Monday, January 10, 2011

Targeting America: Mark Twain, the Tea Party and Freedom of Speech in the crosshairs of Political Correctness

Within moments of the first news bulletin about the shooting in Arizona Rep. Giffords, I pulled up Google News and clicked the first news link which was to UK's Telegraph. Well before it was even known who all was shot and how seriously or who the shooter was, they had already launched into the 'Target' meme, targeting Sarah Palin and Conservatives:

"Miss Giffords had been named in March as a political campaign target for conservatives in November’s elections by former Alaska governor Sarah Palin for her strong support for the health reforms of President Barack Obama.

Mrs Palin had published a “target map” on her website using images of gun sights to identify 20 House Democrats, including Miss Giffords, for backing the new health care law."
In other words, without a second thought (or perhaps even a first), the assumption was made that if a Democrat Rep. was shot, it MUST be for political reasons, those reasons must be partisan reasons, and obviously it must be Right Wingers in general, and Constitutionalist Tea Partiers in particular, which would be responsible. Responsible for stirring up 'unrest', responsible for 'targetting' the left, and responsible for pulling the trigger.

I've little interest in whatever else they might have to say on the subject (But if you do, here's a darned good starting point (T/W Gagdad Bob):here, here, here, and here) or about political conspiracies ready to be sprung, this article is from the U.K. - Philosophy has no need for political conspiracies, it moves minds in like directions far better than any Machiavellian conspirator dreamt up by the very best thriller writer could possibly conceive of - that is the key we should be paying attention to, because the results have the potential to be far worse than mere conspiracies could ever conspire to.

These knee jerk assumptions that have been made about Sarah Palin and Conservatives, are the result of Political Correctness (more properly known as Cultural Marxism), they are the anti-thesis to thought - operating from positions, rather than conceptions - and are seriously dangerous when allowed entry into the political process, let alone the legislative process, where it becomes a danger to freedom and liberty itself.

This morning I'm hearing about lawmakers proposing a measure to ban 'politically sensitive' terms, or angry speech directed towards lawmakers, words like 'Target' are to be verbotten in public speech. That should chill you to the bone, no matter your political persuasion.

But it shouldn't surprise you. Not in the least. Just last week, we heard about a Professor from Auburn University, proposing a new version of Mark Twain's classic "Huckleberry Finn" - minus just a few words.

Professor Gribben wants a sanitized version "Huckleberry Finn" so that schools could read a less offensive version of Twain's tale. Forget the fact that Twain deliberately wrote the tale in as offensive a manner as possible in order to call people's attention to what really transpired, and how shallow and foolish the bigotry behind it was (towards race and dialect), how about having a look at the intent of the Professor? :
"Twain scholar Alan Gribben and NewSouth Books plan to release a version of Huckleberry Finn, in a single volume with The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, that does away with the "n" word (as well as the "in" word, "Injun") by replacing it with the word "slave."

... In the new classroom, it's really not acceptable." Gribben became determined to offer an alternative for grade school classrooms and "general readers" that would allow them to appreciate and enjoy all the book has to offer. "For a single word to form a barrier, it seems such an unnecessary state of affairs," he said"
He wanted to see the tale told in a less offensive language. There's a few degrees of appalling to dive into there, but just right off the top... do you want a story focused on the folly of racism, to have the expressions of racism be... less offensive? How about the the idea of a crucifix being submerged in urine... not worthy of being made less offensive? Wouldn't it be less offensive to replace urine with water? How about rap lyrics? How about South Park? How about Beck, Olberman, Joe Bidden, Clair McCaskill, etc?

What do I mean? Bill Hennessy provides us with a useful list here of those on the left using 'angry words' in the news:
This is a list which the pushers of PC (or at least those addicted to it) would do well to consider, for someday the political winds will reverse and blow in the other direction... what will become of 'their' freedom, if those constitutional protections are removed in order to target 'our' freedoms today?

Targeting Freedom
The Poed Patriot points points us to the latest this morning:
""You can't threaten the president with a bullseye or a crosshair," Mr. Brady, a Democrat, said, and his measure would make it a crime to do so to a member of Congress or federal employee, as well."
When congress is allowed to name some words, symbols or ideas as being offensive and legally unacceptable, and others as not, there's one thing you can be sure of: the knotty list is going to grow exponentially in size and really fast as well, at least as quickly as the Income Tax went from "Only the richest 1% of Americans will EVER be affected by this tax! Those who say otherwise are alarmists!", to applying to all Americans, some of whom are now 'graciously' exempted after the fact, due to income levels, some of whom are enabled by it to receive some of your income (which is one way of 'spreading the wealth around').

This measure, and the like minded ones lining up to follow it, will not, in any way, stop at offensive words. An attack on ideas and your Right to express them, is an attack on Rights as such, and if we allow one aspect of one Right to be taken away, then all others will follow, in a manner of speaking, 'follow' I mean - the fact is that if you infringe on one Right, all rights have been dispensed with already, it's just a matter of 'boiling the frog' slowly enough to not shock people into a realization of the fact.

For instance, right behind the attack on the words and Ideas of Mark Twain, we now have an attack on the words and ideas used in political speech, and swiftly following that we are moving from the 1st amendment to an attack on the 2nd amendment and the Right to bare arms.
""Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., one of Congress’ fiercest gun control advocates, is looking to strike while the iron is hot. “My staff is working on looking at the different legislation fixes that we might be able to do and we might be able to introduce as early as tomorrow,” McCarthy told Politico Sunday. Rep. McCarthy said that she plans to meeting with House Speaker John Boehner and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to see “if we can work something through” this week."
And right behind that, together with some preparatory work with Net Neutrality 'enacted' for Christmas of last year, comes an attack on the right of the people to peaceably assemble, 21st century style, across the Internet:

"President Obama is putting plans in motion to give the Commerce Department authority to create an Internet ID for all Americans, a White House official told CNET.com.
White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt told the website it is "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet."
An "identity ecosystem" wow, that's American style freedom through and through, isn't it?
Or have a look at this from the same article:
"The National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace is currently being drafted by the Obama administration and will be released by the president in a few months.

"We are not talking about a national ID card. We are not talking about a government-controlled system. What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy, and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities," Commerce Secretary Gary Locke said at an event Friday at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, according to CNET.com.

Locke added that the Commerce Department will be setting up a national program office to work on this project."
Govt monitored, controlled, passwords for access to the Internet. Control that, and you control the one thing which made the Tea Party movement possible, the one thing which made the new Republican majority in congress possible, the right to meet each other and peaceably assemble, online first, and together at a physical locations, second. Eliminate that 'glitch' in the "identity ecosystem", and you eliminate a bunch of bureaucratic nightmares for those who want to do good to you.

Recall that with the 16th amendment passed in the 'year of doom', 1913, the income tax was adopted with a 1% tax on net personal incomes above $3,000, with a 6% surtax on incomes above $500,000. In less than 5 years the income tax was increased to 77% on income over $1,000,000. After WWI, the top marginal tax rate was 'generously' reduced to 58% in 1922 then to 25% in 1925, and finally to 24% in 1929 thanks to the administrations of Harding & Coolidge,
"The collection of any taxes which are not absolutely required, which do not beyond reasonable doubt contribute to the public welfare, is only a species of legalized larceny. Under this republic the rewards of industry belong to those who earn them. The only constitutional tax is the tax which ministers to public necessity. The property of the country belongs to the people of the country. Their title is absolute."
, but with the election of another proregressive, Hoover, by 1932 the top tax rate rose to 63% during the Great Depression and continued increasing up to 92% by 1952. From there on out, it has been the task of heartless conservatives (Left and Right, remember JFK reduced tax rates) to reduce that rate by a few points whenever possible, but always to accusations of obstructionism.

Obstructing Liberty
Obstructionism to what? In a word: Liberty. For in all the wrangling over how much shall be taken through the Income Tax and from who, the real question has been forgotten, that being 'Who has a right to their property - the person who earns it, or the Govt who wants to spend it?', and the real question behind that is, Are the source of your Rights in you, by nature of your being a human being, or in Govt, by dint of it's having assumed power over you?

If you cling to any of the denials that things will not perilously proregress from there, compare these current denials to the flat out denials that your Social Security Number would NEVER be used for identification purposes.

You get the picture? Yeah, that's right.

Connect this all, legislating away 'angry words', creating a safe 'identity ecosystem' across the Internet, and together with with Net Neutrality enabling control of the 'net itself... and ladies and gents... something wicked this way comes.

8 comments:

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Excellent post, Van!

Once big brother (or big nanny) gets a foot in the door they never leave.
Like a vampire they must be invited in either directly or indirectly.
Then they never leave.

Not only that they'll eat you outta house n' home, then they'll take your blood and tax you for the "privilege". Twice, thrice and as many times as they can.

Tragedies and crimes like what has happened at Tuscon are merely excuses for the left to spring into action so they can "fix" the problem so it never happens again (yeah right).

Well, we have seen their "fixes" and their cure is worse than the disease.
Like midievel doctors they use leeches...no, strike that, they are worse, they ARE the leeches.
Leeches with the power to put us in chains and suck our very lives...our will to live if it gains them power in any way.

They are the modern day barbarians at the gate and worse than the mafia because at least the mafia doesn't try to control every aspect of our lives.
The mafia steals but these proregressives steal far more than just our money and property...they steal everything, mind, body and soul.

And they do it any way they can by lying, cheating, false accusations, ommitting, deceiving, tricking, class warfare, race warfare, sex warfare, false promises...you name it they have and will do it if it quenches their thirst for power.

Well, I say nuts! to that! Long as I draw breath (and I'm not alone) I intend to fight to protect and defend our lives, liberties and property, and morever, advance and take back what those craven jackals stole from us, and Im not alone.

Benjamin Franklin said "you have a Republic if you can keep it."

I intend to keep it as are millions of patriots are. And I don't care how much the proregressives wail and gnash their teeth or how long they accuse patriots of "hate" speech, I'll keep on tellin' the truth and pointing out Reality every chance I can!

It's heartening to see all this vile crap the leftists have been spouting now biting them in the ass.
However we must continue, all of us, to keep reminding folks exactly what these jackals have been, are, and intend to keep doing, because although they ain't none too bright they are relentless.

Every election we must get the tar n' feathers ready and run these scoundrels outta town.

philmon said...

"to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet."

Made all the more alarming by the fact that progressives look at ecosystems as things that are "delicately balanced" and must be maintained in that balance or disaster will ensue.

So of course it must be controlled by government beaurocrats.

Three guesses on what that "balance" will look like.

Also, yeah, whenever someone says "lies! It's not in the bill!" my standard response is, "Yes, And income tax will only ever be on the top 1%, Social Security tax will never exceed 3%, and your social security number will never, ever be used for personal identification."

On a personal note, Missouri, huh? Computers. Camping. Sounds quite a bit like me. What part of Missouri?

Van said...

Ben said "Benjamin Franklin said "you have a Republic if you can keep it."
I intend to keep it as are millions of patriots are."

Yep!
(Careful with that 'tar 'n feathering' language though, you never know what might cause some deranged person to go out, buy a vat of tar... and the big diesel truck and gizmo to heat it up with... and a sack of feathers... and a bunch of people to help them haul it around... and find some innocent congresscritter type on the side of the road to sit still so they can dump it all on them.
It's amazing the power words might have on the crazed minded)

(ahem)

Van said...

Philomon said ""Yes, And income tax will only ever be on the top 1%, Social Security tax will never exceed 3%, and your social security number will never, ever be used for personal identification.""

Amazing how that'll tick them off too... almost like they're deranged whacko's coming into calamitous contact with the truth.

"What part of Missouri?"

Outskirts of St. Louis, you?

Van said...

(Oops, sorry on typo'ing your nic Philmon)

Yabu (EOTIS) said...

Van my friend, that is a GREAT post. You nailed it.

Troubled times ahead, but I will fight to the (my) very end. I'm all in.

Michael O. Keitel said...

I read the two sentences you quoted. To pour a little reality onto your polemic, as anybody who reads them as a rational adult they are simple statements of fact and they are true. They aren't blame. They aren't opinion. They certainly aren't saying "Palin did it."

What I do see (as opinion) is a group of people playing their endless victimization game. A bunch of people get killed in Arizona and one section of the right responds by "Oh, we're being victimized again! Oh, you nasty people! etc. etc." I could also mention that tendencies heavy use of the term "deranged liberal."

You went on to write "In other words, without a second thought (or perhaps even a first), the assumption was made that if a Democrat Rep. was shot, it MUST be for political reasons, those reasons must be partisan reasons, and obviously it must be Right Wingers in general, and Constitutionalist Tea Partiers in particular, which would be responsible. Responsible for stirring up 'unrest', responsible for 'targetting' the left, and responsible for pulling the trigger."

My research is that when anybody (left, right, center, tinfoil, monarchist) says "In other words" it isn't. The "other words" they're going to use to describe somebody's original words are almost always a distortion to the point of outright dishonesty.

And throwing in the phrase "Political Correctness" has no more weight than "deranged liberal" or "Cultural Marxist."

Van said...

Michael O "Cultural Marxism" Keitel said "To pour a little reality onto your polemic, as anybody who reads them as a rational adult they are simple statements of fact and they are true. They aren't blame. They aren't opinion...."

They also are not relevant to the story. If in quickly scurrying for information on a public figure, someone were to, for some reason, want to note that a politician had engaged in politics and (shocker) found opposition to that person's political positions, being a journalist (in theory) they'd want to get both sides. For some reason the fact that leftist sites such as The Daily Kos ALSO put out target adds on Giffords, using the same ‘targeted’ and ‘bulls eye’ language (which has been used in American politics since they put sites on guns) for being a 'Blue Dog' democrat who 'sold out the constitution', didn't make it into their fair and balanced scales of journalism.

Point being, there was a predetermined position going into the story, which had nothing to do with presenting the facts, but did have quite a bit to do with presenting and furthering a political position... which is supposedly not the job of journalists.

"My research is that when anybody (left, right, center, tinfoil, monarchist) says "In other words" it isn't."
In my research, I find that anybody who tries to refer to anybody as "(left, right, center, tinfoil, monarchist)" is pushing an agenda of their own, while trying to sound all fair and balanced, while in fact they are anything but. The fact that you link you nic to a site "Cultural Marxism" which tries to debunk the idea of Cultural Marxism... raises a few suspicions about your agenda (btw, your internal nav links don't work in IE).

The fact that you worded your comment so as to seem like a reasonable, level headed person, interested in the facts and not polemic, yet you yourself made assertions only, while providing no supporting evidence or reasoning for them, other than "My research is ", and the fact that you failed to actually identify an issue relevant to the post(which was not about either Giffords or Palin, but how political agendas are trying to use this incident, as they have other incidents), confirms my suspicion.

Thank you for playing. Move along.