Betsy Speicher

Ominous Obama-nations

24 posts in this topic

Obama Youth?

From Little Green Footballs (link)

Obama's 'Civilian National Security Force'

Politics | Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 5:48:57 pm PDT

Among the many promises and pledges in Barack Obama’s multi-million dollar infomercial, one statement really stood out: he announced that he will “rebuild the military.”

But somehow, at the same time, he’s planning a “civilian national security force” that is as powerful and well-funded as the US military: Obama outlines plan for national service.

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set,” he said Wednesday. “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.”

The Department of Defense’s current base budget is close to $500 billion. So if he meant that promise, he plans on a total defense budget of about a trillion dollars.

What exactly is Obama planning to do with a “civilian force” with such an astronomical level of funding?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't Ask Questions!

Blogger Myrhaf reports (link):

The most benevolent and revered One has been embarrassed recently by Joe the Plumber and the broadcast journalist Barbara West. Both people had the poor judgment to ask Obama or Biden tough questions. Now Joe the Plumber and Barbara West's husband are being investigated. This is what life under Obama will be -- anyone who does not toe the line will find himself subject to intimidation and character smears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My, my my. "Our" very own, smily-faced Hugo Chavez is getting an early start, I see.

Time to lock and load, perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obama Youth?

From Little Green Footballs (link)

Obama's 'Civilian National Security Force'

What exactly is Obama planning to do with a “civilian force” with such an astronomical level of funding?

That's a damn good question. Interestingly, the concrete activities listed as the focus of this "civilian force" (high school and college students) are all "social welfare" type projects. But the excerpts of his speech talk about issues of national security and safety. Is he explicitly trying to link social welfare issues with issues of law enforcement or national defense? If so, that is suggestive of his ultimate goal.

As related to the election, the following said a lot me:

Obama promised to increase AmeriCorps slots from 75,000 to 250,000 and pledged to double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011.

Presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain of Arizona also supports an expansion of both programs and has stressed public service, including in the military, during campaign appearances.

Isn't this a core issue in the campaign and politics in general? Obama has risen precisely because the conservatives (and Republicans) are incapable of waging an ideological war FOR individual rights and Capitalism rooted in a rational morality. Their altruism and related statist political actions render them powerless, and simultaneously give fuel to the Left.

Altruism is the womb of tyranny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My, my my. "Our" very own, smily-faced Hugo Chavez is getting an early start, I see.

demonstrates a different facet of the concept "early." It's the "Obama Youth Junior Fraternity Regiment." By the time anyone reaches high school, belief in public service will be automatized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit of history...

Youth support was crucial to the establishment of lasting communist regimes and societies (in every country it was attempted). Because young people lacked prior political experience and were considered more malleable - more easily transformed into ardent supporters than adults, communist leaders made the transformation of the younger generation central to the attempt to create new societies. Members of these youth groups often received privileged access to educational, professional, or political opportunities and in exchange were expected to devote themselves to the cause and participate actively in special campaigns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was also true of Fascism. They promised young people not only jobs and educational opportunities, but also a divine mission–to be the leaders of a revolutionary movement that would purify the nation. Fascism celebrated duty, loyalty and physical vitality, and challenged the young to use their natural energy, idealism and competitiveness for the good of the national community. Because leaders encouraged members to put youth group duties above all other responsibilities, many youth joined in order to undermine the traditional authority of parents, school, or church. This practice reinforced core fascist beliefs that individuals owed primary allegiance to the state and that youth–not their elders–would shape the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obama begins suppresion of the media:

Obama Truth Squad videos

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIenDGSAdPA

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQ2DXN3aOSo

Wow, these people are blatant thugs... they don't even pretend to be non partisan by saying "oh, and we'll also be on the lookout for anything that smears McCain"

I looks like just about everything in America is being rigged to produce an Obama victory :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
demonstrates a different facet of the concept "early." It's the "Obama Youth Junior Fraternity Regiment." By the time anyone reaches high school, belief in public service will be automatized.

That's disgusting, but maybe it's for the best that obesity is such a problem in schools. I can't see a generation of fat, slow, brainless kids doing much damage. It's more like a satire on the Hitler youth. This is the generation produced by the anti-intellectuals, and the best they have to defend its future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's disgusting, but maybe it's for the best that obesity is such a problem in schools. I can't see a generation of fat, slow, brainless kids doing much damage. It's more like a satire on the Hitler youth. This is the generation produced by the anti-intellectuals, and the best they have to defend its future.

Yes, part of me wanted to chuckle, but it never came out. I was too disturbed by a couple things. On the surface level, it was the military attire. They even had a symbol as I recall. Second was the very well disciplined, in-synch behavior. That was a routine they had to have practiced for many hours. But the thing that got me the most was the hours they spent memorizing the "talking points" each had to give. And they also delivered them synchronized with each other, with their body movements, and with few mistakes.

These weren't professional or even atheletic looking kids (although some may have been). They looked like regular kids who were recruited into something and, to some extent, buy into it. At least for now. But I hope you're right that the lazy kids the Left has helped produce will end up being too dead a weight for their movement to become successful.

However, my fear is that we're looking at someone (Obama) who has a true desire to take over everything. I either read or heard a list of many of the core pieces of legislation that make up his platform, and the food industry is on the hit list. By that I mean that there will be "social reform" in the interest of nutrition, which will be connected to the environment, energy, and on and on. It truly is a web that he and the Left spin. In any event, he will slim them down and "train them up." Those who can't slim down can be trained up in other things. Everyone belongs and has a part to play, don't you see?

I think it is precisely people who are more the outcast type, or feel that way for some reason, to whom such groups appeal. They give purpose, focus, and an identity (via the collective). The Left, by subdividing and manipulating particular groups of people in society against one another, has laid a perfect groundwork for the introduction of a figure who is allegedly a uniter. He is an amalgam--a single embodiment--of the collective of little "outcast" collectives created by the Left. He is their champion and (literally to some) "godsend."

The measure of the Left's success at creating the intellectual state and psychological readiness required to accept an Obama is in the emotionality of that acceptance. I likened his campaign in a different thread to a magic trick. However, I think his supporters at the grass roots (and perhaps beyond) actually believe that he has magical powers. It's NOT magic to them, it's "energy," "force," "mojo," or whatever other mystical quality one can call it. He transcends reality and touches the divine, with the ability to bring such gifts back to the people.

Every day this man grows more dangerous in my judgment. People are willingly giving him a level power not many are given, and he looks like he intends to use it. Yet, I'm still not sure he has the election sewn up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG... I think I am becoming an "Objectivist Against Obama Against McCain Against Obama Especially Against McCain But Even More Frantically Against Obama For McCain Except I Can't Support McCain... wait... I Am So Horrified By Obama That I Guess I Have To Hope For McCain"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every day this man grows more dangerous in my judgment. People are willingly giving him a level power not many are given, and he looks like he intends to use it. Yet, I'm still not sure he has the election sewn up.

Although the newsmedia continue to screech shrilly and continuously for the foregone conclusion of an Obama victory, I'm not sure anyone knows how Tuesday's election will turn out, the pollsters and leftist reporters least of all (though in this case they may turn out right after all). I would have thought that, if nothing else, the extraordinary personality cult dimension of the Obama phenomenon would have sent Americans running in the opposite direction. This isn't about popularity: Ronald Reagan was immensely popular, but I don't recall a similar swooning halo of hosannas surrounding his every pronouncement or move as we have with Obama's. In fact, all that's missing from Obama is the three-dimensional, Medieval, gilded halo (complete with diamonds en-tremant) attached to the back of his head . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obama begins suppression of the media:

Obama Truth Squad videos

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIenDGSAdPA

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQ2DXN3aOSo

The first video scares the hell out of me. (The second is merely an annotated version of the first.) Here's what the reporter says in that video:

Prosecutors and sheriffs from across Missouri are joining something called "The Barack Obama Truth Squad." Two high-profile prosecutors are part of the team. We met them this afternoon in the central west end. They are Jennifer Joyce from the city, Bob McCullough the St. Louis County prosecuting attorney.

They will be reminding voters that Barack Obama is a Christian who wants to cut taxes for anyone making less than $250,000 a year. They also say they plan to respond immediately to any ads and statements that might violate Missouri ethics laws.

[emphasis mine]

So these government officials are not only going to attack political speech by "target[ing] anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad" (news anchor Russell Kinsaul, earlier in the video), but they're going to "remind" voters of things. What would "reminding" voters amount to? Sounds an awful lot like campaigning for Obama. Now, politicians (which prosecutors and sheriffs are) are certainly free to campaign for specific candidates - they do it all the time - but here we have the Obama campaign not just asking the government to go after something they don't like merely in their capacity as government officials, and not just to actively police political speech on Obama's behalf, but also to use government force to "remind" people what the "truth" is.

What can that be but "Start saying what we tell you to or else"?

On top of that, not only are they doing this, but the thing has a name: "The Barack Obama Truth Squad." They're not only not trying to hide it, they're labeling it, making it an official part of the campaign, and publicizing it.

On top of that, these reporters appear to be completely on board. They're reporting it almost in the same tone they'd use for some human interest story: "That's right, Bob. We met with Susie Derkins, whose pet turtle, Scooter, can sing 'Mary Had a Little Lamb'! Lucky for us all the Truth Squad took care of the little bcensored.gif!"

The whole thing makes me sick to my stomach. I'm afraid that the return of the Fairness Doctrine is going to be the least of our free speech worries under an Obama regime. Watch for persecution of dissenters, not just by law enforcement but also very likely by tacitly approved roving gangs of paramilitary Blueshirt thugs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The whole thing makes me sick to my stomach. I'm afraid that the return of the Fairness Doctrine is going to be the least of our free speech worries under an Obama regime. Watch for persecution of dissenters, not just by law enforcement but also very likely by tacitly approved roving gangs of paramilitary Blueshirt thugs.

According to The Barack Obama Truth Squad, you should be referring to them by their truthful name: the Civilian National Security Force.

OR ELSE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So these government officials are not only going to attack political speech by "target[ing] anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad" (news anchor Russell Kinsaul, earlier in the video), but they're going to "remind" voters of things. What would "reminding" voters amount to? Sounds an awful lot like campaigning for Obama. Now, politicians (which prosecutors and sheriffs are) are certainly free to campaign for specific candidates - they do it all the time - but here we have the Obama campaign not just asking the government to go after something they don't like merely in their capacity as government officials, and not just to actively police political speech on Obama's behalf, but also to use government force to "remind" people what the "truth" is.

What can that be but "Start saying what we tell you to or else"?

On top of that, not only are they doing this, but the thing has a name: "The Barack Obama Truth Squad." They're not only not trying to hide it, they're labeling it, making it an official part of the campaign, and publicizing it.

On top of that, these reporters appear to be completely on board. They're reporting it almost in the same tone they'd use for some human interest story: "That's right, Bob. We met with Susie Derkins, whose pet turtle, Scooter, can sing 'Mary Had a Little Lamb'! Lucky for us all the Truth Squad took care of the little bcensored.gif!"

The whole thing makes me sick to my stomach. I'm afraid that the return of the Fairness Doctrine is going to be the least of our free speech worries under an Obama regime. Watch for persecution of dissenters, not just by law enforcement but also very likely by tacitly approved roving gangs of paramilitary Blueshirt thugs.

As I was reading I immediately thought of the "Sturmabteilung", the brownshirt thugs who squelched dissent leading up to the Hitler election. It was quite satisfying to see you bring up Blueshirts in homage to that idea. Too many eerie similarities between the campaign practices of Obama and the Nazi party. Definitely speaks to the depth of the rivers of evil premises held by both... But whereas the "brownshirts" were evolved from an actual paramilitary group, our "blueshirts" have their roots in "para-educational" groups: in both cases the "stormtroopers" were bred in an environment of irrational hostility towards producers, and both were indoctrinated in the use of force as a fundamental political tool.

A disturbing aspect, that maybe some of you can help me sort out, is that the days of the brownshirts were hallmarked by actual physical violence: they were an outgrowth of an actual wartime group of thugs, and first worked for the party literally as bouncers, meant to protect the Nazi rallies and such from physical confrontations... Is it just me or does it seem like the Blueshirts are a much more impotent group, but getting the same type of results that the Brownshirts did? It just seems that before, opposing ideologies (even opposing bad ideologies) were coming to blows over their disagreements, whereas now, even the good ideas seem to be capitulating at the mere suggestion of needing to defend themselves. Ayn Rand described a similar phenomenon, I think, in describing the "appeasers" in her essay Age of Envy. She contrasted those who went to the barricades vs. those who gave in to a stern frown.

(As an aside, wasn't Susie Derkins the little girl in the Calvin and Hobbes comic strip?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OMG... I think I am becoming an "Objectivist Against Obama Against McCain Against Obama Especially Against McCain But Even More Frantically Against Obama For McCain Except I Can't Support McCain... wait... I Am So Horrified By Obama That I Guess I Have To Hope For McCain"

Ain't Democracy wonderful?

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A disturbing aspect, that maybe some of you can help me sort out, is that the days of the brownshirts were hallmarked by actual physical violence: they were an outgrowth of an actual wartime group of thugs, and first worked for the party literally as bouncers, meant to protect the Nazi rallies and such from physical confrontations... Is it just me or does it seem like the Blueshirts are a much more impotent group, but getting the same type of results that the Brownshirts did? It just seems that before, opposing ideologies (even opposing bad ideologies) were coming to blows over their disagreements, whereas now, even the good ideas seem to be capitulating at the mere suggestion of needing to defend themselves. Ayn Rand described a similar phenomenon, I think, in describing the "appeasers" in her essay Age of Envy. She contrasted those who went to the barricades vs. those who gave in to a stern frown.

Consider the violence already erupting at things like the G8 protests in Seattle, the barely contained violence demonstrated by groups like Code Pink and "Recreate '68" during the Democratic convention, and Obama's exhortation to "get in people's faces" and enlisting of children against their parents (as reported by LGF, though I don't have a direct link handy). They'll be impotent until Obama takes power, then I fear that they'll have at least the implicit backing of real law enforcement, which will then be under Obama's control.

Obama has shown that he's willing to demand that the government harass dissenters during the campaign - just wait until he has those organizations under his legal command. It could be that all that's holding them back from physical violence is that he's not been elected yet and people in this country still won't stand for attacking people for speaking their minds, at least until he's officially in charge, at which time they'll meekly say, "Well, he's the boss now, it must be for the best." My parents, for example, will never vote for Obama (frankly because they're racist, though if called on it they try to deny it). But they believe very much in obeying authority, so they'll submit (I recall complaining about Clinton, whom they disliked, and hearing "You shouldn't say things like that - he's the president!"). Also, that there was little outcry over the violent G8 protests is indicative of a general resignation to, if not acceptance of, violence if the violators claim a "good cause."*

(As an aside, wasn't Susie Derkins the little girl in the Calvin and Hobbes comic strip?)

Yep, though I didn't remember that until a couple of hours later. As I was writing the post I remembered hearing the name somewhere. Fitting, though, isn't it?

_____

* There's a local case of a college student using "concern for the environment" to try to beat a vandalism charge (he destroyed someone's air conditioner). It calls to mind the case in Britain where people got away with destroying a business's property using the same plea. I'll be watching to see if it works here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The whole thing makes me sick to my stomach. I'm afraid that the return of the Fairness Doctrine is going to be the least of our free speech worries under an Obama regime. Watch for persecution of dissenters, not just by law enforcement but also very likely by tacitly approved roving gangs of paramilitary Blueshirt thugs.

According to The Barack Obama Truth Squad, you should be referring to them by their truthful name: the Civilian National Security Force.

OR ELSE.

Oh, right. Sorry.

Geez, I just can't wait for the CNSF to be formed. If I join do I get a pretty blue shirt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, part of me wanted to chuckle, but it never came out. I was too disturbed by a couple things. On the surface level, it was the military attire. They even had a symbol as I recall. Second was the very well disciplined, in-synch behavior. That was a routine they had to have practiced for many hours. But the thing that got me the most was the hours they spent memorizing the "talking points" each had to give. And they also delivered them synchronized with each other, with their body movements, and with few mistakes.

I can't say I laughed either, and in fact I didn't make it through the whole video, but I thought they were deserving of ridicule. I also wondered, when they named their chosen professions, how they had decided on them. Perhaps they came up with a list of careers that sounded suitably impressive and chose them at random? I can't see any person as empty-headed and second-handed as these "aspiring" to anything but to be someone's lapdog.

These weren't professional or even atheletic looking kids (although some may have been). They looked like regular kids who were recruited into something and, to some extent, buy into it. At least for now. But I hope you're right that the lazy kids the Left has helped produce will end up being too dead a weight for their movement to become successful.

What I fear is that they won't need enforcers to be successful, given the state of our culture.

However, my fear is that we're looking at someone (Obama) who has a true desire to take over everything. I either read or heard a list of many of the core pieces of legislation that make up his platform, and the food industry is on the hit list. By that I mean that there will be "social reform" in the interest of nutrition, which will be connected to the environment, energy, and on and on. It truly is a web that he and the Left spin. In any event, he will slim them down and "train them up." Those who can't slim down can be trained up in other things. Everyone belongs and has a part to play, don't you see?

I know it's Halloween, but jeez Scott don't go and give me nightmares! :blink:

But seriously, I have no idea what Obama has planned but groups like these are the clay that will allow him to pursue those plans. So I can only hope that he isn't as ambitious as he seems.

Every day this man grows more dangerous in my judgment. People are willingly giving him a level power not many are given, and he looks like he intends to use it. Yet, I'm still not sure he has the election sewn up.

Well, the numbers don't lie, but they only tell part of the story. There are a lot of people who choose not to share their choice in the polls. Given the hostile environment Obama supporters have created, promising a racist label for everyone who doesn't share their views, I wouldn't be surprised if there is greater opposition than we can see at present.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't say I laughed either, and in fact I didn't make it through the whole video, but I thought they were deserving of ridicule.

Yes, that is an appropriate response, particularly directed at the Obama. Elitist tyrants like him deserve it, particularly because they hate it.

I also wondered, when they named their chosen professions, how they had decided on them. Perhaps they came up with a list of careers that sounded suitably impressive and chose them at random? I can't see any person as empty-headed and second-handed as these "aspiring" to anything but to be someone's lapdog.

I really didn't see them as empty-headed, if by that we mean lacking in basic intellectual skill. What is filling their heads is disgusting, but they demonstrated the capacity to memorize and execute a well-choreographed routine, which says something. It's the combination of the mysticism and militarism that scares me. People of average intelligence can go a long way, even holding irrational ideas, provided their motivation is strong enough. But I totally agree that they are terrible second-handers, just like their leader.

I know it's Halloween, but jeez Scott don't go and give me nightmares! ^_^

^_^^_^ Sorry about that, but it is scary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obama begins suppression of the media:

Obama Truth Squad videos...

Prosecutors and sheriffs from across Missouri are joining something called "The Barack Obama Truth Squad." Two high-profile prosecutors are part of the team. We met them this afternoon in the central west end. They are Jennifer Joyce from the city, Bob McCullough the St. Louis County prosecuting attorney.

They will be reminding voters that Barack Obama is a Christian who wants to cut taxes for anyone making less than $250,000 a year. They also say they plan to respond immediately to any ads and statements that might violate Missouri ethics laws.

[emphasis mine]

So these government officials are not only going to attack political speech by "target[ing] anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad" (news anchor Russell Kinsaul, earlier in the video), but they're going to "remind" voters of things. What would "reminding" voters amount to? Sounds an awful lot like campaigning for Obama. Now, politicians (which prosecutors and sheriffs are) are certainly free to campaign for specific candidates - they do it all the time - but here we have the Obama campaign not just asking the government to go after something they don't like merely in their capacity as government officials, and not just to actively police political speech on Obama's behalf, but also to use government force to "remind" people what the "truth" is.

What can that be but "Start saying what we tell you to or else"?

On top of that, not only are they doing this, but the thing has a name: "The Barack Obama Truth Squad." They're not only not trying to hide it, they're labeling it, making it an official part of the campaign, and publicizing it.

On top of that, these reporters appear to be completely on board. They're reporting it almost in the same tone they'd use for some human interest story: "That's right, Bob. We met with Susie Derkins, whose pet turtle, Scooter, can sing 'Mary Had a Little Lamb'! Lucky for us all the Truth Squad took care of the little bcensored.gif!"

The whole thing makes me sick to my stomach. I'm afraid that the return of the Fairness Doctrine is going to be the least of our free speech worries under an Obama regime. Watch for persecution of dissenters, not just by law enforcement but also very likely by tacitly approved roving gangs of paramilitary Blueshirt thugs.

This did not just start recently. The Obama campaign has been making legal threats and engaging in other forms of harassment all along towards his critics. That he does this in the name of "truth" is consistent with the rest of the New Left anti-conceptual tactics (handouts are "tax cuts", government spending is "investment", etc.). With this approach we will be lucky if all they do is impose the "Fairness Doctrine" limiting criticism of the left to "equal time" on popular broadcast forums. The "Fairness Doctrine" has been only one tactic to control what people say and hear; their end goal is much deeper. If Obama succeeds in conning people into thinking he only wants "truth" and "fairness" to get them to go along with government persecution of his enemies, they may not even bother with the "Fairness Doctrine" as an intermediate step.

One indirect form of such persecution, already in effect in some places, is the use of bureaucracies operating under non-objective law and vague powers, such as taxation authorities. The New Left is not just collectivist, it has a completely different view of the role of government as providing them with the use of raw power against their enemies, which goes well beyond the imposition of laws implementing their policies. This is the institution of government power as such as a tool to gain and maintain more power over their enemies, and establish a regime of "political crimes" and "thought crimes" without their admitting it, except in some areas like so-called "hate speech" where that is now almost explicit.

One other recent example is the chilling actions by Ohio Democrat state officials who scoured confidential government databases to find "dirt" on Joe the Plumber, starting right after he first spoke up on a national forum. They were vindictively gong after anything they could find on him to create an excuse to destroy him either through some government action or to smear him publicly or both.

The New Left progressives are already pursuing this abuse of government power as a tool for their own personal political ends in states where they control state government, like Maine, and you can expect this to become worse when they are in power nationally. They will not only use Federal agencies to go after their enemies, they will collaborate across state and national authorities as the Federal government subsidizes funding for state actions (like adding more personnel in the name of "law enforcement") and different agencies tip each other off as to who to go after, such as collaboration between the IRS and state taxation powers. The abuse of taxation authorities for this new purpose of systematic persecution is ideally suited to them because taxation authorities already have enormous powers that include demanding that the victim prove his innocence against arbitrary accusations and impositions.

Such a view of the use of government power for persecution ultimately goes beyond intimidation and persecution of selected individuals to the denial of voting rights as such, as in fascist countries like Chavez's modern Venezuela. That principle, too, is already illustrated by the pursuit of rampant voting fraud by groups like ACORN collaborating with Obama and his campaign.

The end goal is to use government power on their own behalf to ensure that they do not lose their control of the government and the power it gives them. That is dictatorship and we are seeing its evolution right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OMG... I think I am becoming an "Objectivist Against Obama Against McCain Against Obama Especially Against McCain But Even More Frantically Against Obama For McCain Except I Can't Support McCain... wait... I Am So Horrified By Obama That I Guess I Have To Hope For McCain"

One more cycle of McCain is bad but "OMG Obama is far worse than I realized" and you will have it down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OMG... I think I am becoming an "Objectivist Against Obama Against McCain Against Obama Especially Against McCain But Even More Frantically Against Obama For McCain Except I Can't Support McCain... wait... I Am So Horrified By Obama That I Guess I Have To Hope For McCain"

One more cycle of McCain is bad but "OMG Obama is far worse than I realized" and you will have it down.

As we will soon find out. I have often wondered what it would have been like to live under The New Deal (which was a major break from prior modes of government). I was just a toddler and a young child then, so I have no distinct memory of it. I fear we will soon find out what it is like to live under a government run on -explicit- anti-capitalist pro-fascist principles. Up to now, government fiddling has been covered up (to some extent) by faux pro-market and liberal pro-freedom rhetoric. Now we are likely to get it untinctured and undiluted. Obama's "blue shirts" will run rampant for a while until The Man has to reign them in for political reasons. (Recall that Hitler had to kill Ernst Roehm off and bring the Brown Shirts to heel because the Brown Shirts were too radical).

I think we are about to find out what American Fascism carried out with a blatantly self righteous style is going to be like. Which reminds me of a joke:

In Union square during the 30s there is a pro-commie rally going on:

Comrade A: Comes the Revolution we will ALL have whipped cream with our strawberries!

Comrade B: But, Comrade, I don't like whipped cream and I don't like strawberries!

Comrade A: Comes the Revolution, you WILL like whipped cream and you WILL like strawberries!

And just wait until we have to make Reparations for Slavery. And you thought Affirmative Actions was bad? Oy vey! Like the early scene in -Blazing Saddles-. Schwartzers! Loisem geh! Hast du in dein ganzen leyb gesehen? I shudder delicately.

Ain't Democracy wonderful?

I weep for the Republic.

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites