► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Jonah Goldberg’

Barack Obama and Socialism

by Mojambo ( 104 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Progressives, Socialism at April 28th, 2010 - 9:00 am

What kind of a socialist is Barack Obama – the worst kind of socialist in my opinion. A socialist who actually believes  the bull spit that he learned in school. A socialist who believes that creation of wealth should be part of the seven deadly sins. In another era (say the 1940’s) Obama would be what was later derisively referred to as a “fellow traveler”.

by Jonah Goldberg

The assertion that Barack Obama is a socialist became a hallmark of the 2008 presidential campaign. His opponent, John McCain, used Obama’s own extemporaneous words to an Ohio plumber as Exhibit A: “When you spread the wealth around,” Obama had said, “it’s good for everybody.” That, McCain insisted, sounded “a lot like socialism,” as did Obama’s proposals to raise taxes on the wealthy and high earners for the explicit purpose of taking better care of the lower and middle classes with that redistributed money.

Republicans believed they had hit a rhetorical mother lode with this line of argument in 2008, but their efforts to make hay of Obama’s putative socialism proved unedifying, if not outright comic. The National Committee of the Republican Party even formally considered a resolution on whether the Democratic party should change its name to “the Democratic Socialist Party” of the United States. The stunt was shelved infavor of compromise language lamenting the Democrats’ “march toward socialism.”

Fourteen months into his presidency, in March 2010, Obama succeeded in muscling through Congress a partial government takeover of the national health-care system. That legislative accomplishment followed Obama’s decision a year earlier, without congressional approval, to nationalize two of the country’s Big Three automobile companies. In the intervening months, he had also imposed specific wage ceilings on employees at banks that had taken federal bailout money—the first such federal wage controls since an ill-fated experiment by Richard Nixon in 1971. Obama also made the federal government the direct provider of student loans, and did so by putting that significant change in American policy inside the larger health-care bill. In a September 2009 press conference, Obama suggested that a publicly funded health-care system might help “avoid some of the overhead that gets eaten up at private companies by profits and excessive administrative costs”—thus mistaking the act of making money, the foundational cornerstone of capitalism itself, with the generation of unnecessary expenses.

Given his conduct and rhetoric as president, we have every reason to reopen the question from 2008 and ask, quite simply, What kind of socialist is Barack Obama?

[…]

Read the rest here: What kind of Socialist is Barack Obama?

A Delayed Bush Backlash

by Mojambo ( 177 Comments › )
Filed under George W. Bush, Republican Party, Tea Parties at April 21st, 2010 - 1:00 pm

Compassionate Conservatism lead directly to Barack Hussein Obama, just like the first President Bush and his stated desire to be known as “The Education President” lead to the immature Bill Clinton. The same people (David Frum, David Brooks, Kathleen Parker) who are flapping their gums about the tea partiers, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin are the ones who have very little problem with President Obama and I suspect actually pulled the lever for him. By the way Newt Gingrich ought to get lost.

by Jonah Goldberg

I attended the Cincinnati Tax Day tea-party rally as a speaker. But it was more interesting to be an observer.

First, here’s what I didn’t see. I didn’t see a single racist or bigoted sign or hear a single such comment. Nor did I see any evidence of “homegrown fascism.” Though in fairness, such things are often in the eye of the beholder, now that dissent has gone from being the highest form of patriotism under George W. Bush to the most common form of racism under Barack Obama.

But I did see something a lot of people, on both the left and the right, seem to have missed: a delayed Bush backlash.

One of the more widespread anti-tea-party arguments goes like this: Republicans didn’t protest very much when Bush ran up deficits and expanded government, so when Obama does the same thing (albeit on a far grander scale), Republican complaints can’t be sincere.

[..]

But how, then, to explain the relative right-wing quiescence on Bush’s watch and fiscal Puritanism on Obama’s?

No doubt partisanship plays a role. But partisanship only explains so much given that the tea partiers are clearly sincere about limited government and often quite fond of Republican-bashing. So here’s an alternative explanation: Conservatives don’t want to be fooled again.

Read the rest: A Delayed Bush Backlash

The Progressive Tax Code is about Control

by Phantom Ace ( 123 Comments › )
Filed under Communism, Economy, Liberal Fascism, Progressives at April 6th, 2010 - 12:00 pm

Our current tax code is outdated and needs reform. This has not occurred because Progressives in both the Republican and Democratic Parties love the concept of manipulation. Our code is called the Progressive Tax Code for a reason. It was designed by the Progressive Movement and implemented by Radical Totalitarian Progressive Woodrow Wilson.

The Wilsonian Legacy has harmed America in many ways. Our foreign policy is based on the naive notion of spreading Democracy, not using American power to pursue our National interests. The concept of the government manipulating economic behavior through the tax code is another legacy which has done much to reduce Americans’ economic freedom. But, that is the goal of the Progressive tax code!

Congratulations! This is your last week working for the man — at least for this year. The Tax Foundation calculates that Tax Freedom Day for 2010 is April 9, which means that by Friday, Americans will have spent nearly 100 days working just to pay their taxes. If Democrats have their way, Tax Freedom Day will keep getting later and later.

 Hold that thought. Imagine for a moment that Tax Freedom Day was Dec. 31. In other words, picture working 365 days a year for the government. Now, the government would “give” you a place to sleep, food to eat and clothes to wear, but all your income would really be Washington’s income to allocate as it saw fit. Some romantics might call this sort of arrangement “socialism” or “communism.” But another perfectly good word for it is “slavery” or, if you prefer, involuntary servitude.

Read the rest: How much taxation is enough?

Jonah Goldberg nails it in his column. The amount of taxes dictates the amount of control the governmnet has over the individual. The more in taxes, the more control the elites have. That was one of the goals of Obamacare (the other being Eugenics), to redistribute wealth as the government seems fit. What is needed to alleviate this is not tax cuts, but a total tax overhaul and a new code that promotes investments and entrepreneurship. This is a Neo-Feudalist means to control on the part of the Progressives and Americans are not having it. Our nation is a rejection of Feudalism and as we have rejected it in the past, the future will be no different!

Update: The Regime of Barack Hussein Obama has suffered a blow in its attempt to control the Internet.

(Hat Tip: vapig)

Brennan, Politics, and National Security

by Mojambo ( 65 Comments › )
Filed under Democratic Party, Politics, Progressives at February 17th, 2010 - 9:00 am

I guess when a Republican is president, dissent is the highest form of patriotism – however a Democratic president deserves unquestioning obedience. The fact that the Obama administration can criticize anyone for not falling in lockstep behinds his national defense policies is the height of hypocrisy when one recalls that he and his friends in the Senate did all they could to wage a jihad agaisnt the Bush administrations attempts to protect this country.

The other day Joe the Plumber after dumping on McCain (and Sarah Palin for supporting his reelection) made a good point – about Obama

I think his ideology is un-American, but he’s one of the more honest politicians. At least he told us what he wanted to do.

Yes he did.  Obama’s ultra Left tendencies  should not have been a mystery  to anyone.

by Jonah Goldberg

Politics should never get in the way of national security,” wrote John Brennan, the White House’s shockingly political deputy national security adviser. His USA Today op-ed last week set off a firestorm inside the Beltway by essentially accusing critics of administration policy of deliberately lying — “misrepresenting the facts to score political points, instead of coming together to keep us safe” — and aiding and abetting al-Qaeda: “Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda.”

The kind of fight Brennan is asking for is a classic D.C. slugfest, with charges of partisanship and insinuations of unpatriotism. To some it seems like American politics at its worst. It’s certainly not American politics at its best, but maybe it’s not so bad either.

Partisan attacks are the democratic equivalent of a market signal to those in power. Most businessmen hate competition, but successful businesses learn from what the market tells them. Competitors expose vulnerabilities in your product line and deficiencies in your sales pitch. The unhealthiest firms are those that have gone the longest without serious competition. It’s the same in nearly every field of human endeavor. In a democracy, the hope is that serious arguments will win out over frivolous ones. The only way for that to happen is to have the arguments.

[…]

Read the rest: Brennan, Politics, and National Security