That's right. Whenever there are financial difficulties the Jews are behind it, just like they were in the 1930s. Just ask David Duke, who recently endorsed Occupy Wall Street.
The Occupy Wall Street movement is essentially a re-boot of the Tea Party, but the Occupiers don’t know it. Were the Occupiers savvier and more educated about economics, politics, history and the Constitution they would echo the cry of the Tea Party, which is to limit the federal government.
The Occupiers have become tools, or useful idiots, of the rich and powerful left, which manipulates markets and benefits from the cozy relationship between Washington, D.C. and Wall Street.
Barack Obama’s top donors list from the 2008 presidential campaign is a Who’s Who of Wall Street financial giants (Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase & Co., Citigroup), over-priced educational institutions gouging families with their tuition (Harvard, UC Berkeley) and big corporations (Google, Microsoft).
The left’s biggest money man, George Soros, owns Soros Fund Management LLC (hmmmm… I wonder if it’s related to Wall Street at all?) and is a notorious currency and stock market manipulator. In other words, Soros has repeatedly gamed the system to enrich himself, which is exactly what irks (or I guess is supposed to irk) the Occupiers.
Soros also funds and agitates for left-wing causes, understanding that as the people’s individual power recedes, he and others of his ilk will become more powerful. It’s exactly what happened in the Soviet Union: The Russian people were relegated to a drab life of bare subsistence, while their betters in the bureaucracy enjoyed the spoils of the proletariat’s toil.
This is what happens when people become dependent on the state. America’s unrivaled success was built on individual self-reliance, not a reliance on the state to provide for our every need. If America had been built on the latter, we’d all be speaking German right now.
But the Occupiers seem to have the whole thing backwards, at least as far as one can tell what the hell they’re protesting… The whole thing is such an odd mish-mash of anarchists, communists, neo-Nazis, confused students, baby-talking thirtysomethings, professional protesters ginned up and paid by unions and community organizers, anti-Semites, baby Baby Boomers who missed out on Woodstock, and a smattering of well-meaning liberals.
When the Occupiers went to march on the mansions of the powerful, they studiously avoided left-wing barons who are knee-deep in Wall Street funny business and went to protest at the mansions of right-wingers (Rupert Murdoch, Fox News Corp., and David Koch, Koch Industries) who have little to do with Wall Street.
As one of my favorite pundits put it recently: “Even assuming, for purposes of argument, that Koch and Murdoch are as evil as these morons seems to think, the protesters call their demonstration ‘Occupy Wall Street,’ not ‘Occupy Businesses Whose Products We Disapprove Of.’ This would be like protesting the Holocaust by walking past Adolf Hitler’s house and protesting at O.J. Simpson’s house.”
Wall Street is an excellent target for protest. The financial giants contribute to campaigns, wheeling and dealing their way to immunity when all hell breaks loose, as it did in 2008. A government with the power to pick winners and losers during a crisis is far too powerful, and this is where we need reform.
I’m not talking about campaign finance reform, which restricts free speech and is merely a symptom of far worse disease, but reigning in government per the Constitution so that it does not have the power to reward cronies as it did with TARP and all the other stimulus, bail-out, green jobs BS perpetrated on the American taxpayer. How many more Solyndras will it take before we figure out that we’re being taken for a ride?
Yours truly, Club Soda, happens to be one of those whom the White House and its fascist phalanx of Democratic Party machine drones have characterized as part of “the mob”. In reality, the vast majority of those showing up at town hall meetings to confront their “representatives” are average Americans expressing their Constitutional right to assemble peaceably and disagree with the direction those representatives are taking them.
So what if they’re encouraged by right-wing blogs and talk radio to take to the streets? How else do citizens mobilize en masse? When progressives do it, it’s called “community organizing,” but when conservatives do it they’re referred to as a “mob”. In reality, progressive community organizing means recruiting professional thugs, goons and bullies from unions and Soros-funded shadow groups with benign nom de plumes like Americans Coming Together (ACT).
As these community groups are brought together to help quell the popular uprising of ordinary Americans, you can almost hear Hedley Lamarr from Blazing Saddles: “I want rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers and Methodists.”
What concerns many Americans is the surrender of political power from the local and state level to the Federal level. The more responsibility the Federal government takes for the individual, the less free that individual becomes.
The powers delegated to the Federal government are quite clear, and they basically boil down to national defense, infrastructure and interstate commerce. The 10th Amendment clearly states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, or prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
The entire concept of the Constitution was to provide the necessary cohesion to the Union not provided by the Articles of Confederation while maintaining the autonomy of the individual to pursue life, liberty and happiness with minimal Federal restraint. This is why we do not see an enumeration of “positive rights” in the Constitution, such as a “right” to health care or other creature comforts. Rather, the Constitution enumerates “negative rights,” or the freedom of the people from governmental encroachment on their individual lives and decisions.
Perhaps no one personifies the corruption, cronyism and condescension currently permeating the nation’s capitol than Barbara Boxer. Through Boxer, we are provided a window into the soul of an arrogant aristocracy that will happily trample on our freedoms to expand their power and influence. It is this arrogant exercise of power at the expense of the individual that is driving much of the dissent in America today.
Progressives complain bitterly about evil giant corporate conglomerates, and to some extent I agree with them. I simply hate having to deal with large corporations because I can never get anything done quickly and easily. I am not an individual to this corporation; I am simply a number in a vast sea of ones and zeroes. “Press One for English. Prense dos para Espanol. Press Three for this. Press Four for that. And so on and so forth until you hang up in disgust. Have a nice day!”
The point is that the larger and more remote any organization gets from its constituency, the less likely it is to have any care for the individual. And that’s the problem with yielding more power from the local and state level to the Federal level.
Do we seriously believe that a gigantic, centralized bureaucracy will be efficient, caring and, ultimately, just? If we do, we deserve what we get, which will ultimately be a huge corruptacracy that serves a mish-mash of powerful special interests and grievance-mongering groups living 30 years in the past, a.k.a., community organizers.
This is not “progressive”; it is positively regressive and de-evolutionary. Was the Soviet Union a success; a model to be emulated by future U.S. administrations? What did we learn from past collectivist/socialist/fascist/Marxist forms of government? We learned that concentrating power and wealth in a centralized government led to vast societal misery and poverty. The “people’s republics” were about people alright… the people in power.
Recent Comments