Rush and the New Blacklist

By Patrick J. Buchanan

The original “Hollywood blacklist” dates back to 1947, when 10 members of the Communist Party, present or former, invoked the Fifth Amendment before the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

The party was then a wholly owned subsidiary of the Comintern of Joseph Stalin, whose victims had surpassed in number those of Adolf Hitler.

In a 346-17 vote, the Hollywood Ten were charged with contempt of Congress and suspended or fired.

The blacklist had begun. Directors, producers and writers who had been or were members of the party and refused to recant lost their jobs.

Politically, the blacklist was a victory of the American right.

In those first years of the Cold War, anti-communism and Christianity were mighty social, political and cultural forces. Hollywood acknowledged their power in what it produced.

Rhett Butler’s departing words to Scarlett O’Hara — “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn!” — were the most shocking heard on screen.

Catholicism was idealistically portrayed in “Going My Way” and “The Song of Bernadette.” Priest roles were played by Bing Crosby, Spencer Tracy, Gregory Peck.

But over a half century, the left captured and now controls the culture.

The Legion of Decency is dead. The Filthy Speech Movement from Berkeley 1964 has triumphed. The “seven filthy words” of comedians like Lenny Bruce and George Carlin are regular fare in films and steadily creeping into prime-time.

Movies show sexually explicit scenes that make Howard Hughes’ 1944 condemned film, “The Outlaw,” starring Jane Russell, look like “Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm.”

Where Ingrid Bergman of “Casablanca” fame had to flee the country in 1950 after an adulterous affair with director Roberto Rossellini, the media today happily provide all the salacious details of every “relationship” that Hollywood stars enter into and exit.

All of this testifies to the cultural ascendancy of the left.

Yet every establishment has its own orthodoxy, its own taboos, and its own blacklist. And, despite its pretensions to be open to all ideas, our cultural establishment is no different.

While the Hollywood Ten have been rehabilitated and heroized, it is Christians and conservatives who are in cultural cross hairs now.

Traditional Catholic morality is mocked, as are Southern evangelical Christians. And the new cultural establishment has erected a new regime called Political Correctness. It writes the hate-crimes laws that citizens must obey and the campus speech codes students must follow.

The new mortal sins are not filthy talk or immoral conduct, but racism, sexism, homophobia and nativism. The establishment alone defines these sins and enforces the proscriptions against them, from which there is no appeal, only the obligatory apology, the act of contrition and the solemn commitment never to sin again.

If you still believe homosexuality is unnatural and immoral and gay marriage absurd, you are a homophobe who is to keep his mouth shut.

If you think some ethnic and racial groups have greater natural athletic, academic or artistic talents, don’t go there, if you do not wish an early end to your journalistic career.

If you think illegal aliens should be sent home and legal immigration should mirror the ethnic makeup of the nation, you are a xenophobe and a racist.

All of these terms — racist, sexist, homophobe — are synonyms for heretic. Any of them can get you hauled before an inquisition.

To control the politics of a nation, control of the culture is a precondition. For who controls the culture defines what is moral and immoral, and what is heroic and villainous. And if you can set limits on what journalists write and broadcasters say, you can shape what people think and believe.

Through history, frightened establishments have dealt severely even with peaceful challenges to their power, which is why Socrates was forced to drink poison, Christ was crucified, Sir Thomas More was beheaded and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was sent to the Gulag.

When Rush Limbaugh called Sandra Fluke a “slut” for demanding that Georgetown Law School subsidize the $3,000 women students annually require for birth control to exercise their sexual freedom, the media that piled on Rush objected less to the term than to the target he picked: one of their own.

Bill Maher routinely uses far more odious terms on Sarah Palin. Yet his $1 million gift to an Obama Super PAC was welcomed by agents of the same president who phoned Fluke to console her over Rush’s remarks.

Rush apologized. But the left still campaigns to have his voice stifled and censored, by threatening advertisers of his radio show with boycotts if they refuse to drop him.

Thus does the left honor the First Amendment.

As shown in HBO’s “Game Change,” John McCain in 2008 ruled out attacks on Barack Obama’s 20-year ties to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the Chicago preacher of “God damn America!” fame.

Why? Wright and Obama were black, and such attacks might agitate the latent racism of white America. The Republican Party censors itself so as not to antagonize a cultural establishment that wants to see it dead.

“Beautiful losers,” my late friend Sam Francis called them.

Adolf goes Hollywood

It sounds like the bizzare script of a Hollywood B-movie. Maybe it still could?

In a parallel universe the Nazis have won the war and Adolf Hitler moves to Los Angeles where he mingles with the stars of the silver screen while running his evil empire from a luxurious ranch deep in the LA hills.

But during the 1930s, American sympathizers were so confident this exact scenario was actually going happen they spent millions building a deluxe compound ready for their fuhrer’s imminent arrival.

Equipped with a diesel power plant, 375,000 gallon concrete water tank, giant meat locker, 22 bedrooms and even a bomb shelter, the heavily guarded estate was home to a community of Hollywood fascists who hoped to ride out the war there.

There were further plans to build five libraries, a swimming pool, several dining rooms and a gymnasium with money from Germany.

But on the day after Pearl Harbor, as America entered World War Two, police raided the premises and rounded up the the 50 or so American fascists who were living there.

Today the eerie landmark lies in ruins, splattered with graffitti, and awaiting the bulldozers so it can be turned into a picnic area for hikers, a soon-to-be forgotten slice of American history.

Close to the homes of actors and directors such as Stephen Spielberg, the site has been a magnet for historians, curiosity-seekers and modern-day nazis.

At one point after the war it became an artists colony and was home to the novelist Henry Miller.

It was built by the Silver Shirts, a sinister group of 1930’s fascists who took their name from Hitler’s Brown Shirts grass roots organization. Their official name was the ‘Silver Legion’, but were nicknamed the ‘Silver Shirts’ due to their attire. A silver shirt, silver tie,  a campaign hat and blue corduroy trousers with leggings. The shirt was emblazened with a large scarlett ‘L’ signifying Loyalty, Liberation and Legion.

By 1934, the Silver Shirts had about 15,000 members, led by William Pelley and funded directly by Nazi Germany.

Fascism had been on the rise in the wake of the Great Depression and the Silver Shirts were one of the most fanatical groups.

The 55-acre ranch, was sold to mining fortune heiress Jessie Murphy in 1933 by screen cowboy Will Rogers.

In the next few years, Murphy struck up a relationship with a German man known only as Herr Schmidt. Unbeknownst to her, Schmidt was Hitler’s agent in America.

He persuaded her to invest $4million ($66 million today) to transform the property into a nazi stronghold fit for Hitler.

Historian Randy Young said, “This was supposed to be the seat of American fascism from where Hitler would one day run the United States”.

“The neighbors were a little freaked out by the construction and weird happenings, but until war broke out, they thought they were just eccentric people.”

Attribution: Daily Mail

Joke du Jour

A Father says to his son: “I want you to marry a girl of my choice.”

His son immediately replies: “I will choose my own bride, father.”

The Father sighs: “But the girl is Bill Gates’ daughter.”

The son thinks about this only for a split second – then answers: “Well, in that case, yes! OK Dad.”

The Father then approaches Bill Gates and says: “I have a husband for your lovely daughter.”

Bill Gates quickly answers: “No chance! My daughter is too young to get married!”

The Father says: “But this young man is a vice-president of World Bank.”

Bill Gates thinks for a while then answers: “Ah well, in that case, yes, that’ll be OK with me.”

Finally the Father goes to see the president of World Bank.

The Father smiles and says: “I have a young man to recommend as a Vice-President.”

The President hurriedly answers: “Not interested, I already have more vice-presidents than I need.”

The Father continues smiling: “But this young man is Bill Gates’ son-in-law.”

A few seconds pass, then the World Bank President answers: “Ah that’s interesting, Hmmm. In that case, well yes, he may start tomorrow.”

Now that’s looking out for your kid!

The Road They’ve Traveled

Glenn Beck uncovers the origin of The new Obama campaign documentary, or propaganda film. It is truly chilling.

If you do nothing else, watch the video discussion by Beck and his crew at the end of the article. It is a real eye opener.

Link to it here

A BOSS Farmer

From Jason Mattera of Human Events:

Bruce Springsteen is a man of the people. He stands up for the little guy. A regular blue-collar Joe. A union man. A bona fide working-class hero.

And, when he’s not busy being all that… he’s a tax-dodging liberal hypocrite worth over $200 million who pretends to be a farmer to save hundreds of thousands of dollars on his property taxes that would have otherwise funded the welfare programs he pretends to care about.

That’s right. Mr. “Union Man, Blue Collar” Springsteen is a total fraud, as I explain in my brand-new book Hollywood Hypocrites: The Devastating Truth About Obama’s Biggest Backers.

Recall that Springsteen actively campaigned for Obama in 2008, hosting free concerts that attracted tens of thousands of people in key battleground states. Springsteen’s song, “The Rising,” became a campaign staple for Obama’s speech venues and culminated in him playing for Obama’s Inauguration. And this time around, the White House plans on using the aging rocker’s new politically-motivated track, “We Take Care of Our Own,” to warm up crowds as the re-election bid kicks into high gear.

So does The Boss live by the same prescriptions he and Obama wish to inflict on the rest of America?

Consider the following.

In 2011, perhaps wanting some local free press, Springsteen decided to write a letter to the editor of his town’s newspaper. In response to an article about tax cuts and aid to entitlement programs, the Boss wrote in to praise the piece for being “one of the few that highlights the contradictions between a policy of large tax cuts, on the one hand, and cuts in services to those in the most dire conditions, on the other.”

Furthermore, Springsteen wrote, “your article shows that the cuts are eating away at the lower edges of the middle class, not just those already classified as in poverty, and are likely to continue to get worse over the next few years.” Then, with his well-honed “everyman” touch, he signed the letter along with his oh‑so-common-man-sounding town name, “Colts Neck.”

A year earlier, the Boss echoed similar concerns while emphasizing his support for Obama’s constant naggings to tax the rich.

“The biggest problem we have now is almost 10 percent unemployment, but we also have the disparity of wealth,” Springsteen told London’s Sunday Times. “You can’t have an American civilization with the kind of disparity of wealth we have. It will eat away at the country’s heart and soul and spirit.”

Now, all this would be just fine and dandy. But there’s one small problem with Springsteen’s anti-tax-cut posturing: the man is a first-rate tax evader.

Bruce Springsteen pays over $138,000 a year in taxes for his three-acre home in Colts Neck, New Jersey. He owns another 200 adjoining acres. But because he has a part-time farmer come and grow a few tomatoes (organic, of course) and has horses, his tax bill on the remaining 200 acres is just $4,639 bucks. Do the math. By being a fake farmer, the working-class zero Springsteen is making a mint by robbing New Jersey of the antipoverty program funds he says they desperately need.

“I think it is unfair to our other property taxpayers that if you are a fake farmer, and that you don’t legitimately farm, that you are getting a property tax break and forcing your neighbor to pick up your tab,” said state senator Jennifer Beck. “That was not the intent of the law. It’s a violation of the public trust.” When Fox 5 New York reporter Barbara Nevins Taylor asked a lawyer for the trust that owns Springsteen’s land to comment on the Boss’s lucrative fake-farming tax breaks, predictably, the lawyer had no comment.

The tax loophole comes from the New Jersey’s Farmland Assessment Act of 1964. Originally the provision was created to help preserve agriculture in New Jersey. To qualify for the tax break, landowners must own at least five acres of land and produce just $500 a year in goods in order to qualify. Anyone who can meet those minimum standards can reduce their farmland tax bills by an astounding 98 percent.

Now, no conservative begrudges anyone—not even a die-hard Obama Zombie like Bruce Springsteen—from lowering their tax burden by taking full advantage of every tax break available to them. That’s legal and fine. But for a guy who makes hundreds of millions pretending to be a guardian of the working class, and who vocally supports Obama’s attempts to tax the rich at higher rates, to then turn around and utilize obscure tax loopholes to pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars that would otherwise go to his beloved social programs . . . well, that’s just flat-out Hollywood hypocrisy.

Joke of the Day

Early one morning, a mother went in to wake up her son.

“Wake up, son. It’s time to go to school!”

“But why, Mom? I don’t want to go.”

“Give me two reasons why you don’t want to go.”

“Well, the kids hate me for one, and the teachers hate me, too!”

“Oh, that’s no reason not to go to school. Come on now and get ready.”

“Give me two reasons why I should go to school.”

“Well, for one, you’re 52 years old. And for another, you’re the Principal!”

Ooh, SNAP! (revisited)

Believe or not, food stamp recipients have traded their benefits with nefarious retailers in exchange for cash they used to buy drugs and weapons.

No! Corruption & fraud in a government run program?

That’s just one of many outrageous examples of abuse in the food stamp program revealed when Phyllis Fong, the Department of Agriculture’s inspector general, testified before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Thursday.

“In terms of fraud, we have seen many types of trafficking in SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) benefits,” she said in prepared remarks.

“By giving a recipient $50 in cash for $100 in benefits, an unscrupulous retailer can make a significant profit. Recipients, of course, are then able to spend the cash however they like.

“In some cases, recipients have exchanged benefits for drugs, weapons, and other contraband.”

“When trafficking occurs unchecked, families do not receive the intended nutritional assistance, and unscrupulous retailers profit at the expense of the American public.”

The latest estimate places the number of food stamp recipients in this fiscal year at about 46.3 million, up from 30.8 million at the beginning of fiscal year 2009. That’s a boon for the economy, don’t you know.

The sale or purchase of food stamp benefits for monetary gain is punishable by disqualification from receiving future benefits, fines, and criminal prosecution, according to CNS News.

However, it came to light in Fong’s testimony that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the food stamp program, does not have a policy to ban food stamp retailers from the program even when they have been convicted of defrauding the government.

Fong said: “‘Suspension and debarment’ is a legal tool that Federal agencies can use to protect programs from repeat abusers and ensure that the Government does business only with responsible parties.

“If FNS (the USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service) took steps to debar retailers with a proven record of dishonesty, those individuals would be prevented from abusing other Federal programs.

“However, in a recent audit, we determined that FNS did not debar any of the 615 wholesalers and retailers convicted in relation to 208 cases, even though a conviction is adequate grounds for debarment.”

That’s just great. These companies were not just charged, but convicted and are still able to conduct business as usual.

She also testified that the USDA does not review the criminal background on food stamp retailers and “therefore cannot comply with its own requirement to deny SNAP authorization to any retailers with a criminal history.”

These are the same beuracrats that will control your healthcare soon. Comforting.

In addition, the food stamp program does not even check the Social Security number of many of its recipients, countless of whom are using the numbers of dead people and invalid SSNs to get benefits that Fong said potentially total $1.1 million a month.

Attribution: Newsmax

Joke of the Day

After trying a new shampoo for the first time, a guy fired off an enthusiastic letter of approval to the manufacturer.

 Several weeks later he came home from work to a large carton in the middle of the floor.

Inside were free samples of the many products the company produced: soaps, detergents, tooth paste, and paper items.

“Well, what do you think?” his wife asked smiling.

“Next time,” he replied. “I’m writing to Mercedes!”

Affordable Light Bulbs

Government Stupidity Defies Satire When a $50 Light Bulb Wins an Affordability Prize

 by: Daniel J. Mitchell

I’ve written about the government’s war on consumer-friendly light bulbs (and also similar attacks on working toilets and washing machines that actually clean), so I’m generally not surprised by bureaucratic nonsense.

But even I’m shocked the federal government gave an affordability award for a light bulb that costs $50. I’m not making this up. Here’s a blurb from ABC News.

The U.S. government has awarded appliance-maker Philips $10 million for devising an “affordable” alternative to today’s standard 60-watt incandescent bulb. That standard bulb sells for around $1. The Philips alternative sells for $50. Of course, the award-winner is no ordinary bulb. It uses only one-sixth the energy of an incandescent. And it lasts 30,000 hours–about 30 times as long. In fact, if you don’t drop it, it may last 10 years or more. But only the U.S. Government (in this case, the Department of Energy) could view a $50 bulb as cheap.

Isn’t that wonderful? My tax dollars were used to reward a company that produced a light bulb I can’t afford.

Lisa Benson has a very good cartoon about this light bulb, as well as the less-than-shocking news that Obamacare will be more costly than originally forecast.

Communism Doesn’t Work

Meet Elke. This inspiring woman was born in Hitler’s Germany and lived under communist rule for years before becoming an American citizen.

Her video explanation of what happened in Germany under communism and the parallels to our current administration and the path we are on will give you a chill.

Attribution: The Blaze