Tag Archives: Fascism

News

What is the Chief of the Human Rights Commission like?

1 Comment

I was browsing on “The Blog of Walker”  and I found some links to a speech given by Jennifer Lynch, the head fascist at the Canadian Human Rights Commission. It’s interesting because she is exactly the kind of person that I would expect Obama to put in charge as the Free Speech Czar, given his record of suppressing dissent.

Take a look at his post:

First there was the speech.

…Now she’s actually going to go mano-a-chicko with Ezra Levant on the Roy Green Show! Well…sort of. I guess the excitement would be too much for her delicate constitution, so she’ll be on the show after Ezra’s had his say, or even before – it doesn’t really matter as long as she doesn’t have to deal with that icky fellow who’s been keeping her up at night with head-aches and upset stomach these past few months ( although I’m just guessing as to that).

Mark Steyn links to other responses to the the speech. But let’s focus on Ezra Levant’s response.

The speech given by Canada’s Chief Fascist

Here is a post written by free speech activist Ezra Levant about Lynch’s hate-filled speech:

On Monday, Jennifer Lynch, the chief commissar of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, gave a speech to her fellow censors at the human rights industry’s annual trade show in Montreal. It was such a grotesque speech, any self-respecting government ought to fire her for uttering it. It revealed Lynch’s complete misunderstanding of the nature of human rights, the right of citizens to question their government, and the government’s proper attitude towards peaceful criticism.

It was the speech of an angry bigot.

It showed Lynch to be temperamentally unsuitable for any public office, especially a prosecutorial office with powers similar to those of real police. She’s bitter, vindictive, paranoid and motivated by anger and vengeance. If she was a real cop, answerable to an internal affairs branch, she’d be put on leave and investigated for her rage-filled rant.

Lynch’s speech was that of a bureaucrat at war with Canadian citizens. It was a speech of a bully who seeks the power to destroy those who oppose her.

… Lynch’s speech, in which she catalogues her enemies and denounces them, was a formal, public utterance, vetted by the CHRC’s half-dozen PR staff. It was clearly written by Lynch herself – the personal venom of it just couldn’t be faked.

He then goes on to provide excerpts of the speech that are particularly hateful and bigoted.  Witness the secular-left in their full fascist flowering! Unhinged and unmasked. This is what they learn in university – that there way is the right way and that all dissent to their agenda proceeds from racism, sexism, etc.

My friend Andrew sent me an article from Canada’s National Post about her speech.

Excerpt:

Contrast such criticism, though, with the chill writers and other public figures feel knowing that if their words offend any minority favoured by a rights commission, the commissioners may, on behalf of the complainant (and at taxpayers’ expense), compel testimony, seize documents, search private offices and impose fines and other penalties. The CHRC, too, has a frighteningly undemocratic 100% conviction rate in hate-speech cases.

These laws were brought in by the secular-left in Canada. We just elected the secular left here in the United States. Can we expect the same kind of suppression of free speech from Obama?

Recall that the Democrats have already put forward a hate crime bill and a bill to criminalize blogging, with sentences up to 2 years. The hate crimes bill passed the House, while the blog-crime bill is still in committee.

Will Canada’s Chief Fascist debate?

Ezra “debated” her on Saturday on the radio. (H/T Blazing Cat Fur)

But she would not go against him head-to-head. Instead she wanted to speak after him, so that she could not be corrected or rebutted. There you see the full expression of the left – they cannot stand that you are allowed to talk back to them, and they want to silence you – regardless of evidence.

This is how Darwinism and Global Warming are being put through by the secular-left right now. Stifle dissent, choke off debate, malign your opponent’s motives, coerce them with the force of government.

I will update this post with Ezra’s reflections on the “debate”.

Further study

Commentary

How government forces private firms out of business with predatory pricing

1 Comment

This article on Fox News’ Forum is by John Lott. He explains the threat of predatory pricing as it relates to Obama’s health care plan.

First, Lott explains the stated goal of Obama’s plan:

President Obama is selling government health insurance to the American people as the way to save money.  That government health insurance will merely provide competition to keep private insurance companies from gouging their customers.

But here is the problem with a parallel system run by the government:

There are a couple of problems with Obama’s argument.  Government is just not known for its cost effectiveness or quality.  And the way for government enterprises to survive is with massive taxpayer subsidies and charging customers prices below the firm’s actual costs, driving more efficient private firms out of business.  These subsidies mean that when government enterprises “win” they do so by driving more efficient private firms out of business.

Here is an an example of how it works with USPS vs Fedex:

The U.S. Postal Service would often increase its first-class mail rate, where it had a monopoly, to raise money to subsidize its overnight delivery service where it faced stiff competition.  For example, it raised first-class mail to thirty-three cents in January 1999 and simultaneously reduced the price of domestic overnight express mail from $15.00 to $13.70, even though it was already losing money at the $15.00 rate. The price, which was lowered in response to increasingly successful competition in overnight delivery from FedEx and UPS Overnight, remained below $15.00 for the next seven years.  Clearly the Postal Service was not able to drive its competitors out of business with this maneuver, in part because its on-time delivery record and quality was poorer.

The Postal Service lost money on its overnight deliveries despite advantages that FedEx and UPS could only dream of.  The Postal Service is exempt from paying state sales, property and income taxes.  And it uses some of the most expensive real estate in the country — rent-free. The competition that Obama advocates between government and private insurance companies isn’t going to be any fairer.

The government can run huge deficits, effectively transferring money from the productive private sector into their parallel public competitor, with the end goal being complete control of consumer purchases. Obama intends to run private companies out of business so that you have only one place where you can go to purchase health care: OBAMA. And you will do anything he tells you in order to get that health care.

It’s all about controlling your behavior by taking your money and then restricting your access to services. The end goal is that everyone will have equal life outcomes regardless of how hard they work, and how risky and/or immoral their lifestyle. Democrats do not trust you to keep the money you earn, and to spend your money on the things that you want. They think government knows best.

In his book “Freedomnomics”, Lott has even more examples of predatory pricing. I recommend that book, especially for the chapter on abortion and crime. Pro-lifers will find the book very useful. It’s important for people to understand that the more involved government gets in the free market, the less liberty we have as consumers.

Videos

Understanding Obama’s health care reform bill… with video clips!

1 Comment
Sen. Tom Coburn
Sen. Tom Coburn

Tom Coburn

These video clips feature one of the conservatives I like, Senator Tom Coburn! (H/T Club for Growth)

Tom Coburn is a medical doctor, and ran a medical business. He gives you the inside view of why American health care needs changing, and why big government socialism is not the answer. This is not just a lesson in health care. Listen closely – this is a lesson in economics, and it shows the vision of free-market capitalism, liberty and personal responsibility that drives the policies of the right-wing.

Part 1:

Part 2:

And here is Ronald Reagan talking about the loss of liberty that follows when a country adopts socialized medicine. (H/T Club for Growth)

This is the easiest way to learn about health care policy.

Note: If you prefer to learn about socialized vs consumer-driven health care with podcasts, click here.

More details from a think tank

Here is a comprehensive treatment of the problems of health care today, and the right way to reform it. This article by the founder of the Heritage Foundation, Edwin Feulner, Ph.D., is so long that it is exactly the kind of thing that lefties like commenter Jerry won’t have the patience to read! This is the best thing to read in this post if you can only read one thing.

Here is are some of the myths he corrects:

If you like your health care package you can keep it

“…a public plan will lead many employers to drop private health coverage for their workers and dump them into the public plan… According to independent analyses, as many as 119 million Americans could end up in a public plan….”

The end goal is not a single payer system

“…The “single payer” here is Uncle Sam, using taxpayers’ money, and not just paying the bills but calling the shots and deciding what care every American will get—or not get….”

The end goal is not a single payer system

“…Congress’s own watchdog–have issued preliminary estimates that the cost could be high as $2 trillion over 10 years, with most of that borrowed money…”

The quality of your health care will get better

“…Medicare has huge gaps in coverage. Medicaid’s quality is notoriously bad. They both offer substandard care compared to most private insurance plans…”

And of course his letter also gives conservative solutions to the problem of rising health care costs. The Heritage Foundation is my favorite think tank. Conservative across the board – not just on fiscal issues.

James Demint

And conservatives like James Demint are getting this message out to the public, too.

Sen. James Demint
Sen. James Demint

Here is Senator Demint’s article in Forbes magazine. He answers the question: “What is the cause of our current health care problems? Is it the free market? Or is it government intervention into the free market?”

Excerpt:

…Washington politicians make it hard for individuals to own their own health insurance policies. Government gives tax benefits to businesses to provide group health plans to employees, but offers no such tax benefit to individuals who try to buy their own plan for themselves or their family. Government prevents consumers from shopping for better plans across state lines, which limits competition and drives up prices. Government health care programs like Medicare and Medicaid pay doctors and hospitals less than the full value of their services, and the difference gets priced into the higher premiums paid by people who do have insurance.

In other words, politicians deliberately restrict consumer choice, drive up prices, underpay doctors and hinder both access and portability. Then they turn around, blame the free market for the health care crisis and say the only way to save the system is a government takeover of health insurance in the form of a so-called “public option.”

And he’s goes on to explain conservative solutions to the problem of rising health care costs. A great article from one of my favorite conservatives.

The real costs of Obama’s plan

Keith Hennessey has an analysis of the costs of Obama’s new government-controlled, rationed health care plan. You may have heard that the CBO has issued an estimate about the costs of Obama’s plan: 1 Trilliion over 10 years. Keith says that the number is actually closer to 1.3 trillion.

Health care subsidies over 6 years
Health care subsidies over 6 years

Keith took at closer look at the CBO’s 1 Trillion estimate, which includes only ONE area where money will need to be spent (subsidies for the poor). He found that many items in the Democrats’ health care bill were not included in the CBO estimate!

Excerpt:

  1. The budgetary effects of neither the individual mandate nor the employer mandate are included in this score.  I think CBO will find these provisions would raise revenues for the government and reduce the deficit.  While the leaked draft of Kennedy-Dodd was specific about the employer mandate, the official version has just the placeholder language, “Policy under discussion.”  Both mandates leave wide discretion for the Secretaries of Treasury and HHS to create a level and structure of taxation “to accomplish the goal of enhancing participation in qualifying coverage.”  It is extremely difficult for CBO and their tax counterparts, the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) staff, to estimate something like this.
  2. The estimate does not include the budgetary cost of expanding Medicaid to childless adults with income below 150% of the poverty line.  I expect that this will add hundreds of billions of dollars to the cost over the next decade.
  3. It does not include the requirement that health plans define “children” as dependents up to age 27.  I expect this will raise costs.
  4. It does not include the effects of the Medical Advisory Council’s ability to define benefits, or the requirements that plans rebate premiums to the insured.  I think this too will raise costs.
  5. It does not include the budget effect of having a “public plan option.”
  6. There are a bunch of other programs in the bill, including a new disability program and lots of new public health programs.

Keith will be posting more articles on his blog as he calculates the real costs of Obama’s plan.

The bottom line

Obama’s health care plan is simply “Obama knows best”. You will pay money to Obama, based on your income, (not on your health risks). And then Obama will decide whether government will give you any health care. He’ll probably make these decisions the same way he makes other decisions: based on whether you are one of his unionized supporters, whether you donated to Democrats, or whether you investigate his corrupt dealings.

Obama thinks that you are more satisfied with the service at your local DMV than you are with Amazon.com. And he plans to make sure that you are dealing with government bureaucrats, not with private businesses, when you need health care. Who gives you better service? The government, that isn’t trying to compete with anyone to meet your needs? Or private businesses, which do need to compete to earn your business?

Further study

You can watch some videos containing horror stories from countries that have adopted single-payer health care, too.

My previous post on socialized medicine linked to even more horror stories from other countries with socialized medicine.

http://www.youtube.com/swf/l.swf?iurl=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FAe2XEl5952A%2Fhqdefault.jpg&fexp=903902%2C902800&title=McCain%3A+%27This+is+a+joke%27+on+health+care&length_seconds=172&avg_rating=5.0&video_id=Ae2XEl5952A&showinfo=0&allow_embed=1&swf=http%3A%2F%2Fs.ytimg.com%2Fyt%2Fswf%2Fcps-vfl103922.swf&sk=_0zSL5HkbumJPmD211uCey-iMAHfrOKbC&fs=0&allow_ratings=1&rel=1&amp=&cr=US&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.verumserum.com%2F%3Fp%3D6405&showsearch=0