Category Archives: Neoliberals

Birds of a feather

In reaction to the New York Times story on Obama further expanding the Bush-Cheney power grabs, two pro-war, any war sites have chimed in FAVORING Obama’s actions.

American Power admits, “Personally, I have no problems with the the model of strong executive power (unitary executive theory).”

Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs praises Obama in a post entitled, Obama Using Executive Power to Get Around Obstructionist GOP.

Despite their childish bickering, both big-government, pro-interventionist pundits are still singing the same tune.

Is Ron Paul a leftist?

Over at The American Spectator, Jeffrey Lord (see Dan Phillips’ post below) is whooping it up because Ron Paul didn’t win the Iowa caucus. In Lord’s view, Iowa Republicans stood up for conservatism – which to him, means perpetual war:

The Ron Paul Non-Cons have tonight been effectively marginalized.

Whatever else comes out of this Iowa Caucus night, one thing is clear: conservatives — Reagan conservatives — triumphed.

The combined vote of Santorum, Gingrich, Bachmann, Perry and even the moderate Mitt Romney swamped Ron Paul’s controversial and decidedly non-conservative foreign policy.

As this is written, either Santorum or Romney are first, the other second. Between them that’s about 50% of the vote to Ron Paul’s 25% or so.

Which clearly means that no matter how Congressman Paul — a good and decent man with a wildly left-wing foreign policy — spins the results, his ideas have taken a thorough beating. His candidacy and his controversial foreign policy views have effectively been sent packing.

As well they should. There is nothing remotely historically conservative about Paul’s views.

Congressman Paul is partly to blame for this perception. He effectively endorsed this view at the Sioux City debate on December 15. The moderator accused Paul of “running left of President Obama on the issue of Iran” because he, unlike Santorum and Bachmann, had ruled out a pre-emptive war. This was Paul’s great chance to make mincemeant of the notion that conservatism equals war, and leftism, peace, but he let it slip away. Continue reading

Progressive, Neocon, whatever – it’s all Big Government

We’ve been arguing for some time (see here and here) that there’s no philosophical or practical difference between the “Progressive” and Neocon agendas. Oh, how good it feels to see someone from the left validate that message. Here’s Glenn Greenwald:

As I pointed out just yesterday, many Democrats not only passively acquiesce to Obama’s continuation of core Bush/Cheney Terrorism policies, but enthusiastically cheer it as proof that they, too, can be Tough and Strong (manly virtues demonstrated by how many human beings their leader kills from afar). So here you have Think Progress heaping praise on Obama for seizing what is literally the most radical power a President can seize: the power to target — in total secrecy and with no checks or due process — their fellow citizens for execution: specifically, assassination-by-CIA.

And check out this killer quote from Greenwald’s article, one that every pro-war “conservative” should read and deal with:

It took Ron Paul — whom every Good Progressive will tell you is Completely Crazy and Insane — to point out to the GOP the rather glaring inconsistency between, on the one hand, distrusting government authorities to run health care, but on the other, wanting to empower the President to kill whomever he wants with no transparency or due process.

This is the trap grass-roots, patriotic Southerners have fallen into. They cheer on “the troops,” no matter the mission, and submit to everything DC wants, from the Patriot Act, to illegal searches in airports, yet can’t comprehend why our liberty is slipping away, minute by minute.

Nationalism in Israel and the West

This categorization, by Ellison Lodge,  may be a little unfair to Buchanan and perhaps a little too generous to Michael Savage, but it succinctly captures the mixed positions on nationalism in Israel and the West:

If one were to try to sort out views on nationalism in Israel and the West, it could be neatly split into four categories:

1) Those who support ethno-politics for Israel but not for Europeans and the West. (neoliberals and neoconservatives like Abe Foxman, Alan Dershowitz, Bill Kristol et al.)
2) Those who oppose ethno-politics for Israel and the West (Noam Chomsky, Max Blumenthal et al.) [and politically correct libertarians]
3) Those who support ethno-politics in the West and in Israel (Lawrence Auster, Diana West, Michael Savage)
4) Those who oppose ethno-politics for Israel but support it for the West (Pat Buchanan, Kevin MacDonald)

Like the author, I would include myself in category #3. I have no problem with Israel promoting ethno-nationalist policies or taking a hardline stance on immigration (these are things any sane nation should do), but I think Israel should have to do these things on its own dime, and we don’t need overseas partisans of Israel (e.g. Bill Kristol or Joseph Lieberman) trying to prevent Western nations from pursuing much-needed immigration enforcement and reduction.  That said, unlike Larry Auster, I don’t think one’s position on Israel should be the deciding factor in assessing his political views.  Frankly, I don’t care whether another Westerner is pro- or anti-Israel; I do, however, care whether he’s pro-Western.  Lodge says it best:

The idea that the fate of European or American Civilization is somehow tied up in Israel, as Geert Wilders & Co. often claim, has absolutely no basis in reality; the same goes for the ahistorical, made-up term “Judeo-Christian tradition.”

Read the rest of Ellison Lodge’s article here.

 

Want to help the poor?

And a whole lot of the middle class at the same time? The answer is so obvious, even liberal writer Mickey Kaus can see it:

If you’re worried about incomes at the bottom, though, one solution leaps out at you. It’s a solution that worked, at least in the late 1990s under Bill Clinton, when wages at the low end of the income ladder rose fairly dramatically. The solution is tight labor markets. Get employers bidding for scarce workers and you’ll see incomes rise across the board without the need for government aid programs or tax redistribution. A major enemy of tight labor markets at the bottom is also fairly clear: unchecked immigration by undocumented low-skilled workers. It’s hard for a day laborer to command $18 an hour in the market if there are illegals hanging out on the corner willing to work for $7. Even experts who claim illlegal immigration is good for Americans overall admit that it’s not good for Americans at the bottom.

The law of supply and demand applies to labor, too? Whoa! What’ll Kaus discover next? Gravity?

Tom Friedman’s “centrist” Party

There has been gossip about neoliberal Thomas L. Friedman’s recent claim that a “centrist” third party is in the works.  Michael Collins Piper reports:

The new party will shun both the “liberal left” and the “conservative right” and stand for “centrist, bipartisan” policies. Or, should that be tri-partisan? Friedman’s column is part of an increasingly open campaign by monopolistic media controllers to conjure up a “centrist” rebellion in America, even to the point of launching a third party to vanquish both liberal Barack Obama—presuming he is re-nominated by the Democratic Party—and a “conservative” Republican challenger. AFP warned this “centrist” movement would be a classic “controlled opposition,” dominated by the very big money forces—here and abroad —in the Rothschild banking dynasty’s sphere of influence that have controlled both major parties through their stranglehold over major media outlets shaping public opinion. Friedman’s column was titled bluntly: “Third party rising.” He wrote: “There is a revolution brewing in the country, and it is not just on the right wing but in the radical center.” Friedman described “two serious groups, one on the East Coast and one on the West Coast,” working to build third party movements that the columnist said would “challenge our stagnating two-party duopoly that has been presiding over our nation’s steady decline.”

It’s nearly comical that Friedman is championing a party to combat a decline that people like him helped to bring about.   Regardless, if Friedman has anything to do with this party, expect it to be:

pro-immigration
pro-free trade
pro-nation building

It will be Clintonianism with a new face.   How  revolutionary!   And don’t forget to add in anti-occidental, as Clinton was the first president openly to celebrate that the soon U.S. will no longer be a Western country in terms of demographics.  Thomas Friedman is a mediocre writer and second-rate thinker at best.  Upset by the failures of the Obama Regime and hoping to cash in on tea party angst, he’s now promoting a legerdemain of  passing off failed ideas as something new and revolutionary.   In that respect, he’s already in line behind Dick Armey and Grover Norquist.

Has Obama Lost White America?

Right and left read the same writing on the wall from Scott Brown’s upset victory in Massachusetts, and draw conflicting conclusions. Both Pat Buchanan and Thomas B. Edsall of The New Republic see Obama’s agenda as slanted toward minorities — but each views that agenda in a starkly different light.

Here’s Pat Buchanan:

So what have Obama and Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi been doing for a year? Crafting a federal takeover of health care with a vast plan that provides coverage for the uninsured—most of whom are minorities—while sticking it to Medicare recipients, 80 percent to 90 percent of whom are white.

Immigrants are 21 percent of the uninsured, but only 7 percent of the population. This means white folks on Medicare or headed there will see benefits curtailed, while new arrivals from the Third World, whence almost all immigrants come, get taxpayer-subsidized health insurance. Any wonder why all those Tea Party and town-hall protests seem to be made up of angry white folks?

Buchanan sees an opportunity for Republicans to reverse their 2008 loss if they stake out positions that will attract white voters:

An end to affirmative action and ethnic preferences, an end to bailouts of Wall Street bankers, a moratorium on immigration until unemployment falls to 6 percent, an industrial policy that creates jobs here and stops shipping them to China appear a winning hand in 2012.

I’d vote for that.
Continue reading

Rush Needs to Untie the Other Half of His Brain

I normally listen to sports talk radio in the morning (the great Mike and Mike) because our local morning political talk guy is a GOP hack, but this morning I happened to catch Rush Limbaugh’s morning update. The subject was Obama’s dreaded liberal internationalism, which Rush of course thinks is a bad thing. I think Obama’s liberal internationalism is a bad thing too, but not just because it is liberal but also because it is internationalist. Rush has no problem with internationalism. He just wants unilateral, bellicose, shoot first internationalism and not that mushy liberal type. There could be nothing more internationalist than spreading democracy by force of arms and telling another sovereign nation what kind of weapons it can or cannot have for the sake of a third nation we supposedly have some obligation to defend.

The sad thing is, Rush really does believe that his brand of bellicose internationalism is the polar opposite of and the conservative alternative to Obama’s alleged liberal internationalism. But it is neither. The true opposite would be a philosophy that rejects internationalism in favor of particularism. Something you might call America First.

For the Rushes of the American “right” internationalism is just assumed. It is taken for granted. They can’t even think in terms that aren’t internationalist. But internationalism of this sort is inherently liberal. (Conservatism can be cosmopolitan. It does not require hostile parochialism, but it rejects the assumptions that underlie modern internationalism.) Conservatism is inherently particularist, nationalist (in the good patriotic sense), regionalist, localist and decentralist. So if Rush wishes to speak for the right he should be countering Obama’s liberal internationalism with conservative particularism, but he is so far from getting that.

Rush brags of having half his brain tied behind his back. Well perhaps he should untie it and make an effort to begin to understand how his bellicose internationalism is neither conservative nor the opposite of the liberal internationalism Obama is peddling.

Can the West be saved?

If it is saved, it will first have to be saved from its leaders, as Serge Trifkovic warns us:

Topping the list is elite hostility to all forms of solidarity of the majority population based on shared historical memories, ancestors, and common culture; the consequences are predictable:

- the loss of a sense of place and history among Europeans and North Americans;
- rapid demographic decline, especially in Europe, unparalleled in history;
- rampant Third World (and in Europe, overwhelmingly Muslim) immigration;
- collapse of private and public manners, morals, and traditional commonalities;
- imposition of “diversity,” “multiculturalism,” “sensitivity”; and
- demonization and criminalization of any opposition to any of the above.

The end-result is the Westerners’ loss of the sense of propriety over their lands.

And how do they accomplish this? The government indoctrination system — which we refer to as “public schools” — cranks out enough brainwashed converts who welcome multiculturalism as the inevitable wave of the future — even though the multicultural “ideal” is a fantasy of the American ruling class.

But the more insidious method is that of undermining the opposition, and that’s where they’re achieving their greatest success. They do that by convincing us that conservatism is a universal ideology, instead of the accumulated wisdom of generations which aims to preserve our traditional heritage. Look at the chief spokesmen of the universalists — Bush, McCain, Lindsey Graham — all Open Borders advocates, amnesty peddlers, and friends with La Raza.

McCain is the worst of them all. Let’s not forget his blatant pandering to the Open Borders lobby during the Republican presidential debates. In response to Tom Tancredo’s plea to call a “time out” in record levels of Third-World immigration, McCain dismissed the idea with, “It’s beyond my realm of thinking.” I suspect that for once, McCain was telling the truth. Cultural revolution is his one and only goal.

And how can we forget how McCain later mocked those of us determined to preserve our culture:

“A questioner asked Mitt Romney to explain his tough talk against illegal immigration, in light of political ads the former Massachusetts governor is airing in Spanish. This presented another moment for Tancredo to pontificate on the need to preserve the English language. When it was McCain’s turn, he couldn’t resist quipping, “Muchas gracias.”

Cute, huh? That was a deliberate slap in the face to Americans who do not want to be colonized by Latin America. And yet, he calls himself a conservative — at least, he does when he wants our votes. It is that bait-and-switch with genuine conservatism that enables the neoliberals and Neocons to convince us that America is not an historical nation founded on Western, Christian heritage, but the “proposition nation” that Abraham Lincoln imposed on us.

Both socialists and Neocons sneer at Pat Buchanan’s defense of the traditional America as “blood and soil” conservatism. These pro-amnesty ideologues have managed to turn “blood and soil” into the worst possible insult, thanks to enforcers of political correctness such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and a compliant corporate media. They know that by slandering those who seek to preserve our “historical memories, ancestors, and common culture” as racists, they are attacking the social cohesion that makes limited, Constitutional government possible, thereby paving the way for the authoritarian, socialist government they are determined to impose on us.

And it’s working.

Architects of Existence

Succinctly described, transhumanism is a project for making a new, immortal life form as the evolutionary successor to Man. How this is to be done is not yet clear, for whether humanity’s imminent replacement should be robot, mutant, or a mix of both has not yet been settled among transhumanists themselves. Nor, for that matter, is the final purpose of all our urgent becoming something else entirely clear, either.

Mythic presentations are often more useful than abstract description in evoking what movements, philosophies, or cultures are about; as such, the late Arthur C. Clarke’s science fiction tale 2001: A Space Odyssey could be seen as functionally comparable to the ancient Achaeans’ Homeric vision.

Continue reading

Dobbs Targets Spitzer

“Lou Dobbs is sorry about calling Gov. Eliot Spitzer an idiot. Sincerely. As for ripping the New York Democrat as arrogant, spineless and “a spoiled rich kid brat,” the host of CNN’s “Lou Dobbs Tonight” stands by those nationally broadcast broadsides. Absolutely. Dobbs has made Spitzer an almost daily target over his recent plan to ease restrictions on illegal immigrants seeking New York state driver’s licenses, mixing vitriol with sarcasm while endlessly lambasting the governor’s decision. The lifelong Republican has taken on politicians of every stripe, as when he blasted the Bush administration over port security. But his nightly diatribe against Spitzer is notable for its intensity, and for elevating a state proposal onto the national stage. “What he’s doing is an outrageous, arrogant abuse of power,” Dobbs said in an interview before a recent show. “He’s pandering to a constituency aligned directly against the interests of U.S. and New York state citizens.”” ~ Washington Post

Hopefully the remaining patriots in NY State will commence impeachment proceedings against the traitor Gov. Spitzer, as has already been suggested.

The NeoCon Lexicon

Here is the inception of the NeoCon Lexicon. If you can think of any additions or corrections, please post them below, or email them to: editors[at]conservativetimes.org

——-
THE NEOCON DICTIONARY

The Amen Corner: The neocon’s “useful idiots,” naive Christians unknowingly committing self-destruction by backing the neocon secularist/globalist agenda.

Blood and soil: The basis of traditional patriotism, practiced by Zionist neocons, but forbidden to Christians of Anglo/European descent.

Allan Bloom: Jewish homosexual, hostile towards Christianity, died of AIDS, and author of Closing of the American Mind, which reads like “a civics textbook designed for New Deal Democrats” (Gottfried).

Neocon Calendar: Always set to 1939, where “if drastic action is not taken on X, then a second Holocaust is just around the corner.”

FDR: Hero to neocons. Soft socialism mixed with perpetual foreign war is a fine wine to the neocon pallet.

Abe Foxman: A Leftist fellow traveler, hater of Christianity, checks the right flank for the neocon by attacking real conservatives, so the neocon can further secularize and globalize the West.

Free trade: The neocon method of destroying Western economies – while making a fast buck too!

Genophilia: Instinctive attachment to family and tribe, practiced by Zionist neocons, forbidden to Christians of Anglo/European descent. Continue reading

A Watershed Moment?

It would appear that people’s faith in government is at an all-time low.

A recent Zogby poll gave the U.S. Congress a 3% approval rating, a historic low, perhaps the lowest ever recorded in American history.

More people are now calling themselves “independents” than ever before. Faith in both the GOP and Democratic Party has plummeted.

Only about 14,000 votes were cast in the Iowa Straw Poll, down from the 24,000 in 1999. Many people simply did not care.

And can you blame the apathy? A convergence of interests (corporate, multicultural, globalist) has all but declared war upon the traditional population, especially the Anglo and Euro-American population.

Poll after poll shows that your average, middle American opposes immigration, opposes free trade, and opposes the escalation of the war in Iraq. Yet, the elite in D.C. simply do not care, and continue to pursue their globalist agendas.

What does the future hold?

Confidence In Congress Lowest Ever

Amid a series of bipartisan legal scandals and corruption probes, it’s no wonder that the nation’s confidence in Congress is at an all-time low.  According to a national poll conducted by an esteemed organization that has studied human nature and behavior for more than 70 years, Americans’ confidence in Congress has never been worst. The 14% confidence rating of the country’s federal lawmaking bodies is actually the lowest of the 16 institutions tested in this year’s Gallup Confidence in Institutions survey. It also ranks among one of the all time lowest confidence ratings for any institution tested in the last 30 years. ~ Judicial Watch

Let’s see: The Democrats won the election over Iraq, but now refuse to defund the war. In fact, they are already talking about starting a second war (Darfur). And worst of all, they are attempting to ram through Congress the biggest amnesty piece of legislation in American history, which will facilitate the third-world invasion of the U.S., drive down American wages, and transform the U.S. into a third-world wasteland.

The Queer Lobby

“Homosexuals picture themselves as on the defensive. They claim they are discriminated against. In fact, they are on the offensive. Their lobby has evolved into one of the more powerful lobbies in the country. They are dangerous, not because what they believe is wrong, but because they put fear in the hearts of legislators of both parties. And they deliver.” ~ Paul Weyrich

Just as the third-world invaders want to destroy the real West, so the queer lobby wants to destroy one of the oldest institutions known to man: the natural marriage.

Global Management: Agenda 21 (Part 1)

Global Management: Agenda 21 (Part 1)

By Dave Hodges

“The standard of living of the average American has to decline…”
~ Paul Volcker (1979), Former Chairman of the Federal Reserve.

What does the North American Union, the European Union, IMF, World Bank, GATT, WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA, FTAA, CANAMEX, NASCO, CODEX, the present state of American health care, The United States Conference of Mayors, The National Governor’s Association, The American Legislative Exchange Council, The Trilateral Commission, The Council on Foreign Relations, The Department of Education, No Child Left Behind legislation, the EPA, hate speech legislation, multiculturalism, Smart Growth, The FDA, The Federal Reserve, the global warming “crisis,” amnesty legislation, the rise of the American corporatocracy, record numbers of eminent domain proceedings, genetically modified foods, the implementation of communitarian law, the Earth Charter, the declining standard of living of the American middle class, the draconian police state tactics of Patriot Acts I & II and the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and the unrestricted use of highly volatile fiat money have to do with each other?

All of the abovementioned are inextricably interwoven into a United Nations program, known as Agenda 21. Agenda 21 is in nearly every country and in nearly every city and county in America (Soveriegnty.net, 2007; United Nations, 2007a).

Continue reading