Helen Thomas Shows It’s Official: Barack Obama, Fascist

Take a gander at the definition of fascism, and ask yourself how many parts of it Barack Obama has already implemented:

Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners. Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.) Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically. In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace. Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions.

Barack Obama has seized control of the auto industry, in spite of the fact that Americans overwhelmingly thought it was a bad idea (with 59% disapproving).  He has taken Bush measures to control the banks in order to control the scope of the financial crisis to an entirely new levels.  And Obama additionally recently seized “unprecedented powers” over Wall Street:

The plan clearly grants the central bank unprecedented new powers to conduct comprehensive examinations of almost any U.S. financial company, as well as any of that company’s foreign affiliates.  It would also give the central bank oversight of any commercial company that owns a banking charter known as an industrial loan company, according to The Journal.

If all that wasn’t bad enough, Obama has now appointed some twenty czars – who are answerable only to him – in a move that is unprecedented in American history.  Reuters said, “Name a top issue and President Barack Obama has probably got a “czar” responsible for tackling it“).  Even longest-serving Senate Democrat Robert Byrd says that “President Obama’s ‘czar strategy’ is an unprecedented power grab centralizing authority in the White House, outside congressional oversight and in violation of the Constitution.”

So as a matter of definition and fact, it is entirely appropriate to call Barack Obama “a fascist.”  And fascist leaders have never have paid such trivial matters as a “Constitution” much mind.  And this leading of America into fascism by the left shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention.

The only thing that anyone could argue was lacking in labeling Barack Obama as “a fascist” has been Obama’s contrived persona as presented in the media.

But that’s been blown away as well.

It’s somewhat surprising who would blow that mask away, but the fact that 40-year liberal White House Press Correspondent Helen Thomas would be the one to do it shows how obviously and how blatantly the Obama administration has sought to manipulate the media in full fascist fashion.

First of all, Helen Thomas has called herself a liberal, as an interview with CBC demonstrates:

Helen Thomas: I’m a liberal, I was born a liberal, I’ll be one ’til I die, what else should a reporter be when you see so much and when we have such great privilege and access to the truth?

CBC Interviewer: Well, you know, it’s interesting because I’m sure that if somebody from the right was sitting here they would say… if you ask the question what should a reporter be they will say, “Oh, I don’t know, How about objective?”

Barack Obama had a much publicized “town hall” which turns out to have been very “tightly controlled,” with a tightly controlled audience and a tightly controlled list of White-House-approved questions.  Barack Obama wants to keep the real tought questions – such as who will pay for the massive government health care, how much will it cost, and will any bureaucrat ever be allowed to get between a patient and his/her physician and make decisions based on statistics rather than medical needs, just to name a few – out of the spotlight.  And so he has an event that is falsely presented as an open forum, but in actuality being controlled by the White House for propaganda purposes.

And Helen Thomas, to her credit, came unglued as White House Press Secretary Gibbs cheerfully presented the false face of propaganda as though nothing was amiss:

Gibbs: “… But, again, let’s–How about we do this?  I promise we will interrupt the AP’s tradition of asking the first question.  I will let you [Chip Reid] ask me a question tomorrow as to whether you thought the questions at the town hall meeting that the President conducted in Annandale—“

Chip Reid: “I’m perfectly happy to—”

Helen Thomas: “That’s not his point.  The point is the control–”

Reid: “Exactly.”

Thomas: “We have never had that in the White House.  And we have had some, but not– This White House.”

Gibbs: “Yes, I was going to say, I’ll let you amend her question.”

Thomas: “I’m amazed.  I’m amazed at you people who call for openness and transparency and—”

Gibbs: “Helen, you haven’t even heard the questions.”

Reid: “It doesn’t matter.  It’s the process.”

Thomas: “You have left open—”

Reid: “Even if there’s a tough question, it’s a question coming from somebody who was invited or was screened, or the question was screened.”

Thomas: “It’s shocking.  It’s really shocking.”

Gibbs: “Chip, let’s have this discussion at the conclusion of the town hall meeting.  How about that?”

Reid: “Okay.”

Gibbs: “I think—“

Thomas: “No, no, no, we’re having it now–”

Gibbs: “Well, I’d be happy to have it now.”

Thomas: “It’s a pattern.”

Gibbs: “Which question did you object to at the town hall meeting, Helen?”

Thomas: “It’s a pattern.  It isn’t the question—”

Gibbs: “What’s a pattern?”

Thomas: “It’s a pattern of controlling the press.”

Gibbs: “How so?  Is there any evidence currently going on that I’m controlling the press–poorly, I might add.”

Thomas: “Your formal engagements are pre-packaged.”

Gibbs: “How so?”

Reid: “Well, and controlling the public—”

Thomas: “How so?  By calling reporters the night before to tell them they’re going to be called on.  That is shocking.”

Gibbs: “We had this discussion ad nauseam and—”

Thomas: “Of course you would, because you don’t have any answers.”

This event follows a situation in which Barack Obama called upon a Huffington Post “reporter” to ask an obviously pre-screened question about Iran that generated a lot of media controversy.  Reporters were legitimately outraged over an unprecedented situation in which an American president gets to pre-screen questions at a supposed official White House press conference.

This follows ABC “teaming up” with President Obama in what amounted to a free hour-long “infomercial” to allow Obama to sell his health care agenda.  If that isn’t disturbing enough, ABC refused to allow paid ads that were critical of the presidents health care agenda during that infomercial.  This wasn’t a question of apparent bias suggesting an unhealthy White House-media relationship; it was in-your-face obvious bias proving an unhealthy White House-media relationship.

Helen Thomas has been a White House correspondent for more than forty years.  And she has been a doctrinaire liberal who clearly would tend to see things from the perspective of the administration in power.  It should be beyond disturbing to you that such a journalist would say, “We have never had that in the White House.”  That she would say, This is really shocking.”  And it should frighten you that she is “amazed at you people who call for openness and transparency” even as they reveal themselves to be the most manipulating and controlling administration in history.  It’s not just about self-righteous hypocrisy; it goes to Nixonian levels of deceit and lust for power.

An attempt by a president to control the press is bad enough; it’s terrifying when that same president has already grabbed unprecedented control over so many other things.

And it gets downright creepy when you consider that this president who is now trying to control the press has actually recieved the most favorable press coverage of any president (nearly TWICE as much favorable coverage as Bush recieved during the same period even while Bush was virtually as “popular” as Obama was).  It makes one wonder: what psychological defect, what pathological need to control, would need to exercise so much control?

This is no small matter.  We now have a president who seized more power than any president in American history – FDR included.  And we now have a Congress that is dominated by the same party as the president, and now posessing a filibuster-proof majority.  For the media to be in bed (to allude to a joke Obama made about NBC anchor Brian Williams) with the president is beyond dangerous – especially with our economy in such a fragile state.

Democracy is doomed in a nation that allows propaganda to dominate – as America is clearly doing.  Because in a democracy, people are expected to vote their will, and they cannot vote their own will when their opinion is being shaped and controlled by propaganda.

Update, July 3: As further proof that what I am arguing is true, take something that happened just yesterday, following the publication of this article.

The leftist Washington Post cancelled a “salon” event in the wake of an uproar over the sheer raving inappropriateness of such an event.  The Newspaper planned to sell access to reporters and Obama administration officials to lobbyist for sums of up to $250,000.   A quote from the Politico article breaking the story:

The astonishing offer was detailed in a flier circulated Wednesday to a health care lobbyist, who provided it to a reporter because the lobbyist said he felt it was a conflict for the paper to charge for access to, as the flier says, its “health care reporting and editorial staff.”

The newspaper has an incredibly flimsy excuse for this selling of its credibility, but the entire fiasco merely amounts to yet another of the complete abandonment of journalistic ethics and integrity of the mainstream media.

This is a blurring of the White House and the press that is intended to sell policy to the public.  It is dangerous.  It is facsist.

About these ads

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

12 Responses to “Helen Thomas Shows It’s Official: Barack Obama, Fascist”

  1. ARESAY Says:

    The mainstream media wouldn’t do it. So we are trying to get your important messages to the American people. 62 This post is a suggested read at, http://aresay.blogspot.com/

  2. Dhruv Aliman Says:

    Good job

    Here’s something you might like of mine

    http://www.seekerland.com/2009/07/is-obama-sociopath.html

  3. Paul Hogan Says:

    Mr. Eden,

    That was a great article. I am very concerned that our great Republic is quickly slipping into fascism. I no longer differentiate between the Democrats and the Republicans and I no longer trust any of the mainstream media news. What can I as a citizen of this Republic do to help put our government back into the hands of the people? I cannot seem to find any organization sharing these concerns. My feeling is that Wall Street is really in charge and that our government and media are merely taking their orders from the financiers. This is a very powerful entity and we citizens need to organize to prevent the further decline of democracy and rule of law and ultimately take back our entire government. What group can I join with these concerns? What can I do? Please respond.

  4. Michael Eden Says:

    I have written a number of articles that bring up the fact that we are descending into fascism. And the more I read about the progressive movement of the past and the New Deal under FDR, the more I see that we are truly going down the same dark path that left our nation in such failure before.

    Before I go on, Paul, I understand your disgust with both parties. You are hardly alone. You are being forced to choose between “not good” and “terrible,” and you understandably don’t like it.

    I agree with you that the Republicans are far from perfect. And they dropped the ball when they had a chance to carry it. That said, it was under Democrat control that our economy went into the toilet. Unemployment was 4.4% when Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid took over the House and Senate. The Dow was nearly 12,000. Republicans had tried and failed TWICE to regulate the housing finance industry that collapsed – and Democrats blocked both attempts at regulatory reform, and denied there was even a problem – only to demonize Republicans for the very problem that they had created and then denied existed.

    There are several things wrong with “third parties.” The first is that even if they WON, why do you think they would be more pure than their rivals? Power tends to corrupt. Deals are made. That’s the way it is. And anyone who thinks a third party wouldn’t start playing games is just being naive. The second thing is that they DON’T win; they at best split the vote so that the rival party wins. There is no question, for instance, that Ralph Nader – who ran to the far left – cost Al Gore Florida and the election. And no “third party” has won in at least 150 years. [And in the U.S. Senate, there are only TWO "independents," both of whom derived their base via the Democrat Party rather than emerging from a true "independent" party].

    There’s just no realistic model, and no history, supporting a successful “third” party.

    I would argue that there is a CRYSTAL CLEAR difference between the Republicans and Democrats, and that the Republican Party – no matter how often it has failed to live up to conservative principles – is FAR, FAR, FAR better even at its worst than Democrats even at their “best.” And, unfortunately, to throw up your hands and walk away from Republicans gives the liberals – who are the ones imposing the fascism that you and I both fear – the opportunity to keep running your government.

    On MY view, the answer is clear: support the Republicans, but at the same time work to make the Republican Party a better, more Constitution-based, more conservative, and more fiscally-sound party.

    Here’s how I intend to work toward that end. 1) I plan to donate money, NOT necessarily to my local Republican pols, but rather to conservative Republicans I admire, regardless of where they are. I want to send a message: we want CONSERVATIVES, not just status quo Republican politics. 2) I plant to either work FOR a good Republican in my area (and unfortunately my own Representative – Jerry Lewis – is really himself not very “good”), OR work against a BAD Republican (e.g. Mary Bono, who enraged me by being one of the few Republicans who voted for the despicable cap-and-trade bill) in the primary. Another way is to get involved in a Republican organization (the Republican Women allows men) to have more access to Republicans so you can let them know what you expect – and what you DEMAND. The Republican Party is currently searching for its core or its soul; help them find it.

    In other words, reforming the Republican Party has a real chance of success, versus a third party which has virtually NO chance of success.

    Wall Street being in charge – and I agree that Goldman Sachs seems to be running the country these days – is itself part of fascism. Fascism presented – and presents – itself as a “third way” or “middle way,” being neither communist nor capitalist. And what happens is a cozy relationship whereby government forms relationships with big financial and corporate players to run the country THROUGH that “private” (now quasi-private at best here) relationship. And who is playing this game like no one we’ve ever seen? Barack Obama, Democrat.

    If you like this article on “fascism,” use the search function at the top right of the blog, or just use the list of subjects, to find more. ALSO, read Jonah Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascsim,” as well as Gene Edward Veith’s “Modern Fascism,” to learn more. Both books will blow your mind.

  5. Paul Hogan Says:

    As much as I hate to admit that third parties don’t win, I’d rather be a principled failure than a compromised success. I’ve always thought of myself as slightly right of center. In 1992 I voted for Ross Perot and that was the only time I felt good about casting a vote. In retrospect I don’t think George Bush Sr. was that bad, at the time he seemed terrible. I am proud to say that I never voted for Bill Clinton. George Bush Jr. was without question the worst President I’ve seen in my lifetime. I suspect that 9/11 was engineered to rally public support for invading foreign countries. The passage of the Patriot Act was a major step towards fascism and the unwarranted invasion of Iraq was reprehensible. Fiscal responsibility was hardly the mantra in the Bush administration. The United States is now waging war in Iraq, Afghanistan and we’re starting trouble in Pakistan. We’re also torturing prisoners and the Department of Homeland Security is going to become our Gestapo.

    I’m not sure when these “evil empire” policies started but they won’t be ending with Obama, I think that’s pretty clear. When Obama campaigned on “Change We Can Believe In”, I was hopeful. It’s clear now that he is only picking up where Bush left off and is probably answering to the same elitist Wall Street thugs that George W. Bush did.

    If there was ever a time to bring in a new party, the time is now. A party that would uphold the Constitution and establish rule of law. As long as the Patriot Act is in place the President has virtual dictatorial power if the situation demands it. All the President needs to do is create the situation and he’s the dictator. If you look back to 1934 Germany, one could compare 9/11 with the Reichtag fire and the passage of the Patriot Act as Hitler assuming dictatorial power.

    Washington is a stew of financiers, lobbyists, media manipulation and politicians corrupted beyond repair. To be fair there are a handful of Republican members of congress that I believe are genuinely concerned with the welfare of the people; but not nearly enough. I will not be joining either the Democrats or the Republicans.

  6. Michael Eden Says:

    I suppose my overall sense to your comment is that, while it may have made sense to prefer “principled failure to compromised success,” this is a time when our very survival is at stake. Barack Obama has – just so far in his brief presidency, put us into more debt than every single president in history – from George Washington to George W. Bush – combined. We are facing a tsunami of debt that will crush us. By 2019, our debt will be 144% of GDP – if measured by the SAME standard we used to measure debt-to-GDP used in WWII (when it was 115% in 1945). And during WWII we had FAR more industrial capacity to produce our way out of debts. During WWII we had FAR more in savings. During WWII it was AMERICANS who bought our government’s debt, rather than CHINA.

    I don’t think you realize how truly screwed we are under the massive liberal spending. And how close to the edge of total disaster, followed by banana republic status, we truly are.

    In other words, I would say your argument amounts to, “I’d rather have my economy and my nation plunge into a catastrophic failure than be a compromised success.” Because THAT’S your real alternative. And if your mindset is, “I’d rather watch my children slowly starve to death than live under the compromised success of an imperfect government,” I can’t do anything to talk you down from that. I won’t even try.

    You made the comment that the Patriot Act was a major step toward fascism. I guess on my view, I haven’t seen any loss of my rights as a result of it. I’ll let you have your view, but it seems to be that there are certain things an open society has to do in order to protect itself from having vicious people fly planes into buildings or detonate a nuclear device. And it has seemed to me that the Patriot Act was largely a more than acceptable compromise between having a free society and keeping it safe. Maybe part of my mindset has been “tainted” with the fact that I was a soldier for several years, but that’s my view.

    I won’t try to defend the invasion of Iraq here. But I actually wrote a 3 part series on the subject. Go here for the first. In a nutshell, the United States was prevented from any meaningful sanction that truly forced Iraq to demonstrate it had no WMD, and we were left with the Sophie’s choice of either letting Saddam have WMD, or attacking him.

    Interestingly, we’re about to have to face that very same choice again. Iran seems clearly determined to possess nuclear weapons. Do we let them do so? Countries like Russia and China are using their UN veto to block any meaningful sanction – EXACTLY AS WAS DONE IN THE CASE OF IRAQ – and the only way the US will be able to stop Iran from getting nukes is to be willing to go to war with them. Now, you probably think we should essentially allow Iran to have their nukes; I think it will result in a truly terrifying world, with Iran FREE to launch terrorism or even block the Strait of Hormuz and cripple economies by blocking oil deliveries, with utter impunity. And what do you think will happen if Israel – the hated Jewish state – attacks Iran because we wouldn’t? I see a truly terrifying state of affairs coming because we didn’t do what was necessary to stop Iran.

    It’s interesting to see what leading Democrats said prior to and shortly after we attacked Iraq:
    http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp
    http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/bushlied.htm
    http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html

    It’s interesting to realize that fully 60% of DEMOCRAT Senators voted for the Iraq war.

    Now, having provided the last several paragraphs re: the Patriot Act and the Iraq War, I sense the need to point out that “fascism” is NOT about going to war or pursuing security measures to protect a society that has just been viciously attacked from within. Rather, fascism is really more of the pursuit of “the moral equivalent of war.” It is the pursuit of a “War on X” strategy to use a crisis to impose sweeping measures to deal with the crisis. It is the mobilization of government to bring about a “transvaluation of values” to bring in a sweeping social change in our very way of life. It is the pursuit of massively growing government in a massive mobilization of people and resources to advance a centrally directed end. It is the reliance upon government/media propaganda to harness the people toward the above ends.

    If Barack Obama feels that we have to go to war with North Korea or Iran in order to prevent an imminent attack by those countries that could lead to WWIII, I don’t call that fascism. What I DO call fascism is nationalizing the auto and banking industries, creating a $3.27 trillion slush fund to reward leftist interests in the name of “stimulus,” imposing a cap-and-trade system that will literally have us paying huge taxes just to use energy, imposing a multi-trillion power-grab over our health care in order to be able to compel liberal social policies, and so on.

    I guess you have to ask yourself: Do I despise what the Republicans stood for, or what the Democrats are standing for now? And then vote accordingly.

    But I will say this: if our economy truly goes to hell under the Democrats, as I believe it will, don’t absolve yourself from blame because “I didn’t vote for the Democrats.” Sometimes you have to make hard choices, and merely refusing to make them doesn’t absolve you from anything. If we get more Democrats, and therefore more disaster, you will share in the blame for having refused to support the party that could have tossed them out of power.

  7. Paul Hogan Says:

    Russia and China have already agreed to come to Iran’s aid if attacked by the United States, so I don’t think attacking Iran is an option. The economy was tanking and that massive bailout was negotiated while George W. Bush was still president. Like I said previously, Obama is merely picking up where Bush left off although I will admit he’s spending at an alarming rate. I don’t think this debtor economy has any hope of being sustained until 2019, I’m expecting another huge stock market crash this October.

    I actually don’t despise what the true Republican ideal is, fiscal responsibility, small government, etc. Our previous administration was anything but that.

    Our economy will be going to hell, we are now living on borrowed time and that time will gone in six months. The economic meltdown is inevitable and no political party can stop it. If McCain had won things would be no different, by the way, I voted for McCain. Our economic situation is similar to a large ship that has been maneuvered incorrectly and drifting towards the rocks. It’s impossible to rudder away from the rocks and there is no brake, we’re going to hit the rocks.

    When that happens our enemies will surely try and kick us while we’re down; so we’ll have to regroup here at home. Realistically, the only way we’re ever going to get back on our feet is to begin manufacturing. We may have no choice, we won’t have any credit, we have the resources, we have the people and they can use the work.

    So I say this: If our economy is going to crash and we’re going to have to rebuild anyway, why not toss our politicians out with the rest of the junk we don’t need. Thomas Jefferson said that the people should replace their government every generation or something to that effect. I would like to take part in replacing our current government; keep the Constitution – replace about 95% of the elected officials and 100% of the lobbyists.

    In the 2004 election I actually voted for Bush; not because I thought Bush was good, but because I thought Kerry was that bad. In the 2008 election I voted for McCain. The truth is that even if McCain was president our economy is going to crash. So if neither the Democrats nor the Republicans can take the helm maybe we should find some new drivers.

  8. Michael Eden Says:

    I can’t agree that things would have been the same under McCain. Just one example, McCain vigorously rejects earmarks. Obama said earmarks were no big deal, and then signed an omnibus bill with 9,000 of them. McCain would have vetoed that bill.

    I’m not going to claim you’re wrong about a Russian and Chinese defense pact with Iran. But I have never heard of one, and could not find any evidence that one existed. You’ll have to present a source. Until you do, I won’t accept that Russia or China have any binding arrangement to protect Iran if it is attacked.

    What Iran DOES have from Russia and China is diplomatic/international protection via the U.N.; which is the SAME thing Iraq had. Russia and China will block/veto ANY meaningful international resolution that does ANYTHING that would truly prevent Iran from either an internationally-approved attack OR tough sanctions.

    You are speaking of a national collapse. For the record, I completely agree with you; one is coming. I see it coming in several years, rather than several months. But it’s coming.

    After that collapse, I won’t argue that we may have an opportunity to throw out the whole sorry lot of politicians and fix things. But I don’t believe we have any meaningful way of doing anything like that until then. Sadly, what I see happening after the collapse isn’t so optimistic: I see our economy collapsing, and desperate people screaming for the government to help them – and thus there will be even MORE call for the socialist systems that brought us down in the first place. So you know, that even has a name: look up “Cloward-Piven strategy.”

    What we truly need is wise, prudent, and virtuous leaders. There aren’t enough in the Republican Party; there are NONE at ALL in the Democrat Party. I personally don’t see how bringing in some “third party” will increase the likelihood of ushering in more of such leaders. I see splitting the conservative vote ushering in more Democrat rule, is all. And that is the worst of ALL options.

    On my view, two statements from two founding fathers sum up our real problem:

    “We have no government armed with the power capable of contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and true religion. Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” — John Adams

    “Of all the habits and dispositions which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. “In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars.” — George Washington, Farewell Address

    What are the foundations of America? After 45 years of public service, George Washington gives his farewell address. He says, ‘We need to remember what brought us here. We need to remember what made us different from all the other nations across Europe and the rest of the world. We have to remember what our foundations are.’ It was the road map, showing us how we’d become what we were, and how to preserve it. It used to be considered the most important address ever given by any US president. President Lincoln set aside an entire day for the entire Union Army and had them read and understand it. Woodrow Wilson did the same during WWI. But we haven’t studied it in schools for over 45 years.

    Stop and think about it. George Washington said, ‘Anyone who would try to remove religion and morality from public life, I won’t allow them to call themselves a patriot. Because they are trying to destroy the country.’ And yet that is PRECISELY what the left has done, and is continuing to do.

    Try to get your hands on a copy of Mark Levin’s “Liberty and Tyranny.” He sets up the issues so well.

  9. Paul Hogan Says:

    What I’m really trying to say is that the current course our great nation is taking isn’t taking us anywhere good; and I don’t think there’s a politician that can change that. As far as waging war is concerned I think we’re spreading ourselves way too thin. Historically Afghanistan has been a black hole for invading armies and I think that the whole God forsaken place isn’t worth the life of one U.S. soldier. Why not just bomb them when we think they’re a threat and that should be more than sufficient. At this moment we’ve got troops actively deployed in Iraq, Afghanistan and we’re starting to meddle around in Pakistan. If we make a preemptive strike on Iran deductive reasoning tells me that China will not just watch, WWIII will be official. China gets their oil from Iran. Why can’t we just do our own off shore drilling and buy what we have to. In the mean time we can do more research and development towards renewable energy. Let the rest of the world take care of themselves. Right now the United States is in it’s Empire phase. All empires fall, and they usually topple as a result of internal corruption and over extension. We have both factors at play right now. I hate to say this but I’m thinking we may be better off just starting over on our own terms. Our economy will never get off the ground if we don’t start manufacturing again. The United States cannot sustain a real economy acting as the world’s main office doing the paperwork. We’ve got to produce. I have no interest in the U.S. being the police of the world either, especially at the whims of politicians and bankers. If anyone attacks our shores or borders we fight; but that’s it. Our citizens and soldiers deserve worthy leaders. You may want to do a search on Smeadley Butler, he was a Major General in the USMC that wrote “War is a Racket”

  10. Michael Eden Says:

    Paul,
    I have to start out by pointing out that you were in fact wrong, and DIDN’T have support for your statement that Russia and China have a defense pact with Iran. You’re left with your own “deductive reasoning.” My OWN deductive reasoning tells me that China wouldn’t mess with the most powerful army the world has ever seen. They wouldn’t like a U.S. attack on Iran, but they’d have to sit and watch unless they wanted to start a nuclear war. We’d be able to point out that we didn’t steal Iraq’s oil and kept it flowing, and would do the same in Iran, to mollify their biggest fear. In point of fact, China has NEVER publicly threatened the US with military retaliation over any attack on Iran.

    And by the way, my deductive reasoning also tells me that the reason for our attack on Iran would be to PREVENT a nuclear war. Aside from the fact that Iran has repeatedly vowed to exterminate/annihilate/wipe off the map Israel (which has nukes), there’s also the fact that Sunni nations have already stated their intention to “counterbalance” an Iranian Shi’ite nuke by developing their OWN nuclear programs. I’ll leave it to you to defend the sanity of a nuclear arms race beginning in the craziest region in the history of the world.

    Victor Davis Hansen wrote a terrific piece about the whole “policeman” thing that I fully preserved here.

    My own view of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran is this: we need to stop this “safe and sane” war followed by a “rebuilding of our enemies” and instead have the following policy: “If we are threatened by any country, we will bomb it into the stone age. If any country we have bombed into the stone age proceeds to threaten us again, we will bomb the rubble into smaller pieces of rubble.” We should return to a view of “war” that we had during WWII. We firebombed Tokyo. We bombed Dresden into rubble. We nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If these Muslim countries realized that THAT would be coming if they or their citizens posed a threat to the U.S., I’m guessing that they would reign in their own damned terrorists. Harsh, but real.

    I don’t believe we’ll DO any of that – anymore than i think Obama will do anything to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons – but I think that that would be the only way to end (and certainly “win”) the war against terrorism. If any country that hosted or supported terrorism realized that they would be held MASSIVELY responsible for whatever their terrorists did, things would change.

    The problem with “if we’re attacked” is the question, “WHO attacked us?” Afghanistan didn’t attack us. We even have to admit, “The Taliban didn’t attack us.” Rather, al Qaeda, a terrorist organization from all over the Muslim world based all over the Muslim world and Africa, attacked us. They were just using Afghanistan as a base of operations, and they have such bases all over the place. And when a terrorist organization like al Qaeda attacks us, who do we go to war with? It’s an almost impossible problem to solve – especially when we’ve got U.N.s, Russias, Frances, and Chinas who thwart any resolution short of outright war at every single turn.

    I 100% agree with you that we need to produce. Only a fool – which means a Democrat – thinks we can spend our way out of debt. You may be no fan of Bush or Republicans, but it wasn’t Bush or Republicans who said this:

    “Now, people when I say that look at me and say, ‘What are you talking about, Joe? You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’” Biden said. “The answer is yes, that’s what I’m telling you.”

    It was Obama’s vice president, Joe Biden. It’s the Democrats I’ve been screaming about.

    No, you don’t spend your way out of debt, you PRODUCE your way out of debt. But even as we rack up crippling debts, we have emptied our bladders pissing away our industrial base because of unions, because of environmental regulations, because of Democrats’ allies the trial lawyers and their damned lawsuits, because of one stupid liberal restriction after another.

    We will NEVER be able to have a manufacturing base again in this country as long as liberals and their principle allies – the environmentalists, the trial lawyers, and the unions – are allowed to have any meaningful power at all. NEVER.

    I’ll look for your “war is a racket” article by Gen. Butler. There is no question: it IS one. That doesn’t mean that we don’t fight, though.

    On a host of issues, my real belief is that we may well have broken our system so badly that we can’t fix it. I’m a Christian, btw, and believe in the last days, believe that the beast is coming – a dictator who will rule the entire world and demand to be worshiped as a god – and the Great Tribulation of the book of Revelation. I believe we are racing toward the last days, and that what we are doing under Obama right now will set up the coming collapse that antichrist will rise from. I see more and more and more reason to believe that everything the prophets said is truly coming.

    Fortunately, God – who wins in the end – takes His people OUT of the worst of these coming days. So, as angry as I am over how pathetic we’ve been in voting to literally slit our own national throat, I have no fear.

  11. Thankfully not an American Says:

    If you would like to examine a fascist that has been the president of the US your should simply look at G.W. Bush’s 8 years in office.
    Fascism centres around the absolute removal of all personal freedom of expression, assembly and religion which is basically the Patriot act in a nutshell.
    Of anything you could maybe consider Obama a socialist but lets be honest here, we are not talking about Soviet era communism, modern French socialism or even the milder Canadian version. What you have is a regulator, nothing more.
    What is the difference? A regulator will make it so private industry cannot collude to create oligarchical markets (Obama’s healthcare bill) while a socialist would outlaw all private business activity within a ESSENTIAL sector and then run a not for profit government run corporation (see Tommy Douglas, Canadian that brought in universal healthcare).
    To the guy that has the above comment, go ahead and go to war with Iran you jackass. There is a big difference between tribal afghanistan, Iraq where 2/3 of the people actually want you there to either keep them from being killed (kurds) or to keep them in power, while in Iran every single man, woman and child will pick up arms to defend their land from foreign invaders.
    I once read that many religious [EXPLETIVE] abouts like this guy think that the third anti christ will come from the middle east….if the US continues on this path they will CAUSE THE WAR TO END ALL WARS while their nut job religious idiots will smile as they pull the temple down on their own heads.
    Good luck people….you will need it more than you think if more of the real fascist get back in office….worse yet, let a tea bagger in office and you will see what fascism really is.

  12. Michael Eden Says:

    First of all, let’s just realize that this is someone who is thankful to be unAmerican. And that he then proceeds to say how great Obama and ObamaCare is. You know what they say: from the mouth of unAmericans comes unAmerican crap.

    Let’s see. You must mean the Patriot Act that was passed by the US Senate with 98 votes in favor and only one opposed. Boy, yeah. That Bush was quite the fascist imposing his will. Thank God we’ve never seen the kind of fascism by which one president and one political party would pass the biggest systematic takeover in the last 60 years without so much as one vote from the other party. Now THAT would be fascist.

    Oh, wait. That happened. Your Messiah was behind that.

    As I remember, a few people tried to sue regarding the Patriot Act. But no one was able to show that their rights had been violated in any way.

    And I love the way you side with the terrorists who want the right to repeatedly attack innocent civilians without any measure to prevent it, and stand against the right of the United States to protect and defend itself. That’s very fascist of you.

    You seem to be one of those ‘history retards’ who think that fascism was all about limited government conservatism, when it fact it was all about big government radicalism.

    As to your war with Iran comment, and how America would meet with defeat, well, you ARE unAmerican. And you therefore think like an enemy of America.

    Iran is geographically and culturally very much like Iran. If America took her on, we would destroy Iran with our air power, and then destroy what was left with the finest infantry in the history of the world.

    The only place where we would run into trouble would be in being humane, and refusing to destroy population centers. And in insisting on rebuilding our enemies. And in sticking around to help our enemy rebuild.

    What is fascism? Well, first of all it is socialism. Second of all it is big government totalitarianism. Which is to say that it is what YOU stand for, Mr. “Thankfully not an American.”

    What makes me laugh is that the ideas of someone who signs as “Thankfully not an American” is pretty much identical to the ideas of the Democrat Party.

    P.S. Your naked hatred of religion is quite fascist as well. Let’s just cite the prototypical fascist, Adolf Hitler. First of all, he was the force behind the Holocaust, which was an attempt to eradicate Jews. Second, the man who murdered six million Jews to solve “the Jewish problem” also said he had a “Church problem”:

    “The war is going to be over. The last great task of our age will be to solve the church problem. It is only then that the nation will be wholly secure. . . . When I was young, my position was: Dynamite. It was only later that I understood that this sort of thing cannot be rushed. It must rot away like a gangrened member. The point that must be reached is to have the pulpits filled with none but boobs, and the congregations with none but old women. The healthy young people are with us.” [From Hitler's Tabletalk (December 1941), quoted in The Nazi Years: A Documentary History, ed. Joachim Remak, 1990, page 105].

    And, of course, you should consider the youth named after Hitler:

    “We are the happy Hitler Youth;
    We have no need of Christian virtue;
    For Adolf Hitler is our intercessor
    And our redeemer.
    No priest, no evil one
    Can keep us
    From feeling like Hitler’s children.
    Not Christ do we follow, but Horst Wessel!
    Away with incense and holy water pots.
    Singing we follow Hitler’s banners;
    Only then are we worthy of our ancestors.
    I am no Christian and no Catholic.
    I go with the SA through thick and thin.
    The Church can be stolen from me for all I care.
    The swastika makes me happy here on earth.
    Him will I follow in marching step;
    Baldur von Schirach, take me along.

    [fyi: Horst Wessel was the composer of the Nazi Party anthem. Baldur von Schirach was the Reich Youth Leader].

    That’s what fascism looks like. And again, it looks a lot like you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 493 other followers

%d bloggers like this: