I will continue to call the Barry, Harry & Nancy show fascism, using the definition from The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics which states:
As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie. Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism.
Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners. Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.) Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically. In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace. Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions.
Sounds stunningly close to what we have been living through for the past few years.
According to TheHill, this administration is now racing Scott Brown in order to enact their version of healthcare because Paul Kirk WILL VOTE FOR this legislation. I have been warning my readers about what will happen when Brown and the rest of America pulls off the “Massachusetts Miracle”, and to keep pacing themselves so as to avoid aneurysms and heart failure. Winning an election in America no longer means the same thing it did a decade ago.
Healthcare talks in race with Massachusetts’s special election
Democrats are rushing to finalize healthcare legislation as their hold on the 60th vote in the Senate appears to be slipping.
A deal on healthcare reform is “very close,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said Friday. “I would certainly hope that within the next 24, 48, 72 hours, we have a general agreement between the Senate and the House.”
This is a sure sign that even democratically controlled Massachusetts has gotten the message that our federal government is morphing into a beast that is no longer in line with the Constitution and the Founding Fathers.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) plans to seat the new senator as soon as results are certified and Vice President Joe Biden is available to administer the oath of office, a Reid aide told State News Service.
That date looks to be Jan. 29, which would give local and state officials time to receive overseas ballots and military ballots and then finalize the results.
The Senate requires an official election certification before a senator can be sworn in.
Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin said Wednesday that certifying the election results could take weeks.
Meanwhile, interim Sen. Paul Kirk (D) has said he would vote for the healthcare bill no matter who wins the special election.
The Jan. 29 swearing-in date could give both chambers time to vote on the legislation, which still needs a Congressional Budget Office score. Democrats said they hoped to have the bill to the CBO by Saturday. And Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said the full text of the bill would be published online for 72 hours before a House vote.
Does anybody believe that we are going to be able to see whatever the White House and SEIU’s Andy Stern decided for the rest of us for that 72 hour window before a vote?
Now, from Politico breaking news email:
President Obama will campaign for Massachusetts Senate candidate Martha Coakley on Sunday, POLITICO has learned, a sign that Democrats are deeply worried about her prospects and the party’s 60-seat majority.
Obama to campaign for Coakley
BOSTON — President Obama will campaign for Massachusetts Senate candidate Martha Coakley on Sunday, POLITICO has learned, a sign that Democrats are deeply worried about her prospects and the party’s 60-seat majority.
With a new poll showing Coakley, the state attorney general, down by four percent, Democrats have decided to call in their biggest gun to rouse the Democratic base here before the Tuesday special election.
Details on the Obama visit were not finalized mid-day Friday. Coakley had been keeping schedule on Sunday open, in hopes for a presidential visit, but didn’t get word of Obama’s decision until Friday morning.
via @LogisticMonster Fascism Vs. Liberty: Dems Race Scott Brown And America Over Healthcare http://tinyurl.com/ygsaroc #palin #tcot