Wicked Commentary

It would have been hard not to notice either of those groups. It would also be hard to miss the faux arguments, and near shutdown, Dems recently staged over the tax-cut extension.

Grover Norquist nails the left in this Newsmax article:

“They hoped to say we’re for cutting taxes on low-income people and we want to raise taxes on high-income people. And once they were told that the votes were not there to raise taxes on small businesses and higher-income people, they lost all interest through the whole thing.”

Norquist, the Harvard-educated president of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), says that such tactics are divisive. “They were trying to promote class hatred and division based on how much money people earn,” he explained.

If they can’t have that then they are not interested.

Norquist tells Newsmax.TV that he believes the entire issue was political theater to assist Obama in his re-election bid and to distract Americans from the real issues.

Read more on Newsmax.com: Norquist: Obama Used Payroll Tax to Whip Up Class Hatred

[Well, in this case it was only about that]

True, Norquist has it exactly right. But roots of this are much deeper than he suggests there. This is the Democrats’ platform. Back in Goldwater’s era, he knew exactly what Liberals were about. He wrote in his book “Conscience of a Conservative”, right at the beginning, that the problem is Democrats are obsessed with materialism. By that he explains that their entire platform is only concerned with the politics of economics, and I don’t mean the economy. The first chapter in his book lays it out just the way it was then and still is.

Barry Goldwater

With a little assist from Goldwater. [Excerpts]

“The shoe is precisely on the other foot: it is Socialism that subordinates all other considerations to man’s material wellbeing.”

Here is how Goldwater put it describing their class argument:

“The same judgment, though in the form of an attack rather than an admission, is advanced by the radical camp. “We liberals,” they say, “are interested in people. Our concern is with human beings, while you Conservatives are preoccupied with the preservation of economic privilege and status.” Take them a step further, and the Liberals will turn the accusations into a class argument: it is the little people that concern us, not the “malefactors of great wealth.”[1]

Sound familiar? He then separates the wheat from the chaff:

“Such statements, from friend and foe alike, do great injustice to the Conservative point of view. Conservatism is not an economic theory, though it has economic implications. The shoe is precisely on the other foot: it is Socialism that subordinates all other considerations to man’s material wellbeing. It is Conservatism that puts material things in their proper place—that has a structured view of the human being and of human society, in which economics plays only a subsidiary role.” [1]

……. [he continues]

Secondly, the Conservative has learned that the economic and spiritual aspects of man’s nature are inextricably intertwined. He cannot be economically free, or even economically efficient, if he is enslaved politically; conversely, man’s political freedom is illusory if he is dependent for his economic needs on the State.”

Then he nails the box shut with this:
“So it is that Conservatism, throughout history, has regarded man neither as a potential pawn of other men, nor as a part of a general collectivity in which the sacredness and the separate identity of individual human beings are ignored. Throughout history, true Conservatism has been at war equally with autocrats and with “democratic” Jacobins. The true Conservative was sympathetic with the plight of the hapless peasant under the tyranny of the French monarchy. And he was equally revolted at the attempt to solve that problem by a mob tyranny that paraded under the banner of egalitarianism. The conscience of the Conservative is pricked by anyone who would debase the dignity of the individual human being. Today, therefore, he is at odds with dictators who rule by terror, and equally with those gentler collectivists who ask our permission to play God with the human race.”

My thoughts

He knew what many conservatives know today, or are quickly learning: Conservatism is not just a simple economic theory. It did not and could not survive in that vacuum, or else it would be no better or different than Liberals’ use of political economics as a tool. Of course, the media or Liberals never want you to see that larger picture about conservatism but only play along with their scripted politics to their preferred political ends. And they certainly will not admit the material obsession of the left.

We cannot mistake what we see in phony Republican corporatism and deal making for conservatism. Liberals like to substitute the latter for the former in their attacks on the right. In fact, just the opposite occurred over the decades; Republicans have increasingly divorced themselves from true conservatism, while playing only lip service to any core conservative principles when convenient or necessary. Thus, they diminished the brand. It is only up to conservatives to make a distinction because, frankly, no one else cares.

Enter stage left, Comrade in Chief

As if right on cue, Obama chimed in with his “This is not class warfare; it’s math.” Crapola. In reality, with Dems it is all about class and it is warfare. It is the fine art of using math, or politiconomics when convenient, to justify their ends.

He also said in his so-called argument against class warfare, which was actually a justification for it, that “the only pledge that matters is the pledge we take to uphold the Constitution.” Well, since we see Obama does not take that “pledge” seriously, then I guess nothing really matters in his view. (his oath had a two minute expiration date)  So now we have the left claiming class warfare is the tool of the right.

No doubt that is the same “class warfare” charge the Occupiers were making about the right while engaging in, you guessed it, class warfare. Their brainwashing agenda has now moved to labeling the right as the class warfare culprits.


[1]These are just selected excerpts.

© 1960 by Victor Publishing Co., Inc., General Editor’s Intro. © 2007 by Sean Wilentz. Published by Princeton University Press. Reprinted by permission of Princeton University Press given to PrivateBullRight for this article.

You can also read chapter one at this link: http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8388.html

Ref: Newsmax article http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/norquist-payroll-tax-obama/2011/12/22/id/421938

Class warfare – conflict between social or economic classes (especially between the capitalist and proletariat classes)


Comments on: "Who is right, Tea Parties or Occupiers? by PrivateBullRight, contributor" (28)

  1. PBR,

    Congratulations on a very well done post. You have a lot of interesting information in this article and very well done. Thank you for your contribution.


    • privbullright said:

      Thanks, many thanks for allowing me to post. Its a shame that decades later that some still don’t see the forest for the trees. So often, even the mention of Barry Goldwater now, aside from his loss, is mostly met with hyperbole or attacks about right wing extremism.(and that is even from Rebubs) Well, what we have today is Extremism on steroids.

      “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” — Isaiah 5-20.


      • PBR,

        The irony of all this is that the extremism is actually on the other side, the liberal loony left.
        They think it’s extreme to want to save a child’s life instead of aborting the child. They find it extreme to go shooting on a range. It’s extreme to have a Nativity scene up at Christmas.
        We on the right are extreme if we believe in the death penalty for heinous criminals but yet they think nothing of aborting a live human being.

        The Isaiah 5-20 is so utterly true.


  2. bull,

    Damn good post! Conservatism is not a political way of life it is the overall approach to life in everything we do. The liberals are the ones that are the greedy whore mongers, not those that have benefited from a true capitalistic society. It was good to read some stuff from Goldwater again.


    • privbullright said:

      Dave, I really appreciate the compliment. Right. They have people believe its about the rich, and the right is about the rich. When we do save this republic from their clutches, they will enjoy the fuits too. But that will sort of ruin their playing God platform — and their power-hungry egos.


      • bull,

        Great comeback comment. Simply example; Soros!


        • privbullright said:

          What can I say? You’re correct. If Soros was playing by any ethics or even had a conscience, he wouldn’t be the sick individual he is. Yet it is evil personified, and all his means go toward those ends. And the left is being bought with blood money. Just that all of us pay the price.


          • PBR,

            I too believe that Soros is evil personified. And It galls me that we all have to pay the price of this individual playing with all of our lives and trying to destroy our country. On top of that why is he still allowed here? He openly speaks about how much fun he gets in overthrowing the economies of the other countries. And he is being more open about what he is doing here all the time. Just like the Zero, he is openly now defying everything under the Constitution and yet the
            Congress sits by and allows it to happen. There must be huge payoffs going on inside our government.


          • bull & Pepp,

            And just look at how much hell the media gives the Koch boys when they spread their money around to some very good causes. Only the lefty loons can be rich….


  3. Bull,

    Excellent post! But you know it amazing how many citizens fall for the Communist style propaganda that the Progressive’s (Liberals) continue to use over the years. They use the same tactics over and over again because it works for them! The tactic you write about here..
    “Always accuse the opposition of what you are doing.” (Vladimir Lenin) has been going on as long as I can remember. But the “Stupids” fall for it every time!


    • privbullright said:

      Yea, so apropos, the accusations are their bayonets they’re sticking in mush. Vlad would be cheering them. Churches have a saying too about telling “tickling ears” what they want to hear. We have some tickling ears in this country. But they don’t want to be bothered with the truth.


  4. thedrpete said:

    The argument you make, privbullright, was made difficult before your time. It was in his first presidential campaign speech in 1932 that Franklin Delano Roosevelt — in a classic progressive move that continues to this day — flipped language on its head. Until that day “liberal” meant one who respected individual liberty, the unalienable right. Interestingly, FDR used “liberal” as the name for those previously known as “progressives”. Progressives believed that we needed to progress behind old notions like liberty so as to fulfill some “social contract”.

    As part of this language flipping, Roosevelt also took a famous lecture from an 1860s Yale professor, titled “The Forgotten Man”. The prof posited that A and B (both progressives) would see so problem that was being had by X. A and B would then get Y to pay to solve the problem. Y — the guy who got stuck with the tab for A and B’s idea was “the forgotten man”. FDR in that same speech claimed that X was the forgotten man. To halp make it stick, he had to shed the term “progressive”.

    “Conservative” doesn’t ring as well as “liberal”, associating with liberty. “Libertarian” as well seems contrived.


  5. privbullright said:

    Thanks for the good input. Yes indeed, I’m familiar with the real term. I tend to capitalize Liberal in the progressive sense, and a small “l” when using in the “traditional” old sense…whether proper or not. But that does confuse people sometimes. I personally have a pet peeve when a group or party hijacks a word as their own, complete with definition. The word Liberal has not been friendly to them which is why they opt back for progressive, as if we forgot what it means/is. (history repeats) Great comments.

    Ah, maybe one day liberal can be fully reclaimed like a lot of words in our language. But then the left will often rename something only after ruining the current one – also a habit of politicians. Progressive does apply across the isle. Like the “new left”, the “new Democrat” seems to be another albatross. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=118 But if new Democrat was to sanitize the far left path the Party had taken, it seems to have been short lived. They seem just as progressive to me. The left does have a knack for naming things and making their (re)definitions stick, I digress.


    • thedrpete said:

      Possibly the most-egregious progressive definitions alteration in American history involves the Constitution’s terms “regulate” and “commerce”. The former in 1789 meant to make regular, no more and no less. The latter encompassed pricing and shipping/transporting, no more and no less.

      When properly understood, “regulate commerce among the states . . . ” means nothing like what the progressives have morphed it to. And the results have been devastating.


    • privbullright said:

      Thanks for the pointer.


  6. Excellent post,PBR. Damn shame the GOP today is running in fear away from, instead of what Sen.Goldwater stood for.


    • privbullright said:

      Thanks and yes sir, they are running all right! Maybe its a bit controversial for them… or maybe confrontational is the better word? all they care about is who’s winning and who’s losing. (but at present, we’re all losing)


  7. privbullright said:

    Post script:
    This is not just to sing his praises, as I don’t agree lockstep with his politics. As a base for conservatives, and part of the foundation, we can learn a lot from him. But as an end all for conservatives, I certainly don’t propose that. His opposition on the civil rights was one and the influence of the Christian right (moral majority) was another. I think for the most part “true” modern conservatives would find a friend with Barry, though the movement has outgrown those earlier days.(IMO) Unfortunately, the shortfalls the movement had upon his loss could have been gains for the left, which also was undergoing a restructuring.

    But it is just as hard now to imagine a young Hillary being a Goldwater girl. So there was a drive and appetite for conservative thinking. Nothing happens in a vacuum though and there have been other influences. I heard his views third person for the first time at a young age in the early sixties from a supporter. Even then I had to flinch here and there. It did cause me to think; in as much as where I lived most politics had a dirty and corruptive reputation. Much the kind it has today. But today, rather than a conversation starter, he more often could be a conversation ender in mixed company. I do admit though, Goldwater is like whiskey… some like it straight.


  8. privbullright said:

    ThedrPete brings up the whacky world of redefinitions. Founders would never have imagined these creative ever-evolving government redefinitions. Another such recent example is Kelo. Most people are familiar with creative uses like public use. That struck at the heart of property owners across America. Changing or redefining a word does make a huge difference. For perspective, in the early 20’s Hitler explained his view on the subject: He told a reporter, “I want everyone to keep the property he has acquired for himself according to the principle: the common good takes precedence over self-interest. But the state must retain control and each property owner should consider himself an agent of the state. . . . The Third Reich will always retain the right to control the owners of property.” – [Richard Pipes; essay on Private property, freedom, and the rule of law; 2001]. No matter how much lipstick they apply its still a sow. Comparing that to Kelo is pretty instructive.


    • thedrpete said:

      Affirmative Action
      affordable housing
      affordable healthcare
      corporate greed
      corporate tax breaks*
      public service
      shipping jobs overseas**
      tax cuts***
      tax cuts for the rich****
      the less-fortunate
      working man*****

      * Corporations don’t pay taxes. Their customers do.
      ** Do the jobs travel by boat?
      *** Neither congress nor a president can cut taxes, just rates.
      **** When the top 1% of earners pay 40% of the taxes and the top 25% pay 86% of all the federal income taxes, if you were gonna give a cut, to whom could you?
      ***** Were Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and Donald Trump not working?


  9. Corporate cronyism
    Share the wealth
    Middle class
    Revenues (instead of taxes)
    community service (word for Acorn)

    They are full of these “phony baloney” words up there in Cesspool City.


  10. willibeaux said:

    PBR, Mrs. Pepper’awk, & Gos’awk etal! This is off the subject of an excellent post but I thought I’d post another attempt to be funny.

    ‘ere is a tale about corvettes. Boulder CO has a large community of ‘ippies and transients. One day one of the ‘ippies took off on ‘is bicycle heading East on Interstate 70. This was the typical Boulder ‘ippie, long straggly BLACK ‘air and a unkempt beard. As ‘e was peddling along ‘is merry way a corvette pulls up along side of ‘im. The British driver asks the ‘ippie “where you ‘eading mate?” ‘ippie replies “Kansas”.

    Driver says “would you like a lift?” ‘ippie says yes, but ‘ow are we going to get my wheels in your car?” Driver replies”good question”!

    Driver says “I ‘ave a rope; we’ll tie it to your wheels and I’ll tow you”. “‘ere is a ‘orn”. Blow it if I’m driving too fast.”

    They take off down the road at a reasonable pace. All’s well so far. Out of nowhere comes another corvette which pulls up along side of the British driver. He yells “wanna race”? “Yeah lets do it.”

    The corvettes take off down the road flying low. They pass a State ‘ighway Patrol vehicle. The trooper radios ahead to ‘is buddy down the road and says “Willibeaux you ain’t gonna believe this. Two corvettes racing just passed me doing 80.” Well says Willibeaux “what’s so unusual about that”? The first trooper says “there is an old man with WHITE ‘air and a long WHITE beard on a bicycle blowing ‘is ‘orn for them to move over so that ‘e can pass.”

    ‘ooRah! 😉

    PS: Boulder is famous for being 13 sq. miles of funkeyness surrounded by reality.


    • privbullright said:

      Willi. LOL

      Well, I can’t blame the guy on the bike….at that speed its hard to tell if its a broken line or no passing zone. Funny story.


    • Beau,

      At’s ah goodun mate!

      Man, Boulder sure sounds different since I was there. But shoot, that’s been around 30 yrs back. My poor State… It sounds as if the whole place has gone Liberal! Yuk! I wonder if my birthplace, Rocky Ford, has changed much.


      • willibeaux said:

        Don’t know ‘awk! Ain’t never been there. A melon farm down there had problems this year with Listeria traced to it. Farmer went bankrupt. Many lawsuits pending.

        Farming is tough.


  11. privbullright said:

    Case in point:

    Lesson #1 in how to (try to) interpret a Liberal.

    We squeezed in lesson #2:
    How they define as they go — make things up — to fit the circumstance.


  12. Willibeaux,

    You crack me up with these stories. I was laughing myself to death. Gotta be careful with how hard you hit me with your funnies. 🙂


We welcome all comments, opinions, rants, raves, and humor too

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: