AP classes in Eanes are worth a year of college, maybe two) but it literally enrages me that the very hard-working, very disciplined people who built the place are being forced to subsidize squalor, drug- use, failure, illiteracy, incompetent teachers….
I’ve seen teachers in weak schools admit they can’t do fourth grade math, for instance. They’re fifth grade teachers. They are above their competency level.
Our next door neighbor- five kids? six kids? each has a different dad. Every last one of them is in remedial classes until they drop out. One made it to ninth grade. then he got his ass -kicked into a GED by his in-laws. It’s a section 8 house. I don’t let my kids out front. Theoretically, we live in a suburb. In practice? There are drainage/greenbelt areas- over half our lot is in the commons- we pay for it. It backs up a section 8 housing project. I didn’t know about the drugs, but the pit bulls get old.
All of this was brushed over- it’s modern, dense, land-scaping,and social justice. What can I say? We were both naive, then.
If you took every cent of wealth in this country, distributed it equally among everyone, what would happen is: Within 10 years the poor before would be poor again and the rich before would be rich again. You can give people money but you can’t tell them how to spend it. We’ve all heard of lotto winners who end up bankrupt; the same laws of fool & money would apply here.
As to the suburbs, where is it written that any racial group HAS to like another one? As a white guy growing up in Oakland in the 50s & 60s, it soon became apparent I wasn’t wanted there. So I moved.
There have been quite a few biographies of Obama, including his own “Dreams From My Father”, that have dealt with various areas and times of Obama’s life. The one book that took a serious look at Obama’s political life and ideas was the Stanley Kurtz book “Radical in Chief”.
The mainstream media has succeeded in stigmatizing anyone who suggests that Obama is a socialist of some kind and this has made it difficult to accurately predict the kind of policies that Obama has pursued and will pursue if re-elected. Every political influence on him from childhood until his involvement in Illinois state politics was socialist of some kind. Kurtz listed in great detail the people with whom Obama has worked and their ideological connection to socialism.
People mistake Obama’s pragmatism and cautiousness for ideological moderation. That is a huge mistake. The appointments to the government tell a very different story.
The question for the public should be whether the expansion of government and the massive redistribution of income that he seeks is a good idea. Unfortunately the media has stifled the debate by pretending that Obama’s cautious nature is a reflection of a moderate political ideology. This is deliberate journalist malpractice.
I was involved with the left in the sixties and seventies so many of the names in “Radical in Chief” were familiar to me. In fact, I consider them to be some of the more reasonable elements of the left. They were ideologically socialist but they were also realistic. They had a sense of what could actually accomplished and saw how small steps could fit into a more long term goal of creating a social democracy akin to much of Europe.
I think a lot of people in the media, academia and the left wing of the Democratic Party share this vision. But they know it is not popular so they pretend that they are not Social Democrats. They have been very successful at marginalizing people who have pointed out the radical political agenda behind the moderate facade. This is unfortunate for the country since stealth politics always ends up badly. I don’t believe socialism is a good idea for the United States but what is even worse is putting it into place while pretending not to. Socialism by stealth is a recipe for disaster.
I’m so grateful for this book! The cat is out of the bag.Now if we can get Limbaugh and others interviewing the author until everyone is on board we have a fighting chance to quell the takeover.
One wonders about the commitment our self-styled elites really have to the concept of democracy. Try a thought experiment: If you really thought a social democracy was the best form of society for the US, would you try to persuade a majority so that your ideas could be put into place democratically through elected officials, or would you try the salami slice and stealth approach, working through regulatory agencies, the courts, rule-making and the like, as seems to be the preferred method of the left in this country? Would a real democrat ever chose the latter?
Choose the latter?
What is really concerning, beyond all the important points made so far both by Ron Radosh and those posting comments here, is what Obama is doing with the Justice Department, quite intentionally as it seems, through his chosen instrument Eric Holder (e.g., notice the personnel policies, effectively cleaning out the Justice Department of its older neutral legal and policing professionals, and replacing them with New Left advocates and enforcers). This means that many laws on the books that disturb leftist and political activist types will simply expire in practice, through being unenforced, while norms outside the law will replace them first on the federal level, then on the state and local level too, supplanting state legal regimes (as we see so vividly in relationship to illegal immigration policy, but it applies to all aspects of domestic policy and law enforcement). Without law enforcement to support our liberties, or rather, with subversion of law enforcement so as to undermine our liberties and individual rights, nothing else is safe and our liberties go down the drain. The Justice Department should be the first focus of federal reform if Romney gets into office — and if he does not, truly long-term damage to the American system is sure to be locked in.
Mr. Radosh: in one word, superb. Direct,factual,hardhitting. Chilling. A needed warning to the wise. A heads up to useful idiots. Thank you, thank you.
I avoid calling Obama a “Socialist”. It has connotations to some sort of paternalistic Sweden, which is also a pretty good neighbor to have. Also, the “Alan Colmes” type pundits love to jump in and claim that since Obama is not nationalizing industries, that term is really, really wrong.
Obama is a “Fascist”. This avoids the latter-day Sweden image and reminds you just what kind of neighbor Fascists tend to be. Also, Fascism’s “Corporatism” economics leaves the Alan Colmes of the left trying to change the subject.
Fascism is actually a form of socialism. The Fascist Party in Italy was formed by Benito Mussolini during World War I. Mussolini was the leader of the Italian Socialist Party and editor of its newspaper Avanti. The Socialist policy was to oppose all wars as being between capitalists, and Mussolini opposed Italy’s participating in World War I. But he changed his mind in 1917 and founded the Fascist Party as nationalist socialist party. That is why Adolf Hitler said that his party, the National Socialist Party (NAZI) was fascist.
President Barack Obama is a socialist but not a fascist because he hates his own country; he is an Islamist communist – Alinsky style. That his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – another follower of Alinsky – has as a close aide, Huma Abedin, whose family are members of the Muslim Brotherhood and who herself was active in the Brotherhood (see Andrew McCarthy on this), shows where Obama’s allegiances are.
If you substitute race for nationalism obummer perfectly fits the fascist term. Throw in taking over 2/3 of the auto industry and and choosing which industries succeed or fail and you have full on fascism.
I would readily agree that Obama is unique among Fascists in that he hates his own country. That characteristic actually puts him outside of virtually every leader in the world. I would also agree that Fascism is a form of Marxism, just as Socialism is a form of Marxism.
I use Fascism because it helps recognize the use of force and coercion (recall how Obamacare was enacted) which Socialism (again picture Sweden) just doesn’t convey. Maybe I’ve seen Alan Colmes too often and his smirky putdown of the whole notion that Obama is a Marxist precisely because he has not nationalized industry.
Personally, I think that every Marxist winds up as a Fascist because of the appeal of coercion and because the classical Marxist idea of direct state ownership of the means of production does such a spectacular crash and burn when its actually attempted (see Cambodia).
If I remember correctly, National Socialism (the Nazi’s), didn’t use state ownership of the “means of production”. Factories, etc., were left in private hands- the government just told them exactly what they were going to do. Sound familiar?
Secession will be the result. Conservatives won’t be part of a socialist state. The chasm between Left and Right is too wide for agreement. The best thing to do is create two separate nations, one for the Leftists and one for the rest of us. It would be fun to see how fast the Leftist nation descended into outright North Korea style totalitarianism without the restraint provided by we conservatives.
I hate Liberals and will take up arms against them if I have to to guarantee my liberty.
Conservatives could very well live in a socialist (fascist) State. Hello? They have been off-and-on (and more-or-less) for 100 years or more. As for secession – that worked out SO well the first time. The Feds would wipe the floor with secessionists unless they are truly going to do what is needful – death by a thousand cuts. The tactics would guarantee that such a movement would be crucified in the courts of public opinion, terrorists being as popular as they are.
I too would welcome a movement of this sort. Additionally, I believe most of our soldiers would lay down arms when given the order to attack the would be secessionists.
If all the Red states decided to leave the union there’s nothing the Blue states could do about it. And since Red states supply most of our soldiers, that avenue is out for the rump blues states as well. This isn’t the 1860′s anymore, TX alone could defeat all of the northeast.
In late 1860 and early ’61 lots of Southerners were saying that one Southerner could whip ten Yankees and politicians were saying that they’d mop up all the blood actually spilled with their handkerchiefs.
The federal government WILL maintain control of the military and the vast bulk of the military will obey the order to “suppress the rebellion” no matter that many members are from the Red States. Unlike the situation in 1860, the Red States don’t really have access to either the wealth or the suppliers to supply and equip an army at all competitive with the US Army. Much is made of the losses of civilian property to military action in The South, but there was actually much less actual damage that the Lost Cause mythologists and those who get their history from Gone With the Wind would make out that there was. The real damage to The South and the damage from which it has never recovered was the loss of wealth from loaning the Confederate Government money, from taxation, and from debauched currency as well as the loss of billions of dollars in wealth from the emancipation of the slaves, far and away the most valuable real property held by most wealthy Southerners. While there were a few Rhett Butlers who became wealthy off war profiteering, many, maybe most, wealthy Southern families were all but erased by The War. The officers from Brigadier General down were the leading men of their states and towns/counties. After Gettysburg, most of those men were dead, disabled, or guests of the Yankees. The bulk of the men who emerged after Gettysburg rose from the lower mercantile and wage-earning classes, not the wealthy land-owning “gentlemen” who led The South to war.
I want to see that – Americans going after American civilians. I don’t buy it.
I don’t want to see it, but there is no doubt in my mind that the troops will in the main believe what they’re told by their command and will follow orders, at least in the shortrun and the shortrun is all that it would take.
Let’s say the EBTs don’t recharge some day and the people who live off EBTs go looting and rioting in the ‘burbs because their babies are starving and they need a plasma TV. The bitter clingers in the ‘burbs defend their property. The Democrat mayor of the city and the Democrat governor of the state call on Comrade Obama to suppress the rebellion. He either federalizes the state’s National Guard or, since the threshold for posse comitatus is met, sends in troops. The troops will follow orders and will fire on US civilians.
Guys, guys, before we start talking this secession stuff let’s give Obambi a chance. At the rate he’s going there won’t be an Army to oppose us if he gets reelected.
Every military member takes an oath to “uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States”.
It is possible that many of them have never read it, of if they have, don’t understand it (What’s “Congreff”?)…but the officers do.
It is doubtful to me that the US military would envelop civilians for purely ideological reasons…and because some knothead in the government ordered them to.
They have been teaching for decades now in PME (Professional Military Education) what obeying orders means. It’s in the oath for enlisted members that they will “execute the orders of the officers appointed over them”. However, it’s not carte blanche to follow blindly. The orders must fall in line with the current operation, make sense and not go against the oath itself. In other words, military firing on civilians would set many current soldiers into a rage.
It’s, well…you can’t order a soldier to set himself on fire kind of thing.
Our military, unlike most militarys in the world, is not founded on blind following of orders. It is necessary at times but today’s military members are very well-informed and a sometimes cynical lot in that they banter about their leadership and whether they feel it is qualified to be in that position or not. Compared to, say…when the draft was in place, a soldier’s duty was to simply do that…their duty.
Nowadays the soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines are more thinking entities, knowing when to strictly obey and when to question those orders. It happens very, very rarely which gives credit to the leadership within the military who must hold the respect of their charges.
It’s not a robotic thing to be a soldier anymore. They are taught well and early to carefully listen and understand the orders given to them. It’s got a gradient factor as well…yes, the lowest ranks don’t get to question much..but neither are they charged with enormous responsibility. The idea is that when leaders start making bad moves and give questionable orders, they are replaced.
It is also unlikely that, like the SS, the national socialists will install inside the military some apparatchik arm to deal with the ones who might question orders. Indeed…many in the German military were not “technically” Nazis but the SS had eyes and ears everywhere and those who failed to uphold the top’s wishes were eliminated.
A US soldier would walk away before firing their weapon on a US citizen. They know why they are in the military to begin with.
“We will accomplish this. I will not allow administrative technicalities to slow it down. Every agency will jump to follow my order, or asses will sting. There are no shortages of meathooks on which to hang enemies of the state. …..We look forward to a better day, a peaceful world, a German culture triumphant. That is what we work for.”
SS General Heydrich, from the film “Conspiracy” 2001.
The present domestic political and cultural conflict pits the states against the Federal government, not state vs. state. The better analogy is the war of independence (from an overbearing central authority).
The english speaking world runs in cycles. three times (‘glorious’ revolution, war of independence, civil war) the conservatives became radicalized in response to radicals conserving their gains. We are in the fourth such reversal.
I submit that the culture hasn’t changed sufficiently to dismiss a replay. By this reckoning a GOP win in November delays the inevitable whereas a Dem win hastens the process. The Obamaites are refighting the cold war to no good effect.
The left never learns.
The regionalist agenda presupposes an earlier industrial model, whereby people have to congregate in urban areas. The internet precludes any hope that such a scheme could be successful. People will simply move further away. The regionalists will essentially force de-urbanization. The urban poor will suffer, not benefit.
We might also see novel approaches to economic development, such as new takes on the old company town. Per this model, companies within a particular sector might congregate in locales far away from the reach of the social engineers. The would design the locale in ways which suited their needs.
I live in Nevada, and people have no idea how much space there is out here, and how little government relative to our neighbor to the west. Apple is busy building facilities in and around Reno. No doubt, other smaller tech companies will follow. The social engineers can’t control commerce. Just as the Soviets. Oh, I forget, they went the way of the Dodo.
Stanley Kurtz is a hero. Without him, there would be virtually ZERO investigative reporting done on the underpinnings of this administration, the Midwest Academy, and the whole dirty tricks crowd out of the Fabian Socialist (small c communist) movement.
None.
However, he is a man shouting from a deep well in the middle of the desert. He will be shouted down, exiled and shunned by the Propaganda and Lies Ministry.
The bootlickers and toadies with all their “fact checkers” and “editors” will edit the truth out of existence as they always do.
But, far, far sadder…are the spectacularly uninformed and terminally myopic sorts like Bill O’Really? …who continues to deny the stark truth about Obama’s entire existence being steeped in radical extremism.
The Non-Factor is one of the tips of the spears in mortally wounding any and every attempt to expose the extreme radicalism of Obama/Sunstein/Galluzzo/Soros and what the small c communists truly have up their sleeves.
He has an enormous pulpit and a chance to give truth a gasp of oxygen and he snuffs it out with his dismissive and belligerent incoherence on the topic of Obama and his cronies extreme radicalism.
“He’s just a very liberal guy who thinks the answer is more government” misses the point not by a mile but by a light year.
Give Stanley Kurtz a standing ovation and all the love you can muster. He is an unparalleled patriot. His writing style is wonkish and he has very little flair for the dramatic. But it is more than solid investigative reporting, it is quite brilliant, in fact. He does what no other national journalist is doing nor has done for over four years.
He goes into the hyena’s lair and stares down the snapping jaws of the small c communists…and pulls out their teeth. He doesn’t look the part of the superhero, but then again, neither did Clark Kent.
Stanley could wear an “S” on his shirt and nobody would suspect he was the best, last hope for the resistance.
Bill O’Reilly “uninformed and terminally myopic” ?
I think that here there is a mistake in your otherwise deep analysis of the attack against America by the subversives.
The fact is, that there a large section of the elitists that has decided to side against capitalism and has decided to run the tiger of the commies (Obama and his administration).
The same section of the elitists has decided to run the tiger of islam against the West.
If we were fighting the totalitarians only, we would have a lot more allies. The fact is that we are fighting an unholy and crazy alliance of elitists, totalitarian commies and islamic supremacists who agree on one goal: make America weak (third world weak).
Each of the three parts of this Chimera has its own agenda and at least temporarily protects the other two.
O’Reilly is perfectly informed. He is just on the other side of this war.
Where the elitists want to get I don’t know, I know what they do and I have said it for years.
Of course it sounds like an unbelievable conspiracy theory, so everyone ignores it.
Sherab,
Your description of the three forces resonates, but I have a question. I feel like we are fighting two (islamists and marxists), but I have a sense of elitists simply being short-sighted opportunists rather than outright opponents. Can you elaborate a bit?
I wouldn’t say that the elitists are “opportunists”.
On the whole, their power is far greater than the power of the internationalist totalitarians and they are certainly better organized than the islamic supremacists.
So there is an active choice here. They chose to attack “the system”.
I agree with you that is difficult to see them as “enemies” , at least in the same sense in which we consider enemies the totalitarians and the islamists.
But something has changed in the last twenty years, something deep in the elites of the West (and I am NOT referring to the fake elites: the totalitarians in the media and in the universities).
A long hate for the Christian Tradition seems to have finally come out in full force. A long hate for anything that is truly Traditional.
I don’t know anything, I know what I see in the public behaviors of figures that thirty years ago would have been staunch defenders of the West and today are instead speaking in very very “subtle” ways…Too subtle to be honest.
Just watch how often Bill O’Reilly says, in effect, “there ought to be a law against….” and you’ll see that he’s no friend of small government.
O’Reilley is a statist and populist. Nothing conservative about him. Never was.
Oh yeah, and he’s a doofus as well. As Rush says, “Somebody needs to tell the guy…. he’s Ted Baxter.”
I have tried to give O’Reilly the benefit of the doubt for over a decade. We after all do need Fox to counterbalance the complete wave of propaganda coming from the Main Stream Media 24/7 and the O’Reilly Factor at least provides some form of counterpoint. But your analysis of O’Reilly rings true, especially the duffus part. He is a talented opportunist who is confused about what exactly he does believe in and consequently shows his full blown Big Government underbellie almost by accident on various occassions.
They ARE Fabian Socialists. Shaw and Company invented the movement to “Nudge” (Holdren’s book title) Britain into Socialism, and to let them and their know-better social engineer heirs take over control of society once the hoi polloi had been tamed into well behaved socialists.
There’s a name for that. It’s Stalinism/Maoism. And that’s what the 32 czars and 14 (?) cabinet ministers, only one of which ever had business experience, are out to get.
The shame of it all is that they’ve already won (cf. — not one conservative newspaper or TV outlet exists).
PS: “capitalism” is a word invented by Karl Marx — by using it, conservatives only prove they’ve assimilated into the admitted socialist establishment. Try “individualism” or “entrepreneurism”.
I believe this election will be a land slide for Romney. Most Americans are smarter than you think, and those that voted for him last time know the BLT Marxist is about a New Age agenda, not making America stronger.
Romney is not liked, because people wonder how any smart person can believe in a 4th century Angel named Morni who lived among the native population of America, who talked to Joseph Smith about 200lbs of hidden gold tablets. The Joseph Smith who looked into his hat to view seer stones, and get information. The Joseph Smith that created a religion so he could have a lot of sex partners. Mormons call themselves Christians, but there is nothing in the new Testement about the above stated, ruling planets after you die, or G-d the Father was once a human like you, and I.
That is why people don’t like Romney. They know he is a smart man, but he believes in some crazy s***. Which is his right in America. People will vote for him anyway just to get the Marxist out of office.
I’m sitting here scratching my head…doesn’t it seem just a little odd that all this inflammatory information is surfacing NOW…why not in ’08? ’07? Or when BO was ‘elected’ into the Illinois senate, what-’04?
Even if the lamebrain media didn’t want to cover the lies, the deceptions, the CHOOM gang an’ all, certainly those facts existed then, as they do now. The difference being, now we’re reading about it, several trillion $$$ later.
So, isn’t it too convenient that a Republican will likely move into the White House, just in time for an economic collapse experts are warning about…not that another four years of BO is a better option, but at least then the Dems would be assigned blame for the hole we’re in…as if it mattered, I suppose.
Leatherneck,
I know there are some really odd things about that religion, but I find myself constantly challenged by Jesus’ words to the effect of “you will know a tree by its fruit.” I find myself quite often seeing the fruit of the Mormon church, as measured by the quality of the character of its followers, as being better than what I typically see from Christians. And I am a Christian. It messes with my head.
A lot of Mormons are born into that religion, and do not fully understand the facts, or history of Mormonism. It is true, a lot of Mormons are good people. I never wrote they were not.
I suppose the addage hell is paved with good intentions can be applied here. Also, Christ will have mercy, on whom he will have mercy.
Peace.
A person can have faith in Faith, and find the world empirically supports that. I think perhaps many of the Founders were like that. If i might use a personally familiar example, I’m like that. As for as the myths of origin, well, who can really know, let’s just wait and see. But meantime, i believe in believing, because i have common sense enough to see that faith in Faith has real power over the beast inside. Could be all in my head –like the Michaelangelo painting on the Sistine Chapel ceiling depicts the heavenly host enveloped in a robe the shape and (gag) color of the inside of a human cranium. Spinoza the renegade Jew said to ‘God is all in your head’, ”that’s the manifestation, dummy!”
As a ‘Doubting Thomas’ living deep within the Christian hold, it’s easy to think of someone like Mitt Romney having faith in his religion for all sorts of reasons from the earthly behavioral effect to way on up the spiritual ladder, and yet still kind of stuck a wee bit on the top rungs, just at the frontier of the fantastical, and thinking to himself, “Self, just between you and me, I’m dying to know, but somebody has to make a decision here, and I say, we’re gonna have to wait and see.”
As scary as this program is, it is not even half the story. Even domestically. This ‘Sustainable Community’ shennanigan is just one of at least dozen such ‘initiatives’ pursued by Obama (some already enacted), in order to turn this country into a western-european hell. And then, he hopes, into an eastern european hell. Similarly, internationally, he is pursuing other dozen or so initiatives geared towards turning the whole world into a fascist-socialist hell. This guy, and his cabal, (meaning most of the leading democrats these days), are at least a thousand times more dangerous than what Kurtz is talking about. But hey, if an American Eagle screams ‘murder’ in the jungle, does any american hear it?
People here on this board are essentially against Obama’s programs for “social justice.” However, their reasons for opposing them seem self-serving, which plays right into Obama’s hands. There are real and compelling reasons to oppose any centralization of power, any tearing down of boundaries, and most plans for redistribution of wealth, as well.
1) Like the corporate world, a failure of a local system – state or local government – does not automatically and immediately cause catastrophic failure of other such entities. Ala Hayek and Taleb, separation is a form of redundancy. That is why we have two kidneys, two brain hemispheres, two lungs, large liver, etc. The brain has redundant connections, making it robust in its ability to rebuild function when small local damages occur. No redundancy, no resiliency.
2) Equalizing income across individuals (even movement in that direction) creates entropy – chaos where no directed movement occurs – since there are no significant energy differences. The “individuals” can be defined as companies, government entities, localities, states, educational systems, etc. The concept of “improvement” then becomes strained, since each “improvement” is washed away by forced equalization.
3) The closest thing to complete equality is empty space. Particles are created and then disintegrate in the next instant, but overall nothing happens. The space-time continuum cannot provide meaning for complex humans under such circumstances. Separate functions cannot exist. Advocating equality among cells in the body would be ludicrous even to an Alinskyite like Obama, but applying that principle to systems containing more than one human seems perfectly fine to these not-so-deep thinkers.
4) As Hayek points out, being subject to the whims of chaos or random events is less destructive to the human condition than being subject to the directed efforts of well-meaning (or not so well-meaning) governmental entities. The opportunities for abuse by government are so great as to warrant that we concentrate on our negative rights so that individuals can live without coercion. Positive rights will take care of themselves as the society becomes wealthier.
5) America is a great country based upon the flexibility that it has afforded its citizenry. As the society becomes less wealthy, frictions will increase as everyone scrambles for security. The very idea that older people have to work past the beginnings of their physical decline bumps into the youngsters who would and should be taking over their grandparents’ jobs. Without sufficient wealth, groups and individuals will come into conflict. Rather than a more peaceful society, we will be riven with angst, bitterness, and quarrels. The younger generation will not be able to care for their aging parents and a poorer government will not be able to step in to help. People will die as the default position to aging gracefully. That is fine with the Leftists who believe that there are too many humans in the world anyway. But people will not go quietly into that good night. Darwinism, an abhorrent concept among the Left, will become the norm due to their misplaced efforts.
6) Evolution of society will slow or come to a halt under a sharing-the-wealth system. Rather, it has been the destruction of the inefficient or dysfunctional that has gotten us to the point in evolution where we have been able to apply more mercy to our weaker elements without also aborting progress.
Every farmer knows that he has to save his best seed and husband his best animals to improve his production. We must look to the best practices among farmers to gain a better insight into what will benefit society as a whole. Small family farms would flourish if subsidies did not warp the playing field in favor of mega-farms. So too we shall expect systematic warping of every adaptive system once government is allowed to decide what is best.
The farming analogy deserves much more attention. It provides a model for successful society overall. Just one more point not often considered with regard to agriculture. I now am in possession of too many zucchini squash, tomatoes, eggplants, onions, garlic and basil. There is a limit to how much ratatouille or tomato sauce I am willing to “put up.” My children are all well supplied with these vital commodities and I have now turned to bagging the extras and supplying neighbors and a local kitchen. I still have too much and will have to start putting the less perfect items in the compost pile. Unless a society is this wealthy – like America – we will wind up eating each other rather than tomato sauce.
Over many thousands of years primitive humans struggled to survive without science or mathematics. Men struggled against the hardships of nature. They survived in the face of hunger and the elements with nothing but stone tools. They used whatever they could pick up off the ground. They found food and begat children century after century, millennia after millennia. They did what most of us could not imagine doing, under extreme circumstances of deprivation and hardship. There were no hospitals or doctors, no stores or malls, no entertainment industry. If the scientists are roughly correct in their dating, this hunter-gathering existence was the lot of Homo sapiens for at least 195,000 years. Whatever the truth may be, mankind lived in the Stone Age far longer than he has lived in civilization. And even then, man’s worst enemy may have been his fellow man.
…
It seems there is a law of history at work. Whenever something good is achieved, a force is formed in diametrical opposition to it. Whenever progress is made, a force emerges that wants to take us back – whether it is Nazis who want to replay the survival game of tribe versus tribe, or Communists who want to return us to our Communist roots as hunter-gatherers. Whenever civilization emerges, the romance of the barbarian wells up to swallow it. The noble savage, the praiseworthy primitive, is set before us as a model. And as we look around at the pathologies produced by our civilization, we wonder whether civilization can survive at all.
(close quote from Stone Age Genocide, JR Nyquist
Long before the collapse of USSR, The international socialists i.e communist have realized that Bolshevik style revolution did not produce and will ever produced their utopian society unless they kill everyone over age 5. Instead of arm revolution that they hoped for instant result they adapted a long multy generational approach by first taking over the education system then prey on the poor, the uneducated, and the misfutunate by promising a nirvana that doesn’t exist. Then slowly but surely most everyone have brain washed to accept this alternate universe where everyone will live in peace and harmony, except of-course when someone do not fallow the official line. Right now in America we are seeing this scenario unfolding before our eyes where half of the American population have already accepted this alternate reality. Weak up America November is your last chance.
DHS Prepares for Civil Unrest as Obama Poised to Destroy 2nd Amendment Susanne Posel Jul 28th, 2012
http://occupycorporatism.com/dhs-prepares-for-civil-unrest-as-obama-poised-to-destroy-2nd-amendment/
This story reminds me of Art Chance’s postings where he warns about how the Obama cabal is going to attempt its hand at intimidating enough voters to the point that they stay home on election day. Cannot understate enough the value of early voting.
I think you meant to say “Cannot overstate enough the value of early voting”, something we (wife and I) will be doing.
The Commie Kenyan’s biggest fear is a free, honest election; he will lose by the largest margin in American history – it will not even be close. The polls are so heavily skewed by dramatically oversampling democrats that to believe their data requires checking your common sense at the door. But, they are ‘all in’ and have retained the brightest minds in liberal politics (i.e. the sleaziest and slimiest) to try and conjure up a message that will sell to the people, obviously anything but the truth! Just as in 2010, the polls are intentionally manipulated to try and discourage conservatives and all Americans of any affiliation that are steadfastly opposed to the attempted subversion of our Constitution by Pol Pot on the Potomac. Show up to vote and bring all your friends and neighbors with you…this will be even more of a sweep than 2010! I know, I know….it won’t solve everything, but it will be a good start.
Be strong, resolute and committed to freedom. If we remain united we cannot be defeated. There will be no ‘doomsday’ or apocalyptic events. They know two things for certain, as do I – 1) The American populace will NEVER be overthrown by force of arms because we too are armed (Thank God and our Founding Fathers) and 2) The American armed forces will NEVER take arms against the citizens of the United States if ordered to do so by THIS president. Believe me, they know how big a liar he is more so than we
We have no reason to fear our armed forces.
Our biggest fear should be administrative actions in November designed to facilitate massive voter fraud. We need to ALL become de facto poll watchers in our respective regions and districts. He doesn’t have a prayer of winning, but we have no doubt he will try to steal it if he gets the chance.
I admire your confidence in the 2nd amendment. Rep. Brad Miller of NC has a far different opinion, his comments are embedded in this article.
http://www.news-record.com/content/2012/07/28/article/gun_tracking_fuels_debate
The Democrats also have a very different slant on the 2nd amendment which hopefully will hurt them at the ballot box in November.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/240909-dem-lawmakers-to-unveil-bill-regulating-online-sale-of-ammo
While people continue to try and dismiss Obama’s relationship with Jeremiah Wright as “old news,” the fact remains that “the disavowal of middleclassness” was a major tenet of Wright’s church, prominently featured on the church’s website, until Wright made news during the first Obama presidential run—at which time this anti-middleclass principle was quickly scrubbed.
Obama is, and always has been, hostile to the middle class to the very bone.
Cities can’t forever support themselves, they are parasitic in nature, hence the super high cost of living. Cities have a tendency to hide man from nature and natures God exposing men to the depravities of cronyism and manipulation that people soon become tired of and move to the suburbs or they succumb and die a sort of spiritual death (read zombie)in the cities.
Knowing this, the “evil” cites reach out their tentacles further and further in order suck more and more dry of their resources and their lifeblood itself.
There will come a time when we will build these cities no more as they will be seen as the evil breeders that they are.
It is no surprise that the President and his friends are attacking the middle class and the suburbs or are planning to even more so, knowing what blood suckers they already are. From now on a community organizer should always be recognized as a blood sucking vampire. That of course goes for all government that is not of the people, by the people and for the people, under God.
Nice job Ron.
Venezuela under Chavez is the model for America. I say we allow California to secede before the gangrene spreads and is difficult to remove
One thing is for sure–the most arrogant man in the world is going to hate how he looks on that cover.
It captures who Obama is perfectly–sinister.
I don’t remember another president who was so often photographed with such pure malice oozing from his eyes. When he’s not wearing the goofy “look at me” grin.
I wonder if a Romney victory will be nearly sufficient to stop this ‘spread the wealth’ glacier?
Operatives implementing policies and regulations to further this redistributionist agenda are firmly embedded throughout government.
Stopping this momentum requires an explicit strategy to exorcise these anonymous regulators root and branch. I know of no candidate or party that has the vision. Does anyone?
Yeah, but he was too radical, or anti-semitic or whatever the vampire squids thought they could – and did – make stick in the gooey minds of “social conservatives.”
We got Romney instead.
When Obama, Pelosi, Reed and apologists such as Bob Beckel say “middle class,” they don’t mean the suburbs. If you listen closely, you discover that their “middle class” always refers to union households. It’s liberal code speech.
I’m not exaggerating. Listen closely. And since most union members today are government employees, “middle class” actually means “the government class.”
“The unfortunate title — not an attention-grabber in bookstores —does not covey the breadth of his research….”
Yes, it ought to be called “Protocols of the Elders of Obama.”
Radosh is right in his element with this. Anyone who was a teen or adult in the ’60s can remember the conspiracy theories and other crackpot assertions coming from the extreme left — i.e., RR and his ilk. The gov’t is setting up concentration camps for war protestors! LBJ is going to declare martial law! etc. etc.
Race is the centerpiece of the Dem Party. Obama is a classic New Jim Crow politician with his heart firmly in the academic and political black Left. The Left believes racism has only gone underground and works in unconscious ways that are analogous to pre-Civil Rights-era America. Therefore New Jim Crow.
Racism is no longer out there as conspicuous institutions and so must be inferred from statistics. This is why the Left is so addicted to the idea of White Privilege, completely unconscious racism. Now, the less one thinks of racism the more one enables it – clever.
Given the reality of the Third World and the fact that sub-cultures produce their own value systems, a reasonable person might look at the same statistics and say, get to work, measure up. The theory on the Left is that if it weren’t for whites, we’d have Somali and Mayan spaceship engineers. Given that there is nothing preventing the entirety of the Third World from expressing their exceptionalism, one can only conclude the Left are simply racialist children with Marxist leanings who believe wherever inequality lies, structural racism is at he heart of it. How it is explained we keep the entirety of South and Central America down, among other nations, is never explained.
Yes indeed – race and inequalities of various sorts that must be engineered out of the corrupt system. Here is some more crazy evidence. http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/27/obama-backs-race-based-school-discipline-policies/
So glad Kurtz is picking up on the regional planning. I get invited to those conferences and am always shocked that no one recognizes they are describing a centrally planned economy. I think that is why they find utility or insurance executives and defense contractors to be the Business spokesperson. People who already live in a highly regulated industry or with governments as the sole client. I even wrote a piece to describe the attitude http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/and-governments-must-facilitate-everything/
I have ordered the book but am thrilled Kurtz is calling attention to Linda Darling-Hammond. She has already accepted an award from the John Dewey Society for her Common Core attempt to gut American society. Less well known is how tied she is to the group trying to restructure global education via UNESCO and OECD initiatives. She has been in charge of developing obscuring assessment measures globally for the 21st century skills movement, ATC21S, run conveniently offshore through the University of Melbourne. The very definition of Crony Capitalism with Cisco, MS, and Intel as primary partners.
Her economic model for us is Finland. Probably why she coordinates so much with Pasi Sahlberg. She recognizes that copying their misunderstood education policies also means adopting their economic and social policies.
Which look a lot like Build One America.
Finland. A country of 130,000 square miles and a population of less than six million people the vast (vast) majority of whom are ethnic Finns??
The Finns are obviously successful at educating their children and I’m sure there’s much about their system we could emulate. However, we would have to emulate other aspects of their society as well, a society based on the nuclear family (that is, mom, dad and the kids). Although the rate of non-married cohabitation is relatively high as it is in all Scandinavian countries, the rate of one parent households is relatively low. The Finns, furthermore, do not organize themselves into extraneous special-interest groups that promote separatism and victimization. The Finns are avid readers who make 10 per capita visits to the library annually and their government fosters a “culture of reading.” So, while the Finnish education model might enjoy success in the much-maligned suburbs, I doubt it would get very far in our inner cities. What would Darling-Hammond propose we do about that? The Finnish economic model is one of high taxation (especially for high income earners/investors), but a huge chunk of those taxes goes to municipalities, not the state, a policy anathema to most progressives.
When governments are corrupt or oppressive people have traditionally “voted with their feet.” In America this has been easy to do because (1) The Federal structure of diverse government jurisdictions. One could simply move outside a city or state boundary, and (2) cheap personal transportation (the automobile) made this easy to do.
The progressives have always hated that state of affairs. After all it is very difficult to conduct experiments in social engineering when the guinea pigs flee the lab. In the past this agenda was mostly hidden. No more.
“Building One America (an Orwellian name if there ever was one) is actually a movement to create forced equality of income,”
So that’s great. However, what if the middle class and the working class and the blue and white collar folks don’t agree with this strategy when they see their incomes stripped to create equality for the collective. Does Big Brother then bring in the Armed Forces? Will the brave generals and soldiers of the Armed Forces manhandle their fellow citizens? Does the NRA and middle class bumpkins just lie down and wait to be rubbed on the tummy? I’d love to see what the strategy is to keep their Utopia once it is created. I know where the hell I stand and I won’t go down this road gently.
Thanks
Look no further than Chicago..Rahm is poaching business from the suburbs and bringing them to the city…no value added…but it does hurt the middle class suburbs and help minorities who live in the cities…next up- to work in these companies you’ll need to live in the city…
Sorry, if this has been mentioned already but this has grown into a long thread and I have not read all the responses. This transfer of money from the suburbs to the cities has been going on in New Jersey for years now. It benefits the politicians because the cities have more voters who support such programs and can put them into effect through the polls. Of course these programs work to the benefit of the city-dwellers but mostly to those in the low-income brackets. A writer named Paul Mulshine of the Newark Star Ledger has been writing about his for years now. I strongly suggest looking up his work regarding this, particularly in regard to the “affordable housing” nonsense.
Our governor, Chis Christie, seems to be a darling of the right-leaning vote in other states. I tell you he is no prize. He won’t fight against this sort of thing and, in fact, pandered to it in order to get elected. It worked for him but a serious analysis of his campaign and tenure show that he is as economically illiterate as any given politician. Christie is often mentioned as a possible VP for Romney so I thought it worth mentioning.
It is unfortunate about the title. The publishers could have at least printed the title in bright, screaming commie red to make it more eye catching.
So, the suburbs are a product of racism and greed. One presumes that’s white racism and greed. And middle class and wealthy blacks? Where do they live??
As much as I disliked Carter and Clinton, I never sensed that they disliked America’s founding principles. It’s obvious Obama hates those principles. He is a socialist whose true feelings come out when he’s not scripted… like when talking with Joe the Plumber (“spread the wealth around”) or in Roanoke (“you didn’t build that”). I have never been so frightened for the future of our great republic. It’s a travesty that he was elected in the first place. It will be an utter nightmare if he’s reelected.
I agree with the poster who said the object of the Obamanauts is Venequela, not France. For these people, “banana republic” is not a term of disdain but the object of political aspiration.
I read the first book and flipped over it. It was so amazing! I’ve been anticipating this one for a while now.
Well, the left loves old big cities, anyway, some of their older inner rigns like in LA are worst than the city, Huntington Park, Maywood are burbs poorer than La since they have alot of illegal immigrants or low skilled second or third. I think the regionalism trys to shift to take away from the outer burbs Santa Clarita and gave it to La or the old inner suburbs. Obama might if its a lower income heavily minority suburb give it money and take away from whiter cities like Portland or Seattle since even though their blue towns there less minorities. And the left whites in those towns might have some of them upset. Cicero Ill is almost as bad as Chicago since it too has alot of illegal immigrants that are low skilled.
Well, Orange, San Diego and Inland are not very liberal compared to La, the big giant. The main problem is why changing Demographics Orange and San Diego were when they were mainly white pretty Republican now more minority and poor less minority. Santa Ana and Anaheim in Orange have poverty rates among his panics around 20 percent and Hispanics are majorities in these towns. Republicans won the white vote by 4 percent in California against Boxer but loss the minority vote. Improving on the white vote or timing out Hispanic and Asian immigrant groups might slowly change some voting patterns hard but not impossible in inland Ca or in Orange or San Diego if the regional issue was stress. Inland Empire and OC and San Diego and even liberal La caused the cigarette tax to go down in flames.
I mean less Republican San Diego and Orange with more minorities and poor people compared to 40 years ago.