IM: Two issues dominated today’s Meet the Press: Citizens United and LGBT discrimination, with
George Clooney as the protagonist (enhanced by his Batman fame).
Old Gadfly: Summarize for us Clooney’s
arguments.
IM: First, he defended his role in hosting a
fund-raising event that drew wealthy donors—the same group that is commonly
demonized by the left for its immoral wealth, you know, the evil 1%. To sit at the same table with the Clintons
and Clooneys cost a mere $353,000. He
agreed with Bernie Sanders that this kind of campaign financing is
obscene, but is doing what he can to raise obscene amounts of money to keep
a democrat in the White House, and to put democrats back in charge of Congress,
ultimately resulting in a Democrat-nominated justice on the US Supreme Court to
overrule Citizens United.
AM: Ironically, Citizens United benefits both
Parties. Folks, with their short
memories, may not recall how Obama reneged on his pledge to use only public
funding, something McCain honored through the election in 2008. Obama had nearly twice the funding, a lot of
it from big business, such as the healthcare industry that collaborated
successfully in getting the Affordable Healthcare passed—probably the most
grotesque manifestation of crony capitalism in our history. Citizens United doesn’t come close to
negating the advantage Democrats receive from union support. I just checked Open Secrets.org to see how
the Federal Election Commission has reported funding to the Clinton
campaign. You can see that aside from
Soros leading the pack, many of the large donors are unions.
IM: I noticed for the State of Colorado, Senator Bennet has over $10 million
in campaign assets, whereas his Republican challengers combined have less than
$500 thousand. OpenSecrets.org indicates
Bennet’s funding is coming from financial sectors, corporations, and lobbyists.
AM: Yet, Democrats want the public to
think Wall Street donors primarily support Republican campaigns. That is why Citizens United is such a good
straw man caricature for political purposes.
Old Gadfly: This is part of the power of
creating caricatures of the real thing.
Nobel laureate, Joseph Schumpeter, captured this tactic well when he
said, “We fight for and against not men and things as they are, but for and
against the caricatures we make of them.”[1] IM, expand on the second issue addressed by
Clooney on Meet the Press.
IM: The other issue dealt with the
transgender bathroom controversy in North Carolina. The Governor argued in favor of those who accept
their natural born gender and want to protect their privacy in public restrooms. The LGTB lobby argued against this majority
and for the very small percentage of transgenders. This faction argues that a man in woman’s
clothing has the civil right to use a woman’s bathroom or shower facility. The LGTB lobby convinced business enterprises
to boycott North Carolina until the Governor reverses his decision. Clooney supports this kind of financial pressure. Thus, in the same segment, Clooney demonizes and
then celebrates financial influence in politics.
Old Gadfly: The progressive messaging today is
very sophisticated in shaping public sentiment.
The caricature of a caricature, that is Clooney playing Batman, is the good
hero combatting evil. Clooney was
explicit in the immorality of Citizens United and the North Carolina Governor’s
refusal to accommodate LGTB demands.
AM: It is obvious the political elite
argue that all genders are created equal; some are more equal than others. Sound familiar? That was the single remaining commandment in Animal Farm: all animals are created equal; some are more
equal than others.
IM: This commandment also emerged as
Napoleon and his fellow socialist farm animals began to walk on their hind legs—in
other words, they began to mimic the behaviors of those they despised. In this case, however, the supposed despised
behaviors are manufactured caricatures of those they oppose. Orwell’s caricature of real life seems far more
sobering, and reflective of current affairs in America, than the Clooney’s Batman
character.
AM: Let’s see how far the hypocrites
get on their hind legs in the upcoming elections.
Old Gadfly: What we are witnessing is a tug of war between
liberty and license. I would submit that
liberty is dependent upon a just system of laws and one of the political
Parties, which mostly subscribes to this notion, is unjustly caricaturized as anti-
this or that and as fear mongers. The
other Party does not feel beholden to the current system of laws and through
their notion of social justice will ignore laws in the interest of achieving
political power. One approach respects
and seeks to protect liberty while the other accepts license as a necessary
means to achieve their political ends.
In the process, a secular humanist faction (one that believes science is
dichotomous and superior to faith) believes civil rights trump natural
rights. History documents similar trends
in other socialistic societies—the government becomes the ultimate moral
authority.
[1] Joseph
A. Schumpeter, History of Economic
Analysis (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1954), p. 90.
