Featured Content
Another Reason to Never Buy GM: They Sponsor Communist Propaganda
It’s bad enough that General Motors agreed to accept $80 billion in taxpayer-funded bailout money. It’s bad enough that GM let the government become the de facto head of their own company. And it’s really bad enough that they allowed their bondholders to be completely hosed in favor of big payoffs to the UAW.
But today I find out that not only has GM been working with the government of China to move production lines and research and development to the red empire, they’ve also been sharing secrets and sponsoring Chinese government propaganda celebrating Communism.
And this isn’t even breaking news. Most of this happened a year ago or more. No surprise that, despite some outrage, the MSM didn’t cover it at the time (and won’t cover it now), considering it would obviously be damaging to the Obama administration’s narrative that the bailout worked.
I was clued in by a video that’s making the rounds. Watch if you don’t mind being irritated for the next 9 minutes:
Now I’m not so naive as to be ignorant of the realities of the global marketplace. Nor am I particularly critical of the necessity of the CEO to speak to his audience. Indeed, I understand that China is a huge market and I sympathize with the fact that Big Labor and progressive governance has made it extraordinarily difficult for multinationals to compete while using a primarily U.S.-based workforce.
But my sympathies with the reality of globalization ends when a U.S. company (especially one that received money from the U.S. taxpayer) starts sponsoring Communist propaganda. That’s enough to make me never buy another GM vehicle ever again.
10 Facts About the “Disappearing” Middle Class
The “middle class” will earn a featured role in the upcoming election season. You will hear rhetoric – almost certainly from both sides – that the middle class is disappearing and “the other guy” is to blame and/or will make it worse. They will present their own policies as the solution to the middle class dilemma.
But what do we really know about the middle class? I realized that I had never actually seen or heard an official definition of the middle class, and that got me thinking: without a definition, any statistics, accusations, and plans are baseless and arbitrary. So I set out to uncover the truth behind the claims that the middle class is disappearing. I share what I learned with you.
1. Most Americans think they are “middle class”
A CBS News poll (2007) and a USA Today poll (2006) both discovered that about 90% of Americans self-identify as belonging to the middle class. This data clearly reveals perception bias on both the lower and higher end of the income spectrum. Interestingly enough, this is not unique to the USA – the same bias has been observed in Argentina.
2. The “middle class” has no official definition
While researching for this article, I was surprised to discover that the government does not have an official definition of “middle class”. Considering how often politicians of all stripes cite statistics about the middle class to further their particular policies, I naturally assumed there was an official benchmark. Turns out there isn’t really even a generally-accepted definition.
I note with no small amount of incredulity the convenience of our ruling class being able to cite statistics based on arbitrary definitions to a population which largely self-identifies as belonging to the demographic in question. Perhaps the fact that there is no official definition of “middle class” is no accident?
So how can we even have a rational discussion about the middle class without being able to define its boundaries? Read on!
The Left Got it Right: Let’s Drop the “I-Word”
The self-proclaimed language police of the progressive left have now decided that using the term “illegal alien” is inherently racist and inhuman, and damages the immigration debate. The leaders of this movement are asking that everybody stop using the term altogether. For once, the left got it right… sort of.
Set aside for a moment the sheer absurdity of grouping “illegal alien” together with the “N-word.” Set aside the fact that illegal alien gangs have themselves been committing racially-motivated violence (mostly against blacks) for years. Set aside the irony of the left claiming they are “humanizing” a debate while simultaneously branding millions of people as racists simply for using a factual term.
I actually agree with the left that the term “illegal alien” should be dropped. I even go so far as to generally agree with their statement that “people are not illegal.”Allow me to explain.
Punching someone in the face for no reason is illegal, but we do not refer to that person as an “illegal pugilist“. Selling drugs is illegal, but we do not refer to the dealer as an “illegal businessman”. Stealing is illegal, but we do not refer to the thief as an “illegal acquisition specialist.”
Typically, we refer to people’s ACTIONS as being illegal, not the people themselves. The people who commit those illegal actions? We call them criminals.
An undocumented Obama voter
But what about the charge of racism? I can actually see how someone might object to being called an illegal alien on racial grounds. After all, in today’s society, “alien” has a much different connotation than it did a few hundred years ago.
It kind of makes sense that folks would find racial overtones in being compared to funny looking beings with odd colored skin and strange facial features.
The left would have us replace “illegal alien” with a term like “undocumented immigrant”, or “unauthorized immigrant.” Nevermind that these terms are contradictory, since being an “immigrant” to the United States implies both documentation and authorization. It’s kind of like saying bureaucratic efficiency, or political ethics, or progressive socialism.
Then there’s the hilariously ludicrous replacement term “NAFTA refugee,” which apparently has been coined to give the progressive left a succinct way to blame U.S. capitalism for the plight of Mexican citizens… you know, rather than the systemic corruption of their government, dysfunctional legal system, and rampant drug violence. But that’s another story.
The left is right though: it’s time to drop the I-word. It’s time to stop using the term “illegal alien,” because it lacks sufficient accuracy and context. Instead, I propose we all start using a far more descriptive term to describe those who cross our borders illegally; a term which may have even been coined right here on this very site two years ago:
“Criminal Entrant“
As I said before, “criminal” is a much more correct and accurate way to describe a person who commits an illegal act than as an “illegal”. And using the word “Entrant” simply describes an action, thereby avoiding the inaccurate and contradictory use of “immigrant,” as well as the racial component of comparing people to little green men (or huge, scary, acid-spitting harbingers of death).
So today, let’s acknowledge that words are indeed important. Let’s follow the lead of our friends on the progressive left. Let’s agree that “illegal alien” is inaccurate, insufficient, and possibly charged with interplanetary racism.
Today, let’s begin using the far more accurate and race-neutral term of criminal entrant.
HillBuzz Open Thread: Monday, April 2, 2012
Hey folks, happy Monday!
In case anybody out there missed it, a week ago the SCOTUS began hearing oral arguments on Obamacare. Over three days they heard 6 hours of testimony and, based on the reaction of the Democrat spinsters, I think even the Obama camp is worried he mandate or the entire law may be struck down. Check out the Wall Street Journal for the 5 Take-Aways of the Obamacare hearings.
Thanks to the couple of folks who linked to an update on Olbermann’s firing from Current TV (previous HillBuzz write-up: Olbermann Fired). The main goodie from this article is that Olbermann supposedly complained about his car service because the drivers spoke to him and “smelled”. I wonder how many of the 99%-ers who idolize Olbermann have car services? And I wonder just how far in to the 1% you have to be before you feel elitist enough to complain about your car service?
One of the commentors here alerted us to this story on Breitbart: Shockingly, the left and the media are silent when conservative women are treated similarly to Ms. Fluke. Actually, truth be told, although I do not agree with Rush’s comments, he probably had more grounds to make the ‘slut’ accusation than anybody had to make these comments about Lt. Governor Rebecca Kleefisch. After all, it was Ms. Fluke who chose to put her sexual opinions on very public display. All Lt. Gov Kleefisch did was be a conservative woman elected BY THE PEOPLE to public office.
The emperor is truly naked folks. I’ve come to a realization. By and large, besides doing a lot of research, blogging every now and then, and arguing with friends and family, I’ve basically just been waiting for the media to “fix itself”. Not by magic of course, but I always envisioned that the business model would collapse as they continued to lose eyeballs and they would be forced to become more fair, more honest, etc.
However, the book I’m currently reading (and will review here soon), along with Shakedown Socialism, has made me realize that my belief in the inevitability of said outcome is a fantasy. It is not inevitable. In fact, I’m starting to see that the odds are actually stacked the other direction. Throughout history, the “inevitability” is that the media and the government become increasingly intertwined, and the media become MORE corrupt as a result.
Of course I’ve known this for years, but I never believed it could be possible here in the USA. I never believed that insidious forces could sneak in and take over. But that is happening even as I type this. Media collusion, distributed progressive talking points, voter fraud, and Lord knows what else! Maybe we’ll post a list someday of all the ways the progressive left is working to destroy everything that you and I love and take for granted about this country.
You see, most of us conservatives just want to be left alone to live our lives, raise our families, help our neighbors, etc. We don’t like the government intruding in our lives, but along with that comes a desire to not to have to get involved beyond our civic duty of voting and maybe the occasional argument or debate with a family member, friend, or MAYBE even a coworker.
HillBuzz is a microcosm of the conservative populace. For every person who comments here regularly, there are thousands who do not. For every person who comments here occasionally, there are hundreds upon hundreds who never comment. We have some very dedicated folks among us. We have readers and contributors who even get involved in the races. But those of you who do that are in the minority.
I wonder, even among those of us who are highly involved, how many of us are actively working to reverse our slide into socialism? How many of us are actively working to try to force the main stream media to change? I admit, beyond blogging and some debating with folks, I don’t really even know how to go about doing that. How many of you out there have ideas on how we can go after the media? We would love to hear from you. And we would really love to hear from anyone who has been lurking for awhile but never or rarely comments.
What else is on your minds this Monday?
HillBuzz Open Thread: Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Anybody been following the Supreme Court hearing arguments on the constitutionality of Obamacare?
The left is worried. You can tell because they are now talking about how good it will be for Obama if the bill gets struck down. One guy actually said “it’s the best thing that could happen”.
These people are fools and tools.
But it is an interesting theory. If the bill DOES get struck down, will that impact anti-Obama turnout in the election? Likewise, will it rile up the pro-Obama turnout? These are valid questions. The one thing I’ve learned from reading HillBuzz over the years is to NEVER, EVER underestimate the left. They will do everything in their power to transform a possible overturn into a “crisis”, and agitate to turn out the vote.
What do you think?
What else is on your minds?
Socialism and Obama’s Pitchfork Shakedown
“Obama is a socialist!” How many times have you heard this? Maybe even said it yourself? I know I’ve said it. Though not without merit, the term is technically inaccurate. A new term is needed.
Perhaps it would be more accurate to refer to Barack Obama as a shakedown socialist. After all, what was it he said to the CEOs of the financial institutions? Something like: “I am the only thing standing between you and the pitchforks.”
What did Obama mean by that? What exactly is a modern-day “pitchfork?” For the answer, we turn to a great little book I recently finished called Shakedown Socialism. The subtitle is “Unions, pitchforks, collective greed, the fallacy of economic equality, and other optical illusions of ‘Redistributive Justice’”.
The author is Oleg Atbashian, who was born and raised in the Ukraine. He lived in the USSR and tells the reader in his preface that, at the time, he believed the Soviet Union was the most advanced society on Earth. As he grew older he says he noticed limits to intellectual inquiry, as well as corruption, and his eyes were eventually opened to the fallacy of Socialism.
He goes on to detail in seven concise chapters how certain things which are happening in the U.S. remind him of things that happened in the USSR. He talks about how unions breed the concepts of communism and socialism. He talks about the lie of economic justice, and how forcing “equality” by rigging the economy will actually CREATE a financial crisis. And he details how all these ideologies — which are presently very popular among the progressive left — are actually UNjust, selfish, demeaning, and ultimately dangerous.
There were so many great observations and statements in this book that I can’t even begin to detail them all. But one of my favorite passages of the book begins with the following:
On the surface, the idea of economic equality may seem like an honorable moral goal, which explains its resilience and attraction. This is why it continues repeatedly and with impunity to bring one economic and social disaster after another anywhere it’s tried. On the flip side, opponents of economic equality are branded as greedy, selfish, and immoral – which is why few politicians dare oppose this absurdity.
Atbashian goes on to articulate a fantastic dismantling of the case for “social justice” and mounts a rousing defense of capitalism.
The author also includes an addendum aimed directly at Barack Obama. In it, he discusses how Obama uses “angry mobs” (think SEIU, and organizing communities through agitation) to further his goals. But he also points out that “in a balanced society, an angry mob is never part of the equation.”
I love books on Socialism or Communism written by folks who actually lived it. The credibility behind their opinions are immediately apparent, and they have personal insight that those of us who grew up in the U.S. typically lack. Shakedown Socialism is one of those books, and at 124 pages it is a quick and easy read.
And remember, any purchase made by clicking one of these links helps HillBuzz a little bit without costing you anything extra! If you pick this book up, let me know what you think.
or get the Kindle Version
HillBuzz Open Thread: Friday, March 16, 2012
I happened across this video the other day. Loved it!
I’m too young to remember Jimmy Carter’s behavior. Anyone out there see similarities in the way Obama treats these other nations? He seems detached, robotic, and generally bored. I also enjoy the irony of the supposed “smartest President in history” and “greatest orator since Lincoln” having to re-use the same tired metaphors over and over… and not even being able to pull them off without an abundance of “ums” and “uhs”.
What else is on your mind today?
