Obama is not a Marxist. He’s a Fascist.

Thanks to society allowing the Left to take over the language most people think that a Fascist is a far right, Tea Party member. Nothing could be further from the truth. Here’s the definition:

13-1210 - Fascism

Conservatives, Libertarians, the Tea Parties, all stand for free markets and individual liberty. Individual liberty. We are absolutely opposed to centralized planning, we reject the idea that “the government” knows better than we do what is right for ourselves, for our families, for our children. We believe the government has a role in life of the nation, but that role is limited, and the Constitution defines that limited role.

Obviously, we’re a long way from the Founder’s vision of a limited central government.

The Obama administration is the poster for modern Fascism. All you have to do is look at every one of their initiatives.

  • They’ve defined “poverty” at an all time high income level, the sole purpose is to get more people reliant on government handouts. Food stamp usage is at an all time high, XX million Americans are on this welfare program.
  • They’ve used the EPA to increase the regulation of business to the point where they control utility rates and they’ve made it nearly impossible to start a manufacturing business.
  • ObamaCare is an initiative to control one-sixth of our economy and in the process the government gets to decide what health care you need.

You get the idea. This President, and the Democratic Party, is all about centralized control. Listen to this exchange on ObamaCare. It’s instructive that the woman in the lower right panel is working overtime, not on the central theme of the argument, but on definition of terms. Thankfully, Jonathan Hoenig stomps the daylights out of her.

I especially love the way he deconstructs her pathetic argument that ObamaCare is all about some notion of “equality”. There’s nothing “equal” about Obama’s exemptions of favored groups and his certain bailout of the insurance companies in three years when we find out what we all know will happen, young people will not enroll in sufficient numbers, and the cost curve will dramatically accelerate because older, sicker people will be “insured”.

This is exactly why the insurance industry was such a big supporter of ObamaCare. They can’t lose. The insurance industry wins big, Obama gets lots of press proclaiming him the modern day Moses leading America out of the wilderness of private health care, and the losers are taxpayers and anybody who is actually going to need medical care because this nightmare is already beginning to collapse the healthcare industry.

At least Mussolini made the trains runs on time.

Curmudgeon Subscribe 150h

Enhanced by Zemanta


Posted by on December 10, 2013.
Filed under Obama Regime, Politics.
Tagged with: .
Michael Becker is a long time activist and a businessman. He's been involved in the pro-life movement since 1976 and has been counseling addicts and ministering to prison inmates since 1980. Becker is a Curmudgeon. He has decades of experience as an operations executive in turnaround situations and in mortgage banking. He blogs regularly at The Right Curmudgeon, The Minority Report, Wizbang, Unified Patriots and Joe for America. He lives in Phoenix and is almost always armed.

You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
  • alanstorm

    The definitions shown are pretty vague – they omit one of the central features of fascism, which Barry O has embraced wholeheartedly: nominal private ownership of business, but with heavy government control. This allows the government to dictate industrial policy, but still have business as a scapegoat when their policies inevitably screw up.

  • alanstorm

    The definitions shown are pretty vague – they omit one of the central features of fascism, which Barry O has embraced wholeheartedly: nominal private ownership of business, but with heavy government control. This allows the government to dictate industrial policy, but still have business as a scapegoat when their policies inevitably screw up.

  • Lawrence Westlake

    Semantics aside (fascism and communism, for example, are the flip sides pretty much of the same coin) this does address a crucial issue, which unfortunately as a result of bad demographics gets short shrifted by the chattering classes. By the time Team Obama is done we’re simply not going to be the same nation in terms of economics, public finance, personal finance or international finance. Each day we devolve closer and closer to our now inevitable denouement: third-world banana republic. Our debt-GDP and deficit-GDP ratios would make Argentina blush and that’s despite four consecutive years of the media/Democrat’s self-proclaimed “recovery.” Real savings rates are negative. Real wage growth is negative. Income growth is stagnant. Severe inflation is a foregone conclusion. So too are much higher interest rates. For Gen. Y/Millennials the underemployment and unemployment rates are dystopian. Because of Obamacare the labor markets are turning into part-time endeavors devoid of fringe benefits. We’re already in another housing bubble. We’re already in another stock market bubble. The next crash will be catastrophic. States, counties and municipalities nearly across the board are broke or at best are treading water because of cheap money. For decades to come these items will have material deleterious effects on society at large. Politics has ripple effects. And we’re circling the drain.

    • ackwired

      You are certainly right about the economic problems facing us.. However, your analysis of the causes should include the fact that real wages have been falling since the late 70′s, the trend of business to limit employees hours started at least 15 to 20 years ago, and the bubbles are the result of under-regulated MBA’s devising ever-new financial schemes to make money without making anything else. Both major political parties have created this problem, in part by blaming the other party rather than seeking solutions. We really need to stop allowing them to exclusively share the power.

      • jim_m

        So your solution to the problem of management adapting to flawed regulation that encourages them to maximize profit (what a company is about ultimately) at the expense of things such as employee hours, etc, it to enact even more regulation in the unsupported assumption that what your failed regulation needs is more regulations to make them work right.

        Maybe the problem is that your regulations are distorting the actions of employers and that had you not gotten government involved in the first place you wouldn’t have these problems.

        The solution to your failed leftist police state is not more leftist police state.

        • ackwired

          You need to first understand the problem before you can discuss solutions. Simply blaming the “other side” forces you to omit and change facts, as was done int the post to which I replied. You are correct that the goal of a business is to maximize profits and shareholder value. Business schools teach this as business ethics, and it would be foolish to expect a business to act otherwise. If unregulated, they will lie, cheat, and steal to maximize profits. That is simply their job. The government’s job is to create a business environment in which a business maximizes profit by benefiting society. Unfortunately, government has failed miserably at this, primarily because business is allowed to bribe and buy politicians and write laws.

          • jim_m

            No. Not all businesses will lie cheat and steal to make better profits. Businesses are run by regular people. Now, unless you are claiming that all people are strictly immoral, I would suggest that you are wrong and if you are claiming that then I suggest that you are even more wrong and potentially have deeper issues.

            The problem is that rather than make unethical behavior illegal and punishing those who do it, the left chooses to preemptively declare all people criminals and force them to continually prove their innocence by submitting to government inspections, completing government forms etc.

            SO instead of punishing the guilty the left’s answer is to punish everyone. Nice.

            The only reason business can bribe government officials is because government officials have put themselves in a position of preemptively punishing business. Corruption is the tool by which people use unethical government workers to bend the regulatory structure to exempt themselves from needing to comply and to force strict compliance on their competitors.

            And finally, if you think that people are so corrupt that they cannot be trusted to run a business ethically, what on earth makes you think that these same people can be trusted to run a government?

            I would suggest that if you think that all businesses will act unethically, then the temptation would be significantly greater for politicians and bureaucrats, who have exponentially greater power, to abuse their position.

            You are substituting a greater danger of corruption as the cure for one that is far less invidious. Not a good choice.

          • TomInCali

            the left chooses to preemptively declare all people criminals and force them to continually prove their innocence by submitting to government inspections, completing government forms etc.

            Bull hockey. “Trust, but verify”.

          • jim_m

            The level of regulatory burden is immense and goes well beyond any legitimate verification and has long since become little more than harassment and an obvious barrier to entry into the market place in order to protect the interests of existing businesses that contribute to politicians.

          • ackwired

            It has nothing to do with how I view people. Business schools teach that the overriding ethical imperative for a manager is to maximize shareholder value. I think this is the way it should be. If the government allows an action that would increase shareholder value, the manager’s responsibility is to take that action. That is the way it is and that is the way it should be.

            I don’t know what the solution is for businesses buying and bribing politicians. But I know it has nothing to do with left and right. The world is not two dimensional, and we must be able to see beyond a narrow dualism to understand what is happening.

          • jim_m

            I am simply saying that not all people are amoral. One can still maximize shareholder value and not behave unethically. It is a leftist trope that businesses are obligated to act immorally in order to maximize shareholder returns.

            The concern is that people will act immorally if we do not constrain them by government supervision. You seem to be claiming that business mandates that people act unethically. This is not true. Business ethics does not stop with maximizing profit, it is about balancing profit and shareholder value with other moral obligations.

            This is the problem is trying to explain business to a leftist. Your ideas of how business works are so warped and false that there is little point to even having a discussion. And as evil as you suppose business people to be you believe that government workers are necessarily as pure as the driven snow until some evil businessman comes and corrupts them. Allow me to let you in on some facts: it isn’t businessmen that corrupt bureaucrats, it is the power they wield over those businessmen. Power leads to corruption.

          • ackwired

            There you go again, Jim. Just making up things for me to believe and say. Just can’t help yourself, can you?

          • jim_m

            While you are complaining about people viewing things in “narrow dualism” your own comments are filled with idiotic dualist assumptions. You make the claim that the overriding imperative is maximizing shareholder value, but if you had ever taken an MBA business ethics class (I have) you would know that this is not true.

            Your comments are filled with anti-capitalist lies that you assume are true because some socialist moron told you so.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            The projection remains strong with ackwired…

          • ackwired

            Again your assumptions are all wrong. I started 3 businesses and worked for two corporations. One of the corporations was the largest in the world at the time and the other was the largest employer of Harvard MBA’s. My boss was a Harvard MBA and had a Harvard Business School Professor in to address us at a meeting, We even had to read his book to prepare. It was during his address in response to my question as to why he insisted that every management decision be based on shareholder value that he schooled me in corporate ethics. I would challenge you to identify two of my comments that are filled with idiotic dualistic assumptions.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Show proof.

          • jim_m

            You have stated more than once on this thread that business ethics are for maximizing shareholder value at the expense of everything else. You have also stated that only by increasing government regulation can this predatory nature of business be thwarted. You also state that government is good except for the corrupting influence of business.

            These are all examples of a dualist thinking. You are claiming that business= bad and government = good. If you don’t think that way you certainly write that way. When you do say that government is bad it is because business has corrupted it and not that government could be bad all on its own,

          • ackwired

            That would be a type of dualism. But you made those things up. I never said them. Great strawman, though.

          • jim_m

            I responded to them when you wrote them. As I said, if what you think differs from what you write, you should take note about how what you write comes across to everyone else.

          • ackwired

            Only seems to happen with you.

        • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

          As we see here most every day, he’s all about reinforcing failure.

  • LiberalNightmare

    A rose by any other name, still smells like a communist

  • jim_m

    I don’t think obama is all that picky. HE would accept heading up either form of dictatorship

    • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves


  • Commander_Chico


    This is exactly why the insurance industry was such a big supporter of ObamaCare. They can’t lose. The insurance industry wins big,


    Stop the autoplay on the video.

    • jim_m

      Yeah, because the aim of every CEO is to make their company forever dependent upon government largesse to cover the huge losses they are going to experience due to government regulation.

      And note that Chico only objects to anything that might bail out the insurance companies, he has no problem with the corrupt cronyism. Chico believes in using the power of government to protect and enrich your friends and to punish your enemies.

    • Retired military

      Ah yes. Chico uses Option A.
      The Oligarchy.

  • Constitution First

    Her Obummer has illegally (ab)used the IRS to attack, and the NAS to spy on, his opposition. He has made recess appointments while Congress was in session, appoint dozens of unvetted czars circumventing Congress. Jamming Socialized Medicine down people throats along purely partizan lines, and of course let’s not forget the purchase of 4,200,000,000 rounds of hollow point ammunition as a backdoor form of gun control. So yes, the term FASCISM fits Barry’s regime a lot closer than any another term.

  • klaffner

    Fascism is also about BIG business. As opposed to small business. Fewer big companies providing necessary services means fewer necks to put the noose around. I do believe this is the reason every bit of legislation is designed to burden small business in a way that will put them out of business while offering up crony partnerships with big business. GE for Energy. As this column notes, ObamaCare is one big continuing wet kiss to big insurance companies. EPA regulations are impossible for small business to meet, but only a nuance for big business. In the end, it is a Fascist state controlling big business and the rest of us.