Andrew Breitbart: Mall Cop

Cow Towing to Other Countries

Archive for the ‘We Are All Socialists’ Category

What Would Judah Maccabee Do?

with one comment

7_068

As long as Skip Press has us basing our lives around the actions of random Biblical figures, I think it’s a fair question.  I’ll tell you what he’d do.  He would FUCK shit UP.  Jepthah?  He’d BREAK some SKULLS.  Jeroboam?  Time to SLIT some THROATS.  CAPS.

There is a Biblical parallel in what is going on in America. It’s the story of Joseph, from Genesis in the Bible. Here are the main points, in case you missed Sunday school or never read the story that is generally held to be historical fact.

By whom, exactly, is a story that has ancient Canaanites living to the age of 130 “generally held to be historical fact”?  

Anyway, Press goes on to tell the story of Genesis 37-47, offering along the way a tortured analogy where, and I’m not exaggerating, Ronald Reagan (or a combo of Reagan/Thatcher/JP2/Gingrich) is Joseph, the American people are Pharaoh, Nancy Pelosi is Potiphar’s wife, the Democrats are Joseph’s brothers, California is Egypt, and Arnold Schwarzenegger is a Democrat.  I don’t want to quote it in full because it’s long, but go ahead and read it; it makes about as much sense as it sounds.  

Then there’s this:

It’s fine to speak out about the current administration’s outrages that are a march toward socialism, which is an enslavement that sours the soul while proclaiming the grand benefits of collectivism yet always benefits only those running the society into the ground. That’s not what we need to solve our problems. Most of our brothers’ principles are so crazy they’re only believed by Hollywood actors who often didn’t even finish high school.

Per Genesis 47:13-26, here is the land policy Joseph instituted during the famine (which Press compares to the current economic crisis):

13 Now there was no food in all the land, because the famine was very severe, so that the land of Egypt and the land of Canaan languished because of the famine.

13 Now there was no food in all the land, because the famine was very severe, so that the land of Egypt and the land of Canaan languished because of the famine.  14 And Joseph gathered all the money that was found in the land of Egypt and in the land of Canaan for the grain which they bought, and Joseph brought the money into Pharaoh’s house.  15 And when the money was all spent in the land of Egypt and in the land of Canaan, all the Egyptians came to Joseph and said, “Give us food, for why should we die in your presence? For our money is gone.”  16 Then Joseph said, “Give up your livestock, and I will give you food for your livestock, since your money is gone.”  17 So they brought their livestock to Joseph, and Joseph gave them food in exchange for the horses and the flocks and the herds and the donkeys; and he fed them with food in exchange for all their livestock that year.  18 And when that year was ended, they came to him the next year and said to him, “We will not hide from my lord that our money is all spent, and the cattle are my lord’s. There is nothing left for my lord except our bodies and our lands.  19 “Why should we die before your eyes, both we and our land? Buy us and our land for food, and we and our land will be slaves to Pharaoh. So give us seed, that we may live and not die, and that the land may not be desolate.”  

20 So Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh, for every Egyptian sold his field, because the famine was severe upon them. Thus the land became Pharaoh’s.  21 And as for the people, he removed them to the cities from one end of Egypt’s border to the other.  22 Only the land of the priests he did not buy, for the priests had an allotment from Pharaoh, and they lived off the allotment which Pharaoh gave them. Therefore, they did not sell their land.

23 Then Joseph said to the people, “Behold, I have today bought you and your land for Pharaoh; now, here is seed for you, and you may sow the land.  24 “And at the harvest you shall give a fifth to Pharaoh, and four-fifths shall be your own for seed of the field and for your food and for those of your households and as food for your little ones.”  25 So they said, “You have saved our lives! Let us find favor in the sight of my lord, and we will be Pharaoh’s slaves.”  26 And Joseph made it a statute concerning the land of Egypt valid to this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth; only the land of the priests did not become Pharaoh’s.

Advertisements

CHRISTIIIIIIIIIIIINE!

with 5 comments


  The Mountain Goats - Tell Me On a Sunday

 

 

For a website dedicated in no small part to the idea that people in the entertainment industry should STFU when it comes politics (witness the “Celebutard of the Week” feature), Big Hollywood sure does get off on lionizing conservative celebrities, such as they are.  I mean, Gary Sinise is undeniably awesome (Chi-town, what’s goin on), but Andrew Lloyd Webber?  Seriously?  Just because he doesn’t want to pay taxes?

And before you lynch me as a rich b*****d flying a kite for my own cause, let me beg you to believe that I am not.  I believe that this new top rate of tax could be the final nail in the coffin of Britain plc.  I am 61 years old. I have lived and worked in Britain all my life. Not even in the dark days of penal Labour taxation in the Seventies did I have any intention of leaving the country of my birth.

 

Well, there goes any hope of Webber going Galt.  Damn it; I would’ve pushed that meme had I known it was a possibility.  I would fucking attend a Tea Party in a Nazi uniform and an Obama mask if it would get Webber to close up shop forever.  

Stage Right (who, take note Jeffrey Jena, refuses to write under his real name):

What I love about both of these men and their approach to this issue is the irrefutable logic of the arguments.  Taxation policy always seems to get argued from the left on an emotional level.  Using class warfare rhetoric and casting the top earners in our country as the greedy rich, we have now reached a point where 49% of our nation pays no taxes at all.  This means that half of our country’s voters are deciding how much the other half has to pay. 

I’d be be interested to see where he came up with the 49% number.  All the data I can find is from conservative anti-tax groups, and even they put the number at 29%.  All income in the United States is subject to tax liability.  If a person pays no taxes, it’s either because he or she made no income, or else had deductions (or credits) totalling more than the amount owed.  In which case, there’s still payroll taxes, or the equivalent self-employment taxes, not to mention sales taxes (which disproportionately affect people who live hand-to-mouth), gas taxes, etc.  

So is Stage Right proposing, in an anti-tax piece, that we get rid of various tax deductions and credits?  More likely he just wants to take away the franchise from the poor.  He claims liberals resort to emotional, nonlogical arguments by fomenting class anxiety, but there he is, in the very next sentence, all, “ZOMG those layabout poor people are deciding how much the wealthy, noble captains of industry should have to pay!  The injustice!”

So yeah, I do think that Stage Right is a “wealthy b*****d” out for his own interest.  I also think that he’s a whiny b***h-a*s m***********r who ***** *** ***** *****l.

Written by dieblucasdie

May 12, 2009 at 3:24 pm

On Going Galt

with one comment

Big Hollywood has two links on their marquee today, one pimping Dr. Helen’s hilarious “Going Galt” meme (by all means, Andrew Breitbart, go Galt.  It would be nice to have my free-time back), and one crowing about the uptick in sales for Atlas Shrugged.

I’ve long been puzzled by some Republicans’ love for Rand, especially when they are OG, not-a-pose social conservatives like the bros at BH.  Here’s a few helpful quotations from Rand.

On abortion:

An embryo has no rights. Rights do not pertain to a potential, only to anactual being. A child cannot acquire any rights until it is born. The living take precedence over the not-yet-living (or the unborn).

Abortion is a moral right—which should be left to the sole discretion of the woman involved; morally, nothing other than her wish in the matter is to be considered. Who can conceivably have the right to dictate to her what disposition she is to make of the functions of her own body?”

On religion:

Qua religion, no—in the sense of blind belief, belief unsupported by, or contrary to, the facts of reality and the conclusions of reason. Faith, as such, is extremely detrimental to human life: it is the negation of reason. But you must remember that religion is an early form of philosophy, that the first attempts to explain the universe, to give a coherent frame of reference to man’s life and a code of moral values, were made by religion, before men graduated or developed enough to have philosophy.

On conservatism:

Above all, do not join the wrong ideological groups or movements, in order to “do something.” By “ideological” (in this context), I mean groups or movements proclaiming some vaguely generalized, undefined (and, usually, contradictory) political goals. (E.g., the Conservative Party, which subordinates reason to faith, and substitutes theocracy for capitalism; or the “libertarian” hippies, who subordinate reason to whims, and substitute anarchism for capitalism.) To join such groups means to reverse the philosophical hierarchy and to sell out fundamental principles for the sake of some superficial political action which is bound to fail. It means that you help the defeat of your ideas and the victory of your enemies.

On states’ rights:

[George Wallace] is not a defender of individual rights, but merely of states’ rights—which is far, far from being the same thing. When he denounces “Big Government,” it is not the unlimited, arbitrary power of the state that he is denouncing, but merely its centralization—and he seeks to place the same unlimited, arbitrary power in the hands of many little governments. The break-up of a big gang into a number of warring small gangs is not a return to a constitutional system nor to individual rights nor to law and order.

Written by dieblucasdie

April 28, 2009 at 5:14 pm

These Two Cats

with 3 comments

John Romano (whose headshot, hilariously, features him scratching his head confusedly) digs up a video of Obama and Chavez talking at the Summit of the Americas (actually, it’s more accurate to say that Obama is talking at Chavez):

Finally, some actual video of Obama and Hugo chatting at the Summit of the Americas.  Obama calls for spreading the wealth around and Chavez says “those of us who want to build heaven here on earth, we will follow socialism.”  They seem to have a lot in common.  I can’t make heads or tails of anything in this video and I wouldn’t trust the reporter from CNN, I mean Venezuelan state TV.

This is not video of the infamous brothers in Socialism handshake, but is interesting nonetheless.  The handshake video, if it ever existed, seems to have been thrown down the memory hole with Obama’s college transcripts.

What on earth can these two cats be talking about?

I haven’t had my coffee yet, so I’m going to let Obama himself do the mocking this morning.

THE PRESIDENT: I think it was a nice gesture to give me a book; I’m a reader. And you’re right, we had this debate throughout the campaign, and the whole notion was, is that somehow if we showed courtesy or opened up dialogue with governments that had previously been hostile to us, that that somehow would be a sign of weakness. The American people didn’t buy it. And there’s a good reason the American people didn’t buy it — because it doesn’t make sense.

You take a country like Venezuela — I have great differences with Hugo Chavez on matters of economic policy and matters of foreign policy. His rhetoric directed at the United States has been inflammatory. There have been instances in which we’ve seen Venezuela interfere with some of the — some of the countries that surround Venezuela in ways that I think are a source of concern.

On the other hand, Venezuela is a country whose defense budget is probably 1/600th of the United States’. They own Citgo. It’s unlikely that as a consequence of me shaking hands or having a polite conversation with Mr. Chavez that we are endangering the strategic interests of the United States. I don’t think anybody can find any evidence that that would do so. Even within this imaginative crowd, I think you would be hard-pressed to paint a scenario in which U.S. interests would be damaged as a consequence of us having a more constructive relationship with Venezuela.

So if the question, Dan, is, how does this play politically, I don’t know. One of the benefits of my campaign and how I’ve been trying to operate as President is I don’t worry about the politics — I try to figure out what’s right in terms of American interests, and on this one I think I’m right.

Written by dieblucasdie

April 28, 2009 at 4:16 pm

Excuse Me, Your CRAZY is Showing

leave a comment »

tin-foil-hatJeffrey Jena finds a massive left-wing conspiracy in the fact that the national media didn’t spend enough time talking about the Tea Parties (!):

On March 2nd there was a demonstration in Washington D.C. It was billed as the largest demonstration for green power/global warming awareness/stop dirty coal/ let’s all go live in a tepee, ever held. It was attended by, (are you ready for the number?), 2,500 people. That was the largest one ever! This demonstration was covered by every major television and news service. No station or alleged newspaper gave any coverage to opposing opinions. Ironically there was a blizzard that day another fact which, to the best of my knowledge, was not noted by any major news outlet.

Thirteen days later one of the first of the grassroots “Tea Parties” was held in Cincinnati Ohio. Over five thousand average middle-class folks showed up on Fountain Square in the center of the city. Their message was simple, we can’t afford our government! Did you see it on CNN? Maybe you caught it on ABC or MSNBC? If you did you need to check the strength of your prescriptions, it wasn’t on any of them. In fact, the overwhelming success of this protest against rampant, run away big government was one of the inspirations for yesterday’s national day of protest. But unless you live in Cincinnati you probably never heard about it.

First off, Jesus Christ, you wanted more coverage of the Tea Parties?  It’s all any of the cable news nets talked about last week, and, shit, Fox News has been the Tea Party Channel for a solid three weeks now.

Second, I actually hadn’t heard or read anything about this Eco-protest that supposedly got such massive coverage.  After some googling, I guess he’s talking about the Capitol Climate Action.  I don’t know what cable news said about it (my suggestion to Jena: watch less cable news), but in terms of print coverage, it garnered one AP article (which was carried around various mid-level dailies, but neither the New York Times nor the Washington Post carried it, though one of the NYT’s online blogs covered it), and one piece in Time, which does mention the blizzard.  (Note to Jena:  Instead of using caveats like “to the best of my knowledge,” why don’t you just take five seconds to google your assertions before hitting “Post”).

You wouldn’t know that from the coverage. Everyone from CNN to MSNBC to my local paper went out of their way to make it seem like anyone who attended one of these gatherings was a right-wing extremist! Right-wing extremist, hummm where have I heard that term lately? Wasn’t there some sort of government document leaked to the public the day before all these Tea Parties? I am not a believer in coincidence, especially in politics. I believe that the Department of Homeland Security report was released in an effort to intimidate some citizen and keep them from attending the anti-tax rallies.

You know, a lesson the left has learned well is that, if you’re going to stage mass protests, reporters are going to interview protesters.  You can’t really be angry when reporters interview someone who doesn’t stay on message, or is a little crazy.  Protesters aren’t professional politicians!  That’s the point!  They aren’t always going to be able to regurgitate careful-constructed talking points.  Sometimes they’ll go too far.  I’m not sure how you can blame the media itself for this, unless you expect them to shelve unflattering interviews and only air flattering ones.  Which, they ain’t gonna do.

I’m sick of talking about that completely innocuous DHS publication, but you can see my take on it here, if you like.  The only new bit here is the implication that DHS leaked this publication specifically to mess with the Tea Parties (I’m not sure how this would’ve accomplished that).  All you have to do is read the publication to realize it has absolutely nothing to do with that.

These demonstrations were too many and too big to be ignored so the leftists in the media moved to their second tactic, belittle and mock. I am sure that you may have seen alleged journalist from Anderson Cooper to Susan Roesgen to Keith Obermann mocking you and your beliefs. Belittling your efforts to make your voices heard. I personally have had enough of a mediocre sportscaster passing himself off as an intellectual. His program would be alright if it were on the proper cable channel at the proper time: Comedy Central sandwiched in between Stewart and Colbert. It would probably also get better ratings.

Yeah, I wonder what it would be like to have well-paid cable news talking heads spouting transparent one-sided rhetoric.  Must suck.

Written by dieblucasdie

April 18, 2009 at 6:12 pm

Letting Thy Left Hand Know What Thy Right Hand Doth

leave a comment »

10percentWhat percentage of his income did Bob Hamer give to charity?  Inquiring minds wand to know.

Earlier this week, UPI reported Vice-President Joe Biden and his wife released their 2008 tax returns and while the Second Couple had an adjusted gross income (AGI) of $269,256, they gave a mere $1,885 to charity.  Not quite the Biblical standard of a tithe. According to a statement by the White House, the charitable donations are “NOT (my emphasis added) the sum of their annual contributions to charity. They donate to their church, among other contributions.” Then what is the sum of their contributions to charity? Inquiring minds want to know.

Listen, fucker, not everyone is the same religion as you.  Like me, Biden is Catholic.  The Catholic Church neither requires nor expects the tithe as many fundamentalist churches do.  Tithing is not taught in Catholic schools (except maybe in the study of  Jewish-Scripture law, along with keeping kosher).  It’s not preached from the pulpit in Catholic churches.  Just because your lame-ass,  new jack brand of Christianity takes the Bible literally, it doesn’t mean that everyone’s does.

But that’s neither here nor there, really, since it’s maybe the douchiest thing in the world to look at someone else’s tax return and say “You didn’t donate enough to charity.”  Especially if the person leveling the accusation is a free market type.  Fuck you.  Where the fuck is Bill Donahue when you need him?

Written by dieblucasdie

April 17, 2009 at 9:26 pm

These White Dudes Still Constitute a Voting Bloc, Don’t Worry

leave a comment »

gopBizarrely, Tim Slagle seems to think that there’s no representation for conservatives in our government:

The popular meme circulating throughout the “unbiased” media yesterday was: The original Tea Party was about taxation without representation but Americans HAVE representation and Republicans are just mad because they lost. The more I twist that in my head, the more absurd it sounds. What they’re really saying is: you are only allowed representation in government if you’re the majority.

Well, there’s a difference between being unrepresented, and being in the minority.  There are, in fact, lots of conservatives in our government.  They are full, voting members.  They have committee assignments.  They have special-interest caucuses.  They’re in the minority, sure, and so do not have nearly as much power as they did a few short months ago.  That’s what elections do!  I’m not sure what else Slagle expects a 2-party government to look like.  If Slagle wants to make an argument in favor of European-style coalition governance or something, I’d love to hear it, but I don’t think that’s his point.

I honestly did not see much of the Tea Party coverage other than the stuff that was floating around the internets (the Shuster thing, that CNN reporter freakin’ out in Chicago,  Fox’s non-stop pimping) and the 100% sympathetic coverage from my local Fox affiliate (and I live in a liberal urban hellhole!).  

So I’m unsure where the scale finally landed.  I do think that, generally, what both the Media Matterses and MRCs of the world, in their scrambling to find any instance of political bias, miss about our national press is that they’re not particularly liberal or conservative, they are just enamoured of their own power.  They are flattered by their access, they are synchopants for whoever is in power, and/or whoever is good at gaming them. 

Anyway, off my soap box.  

And lest you think I’m being hyperbolic with that argument: Taxation is involuntary servitude. When you work for money you don’t get to keep, it’s forced labor.

It’s funny how Democrats only support democracy when it skews in their favor. Things like abortion rights, gun control, and nontraditional marriage, are just “too important” to leave up to the electorate. But when it’s a decision to limit salaries, ban smoking from bars, tax the rich, or any other thing the Left wants, populism rules.

Some things are civil rights issues!  Some things are not!  Like, for example, the power of Congress to tax citizens and spend the revenue.  The Constitution is pretty clear on that score.

Written by dieblucasdie

April 17, 2009 at 5:18 pm