Video Of Anti Pelosi Rally In Texas

The March To Fascism And How To Stop It

People know I've been beating the drum, warning of the Fascist trends in our government which have been building for years and are reaching a crisis.

Jack Gildern did a much better post on this subject than I have called Fascism: Foolish Fallacy Or Frightening Fact. I urge you to read it-please.

He starts with a simple definition of Fascism.

Here is the literal definition of Fascism:
fas⋅cism [fash-iz-uhm]
–noun
1. A governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
2. The philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.

Of course, we haven't reached this level yet. Exactly when one says something that walks like a duck and quacks like a duck can be described as a duck is always a judgement call. The problem is--- This is not a duck we are talking about here-- It's Fascism!-- or perhaps some other brand of totalitarianism. We test and test for cancer in a way we don't for colds because- it's a deadly and often fatal disease and when we find it we try to kill it and cut it out. (no that was not just a call to kill the president. Our troubles go much deeper than one man. He was actually elected)

I made two comments that prescribe what I think might be the quickest and most effective way to stop this train and get people to think. You need to read the post and comments for context.

Comment One

"One of the best posts on here ever. I think one of the biggest factors at work here is what Hitler called the big lie. Admiting just how bad, Obama is means confronting our own guilt for having elected him and going deeper into just how the government got this out of control means looking at almost a century of guilt.

We as American's as whole- not all, have betrayed our founders and the basic ideals and foundations our country was founded on in exchange for a few favored programs or vague promises.

People need to stop and admit they live a nearly bankrupt and nearly Fascist country and then decide what role they have played in it and what they are going to do about it.

As, I mentioned before-- I think the Tenth Amendment route might be the fastest clearest way to stop this train. There are states and places in the country where enough broad support for individual rights and the Constitution exists. We need to work from there, to both educate and broaden this base and use it to confront the Monstrous powers in Washington.

After all, the Constitution and the founding documents of the country are on our side. If enough people scream that they really matter, and that the law matters and rights and truth matter, something might be done."

Comment Two

Well, I'm going to have to admit to living in "blue states" all my life in either NY or PA.

But my perception from my reading, interactions and occasional travels is that there really are very large chunks of the country that could almost be called "occupied territory" at this point. I mean when was the last time Wyoming, Utah or Alaska voted blue. I think we need to start from there and work to educate the people about just how deeply damaging the federal occupation of their states has been. Instead of working from positions of weakness, we can start from strength where there is already a lot of political and media support and build on that.

The starting point should be for the "occupied states" to one by one re-affirm their commitment to the original Constitution and it's tenth amendment- which in reality is an implied threat to take the clear course out of the union that the Constitution allows.

Hopefully, a chain of firm resolutions by a large number of states that seem very serious will in itself put a radical brake on things. Remember that just by taking these actions, one is calling attention to all the Constitutional and legal violations, which may help more people in other states to wake up and think deeply about what's going on. This will be hard for the media to ignore.

Remember---the Constitution and all the legal traditions of our country are on our side. Every founding document shows a clear intent to protect individuals from out of control federal power and to protect minorities from a possible tyranical majority.

We can't do this blindly so each resolution needs to state clearly the exact Federal moves that would trigger further action. For example, I think every state should declare federal limitations on free speech and the press to be an instant trigger for further action. Moves against the Second Amendment are in close to the same territory.

Independent Media In A Fascist State

I want to do a more detailed post on this subject, but here are a few thoughts.

Our founders had a very clear opinion that all rights and liberties were interconnected and that attacks one right one would cause the collapse of all others. For example, they didn't think a person, company or group could keep their independence from the state without an absolute right to their private property and contract rights. How could a newspaper, or any person be fully free from government coercion in a place where, the state controlled media licenses which they could pull at will, or provided subsidies and hand outs.

Th Fascist state goes to great extremes to make sure that nothing and nobody can be fully independent but it doesn't always do this by directly seizing all private property. Instead it uses a process of subsidies, licenses and other state powers to threaten and control the flow of ideas, much like the king did only on a bigger scale.

Please keep this in mind when looking at current media reporting. The three major networks are always under the threat of having their licenses revoked if they don't act in whatever the current leader or gang considers "the public interest".

Of course, we know on top of this, there is now "public TV" and "public radio" which get a large chunk of their money directly from the government which should, for any sane person exclude them as a possibly objective source of news about the state.

However, the ever increasing bailouts have added a new ingredient to the mix.

Can GE, which owns NBC and MSNBC and other media assets, really be considered an independent company anymore? Remember, that GE has taken billions of dollars in TARP money to shore up it's troubled and huge GE Capital unit. It's also almost surely on the "too big to fail list" of companies that administration has said will never be allowed to go down. How many of their toxic assets have been bought by the FED is a secret as are those of many huge banks that owe it money in some way.

Add to this the fact that GE is also a huge defense contractor and has a host of units hoping to cash in on "stimulus spending" and you have to question if it can have any independence at all.

Fascism Update: NY FED Chief Makes Two Million Dollar Score On Goldman Sachs

People who look at Fascist and other economies of that type have a hard time telling whether corporate interests and insiders have taken over the state or the other way around. Anyway, the recent revolving door between Goldman Sachs and government and quasi governmental agencies is a perfect example.

Here we have the NY Fed chief not only keeping his Goldman Sachs position after Goldman became a bank but using likely inside knowledge to double down on his investment.

"The New York Fed asked for a waiver, which, after about 2½ months, the Fed granted. While it was weighing the request, Mr. Friedman bought 37,300 more Goldman shares in December. They've since risen $1.7 million in value.

Mr. Friedman also was overseeing the search for a new president of the New York Fed, an officer who has a critical role in setting monetary policy at the Federal Reserve. The choice was a former Goldman executive."

Remember, the exact actions of the FED such as what bad assets it may have bought or guaranteed from Goldman or any of it's counterparties are kept secret.

Goldman was one of nine big banks the Treasury aided with capital injections in early October. The prior month, the government decided, partly at the urging of New York Fed officials, to bail out insurer American International Group Inc. The initial $85 billion provided to AIG enabled it to pay a portion of $8.1 billion it owed to Goldman, stemming from past trading agreements. By the end of the year, Goldman had gotten all of the $8.1 billion as AIG received more government aid.

Why Do People Vote For Collectivists?

This post was originally posted on Tea Party Patriots.

One of the great mysteries in social and political science is that a large number of people who personally, experienced the failures and horrors of Collectivist rule still want more of it. This is obviously one of the reasons.

"In contrast, the enlargement of the state always means an attack on responsibility. Under a communist regime, self-responsibility is eliminated. The more a government intrudes into citizens’ lives, the less people feel a sense of responsibility for their actions. Bureaucrats do not typically have full responsibility for their actions. Politicians, central bankers, and judges do not pay for their mistakes. They experience a kind of immunity from bearing blame for the consequences of their actions during the time they are in power.

The same holds true for police officials, public surgeons, public school teachers, etc. All mistakes that are made by public employees are often paid for by others. The bill is paid by taxpayers, by people sent to jail mistakenly, by people killed in public hospitals, by Iraqi citizens, etc. Not even people who earn private salaries are fully responsible under the State. Under the larger and larger safety nets created by the state, firms get more and more dependant on public help in order to survive. Big companies lobby for subsidies, duties on imports, and other kinds of help. Banks and large industries such as airlines hope to be declared “too big to fail.”

Individuals are also less and less responsible. In Europe many people grow up with the idea that the State owes them something: jobs, health, free education, vacations, happiness, and deliverance from despair. People are led to believe that the State will always care about their problems and address their community concerns. People are made to believe that whatever they do (they lose their job, they get sick, they become depressed) the State will be there to help.

The perverse result of all this is that citizens no longer bear full responsibility for their actions. All this can be explained through the concept of the moral hazard. The mechanism works as follows: on the one hand the responsibility of public employees is transferred to everyone affected by their mistakes (among these, the taxpayers); on the other hand, taxpayers demand also for a shift of their responsibility to the State. Given the taxes they pay, they should get something back, shouldn't they?"

Needless, to say this places the costs of "society" on anyone who takes responsibility for anything.

Using The Other F-Word

One word that is popping up on signs at tea parties is Fascism and it clearly seems to have invoked more than a little fear on the traditional left. In spite of their common use of the word, they have gone to elaborate lengths to obscure it's true meaning and philisophical roots.

Study the meaning of this word. Go to the Wikipedia and you will see the similarities between Obama's current policies and Fascism. The founders of our country were true Liberals and opposed these ideas with their lives.

My last post about the PPIP program implied that many of Obama's policies and methods were not socialist, but corporatist or fascist.



Steve Malanga, who I think I remember from Crains, NY has written a great little primer on this. He correctly points out that corporatist policies often gain popularty in periods of crisis and are in fact attempts by elites and existing power bases to limit and resist change.Let's start with definitions.

Corporatism

"Historically, corporatism refers to a political or economic system in which power is held by civic assemblies that represent economic, industrial, agrarian, social, cultural, and/or professional groups. These civic assemblies are known as corporations (not the same as the legally incorporated business entities known as corporations, though some are such). Corporations are unelected bodies with an internal hierarchy; their purpose is to exert control over the social and economic life of their respective areas. Thus, for example, a steel corporation would be a cartel composed of all the business leaders in the steel industry, coming together to discuss a common policy on prices and wages. When the political and economic power of a country rests in the hands of such groups, then a corporatist system is in place."

I can't paste in the whole definition but corporatism works through a complex of "public/private partnerships which ossify power through force.

"Political scientists may also use the term corporatism to describe a practice whereby a state, through the process of licensing and regulating officially-incorporated social, religious, economic, or popular organizations, effectively co-opts their leadership or circumscribes their ability to challenge state authority by establishing the state as the source of their legitimacy, as well as sometimes running them, either directly or indirectly through corporations. This usage is particularly common in the area of East Asian studies, and is sometimes also referred to as state corporatism."

Fascism

Fascism, can be described as a much broader ideology but fascist economic ideas are basically corporatist.

"The fascists opposed both international socialism and liberal capitalism, arguing that their views represented a third way. They claimed to provide a realistic economic alternative that was neither laissez-faire capitalism nor communism.[19] They favoured corporatism and class collaboration, believing that the existence of inequality and separate social classes was beneficial (contrary to the views of socialists).[20] Fascists argued that the state had a role in mediating relations between these classes (contrary to the views of liberal capitalists).[21]

An inherent aspect of fascist economies was economic dirigisme[22], meaning an economy where the government exerts strong directive influence, and effectively controls production and allocation of resources. In general, apart from the nationalizations of some industries, fascist economies were based on private property and private initiative, but these were contingent upon service to the state.[23]"

Getting to Malanga's piece

"But we are entering quite a different age right now, one in which the President of the United States and his hand-selected industrial overseers fire the chief executive of General Motors and chart the company’s next moves in order to preserve it. Conservative critics of the president have said that the government’s GM strategy is one of many examples of an America drifting toward socialism. But President Obama is not a socialist. If his agenda harks back to anything, it is to corporatism, the notion that elite groups of individuals molded together into committees or public-private boards can guide society and coordinate the economy from the top town and manage change by evolution, not revolution. It is a turn-of-the 20th century philosophy, updated for the dawn of the 21st century, which positions itself as an antidote to the kind of messy capitalism that has transformed the Fortune 500 and every corner of our economy in the last half century. To do so corporatism seeks to substitute the wisdom of the few for the hundreds of millions of individual actions and transactions of the many that set the direction of the economy from the bottom up."

I urge one to read and think about it and I leave with one last definition. Obama's ideas are in stark contrast those of our nation's founders.

Classical Liberalism

"Classical liberalism holds that individual rights are natural, inherent, or inalienable, and exist independently of government. Thomas Jefferson called these inalienable rights: "...rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law', because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."[25] For classical liberalism, rights are of a negative nature—rights that require that other individuals (and governments) refrain from interfering with individual liberty, whereas social liberalism (also called modern liberalism or welfare liberalism) holds that individuals have a right to be provided with certain benefits or services by others.[26] Unlike social liberals, classical liberals are "hostile to the welfare state."[9] They do not have an interest in material equality but only in "equality before the law."[27] Classical liberalism is critical of social liberalism and takes offense at group rights being pursued at the expense of individual rights.[28]"

Being Fair To Ford

I don't know how it happened, but a reporter from the NY Times did sympathetic story about Ford's proud but desperate struggle to survive, on it's own two feet and do what it has to get it's costs and financial situation in order without major government handouts.

The problem is that now it faces two major domestic rivals and a world of other car companies in which handouts and bailouts are the norm. Most likely they will have to throw in the towel and dance to Obama and the Car Czar's crazy tune.

"That was when the car market crashed and the auto companies began burning through huge amounts of cash. A month later, Mr. Mulally was in the spotlight — along with G.M.’s chairman, Rick Wagoner, and Chrysler’s chairman, Robert L. Nardelli — during Congressional hearings on Detroit’s financial woes.

Mr. Mulally said Ford never intended to ask for federal help but needed to support the industry during its crisis.

“From Day 1, we had no desire to access the government money,” he said.

Ford parted ways with G.M. and Chrysler in December, when its two rivals effectively came under government supervision as part of their loan agreements.

Last month, the presidential task force forced Mr. Wagoner to resign at G.M. and began an effort to replace the company’s board.

Meanwhile, Mr. Ford, whose great-grandfather founded the auto company, and Mr. Mulally continue to pursue their long-range turnaround plans."

Give up Ford and learn the lesson Obama and people like him are teaching us all. Failure is the new path to success.

Federal Budget Deficit Was A Record 192.3 Billion For March

"The Treasury Department said Friday that the budget deficit increased by $192.3 billion in March, and is near $1 trillion just halfway through the budget year, as costs of the financial bailout and recession mount"

Yes that's for one month.Obama predicts a full year deficit of "only 1.75 trillion" (Don't worry kids) but we are already at 956.8 billion and i think we are not halfway yet.

Time to put more "skin in the game folks".