Liberal roundup

The Shaved Ape has donned his protective suit and made another reconnaissance mission to the liberal blogosphere. As I was reading these liberal blogs, plus my daily reading of mainstream media, it occurred to me that the most difficult job of the American press and these blogsters is to describe their concerns in terms that aren't overtly communist. It's still unpopular to declare, "I'm a communist and the government should be all powerful so it can provide all things to all people."

So they have to translate the communist message into something palatable to the American public, such as, "It's unfair that the 1% has perverted the constitution to further enrich themselves," and "It's wrong that people living in the islands of wealth in Europe and America, and have it so easy at the expense of the developing world."

A lot of this rhetoric sounds nice and sensible, especially to the uninformed, but when you realize what they're actually saying, and what they plan to do, it becomes clear that this is just communist redistribution of wealth on a global scale. The results here in the U.S. will be the same as everywhere communism has been tried -- mass poverty for all citizens.

Daily Kos

The Kossacks are banging the Occupy drums again with a piece by Jack Balkin:

The American Constitution is the framework for a democratic republic. A democratic republic, in turn, is system of government that is designed to be responsive to the people of the United States as a whole, and not to the wealthiest 1 percent.

There is a single, concise word to describe OWS's desire to make the playing field "fair" in America: communism. Wealth, according to liberals, is a resource that belongs to all of us. Never mind that if we remove incentives for job creators, they'll stop creating jobs. That's okay for liberals because the government can create jobs directly. See Greece.

Here's something from brooklynbadboy:

Well, finally somebody in the traditional media has caught up to what we have been saying for years. Bipartisanship isn't the two parties negotiating in good faith. Bipartisanship is when Democrats cave in to whatever Republicans want. Has been for a long time.

Maybe, but I think it's unnecessary to discuss bipartisanship in the current era. The age-old battle between communists and capitalists is polarizing America more and more with every election cycle. I don't expect my leaders to cave in to the communist desires of liberals even if that means gridlock in government. I want leaders to fight and never make deals. If the liberals get angry, they should move to Cuba or China or North Korea and enjoy communism in all its glory.

It's not unfair that some people are rich and some people are poor. Rich people, for the most part, got rich by getting a good education and then working extremely hard, not exploiting the poor. Most rich people have a similar story, like Bill Gates and Steve jobs and countless others -- making more good decisions than bad, and working 80-hour weeks. They deserve what they have. Nothing unfair about it.

TPM Muckraker

This liberal site has numerous stories about the Obama DOJ suing Sheriff Joe Arpaio from Arizona. Nick Martin is attacking Joe Arpaio just as zealously as his man Obama:

Joe Arpaio has been here before. At another time, during another Democratic administration, the tough talking Arizona sheriff was hit with a federal civil rights lawsuit designed to end the abusive practices of his agency.

My take on Joe being sued during the last Democratic administration as well as the current one is this: Democrats want to increase their voter base to the exclusion of all else. This is the only reasonable explanation for attacking anyone who wants to stop illegal immigration. It's not a coincidence that Democrats want things to continue as they are, and attack anyone who tries to fix a badly broken system. Illegals and their legal children vote Democrat; stopping illegal immigration would dry up a large source of support for Democrats.

TPM's David Taintor is attacking Jonah Goldberg, formerly with National Review Online and currently the token conservative opinion writer for the Los Angeles Times. Hey, if a man isn't communist, he must be vigorously attacked, right? After seeing Goldberg claiming to have been nominated for two Pulitzer prizes in the past, Taintor locks and loads:

The problem? Goldberg has never been nominated for a Pulitzer. His work has simply been entered. “I’ll check it out and have ‘em remove it if you’re right,” Goldberg told msnbc.com, who first reported the story. “Happily. If it’s not kosher, I shouldn’t have it in there. Period.” Goldberg did not immediately respond to TPM’s request for comment.

That last sentence is funny. It sounds professional, but it would be laughable for Jonah Goldberg to lower himself to responding to a communist website like TPM.

Firedog Lake

Somebody calling himself Siun has posted a piece about George Bush and crew being found guilty of war crimes:

A tribunal convened in Kuala Lumpur found George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and five administration attorneys – Gonzales, Yoo, Bybee, Addington and Haynes – guilty of war crimes yesterday.

Oh no, not Kuala Lumpur! Surely that's the court most respected by Americans. I'm sure George Bush and Dick Cheney are now hastily cancelling trips to Malaysia as they wipe sweat from their brows. It must have given the Firedog Lake commies a psychological boost, if only symbolic, to see a slapdown of folks who stood up to a genocidal dictator.

Another Fireduck, David Dayen, is discussing Elizabeth Warren's calls for JP Morgan's CEO to resign:

In the wake of JPMorgan Chase’s $2 billion Fail Whale trade and the ensuing federal investigation into violations of disclosure laws, US Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren has called on JPM CEO Jamie Dimon to resign from his position on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

I question Dayen's decision to devote a post to Warren and JPM. Warren is involved in a scandal for lying about minority status in her university days. She lied, saying she is Native American, reminiscent of the lies of Ward Churchill. She apparently used this false minority status to gain unwarranted advancement. It recently came to light that she has an ancestor who helped round up Cherokee Indians to force them onto the Trail of Tears.

Michael Moore

America's Fattest Communist™ is doing a poor job of updating his website, but he is doing a good job of supporting OWS, the movement of unwashed communists. As always, the wealthy Michael Moore is trying to claim he is part of the poor 99% and stands with them. He's as shameless as a politician. Anything to sell books, I guess.

Here's something on his home page dated Feb 2012. Moore is commemorating a 1937 worker struggle in Flynt, Michigan:

And so, 75 years after the victory in Flint, the battle is now being fought all over again. But this time it's not just about getting paid a dollar an hour, or having Sunday off, or reducing the chance of your hand being crushed in the metal stamping machine. This time, the stakes are even greater: Who is going to own America and control the basic functions of our democracy -- the richest 1% who buy the politicians to get what they want, or the 99% who don't have much these days and live in anxiety or fear of what's around the bend. I believe that justice will win out again, in the end, just as it did 75 years ago today in Flint in 1937.

Moore's idea of "justice" is taking all money from the wealthiest 1% and giving it to the other 99%. America's Fattest Communist™ said last year, and I'm paraphrasing, "All this wealth in America belongs to all of us. It's a resource for all of us to use." This is pure, unadulterated communism. Moore is faced with the same challenge all liberals in America are faced with -- phrasing his communist ideals in language that avoids using the word "communist".