Some Are More Equal

IM:  Events during this week demonstrated life imitating satire.

Old Gadfly:  What do you mean, IM?

IM:  In Orwell’s Animal Farm, after the socialists took command, they issued seven commandments.  Over time, seeing how easy it was to control the other animals, Napoleon (styled after Joseph Stalin) reduced the commandments to just one:  “all animals are created equal; some are more equal than others.”

Old Gadfly:    Animal Farm’s class distinctions certainly appear to reflect the FBI Director’s decision not to prosecute Hillary Clinton despite his own well-described case of someone who grossly violated federal statutes.  Comey was very careful in his wording:  “no evidence of criminal intent” and “extreme carelessness.”

IM:  This wording was precisely what President Obama signaled when interviewed by Chris Wallace on April 10, 2016 on the Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace program.  Obama said he believed there was “no intent” to violate laws, although the actions certainly were “very careless.”

AM:  Then, on a Monday, June 27, 2016, in an unscheduled but well-choreographed arrangement, Bill Clinton privately (no witnesses or photographers) met with Loretta Lynch, the Attorney General of the United States, on her plane on the airport tarmac in Phoenix.  When leaked, Lynch claimed it was just a casual discussion about grandchildren.

IM:  Five days later, on Saturday, July 2, 2016, several FBI agents interviewed Hillary Clinton for about three hours.  This was not a sworn deposition, and there was no recording or transcript of the session.  Yet, Democrats wanted to compare this case to the Petraeus case—the big difference is that the FBI interrogated him under oath.  Do you think Bill advised Lynch to remind the FBI that when they talked to Hillary, it should not be under oath to avoid perjury implications?  Bill remembers his own experience under oath regarding his sexual encounter with Monica Lewinsky.

AM:  Then, on Sunday, July 3, 2016, the New York Times published an article that sent a signal to Loretta Lynch:  “. . . Democrats close to Mrs. Clinton say she may decide to retain Ms. Lynch, the nation’s first black woman to be attorney general, who took office in April 2015."  Of course, by then Lynch said to the public that she would do whatever the FBI recommends.

IM:  All of which led up to FBI Director, Comey, making his announcement on Tuesday, July 5, 2016, that he would not recommend charges against Hillary Clinton.  This announcement was just in time for Obama and Clinton to emerge from Air Force One in Charlotte, North Carolina, for a campaign stop.  The optics were powerful—Air Force One, the President, and an unindicted felon flaunting the notion that some people are above the law and thus more equal than others—like Obama, another anointed one.  Obama declared Hillary the most qualified person for President ever in our history.  Sadly, job titles are not sufficient qualifications.  What has Hillary actually accomplished that is positive?  A lot of wreckage followed her wake:  the Russia reset, a Middle East in absolute turmoil, ISIS, North Korea, Iran nuclear deal, and so forth.

AM:  In the military we had a saying, screw up and move up.  It was recognition that senior people who made mistakes somehow got promoted. 

IM:  With the “above the law” precedent clearly established thanks to Lynch, Comey, and Clinton, Tom Perez, Secretary of Labor, appeared on the Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace program (hosted by Shannon Bream) today in his “private capacity” on national television to stump for Hillary Clinton.  Can you imagine Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunsford, presenting himself in a business suit on the same talk show to stump for a politician?  He’d be court-martialed for violating the Hatch Act—which applies to all federal officials by the way.  Clearly some Americans are more equal than others.

Old Gadfly:   My son-in-law is a legal immigrant.  When I asked him why foreign nationals come to America, he unhesitatingly said, “America has been known as a prosperous and peaceful society based on the rule of law” (bold italics added for emphasis).  He is very disappointed by what is playing out by this corrupt administration, in general, and by an unscrupulous, above the law, presidential wannabe, in particular. 

Gentlemen, we talked about a ruling class in January.  This week provided more evidence.  How do we wake up Americans? 

Walking on Hind Legs

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.

Over the Top?

Old Gadfly:  IM, some of my colleagues told me they thought the Animal Farm graphic, President Obama, and logo collage seemed “over the top.”  I asked, “In what sense?”  The typical response was that it offended them by being insensitive.

IM (an American citizen with an inquiring mind):  Insensitive toward whom or what?

Old Gadfly:  Isn’t it obvious that the collage is insensitive toward President Obama?

IM:  Well, let’s think about this.  Being “insensitive” is about a lack of feeling about something.  So, if my graphic implies a lack of feeling for someone in particular, then I would say that the message intended by the graphic has absolutely nothing to do with feelings.  Thus, anyone choosing to be offended by the graphic is reacting to their own set of feelings toward or attachment to President Obama.

AM (an American combat aviator with an inquiring mind):  Is this where the concept of “false consciousness” applies, as in our last discussion about Margaret Sanger’s propaganda about women and motherhood?

Old Gadfly:  Excellent connection, AM. 

IM:  When Orwell completed the manuscript for Animal Farm in 1944, he could not find a publisher because of perceived “insensitivities.”[1]  Orwell’s experiences in the Spanish Civil war shaped his very serious concerns about propaganda.  In a 1947 preface to the Ukrainian edition of the book, Orwell described, “how easily totalitarian propaganda can control the opinion of enlightened people in democratic countries.”[2]

Old Gadfly:  Orwell had a special “indentured class” status for sheep.  The bleating sheep remind me of the mainstream media.  How about the dogs in the graphic, IM?

IM:  Good question.  Here’s a passage from Animal Farm:

Until now the animals had been equally divided in their sympathies, but in a moment Snowball’s (Napoleon’s ideological opponent) eloquence had carried them away. . . By the time he had finished speaking, there was no doubt as to which way the vote would go.  But just at this moment Napoleon stood up and, casting a peculiar sidelong look at Snowball, uttered a high-pitched whimper of a kind no one had ever heard him utter before.

            At this there was a terrible baying sound outside, and nine enormous dogs wearing brass-studded collars came bounding into the barn.  They dashed straight for Snowball, who only sprang from his place just in time to escape their snapping jaws.  In a moment he was out of the door and they were after him. . . . Then he put on an extra spurt and, with a few inches to spare, slipped through a hole in the hedge and was seen no more.[3]

Old Gadfly:  Eerie.  Makes you think about Eric Holder and Lois Lerner, among others.  What is the significance of the logo behind President Obama?

IM:  We discussed the logo almost a year ago.  Here is what I said: 

Obama’s logo signifies a rising sun within a circle that represents “O” in Obama.  The sun represents hope over the “changed” landscape of America as symbolized in the complete restructuring of the elements of the American flag.  The change is the fundamental change Obama keeps promising and pushing in violation of the “self-governing” ideal “gifted” to us by our founders.

AM:  The logo reminds me that a couple days ago I read an interesting analysis about terrorist groups such as al Qaeda and ISIS.  The article was written by a former member of such a group.  Essentially, these groups represent an ideological movement characterized by five key elements:  Islamism (the ideology), narratives, cult of personality, iconographic prowess, and an end goal.  Sound familiar?  Here in America we are confronted with our own movement:  progressivism, narratives advanced by a complicit media, Obama the Messiah, the Organizing for America logo (discussed above and pictured with the cult personality superimposed) for iconographic prowess, and a “fundamentally transformed America” as the end goal.

Old Gadfly:  But al Qaeda and ISIS are brutal in their methods.

AM:  One movement strives for a Caliphate as the governing power; the other strives for a deified progressive state as the governing power.  While not as physical, America is accumulating its own casualties in terms of a major loss of international credibility and in our national decay. 

Old Gadfly:  The decay will generate a void.  Evil will fill the void.  As we know, history has recorded how evil triumphed when good people chose to do nothing about it.  Is it over the top to warn against such possibilities?  I think not.  It would be insensitive to those who gave their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to give us the American ideal. 

---

[1] As cited in “Animal Farm,” Wikipedia, retrieved on September 1, 2014 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm#cite_note-26

[2] Ibid.

[3] George Orwell, Animal Farm, (New York, NY:  Signet Classics, 1996 [1945]), pp. 52-53.  Ironically, given the tremendous reluctance of any publisher to publish the manuscript, today’s publishers have no reservation in financially benefitting from the fruit of Orwell’s labor.

Another Teaching Moment

IM (an American citizen with an inquiring mind):  Gadfly, I know you are terribly busy right now with teaching and your book project; but, I must interrupt your train of thought.
 

Old Gadfly:  What is it, IM?

IM:  This morning, I watched President Obama’s press conference about the impact of sequestration.  Of course, listening to his speech while observing the fire fighters standing behind him seemed to overwhelm my consciousness with strange signals.

Old Gadfly:  I had the broadcast on in the background, watched the same theatrical display, and immediately thought: this is another “teaching moment.”

IM:  What do you mean?

Old Gadfly:  Do you remember the rare Obama press conference when he actually entertained a question from the press corps, and the question that caught him off guard involved the Cambridge Massachusetts police officer that confronted the black Harvard professor attempting to break into his own home?  Do you remember how Obama responded?

IM:  Yes.  He said the Cambridge police “acted stupidly.”  He also, added, “that it is ‘just a fact’ that African-Americans and Latinos are disproportionately stopped by police—evidence ‘that race remains a factor in our society.’”

Old Gadfly:  That is correct and it generated a lot of reaction from the public.  A Google search produced almost 10 million articles, blog entries, and so forth.  For damage control, it was inconceivable that Obama would admit that he made a mistake, and really did “act stupidly”; thus, it was time for a teaching moment at a picnic table on the White House property over a glass of beer and in full view of photographers.  A complicit media collaborated in portraying a touching scene of the all-knowing one descending down to the ordinary man level, to lecture those (which does not include the Harvard professor) who actually live a life full of risk, cost, and consequence. 

In his book Intellectuals and Society, Thomas Sowell provides a powerful description of people like Obama, intellectuals who are full of ideas without risk, cost, or consequence.  Obama’s trip to Florida was at no personal cost to play golf with Tiger Woods.  Ironically, both suffer from a character flaw called fidelity--Woods with his former wife and Obama with the people he serves (see Honeymoon Tonight, Marriage Tomorrow?).  And, far more importantly, Obama’s role in setting the conditions (i.e., the result of debt ceiling negotiations) for what we call sequestration was a tremendous risk to others (especially those who will lose jobs) and at a tremendous cost to others (especially those who actually pay taxes), which will be very consequential.

IM:  This may explain why I felt overwhelmed by signals.

Old Gadfly:  How would you describe the signals?

IM:  One signal was the nameless fire fighters coopted into the visual frame.  Fire fighters provide safety from harm for nameless and faceless people.  So, the subliminal message is that Obama wants to keep the public safe.  The other signal was the theme of Obama’s speech--to blame others, especially the Republicans and the top 1% that has not paid its fair share, for getting us to this point and for not getting us out of it.  In other words, he used this speech as an opportunity for a “teaching moment.”  In the process, he threw out a bunch of ideas, knowing he had absolutely no risk of incurring cost, that is, political capital, or consequences.  There is no risk of consequences for Obama because, when conditions get progressively worse, Obama, Democrats, and the remaining intellectual class (i.e., journalists, the Hollywood cohort, and academics) will blame Republicans for the cost and consequences that burden primarily taxpayers and secondarily, trickle down consequences through reduced subsidies to, non-taxpayers.

Old Gadfly:  Obama’s teaching should only resonate with Copernican drones.

IM:  My concern is that, even considering George Soros’ intellectual concept of an Open Society, these Copernican drones and those who are susceptible to joining their class are offered little in terms of alternative teaching.  All they get now are the intellectual ideas associated with hope and change. 

Old Gadfly:  There’s another subliminal signal here, IM:  The Animal Farm pigs have successfully protested and now conspicuously walk on their hind legs.